Australia’s official plan for AI safety isn’t much more than a single dot point. Will it be enough?

Australia’s official plan for AI safety isn’t much more than a single dot point. Will it be enough?

Australia’s official plan for AI safety isn’t much more than a single dot point. Will it be enough?

https://theconversation.com/australias-official-plan-for-ai-safety-isnt-much-more-than-a-single-dot-point-will-it-be-enough-276962

Publish Date: 2026-03-05 14:07:00

Source Domain: theconversation.com

Last week, one of Australia’s leading artificial intelligence (AI) researchers, Toby Walsh, warned Australia’s lack of guardrails for AI is putting young people at risk of being “sacrificed for the profits of big tech”.

Walsh’s remarks came after the government scrapped its own proposal to establish an advisory body of AI experts. Instead, the government offered its National AI Plan, which, among others, stresses investment in data centres, telecommunications infrastructure, and workforce training.

The plan also envisages an “AI Safety Institute” (currently recruiting staff), and also some internal AI transparency measures for the public sector. Transparency results so far have not been great.

What does it all add up to for AI regulation in Australia?

What are other countries doing?

The European Union has attracted attention for its AI Act, which already prohibits such things as using AI systems to exploit vulnerable groups or individuals. However, Europe is struggling to implement rules on high-risk AI uses that are not prohibited.

Several governments in Australia’s region are also passing AI laws, mainly to give themselves the powers to respond when they deem it necessary.

South Korea, Japan and Taiwan – none of them minor AI players – all have newly minted laws, which are meeting the expected pushback from industry.

Not everyone has comprehensive rules

There are countries without any kind of comprehensive AI regulation, including the United States and the United Kingdom.

In the US, president Donald Trump has even prohibited most state-based regulation in relation to private AI uses. Despite the anti-safeguards language, the government has quietly retained strong safeguards for federal use of AI.

The UK has followed an even more erratic path, to end up in a similar place to Australia. Incapable of deciding what to do, it has tried to provide technical (non-legal) safeguards. This has been done through the creation of…

Source