MPs divided over whether AI should draft House of Commons statements; 20% flagged as AI-generated
The Economist reported that as much as 20% of House floor speech was flagged as AI-generated. Some MPs deny using the tools; others call it widespread practice.
The day's top stories, food & events — every morning at 7. Unsubscribe anytime.
As many as one in five statements delivered on the floor of the House of Commons may have been generated by artificial intelligence, according to reporting this week by The Economist, which used an AI detector tool called Pangram to analyze parliamentary speech.
The finding has split MPs on whether AI belongs in their work. Some flatly deny using AI tools to draft their remarks. Others say the technology is useful for research but problematic for floor speeches. And some acknowledge the practice is likely widespread.
Greg Fergus, a Liberal MP, said he opposes the use: "I don't think it's a good tool for members who are supposed to represent their constituents." Sandra Cobena, a Conservative MP, took a different view: "Everyone is using AI and that it should be used with care."
Luc Berthold, also a Conservative MP, agreed AI use is probably widespread but expressed doubt about its effectiveness for parliamentary debate: "I don't think it can capture the emotion I want to portray in my speech."
No statement from the House of Commons leadership, the Speaker, or any official parliamentary body has been released regarding a policy on AI use in Parliament. The Economist has not disclosed the methodology, sample size, or limitations of Pangram's detection capabilities.
