Andrew Bailey says regulation is not the right first step for AI

Andrew Bailey warned that immediate regulation is not the correct starting point for artificial intelligence, arguing instead for "rigorous" testing and safeguards to limit potential harms.

Andrew Bailey said that regulating artificial intelligence is "not the right place to start," urging a focus on extensive testing and protective measures to manage risks associated with the technology.

Call for testing and safeguards

Bailey warned that the priority should be to subject AI systems to rigorous assessment and to put robust safeguards in place so their risks can be contained. He emphasized that careful evaluation of systems before wide deployment is essential to understand possible failures and unintended consequences.

Balance between innovation and protection

His comments framed AI governance as a process that should begin with safety and risk mitigation rather than immediate legislative intervention. Bailey argued that testing and safeguards can help build understanding of how AI behaves in practice, which in turn can inform any future regulatory steps without unnecessarily stifling innovation.

Guidance for policymakers and industry

Bailey’s remarks imply a role for both industry actors and regulators in developing standards and testing regimes that verify performance and reliability. He suggested that a measured approach—prioritizing evidence from rigorous trials and protective mechanisms—would better position policymakers to design effective rules if and when they are needed.

Looking ahead

While acknowledging the risks AI can pose, Bailey’s stance underscores a preference for incremental, evidence-based responses. By concentrating first on testing and safeguards, he indicated that stakeholders could reduce harms and build a firmer foundation for any subsequent regulatory framework.