UK Seeks More Powers Under Online Safety Act to Tackle AI Harms

2026-04-08 · Source: Tech Policy Press · Field: Government & Public Sector — Public Policy & Governance, Regulatory & Compliance, Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning · Depth: Novice, medium

Summary

The United Kingdom government is seeking to expand its regulatory powers under the Online Safety Act (OSA) by introducing amendments into two unrelated bills: the Crime and Policing Bill and the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. These amendments, proposed in March, would utilize "Henry VIII clauses" to allow ministers to unilaterally add up to a third of new rules to the OSA, bypassing full parliamentary debate and limiting scrutiny to a simple yes-or-no vote. This move follows admissions by Ofcom, the UK's communications regulator, that it lacked the authority to address deepfake scandals involving AI chatbots like Grok. Critics argue these changes grant unfettered power to the executive, weaken democratic legitimacy, and could make it easier for tech companies to lobby ministers directly, despite the OSA already being a 300-page, complex piece of legislation passed in 2023.

Key takeaway

For CTOs and legal counsel navigating UK tech regulation, these proposed amendments to the Online Safety Act signal a significant shift towards executive control over digital policy. Your teams should prepare for potentially rapid and less predictable regulatory changes, particularly concerning AI-generated content and child online safety. This approach could create new compliance challenges and may invite legal challenges from tech companies, necessitating a proactive review of your lobbying and compliance strategies to engage with ministerial offices more directly.

Key insights

The UK government seeks to rapidly expand online safety regulation via executive power, bypassing full parliamentary scrutiny.

Principles

• Executive power can bypass legislative debate.
• Regulatory gaps drive legislative amendments.
• Speed can compromise democratic legitimacy.

Method

Ministers propose "Henry VIII clauses" in unrelated bills to amend the Online Safety Act, allowing them to add new rules with only a yes-or-no parliamentary vote.

In practice

• Monitor "Henry VIII clauses" in legislation.
• Assess regulatory changes for democratic impact.
• Evaluate government's tech regulation strategy.

Topics

• Online Safety Act
• AI Regulation
• Henry VIII Clauses
• Parliamentary Scrutiny
• Deepfake Technology

Best for: CTO, VP of Engineering/Data, Director of AI/ML, Policy Maker, Legal Professional, Tech Journalist

Related on AIssential

• Starmer to extend online safety rules to AI chatbots after Grok scandal — AI-generated content requires explicit regulation to protect children and prevent illegal material.
• The EU’s Online Safety Moonshot Is Losing Altitude — Internal EU challenges, not just external opposition, are hindering the Digital Services Act's intended impact on online safety.
• Our 2026 UK Future Report — Understanding and supporting UK teens in the digital world, especially regarding AI and online balance, is paramount.
• White House releases AI policy wishlist for Congress - The Hill — Federal AI policy aims to unify regulation, prioritizing online safety and infrastructure over fragmented state laws.
• The EU simplified its toughest AI law: what changed and why it matters - Euronews.com — The EU AI Act has been simplified to reduce red tape and extend deadlines, balancing regulation with innovation pace.
• Australia’s official plan for AI safety isn’t much more than a single dot point. Will it be enough? — Australia's AI regulation relies on existing laws, contrasting with other nations' specific AI legislation.

Open in AIssential →

Editorial summary, takeaway, and curation by AIssential. Original article published by Tech Policy Press.