UK Public Sector Criticized for Not Registering Mandatory AI Systems in Use

Key Insights:

• Public concerns grow as UK government departments fail to disclose mandatory AI use in policing, welfare, and immigration systems.
• Transparency questioned as only 9 AI tools are registered, despite over 160 public sector contracts mentioning automated technologies.
• Civil liberties groups warn secretive AI use risks privacy, urging government to improve oversight and public accountability policies.

The UK government is under scrutiny for failing to meet its own requirement to list the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems on a public register. Despite announcing in February that it was mandatory for all departments to disclose their use of algorithms, no submissions have been made by Whitehall departments, sparking concerns about transparency in decision-making processes that affect millions of citizens.

Currently, only nine systems have been recorded on the register. These include a tool from the Cabinet Office for archiving historical records, a traffic monitoring system in Cambridge, and a review system for NHS patient feedback. 

However, none of the growing number of AI tools used in welfare, immigration, or policing have been included. This lack of transparency has raised alarm about the potential misuse of technology in public administration.

Ministers Admit to Oversight Issues

Peter Kyle, the Secretary of State for Science and Technology, acknowledged that more effort is needed to ensure public visibility over the use of algorithms in government operations. Speaking to reporters, Kyle admitted, 

“If the government is using algorithms on behalf of the public, the public has a right to know. Transparency is the only way to show that these tools are being used to benefit people, not control them.”

Civil liberties groups have also raised concerns about this lack of accountability. Big Brother Watch, a privacy advocacy organization, criticized the government for its secretive approach to AI. Madeleine Stone, the group’s chief advocacy officer, stated, 

“The use of AI and algorithms in ways that affect people’s lives should not be hidden. Departments must be open and honest about their deployment of these technologies to protect people’s rights.”

The Department for Science and Technology confirmed that the mandatory registration standard is in place and added that more records are expected to be published soon. However, no clear timeline for this has been shared.

Expanding Use of Automated Systems in Public Services

Despite the lack of disclosure, automated systems are already influencing key areas of public service. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has implemented systems to assist with summarizing documents, detecting fraud in benefit claims, and supporting job center staff in providing guidance to claimants. These tools are reportedly used to improve efficiency, with decisions ultimately reviewed by human workers.

The Home Office uses automated systems to support immigration casework, which officials say helps prioritize workloads and streamline enforcement actions. While officials describe the system as rule-based and not reliant on machine learning, critics have expressed concerns over the risk of errors and bias in these processes.

Several police forces, including the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police, have adopted facial recognition technology to track suspects. Proponents of the technology argue it enhances public safety, while critics warn it could infringe on privacy rights by potentially turning public spaces into zones of mass surveillance.

Calls for Greater Accountability

Research bodies and advocacy groups have called for urgent action to address the government’s lack of transparency. The Ada Lovelace Institute, a research organization focused on technology and society, warned that inadequate oversight could lead to tools that harm rather than help. Imogen Parker, an associate director at the institute, stated, 

“Without transparency, the public sector is unable to assess whether these systems are working effectively or causing harm.”

Big Brother Watch has also criticized the government for pushing forward with AI tools, such as facial recognition software, without clear safeguards in place. Stone emphasized the risks to privacy and individual freedoms, urging the government to prioritize accountability.

Public Sector Increases Spending on Technology

While the transparency register remains sparse, public spending on automated tools continues to rise. A report by Tussell, a company monitoring public sector contracts, revealed that 164 agreements mentioning automation have been signed since 2022.

Examples include NHS England’s £330 million partnership with the US firm Palantir to create a centralized data platform. Although Palantir asserts that data control remains with the NHS, privacy groups have raised concerns about how sensitive information will be handled.

Other contracts include £4.5 million for the Department for Education to improve educational tools and £7 million for Derby City Council to integrate automation into its operations. The government has also introduced virtual assistants to help users navigate its online services, with one system based on OpenAI’s chatbot technology.

Government officials have pointed to the potential of such tools to improve public services and reduce costs. However, experts warn that without clear oversight and public accountability, these tools could lead to distrust and unintended outcomes.

Tokenhell produces content exposure for over 5,000 crypto companies and you can be one of them too! Contact at [email protected] if you have any questions. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Some of the posts on this website are guest posts or paid posts that are not written by Tokenhell authors (namely Crypto Cable , Sponsored Articles and Press Release content) and the views expressed in these types of posts do not reflect the views of this website. CreditInsightHubs is not responsible for the content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products or any other content or banners (ad space) posted on the site. Read full terms and conditions / disclaimer.