The Relaunched UK AI Regulation Bill: A Step Towards Statutory Regulation of AI in the UK
Discussions regarding AI regulation in the UK are gathering momentum following the reintroduction of the UK Artificial Intelligence (Regulation) Bill (the AI Bill). Originally introduced as a Private Members Bill in November 2023 in the House of Lords under the previous Conservative Government, the AI Bill returned to square one with the election of the Labour Government in July 2024. However, the AI Bill has since been relaunched in the House of Lords and passed its first reading on 4 March 2025.
This article considers the key features of the AI Bill and how they fit in the context of AI regulation globally.
Key Features of the AI Bill
The AI Bill broadly defines AI as technology capable of perceiving environments through the use of data, interpreting data using automated processing designed to approximate cognitive abilities, and making recommendations, predictions, or decisions— all with a view to achieving a specific objective.
The AI Bill has three central objectives:
- Creation of an AI Authority
- Regulatory Principles
- Public Engagement
Creation of an AI Authority
To date, the UK has taken a principles-based approach to regulating AI, with sector-specific regulators including the FCA and Ofcom supervising the development and use of AI. In contrast, the AI Bill seeks to introduce a central AI Authority to oversee the regulation of AI, assess emerging AI risks, and support the innovation of AI with a view to ensuring alignment in approach across sectors.
Regulatory Principles
The AI Bill sets out five principles for regulating AI, effectively codifying the UK’s principles-based approach. The principles are as follows:
- Safety, security, and robustness
- Appropriate transparency and explainability
- Fairness
- Accountability and governance
- Contestability and redress
The AI Bill similarly seeks to regulate businesses developing and/or deploying AI solutions. Businesses are required to adhere to the five principles above and ensure AI solutions are applied in inclusive, non-discriminatory ways.
Finally, the AI Bill mandates that businesses developing and/or deploying AI solutions appoint a dedicated AI Officer responsible for ensuring the safe, ethical, unbiased, and non-discriminatory use of AI solutions.
Public Engagement
The AI Bill requires the AI Authority to engage with the public when considering the future development and implementation of AI-related regulation. This engagement aims to develop regulations that match the opportunities and risks presented by AI.
Next Steps for the AI Bill
The AI Bill has an uncertain future despite passing its first reading. As a private members bill in the House of Lords, it lacks the backing of the UK Government, and cross-party support in the House of Commons is not guaranteed.
Indeed, the provisions of the AI Bill do not align comfortably with the UK Government’s innovation-friendly, pro-business outlook regarding AI. The UK Government published its AI Opportunities Action Plan on 13 January 2025, containing recommendations to foster AI innovation in the UK, which fall into the following categories:
- Support for innovators
- Invest in making the UK a leading AI customer
- Attract global talent to establish AI companies in the UK
Moreover, the UK Government declined to sign the Statement on Inclusive and Sustainable Artificial Intelligence at the Paris AI Summit in February 2025. Signatories to the Declaration pledged to make AI “open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure, and trustworthy.”
Taken together, the Action Plan and the UK Government’s reticence to sign the Declaration indicate that the UK Government’s priorities lie with business and innovation rather than regulation.
The AI Bill and the Global AI Regulatory Landscape
The AI Bill represents a halfway house in contrast to AI regulatory frameworks globally. In comparison to the EU AI Act, the AI Bill is decidedly light touch. While both the EU AI Act and the AI Bill feature the introduction of a central AI supervisory body, the EU AI Act’s regulatory framework is significantly more comprehensive than the regulatory principles in the AI Bill. Similarly, the AI Bill does not follow the EU AI Act in introducing a strict liability regime for breaches of AI regulations.
The AI Bill is more akin to the approach taken in the US. While some states have elected to introduce AI regulations, the federal government has thus far embraced a principles-based approach reflective of that in the UK. The Trump Administration overturned a Biden-era Executive Order aimed at regulating AI and instead introduced an AI Action Plan aimed at deregulating AI to foster innovation.
The AI Bill highlights the growing tension between pro-regulation and pro-innovation approaches. Whether or not the AI Bill enters the statute book will likely depend on how the UK Government resolves that tension.
