Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)

That follows on perfectly because Senator Ruane had asked me to put forward one question in particular. In the AI governance structure, we know there is an AI advisory committee, which is largely drawn from people who are experts academically or from the industry and technology side. This is the “who you are led by” piece. Do the witnesses think there should be a civil society advisory group looking at those kinds of public interest and ethical issues as part of the new governance structure that is put in place? Is there a role for that as a formal component within the governance structure?

Somebody referred to cost benefit, which is a good thing. I worry about this. I feel we often get told, when it is asked if there is a benefit, that there is, that is great, so let us go. That is the kind of narrative we get, whereas we need a cost-benefit approach. Within health, for example, there is the idea of an interrogation, and I am thinking particularly in terms of the public sector usage of AI. How important is it that a cost-benefit analysis is constantly being applied? It might be said that one of the proposed costs is that we would share all of the data but, actually, we would want to put a safeguard on that. How important is that cost-benefit analysis, even if it simply means proceeding but taking steps to mitigate the costs and widen the benefits? The witnesses might comment on cost-benefit analysis within public usage.

I also ask for feedback on the issue of people being able to request information, especially regarding decisions that affect them. How important is that alternative? We need to make sure intentional obstacles are not placed around people who want to be able to access an alternative or appeal to a real human decision-maker.