Out-of-date government IT systems ‘hampering public sector adoption of AI’

Out-of-date technology and poor quality data are putting the Government’s plans to scale up the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) in the public sector at risk, a report from MPs says.

In its analysis of the Government’s use of AI, the Public Accounts Committee said that while the technology had the potential to radically change public services, the scale of the task to grasp these opportunities was concerning.

Earlier this year, the Prime Minister unveiled a major plan to make the UK an AI “superpower” by investing heavily in the technology and its surrounding infrastructure in order to make it a hub for investment, but also by increasing AI adoption in Whitehall and the wider public sector to help cut costs and waste, as well as improve productivity.

It also said government data was too often of poor quality and as a result was putting efficient AI adoption at risk because the technology relies on and requires high quality data in order to learn.

In addition, the committee warned that public trust in AI was being jeopardised by slow progress from government in being transparent about when and how the technology is being used in public sector decision making, and that a general lack of digital skills across the public sector was a barrier to AI adoption.

According to figures in the report, as of January this year only 33 records have been published on the government website set up to provide transparency on how AI had been used in decision making.

The report included a number of recommendations for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), including prioritising funding to ensure that IT systems were brought up to date.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “This committee’s role is to help ensure efficient Government policy delivery through our recommendations.

“The potential for AI to secure widespread efficiencies is obvious, and the need for digital improvements is a theme that will run through all our inquiries as through a stick of rock.

“The AI industry needs a Government that is on its side, while making sure that any opportunities for improvement are seized in a safe and ethical way.

“We still have a long way to go in this area.

“The Government has said it wants to mainline AI into the veins of the nation, but our report raises questions over whether the public sector is ready for such a procedure.

“The ambition to harness the potential of one of the most significant technological developments of modern times is of course to be welcomed.

“Unfortunately, those familiar with our committee’s past scrutiny of the Government’s frankly sclerotic digital architecture will know that any promises of sudden transformation are for the birds.

“A transformation of thinking in Government at senior levels is required, and the best way for this to happen is for digital professionals to be brought round the top table in management and governing boards of every department and their agencies.

“I have serious concerns that DSIT does not have the authority over the rest of Government to bring about the scale and pace of change that’s needed.

“We hope the recommendations in our report aid the Government in succeeding in bringing public sector systems into the 21st century for their users, where other efforts have failed.”

A Government spokesperson said: “These findings reflect much of what we already know, which is why we set out a bold plan to overhaul the use of tech and AI across the public sector – from doubling the number of tech experts across Whitehall, to making reforms to replace legacy IT systems more quickly and building new tools to transform how people interact with the state.

“There’s a £45 billion opportunity if we get AI right, which will help us deliver on our Plan for Change and drive up living standards across the country, and to support trust along the way, we’ve published over 55 records showing how we’re using algorithms – with more to follow in the coming weeks.”