Labor under pressure on plans to regulate AI as Coalition accuses government of mixed messages

The Guardian

a day ago

The federal government is facing mounting pressure to confirm how it plans to regulate fast-growing artificial intelligence technology, with the Coalition critical of mixed messaging from Labor ministers about whether new laws are needed.
As debate erupts over big tech companies seeking access to Australian material including journalism and books to train AI models, Anthony Albanese has stressed the importance of protecting copyright. But the shadow productivity minister, Andrew Bragg, has urged Australia not to squander its opportunity to harness AI's benefits, warning against any major new rules.
'The risk is that we over-regulate. The risk is that we make ourselves even more uncompetitive,' Bragg told Guardian Australia.
'[AI] might be the only free kick we get on productivity.'
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
A suggestion from the Productivity Commission to give big tech companies an exemption to copyright laws for 'text and data mining', or to expand existing fair dealing rules, prompted fierce pushback from arts, creative and media companies this week, alarmed that Australian work could be used by massively wealthy tech companies – without compensation – to train AI models.
Federal ministers, including the treasurer, Jim Chalmers, have said they have no plans to change copyright law, and spoken in favour of creatives and rights holders. Albanese on Thursday echoed concerns over protecting copyright, but also said the government was keen to reap the benefits of AI technology, including productivity gains, expected to be a focus of the upcoming economic reform roundtable.
'My government's a government that supports the arts,' Albanese said at a press conference in Melbourne, calling AI a 'complex' issue.
'We as a society will work [the balance of AI risks and opportunities] through. It's good there's debate about it, but copyright and intellectual property is important.'
The government's plans to respond to the fast-moving technology have shifted, prompting Bragg to call on Labor to offer certainty to the industry.
Former industry and science minister Ed Husic had set out plans for a standalone AI act to regulate the field; the productivity minister, Andrew Leigh, has advocated for a low-intervention approach described by some as 'light-touch'; the new industry and science minister, Tim Ayres, has spoken about regulation and legislation among plans still to be decided, as well as giving trade unions more say in developing the sector. Chalmers has pushed for a 'sensible middle path' between high and low regulation.
'I just think the government has no idea, really, what it wants to do. They have more position than you can poke a stick at on AI,' Bragg said, noting these positions.
'We don't need new laws,' he said. 'The government need to say to the regulators, 'How are you going in enforcing the laws the parliament already has on the books?' before they look to put more laws on those books.'
Julian Leeser, the shadow attorney general and arts spokesperson, echoed similar sentiments, saying creators deserve fair compensation and calling for clarity from the government.
'In the real world, we wouldn't let someone use an artist's work for commercial purposes without paying for it. The virtual world should be no different,' he said in a statement.
'This government just doesn't know what it's doing when it comes to AI, and it has no plan to protect Australian artists.'
Labor senator Tony Sheldon, who chaired an inquiry into AI in the last term of parliament, wrote on X that copyright laws 'must be enforced to ensure big tech fairly licenses and compensates artists, writers, and other creatives'.
'Despite the Productivity Commission's interim report, the Albanese Government has been clear - we stand with Australia's creative workers and industries, and we will not compromise our copyright laws,' Sheldon wrote.
'If the Googles and Amazons of the world want to use Australia's extraordinary trove of written and recorded treasures, they can license and pay for it just like everyone else.'