Is Keir Starmer Being Advised by AI? Insights into Government Transparency
The UK Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, aspires to position the country as a global leader in artificial intelligence. Recent revelations indicate that numerous civil servants within the UK government are utilizing a proprietary AI chatbot to assist in their daily tasks.
Despite this integration of technology, officials have been reticent to disclose how this AI tool, known as Redbox, is employed, particularly regarding whether it provides advice to the Prime Minister and how risks associated with inaccurate or biased AI outputs are managed. This lack of transparency has sparked concerns about the reliability of the information that informs governmental decision-making.
Government Departments’ Responses
Following a request for information under freedom of information (FOI) legislation, it was discovered that 20 government departments were approached for details regarding their interactions with Redbox. The AI tool, which is powered by a large language model, allows users to analyze government documents and create draft briefings. Early trials reportedly enabled one civil servant to synthesize 50 documents in mere seconds, a task that would typically take an entire day.
However, all contacted departments either claimed not to use Redbox or dismissed the request as “vexatious,” a term used to denote requests that cause disproportionate distress or irritation. Only two departments provided partial information: the Cabinet Office, which supports the Prime Minister, indicated that 3000 personnel had engaged in 30,000 chats with Redbox, while the Department for Business and Trade noted it held over 13,000 prompts and responses but deemed reviewing them impractical.
Concerns about AI Utilization
When further inquiry was made regarding Redbox’s application, both departments redirected questions to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), which oversees the tool. However, DSIT declined to provide specific answers about whether the Prime Minister or other ministers receive advice generated by AI.
A spokesperson for DSIT stated, “No one should be spending time on something AI can do better and more quickly.” They emphasized that Redbox is designed to enhance efficiency in summarizing documents and drafting agendas, thereby allowing officials to concentrate on shaping policies and improving services.
Expert Opinions on AI in Government
However, the incorporation of generative AI tools into government processes raises alarm among experts. Large language models have well-known issues regarding bias and accuracy, which are challenging to mitigate. Consequently, there is concern over whether Redbox is providing reliable information.
One expert remarked that transparency is vital in government operations, stating, “As taxpayers and voters, we should have access to understanding how decisions are made.” The opaque nature of generative AI tools complicates the ability to verify how they arrive at certain outputs, further diminishing transparency.
The Treasury’s Position
Compounding the issue, the Treasury indicated in response to the FOI request that its staff does not utilize Redbox and that the AI tools available within the Treasury do not retain prompt history. This statement raises questions about the type of AI tools being employed and their governance, as it suggests the Treasury is using AI without maintaining comprehensive usage records.
An expert in data protection noted that the Treasury is legally within its rights not to retain AI prompts under FOI laws, provided there are no specific regulations requiring such retention. However, the general consensus among experts is that good information governance would advocate for retaining records to inform policy development.
In conclusion, the integration of AI in governmental functions presents both opportunities and challenges. As the UK government seeks to harness the advantages of AI like Redbox, the imperative for transparency and accountability remains crucial to ensure that the technology serves the public interest effectively.
