Regulation of Artificial Intelligence Bill 2026: Committee Stage
Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-09
============================================================

Niamh Smyth (FF), Cavan-Monaghan

I thank colleagues for their amendments. I will speak to amendment No. 3 first and thank Senator Stephenson for it.
The purpose of section 9(1)(c) in the Bill is to provide a broad statement of the function of the office to promote and foster AI innovation and literacy. The Bill is intended to give effect to the EU AI Act, and in doing so it is important that the language used in the Bill remains consistent with the terminology and objectives of the underlying regulation. Article 1 of the EU AI Act states that its purpose is "to improve the functioning of the internal market and promote the uptake of human-centric and trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI), while ensuring a high level of protection of health, safety,[and] fundamental rights" while supporting innovation. The regulation, therefore, already embodies the principles that the amendment seeks to advance. In addition, neither "ethical" nor "responsible" is defined in the AI Act or in this Bill. Introducing those terms in a single provision without definition and without corresponding usage elsewhere in the legislative framework could create uncertainty as to whether a different or additional standard is intended to apply to the function of the office. I consider that the existing reference to promoting and fostering AI innovation and literacy is sufficiently broad, and that the wider framework of the AI Act already ensures the innovation is pursued in a manner that is human-centric, trustworthy and protective of fundamental rights. Accordingly, I do not consider the amendment necessary and will not be accepting it.
On amendment No. 4, in much of Senator Higgins's contribution she said that this AI office was not to serve the Government. She is right. It is to serve citizens.
I again thank Senators for their amendments here today and reiterate the purpose of section 9(1)(c) in the Bill is to provide a broad statement of the office's functions. I do not want to be repeating myself, but Article 1 in EU AI Act states that its purpose is "to improve the functioning of the internal market and promote the uptake of human-centric and trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI), while ensuring a high level of protection of health, safety,[and] fundamental rights".
Sustainability in the development of AI is a key focus of the AI Act. The Act already provides for sustainable AI by mandating energy consumption documentation for general purpose AI, promoting energy efficiency standards and utilising AI regulatory sandboxes to develop eco-friendly algorithmics safely. Furthermore, these provisions integrate with the broader EU AI Act strategy to ensure long-term environmental responsibility. The Act also encourages the development of common benchmarks and methodologies to measure and minimise the energy and other resources of AI models throughout the entire life cycle.
The Act requires providers of general purpose AI models to document the known and estimated energy consumption of their models as part of their technical documentation obligations under Annex XI of the AI Act. To support this, the European Commission is currently undertaking a piece of work to develop a robust and practical framework for measuring AI energy and consumption efficiency.
Furthermore, the Bill requires that the office has regard to the policies and objectives of the Government and any Minister of the Government insofar as the policies and objectives may affect or relate to the functions of the office. This provision is broad and captures wider Government policies, including environmental policies. The Act is clear and strong on its emphasis on application in accordance with the values of the Union as enshrined in the Charter, facilitating the protection of natural persons undertaking democracy, the rule of law and environmental protection in the uptake of trustworthy AI. The Government is conscious that the functions of the office may evolve over time but it is important to avoid unnecessary duplication in relation to its functions. The amendment is, therefore, unnecessary and I cannot accept it.
On amendment No. 5, the Bill already contains a number of provisions designed to ensure transparency and accountability in the performance of the office's functions, including requirements to prepare a statutory statement and annual report, both of which must be published. In addition, section 9(4) provides that the office shall have all such powers as are necessary for the performance of its functions. Where research, analysis or the publication of reports is required to support the exercise of those functions the office would already be able to undertake such activities. The proposed amendment would introduce a broad, stand-alone function to prepare and publish reports on research undertaken, sponsored, commissioned or assisted by the office. It is not clear what additional legal effect this would have, particularly as the office would already be capable of publishing research or reports where these support the performance of its statutory functions, including its function to promote AI innovation, literacy and enhanced public awareness. I consider the Bill already provides the appropriate framework and therefore the amendment is not necessary.
On amendment No.6, I acknowledge that Senator McCarthy feels very passionately about the SME sector and how it is implicated in all of this. In my view and in my humble opinion, this is why that effort has been made to have this one-stop shop. With regard to the regulatory framework there is no extra bureaucratic burden. The sandbox is there to ensure the adoption of AI and to allow SMEs comply in an easy way. That will be one of the advantages of having the AI office as the one-stop shop as the regulatory adviser. Businesses in the SME sector will be dealing the regulatory bodies they are used to dealing with in respect of the market surveillance and the competent authorities. That is very much taken into account in the establishment of the AI office. On the amendment's reasoning, section 9(1)(c) of the Bill provides that the office shall promote and foster AI innovation and literacy, which the Senator spoke to. Section 9(1)(d) provides that it shall enhance public awareness in relation to the use of AI systems and the rights and obligations under the artificial intelligence regulation. These functions complement the range of supports that are provided for in the AI Act at an EU level, including guidelines, codes of practice and a service desk, which are intended to support and reinforce a consistent implementation of harmonised rules across the EU. I am satisfied that these provisions already capture what is proposed in paragraphs (h), (i) and (j), and re-stating them in granular subparagraphs would result in legislative duplication without adding any substantive legal effect.
The Bill, through section 46, provides for the establishment of one or more regulatory sandboxes, in accordance with Article 57 of the EU AI Act, with priority access for the SME sector and startups free of charge as mandated by Article 62 of the regulation. This sandbox function is the primary structural vehicle through which the office will support the SME compliance and reduce regulatory barriers in the adoption of AI. The proposed paragraph (k) duplicates what is already embedded in the sandbox and real-world testing frame provided for in Part 3, Chapter 3 of the Bill.
Section 9(1)(f) already requires the office to provide advice to the Minister on matters relating to its function. The proposed paragraph (j) requires the office to provide advice and technical assistance to the Minister, competent authorities, businesses and organisations. It is a repetition of its existing function.
Section 10 of the Bill confers on the Minister the power to assign additional functions to the office by ministerial order, following consultation with the office and relevant Ministers. This ensures that the office's functions can evolve responsibly to alignment with the wider national policy priorities. That is all I have to say for the moment.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-07-09/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:55:11+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-07-09