APS AI Tracker

ALRC

Australian Law Reform Commission

View the original ↗

Tracked since 26 Feb 2026 · 2 changes of substance across 4 captures · last changed 10 June 2026

The story so far

How to read this

  1. Tracking begins. The statement already existed; when Australian Law Reform Commission first published it is not recorded.

  2. substantive Rewrites the statement: Copilot now live for staff, a new AI working group and legal-research tools flagged, named officials and the assurance-framework pilot dropped.

    read by Claude Opus 5
    • Microsoft Copilot now in actual use by all staff (previously only an intended April 2025 trial)
    • Removed: names of the Accountable Official (Mandeep Bahia) and Executive Director (Ruth Barson), now only titles
    • New statement that AI is not used in ways the public directly interacts with or is significantly impacted by, with a promise to update if that changes
    • New disclosure of a February 2026 staff working group assessing broader AI use, including submission analysis, proofing and document handling
    • LexisNexis AI+ and Westlaw Edge named as tools under consideration for future legal research
    • Explicit claim that AI is not used for law reform activities and does not materially influence inquiry outputs
    • Removed: participation in the pilot Australian Government AI assurance framework
    • Removed: detailed list of sensitive material types and the link to the ALRC Privacy Policy and PSPF guidelines
    • Removed: commitment to AI fundamentals training for all staff regardless of role
    • Removed: Accountable Official duty to report to the President and Audit & Risk Committee
    • New sections classifying use case (workplace productivity, corporate and enabling) and setting update triggers alongside the twelve-month cadence
    • Named tool dropped: Lexis+ AI
    • Commitment dropped (will): Implement AI fundamentals training for all staff, regardless of role
    • Commitment dropped (will): Staff must complete internal generative AI training before using Copilot
    • New commitment (will not): Do not use AI for law reform activities: legal analysis, drafting or recommendations
    • New commitment (will): Update the statement if public-facing use, or additional usage patterns or domains, arise
    • New commitment (will): Use AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes
    Show the words that changed ↓

  3. substantive Replaces planned AI work with an active pilot, naming Lexis+ AI with Protégé and Westlaw Precision for legal research, and listing permitted uses and limits.

    read by Claude Opus 5
    • Discloses an active AI pilot governed by an internal framework, replacing 'planned AI work'
    • Names LexisNexis Lexis+ AI with Protégé and Thomson Reuters Westlaw Precision Australia (AI-Assisted Research) for legal research
    • Lists approved uses: operational efficiency, summarising, meeting notes, drafting, legal research and analysis
    • Commits that AI is not used for legal reasoning, independent analysis, or inquiry findings and recommendations
    • Adds commitment that all AI outputs are reviewed and verified, with staff accountable for final content
    • Removed: February 2026 staff working group and its assessment of trials for submission analysis, proofing and document handling
    • Removed: statement about internal guidance and SharePoint page, staff acknowledgement before access, and warnings on sensitive material
    • Commitment dropped (human oversight): Do not rely on authenticity or veracity of AI-generated content without external verification
    • Commitment dropped (will not): Prohibit distribution of sensitive material to third parties, e.g. pasting into AI software
    • Commitment dropped (will): Staff must acknowledge the AI tools policy before accessing generative AI tools
    • Domain added: policy and legal
    • Named tool added: LexisNexis Lexis+ AI
    • Named tool added: Thomson Reuters Westlaw Precision Australia
    • New commitment (human oversight): All AI outputs are reviewed, verified against source material and refined before use
    • New commitment (human oversight): Staff remain accountable for all decisions and final content
    • New commitment (will not): AI not used in legal reasoning, to substitute independent analysis, or produce inquiry findings
    • Usage pattern added: analytics for insights
    Show the words that changed ↓

What the statement says

How to read this

The ALRC says its current AI use is limited to workplace productivity with Microsoft Copilot and Microsoft 365 Copilot in the corporate and enabling domain, alongside a controlled pilot of legal AI tools (Lexis+ AI, Westlaw Precision) supporting legal research and analysis, with no public-facing use and no AI in legal reasoning or inquiry findings. Governance rests with an AI Accountable Official (Director of Operations and Finance), supported by an internal use-case register, staff guidance and training requirements, and mandatory human review of all AI outputs. read by Claude Opus 5

What it says AI is used for

  • Workplace productivity
  • Analytics for insights
  • Corporate and enabling
  • Policy and legal

Named tools: Microsoft 365 Copilot, Microsoft Copilot, LexisNexis Lexis+ AI, Thomson Reuters Westlaw Precision Australia

Public-facing AI: none

Safeguards named: risk assessment, human review of outputs, staff training, use-case register, privacy or security controls, an acceptable-use policy

Against the Standard 8/8

  • Intentions behind AI use
  • Use classified by DTA usage pattern or domain
  • Public-facing use addressed
  • Monitoring and protection measures
  • Compliance with the policy
  • Compliance with legislation
  • Date last updated
  • Public contact

What the policy requiresPolicy v2.0

Accountable official
Director of Operations and Finance
Strategic position on AI
planned
AI use-case register
in place
Staff training
mandatory
Policy version referenced
unspecified version

What the AI Plan asksAI Plan

Chief AI Officer
not mentioned

Currency as of 29 Aug 2026

Review cadence
annually and when the approach changes
Says it was last updated
10 Jun 2026
Last change we observed
10 June 2026
Updated since policy 2.0
yes
Annual review
within a year of its own date

Commitments

  • will notDo not use AI for law reform activities: legal analysis, drafting or recommendations
  • will notAI not used in legal reasoning, to substitute independent analysis, or produce inquiry findings
  • human oversightAll AI outputs are reviewed, verified against source material and refined before use
  • human oversightStaff remain accountable for all decisions and final content
  • willUpdate the statement as our approach changes and at least every twelve months
  • willRecord all AI use cases in an internal register
  • willUse AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes
  • willUpdate the statement if public-facing use, or additional usage patterns or domains, arise

The statement

How to read this

The Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) Policy for the responsible use of AI in government requires agencies to designate AI accountable officials and publish a public AI transparency statement. This page provides details of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC)’s implementation of these requirements.

The ALRC has an AI Accountable Official under the policy. The ALRC’s AI Accountable Official is the Director of Operations and Finance, reporting to the Executive Director of the ALRC. There is no change to the ALRC’s accountable official.

The AI Accountable Official has primary responsibility for the development and application of the ALRC’s AI policy and implementation approach, including:

  • facilitating ALRC involvement in cross-government AI coordination and collaboration
  • developing and maintaining the ALRC’s AI policy and supporting resources
  • uplifting governance, education and guidance for AI use in the ALRC
  • embedding a culture that balances AI risk management and innovation
  • supporting adaptation to changes in whole-of-government AI policy over time.

ALRC’s approach to AI adoption and use

The ALRC is committed to adopting and using AI in a way that is safe, ethical, accountable and transparent, consistent with Australian Government requirements and community expectations.

At present, the ALRC’s approach is to:

  • use AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes, and
  • build organisational capability and governance so we can assess whether, and how, AI might responsibly support additional activities over time (subject to risk assessment and approvals).

As part of this commitment, the ALRC maintains internal guidance and training requirements for staff on the safe and responsible use of AI tools.

Public interaction and impactAlso appears in 14 other agenciesABSACCCACQSCAERAICAIFSARPANSAASSEABOMCCADCCEEWGBRMPANHFBWGEA

The ALRC is not using AI in a way the public can directly interact with, or be significantly impacted by, If this changes, we will update this statement to describe the use and safeguards

The ALRC does not use AI for strictly law reform activities, including legal analysis, drafting or recommendations. AI does not produce or materially influence inquiry outputs.

Corporate and workplace productivity

Our current AI use is limited to workplace productivity. All staff have access to Microsoft Copilot, and Microsoft 365 Copilot is available to approved roles across the organisation (for example, for collaboration, meeting support, and drafting and summarising routine material).

Current trials and pilot use of AI

We are trialling the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to support ALRC staff to work more effectively and to assist with our responsibilities in a controlled and low‑risk way. This pilot is governed by an internal framework that sets out approved tools, including Microsoft 365 Copilot for productivity and operational efficiency and selected legal AI tools — LexisNexis Lexis+ AI with Protégé and Thomson Reuters Westlaw Precision Australia with AI‑Assisted Research — to support legal research, analysis and synthesis.

In this pilot, AI may be used to:

  • support operational efficiencies, such as calendar and email management
  • summarise and organise information from approved documents and materials
  • prepare meeting notes, transcripts, summaries and action items
  • assist with internal planning, coordination and other operational tasks
  • help draft and refine internal and / or non-sensitive content and routine correspondence
  • support legal research, drafting and analysis including by:
  • identifying potentially relevant cases, legislation and other sources
  • identifying themes, issues and patterns in academic, consultation or submission material
  • comparing approaches across jurisdictions
  • checking whether sources support a stated proposition
  • assisting with editing, proof reading and spelling and grammar checking legal and policy work.

AI is not being trialled to produce substantive ALRC work from scratch – it is not being used in legal reasoning, to substitute independent analysis, or to produce inquiry findings or recommendations.

AI supports staff, but it does not replace human judgement. All AI outputs are reviewed, verified against source material, and refined before use. ALRC staff remain accountable for all decisions and final content.

Within the ALRC, all AI use cases are recorded in an internal register to track their progress and status. For new and emerging potential uses of AI, it is the responsibility of the AI Accountable Authority to:

  • Ensure that any AI is implemented safely and responsibly
  • Monitor the effectiveness of the deployed AI system
  • Ensure legal and regulatory compliance of the ICT system
  • Identify potential negative impacts of the AI use case
  • Implement measures to mitigate potential harms from AI

Classification of AI system use casesAlso appears in 2 other agenciesAUSTRADEDTA

The DTA standard requires agencies to classify AI use by usage pattern and domain.

The ALRC’s current AI use is classified as:

  • Usage pattern: Workplace productivity using Microsoft CoPilot and Copilot 365.
  • Domain: Corporate and enabling.

If the ALRC’s AI use expands to additional usage patterns or domains, we will update this statement accordingly.

Updates to this statementAlso appears in 4 other agenciesAECAPSCAUSTRADEBOM

This statement will be updated as the ALRC’s approach to AI changes, and at least every twelve months. It may also be updated sooner when the ALRC makes a significant change to its approach to AI, or when any new factor materially impacts the statement’s accuracy.

For enquiries about the ALRC’s adoption of AI, contact: [email protected]

Statement text © Australian Law Reform Commission, reproduced for transparency tracking (most agency content is CC BY 4.0 — check the original for specifics).

Every revision

Every capture the daily scrape recorded that differed from the last, including edits with no change of substance. Pick a dot to view the statement as it stood at that capture.

  1. substantive+996

    Replaces planned AI work with an active pilot, naming Lexis+ AI with Protégé and Westlaw Precision for legal research, and listing permitted uses and limits.

    read by Claude Opus 5
    View diff
    # AI Transparency Statement The Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) Policy for the responsible use of AI in government requires agencies to designate AI accountable officials and publish a public AI transparency statement. This page provides details of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC)’s implementation of these requirements. ## **Accountable Official** The ALRC has an AI Accountable Official under the policy. The ALRC’s AI Accountable Official is the Director of Operations and Finance, reporting to the Executive Director of the ALRC. There is no change to the ALRC’s accountable official. The AI Accountable Official has primary responsibility for the development and application of the ALRC’s AI policy and implementation approach, including: - facilitating ALRC involvement in cross-government AI coordination and collaboration - developing and maintaining the ALRC’s AI policy and supporting resources - uplifting governance, education and guidance for AI use in the ALRC - embedding a culture that balances AI risk management and innovation - monitoring implementation - supporting adaptation to changes in whole-of-government AI policy over time. ## **ALRC’s approach to AI adoption and use** The ALRC is committed to adopting and using AI in a way that is safe, ethical, accountable and transparent, consistent with Australian Government requirements and community expectations. At present, the ALRC’s approach is to: - use AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes, and - build organisational capability and governance so we can assess whether, and how, AI might responsibly support additional activities over time (subject to risk assessment and approvals). As part of this commitment, the ALRC maintains internal guidance and training requirements for staff on the safe and responsible use of AI tools. ## **How the ALRC uses AI** ### **Public interaction and impact** The ALRC is not using AI in a way the public can directly interact with, or be significantly impacted by, If this changes, we will update this statement to describe the use and safeguards ### **Law reform activities** The ALRC does not use AI for strictly law reform activities, including legal analysis, drafting or recommendations. AI does not produce or materially influence inquiry outputs. ### **Corporate and workplace productivity** Our current AI use is limited to workplace productivity. All staff have access to Microsoft Copilot, and Microsoft 365 Copilot is available to approved roles across the organisation (for example, for collaboration, meeting support, and drafting and summarising routine material). ## **Planned AI work** In February 2026, the ALRC established aCurrent trials and pilot use of AI We are trialling the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to support ALRC staff to working group to assess broader AI use, including potential trials for inquiry-adjacent tasks such as submission analysis support, proofing and document handling (subject to governance and approval). The group is also considering legal-specific tools (for example, L more effectively and to assist with our responsibilities in a controlled and low‑risk way. This pilot is governed by an internal framework that sets out approved tools, including Microsoft 365 Copilot for productivity and operational efficiency and selected legal AI tools — LexisNexisN Lexis+ AI+ and Westlaw Edge) for possible future legal research support, noting the with Protégé and Thomson Reuters Westlaw Precision Australia with AI‑Assisted Research — to support legal research, analysis and synthesis. In this pilot, AI may be used tools are not currently use: - support operational efficiencies, such as calendar and email management - summarise and for inquiry work. We have internal guidance and a SharePoint page on the use of AI tools. Staff are required to confirm and acknowledge theganise information from approved documents and materials - prepare meeting notes, transcripts, summaries and action items - assist with internal planning, coordination and other operational tasks - help draft and refine internal and / or non-sensitive content and routine correspondence - support legal research, drafting and analysis including by: - identifying potentially are familiar with this guidance before accessing AI tools. Our guidance reminds staff to verify AI-generated content and to avoid sharing or copylevant cases, legislation and other sources - identifying themes, issues and patterns in academic, consultation or submission material - summarising legal materials - comparing approaches across jurisdictions - checking whether sources support a stated proposition - assisting with editing, proof reading and spelling and grammar checking legal and policy work. AI is not being trialled to produce substantive ALRC work from scratch – it is not being usensitive material into AI tools, consistend in legal reasoning, to substitute independent analysis, or to produce inquiry findings or recommendations. AI supports staff, but with relevant Australian Government security and privacy requirem does not replace human judgement. All AI outputs are reviewed, verified against source material, and refined before use. ALRC staff remain accountable for all decisions and final contents. ## **AI safety and governance** Within the ALRC, all AI use cases are recorded in an internal register to track their progress and status. For new and emerging potential uses of AI, it is the responsibility of the AI Accountable Authority to: - Ensure that any AI is implemented safely and responsibly - Monitor the effectiveness of the deployed AI system - Ensure legal and regulatory compliance of the ICT system - Identify potential negative impacts of the AI use case - Implement measures to mitigate potential harms from AI ## **Classification of AI system use cases** The DTA standard requires agencies to classify AI use by usage pattern and domain. The ALRC’s current AI use is classified as: - Usage pattern: Workplace productivity using Microsoft CoPilot and Copilot 365. - Domain: Corporate and enabling. If the ALRC’s AI use expands to additional usage patterns or domains, we will update this statement accordingly. ## **Updates to this statement** This statement will be updated as the ALRC’s approach to AI changes, and at least every twelve months. It may also be updated sooner when the ALRC makes a significant change to its approach to AI, or when any new factor materially impacts the statement’s accuracy. ## **Contact** For enquiries about the ALRC’s adoption of AI, contact: [email protected]
    a07889f
  2. scrape noise-26

    No agency edit: the contact email now appears masked by the site's email-protection script rather than as a real address change.

    read by Claude Opus 5
    View diff
    # AI Transparency Statement The Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) Policy for the responsible use of AI in government requires agencies to designate AI accountable officials and publish a public AI transparency statement. This page provides details of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC)’s implementation of these requirements. ## **Accountable Official** The ALRC has an AI Accountable Official under the policy. The ALRC’s AI Accountable Official is the Director of Operations and Finance, reporting to the Executive Director of the ALRC. There is no change to the ALRC’s accountable official. The AI Accountable Official has primary responsibility for the development and application of the ALRC’s AI policy and implementation approach, including: - facilitating ALRC involvement in cross-government AI coordination and collaboration - developing and maintaining the ALRC’s AI policy and supporting resources - uplifting governance, education and guidance for AI use in the ALRC - embedding a culture that balances AI risk management and innovation - monitoring implementation - supporting adaptation to changes in whole-of-government AI policy over time. ## **ALRC’s approach to AI adoption and use** The ALRC is committed to adopting and using AI in a way that is safe, ethical, accountable and transparent, consistent with Australian Government requirements and community expectations. At present, the ALRC’s approach is to: - use AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes, and - build organisational capability and governance so we can assess whether, and how, AI might responsibly support additional activities over time (subject to risk assessment and approvals). As part of this commitment, the ALRC maintains internal guidance and training requirements for staff on the safe and responsible use of AI tools. ## **How the ALRC uses AI** ### **Public interaction and impact** The ALRC is not using AI in a way the public can directly interact with, or be significantly impacted by, If this changes, we will update this statement to describe the use and safeguards ### **Law reform activities** The ALRC does not use AI for strictly law reform activities, including legal analysis, drafting or recommendations. AI does not produce or materially influence inquiry outputs. ### **Corporate and workplace productivity** Our current AI use is limited to workplace productivity. All staff have access to Microsoft Copilot, and Microsoft 365 Copilot is available to approved roles across the organisation (for example, for collaboration, meeting support, and drafting and summarising routine material). ## **Planned AI work** In February 2026, the ALRC established a staff working group to assess broader AI use, including potential trials for inquiry-adjacent tasks such as submission analysis support, proofing and document handling (subject to governance and approval). The group is also considering legal-specific tools (for example, LexisNexis AI+ and Westlaw Edge) for possible future legal research support, noting these tools are not currently used for inquiry work. We have internal guidance and a SharePoint page on the use of AI tools. Staff are required to confirm and acknowledge they are familiar with this guidance before accessing AI tools. Our guidance reminds staff to verify AI-generated content and to avoid sharing or copying sensitive material into AI tools, consistent with relevant Australian Government security and privacy requirements. ## **AI safety and governance** Within the ALRC, all AI use cases are recorded in an internal register to track their progress and status. For new and emerging potential uses of AI, it is the responsibility of the AI Accountable Authority to: - Ensure that any AI is implemented safely and responsibly - Monitor the effectiveness of the deployed AI system - Ensure legal and regulatory compliance of the ICT system - Identify potential negative impacts of the AI use case - Implement measures to mitigate potential harms from AI ## **Classification of AI system use cases** The DTA standard requires agencies to classify AI use by usage pattern and domain. The ALRC’s current AI use is classified as: - Usage pattern: Workplace productivity using Microsoft CoPilot and Copilot 365. - Domain: Corporate and enabling. If the ALRC’s AI use expands to additional usage patterns or domains, we will update this statement accordingly. ## **Updates to this statement** This statement will be updated as the ALRC’s approach to AI changes, and at least every twelve months. It may also be updated sooner when the ALRC makes a significant change to its approach to AI, or when any new factor materially impacts the statement’s accuracy. ## **Contact** For enquiries about the ALRC’s adoption of AI, contact: [info@alrc.gov.au](mailto:info@alrc.gov.au)email protected]
    8c8591c
  3. substantive-182

    Rewrites the statement: Copilot now live for staff, a new AI working group and legal-research tools flagged, named officials and the assurance-framework pilot dropped.

    read by Claude Opus 5
    View diff
    # AI Transparency Statement The pDigital Transformation Agency (DTA) Policy for the responsible use of AI in government provides mandatory requirements for departments and agencies relating torequires agencies to designate AI accountable officials and publish a public AI transparency statements. This page provides details of the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC)’s implementation of these policy requirements. ## **Accountable Official** The ALRC has an AI Accountable Official under the policy,. The ALRC’s AI Accountable Official is the Director of Operations and Finance (Mandeep Bahia), reporting to the Executive Director of the ALRC (Ruth Barson). There is no change to the ALRC’s accountable official. The AI Accountable Official has primary responsibility for the development and application of the ALRC’s AI policy across the follownd implementation approach, including: - Ffacilitating ALRC involvement in cross-government AI coordination and collaboration - Ddeveloping and maintaining the ALRC’s AI policy and its associated implementation plansupporting resources - uplifting governance, education and guidance for AI use in the ALRC - Eembedding a culture that fairly balances AI risk management and innovation - Uplifting governance and education of AI adoption in the ALRC - Enhancing the response andmonitoring implementation - supporting adaptation to AI policy changes in the ALRC - Encouraging the development or alignment of an ALRC or Inquiry-specific AI policy - Reviewing and monitoring ALRC’s AI policy implementation regularly and providing feedback to the ALRC’s President and Audit & Risk Committeewhole-of-government AI policy over time. ## **ALRC’s Aapproach to AI Aadoption and Uuse** The ALRC has not yet used AI is committed to adopting any formal setting or supported any Law Reform activities to date. Our intention is to trial the adoption of AI in 2025 and beyond as part of d using AI in a way that is safe, ethical, accountable and transparent, consistent withe Australian Government’s commitment to digital innov requirements and community expectations. The ALRC is committed to demonstrating, encouraging, and supporting the safe and responsible adoption of AI within the Australian Public Service, and in digital and ICT investments, systems, and digital services. As part of this commitment, we will implement AI fundamentals training for all staff, regardless of their rAt present, the ALRC’s approach is to: - use AI only for approved, low-risk workplace productivity purposes, and - build organisational capability and governance so we can assess whether, and how, AI might responsibly support additional activities over time (subject to risk assessment and approvals). As part of this commitment, the ALRC maintains internal guidance and training requirements for staff on the safe and responsible use of AI tooles. ## **How the ALRC Uuses AI At this time, we are not using AI to support any of our Law Reform activities or engage with the public. From April 2025 we intend to trial AI to support Workplace Productivity and trial generative AI service, Microsoft 365 Copilot. We understand that the Australian government trailed this software from 1 January 2024 to 30 June 2024 and a number of commonwealth agencies have adopted this software. Copilot has yet to be formally announced internally or made available to staff officially. As a prerequisite to using Copilot, ALRC staff are required to complete internal training on the use of generative AI. We also intend to consider the use of AI tools to support Legal Research and will look to Pilot Lexis Nexis+ AI or similar such products which are used within the legal industry to support research. We have a policy and SharePoint page on the use of AI tools by staff, which staff are required to confirm and acknowledge they are familiar with before accessing any generative AI tools online. This policy encourages and assists staff to: - Not rely on the authenticity or veracity of content generated by AI, without external verification. - Prohibit the distribution of sensi** ### **Public interaction and impact** The ALRC is not using AI in a way the public can directly interact with, or be significantly impacted by, If this changes, we will update this statement to describe the use and safeguards ### **Law reform activities** The ALRC does not use AI for strictly law reform activities, including legal analysis, drafting or recommendations. AI does not produce or materially influence inquiry outputs. ### **Corporate and workplace productivity** Our current AI use is limited to workplace productivity. All staff have access to Microsoft Copilot, and Microsoft 365 Copilot is available to approved roles across the organisation (for example, for collaboration, meeting support, and drafting and summarising routivne material (as outlined in Clause 9.2 in the [Australian Government Protective Security Policy Framework – Release 2024 Guidelines](https://www.pr). ## **Planned AI work** In February 2026, the ALRC established a staff working group to assess broader AI use, including potecntivesecurity.gov.au/system/files/2025-02/pspf-release-2024-guidelines_0.pdf)) to third parties, for example by copy-and-pasting sensitive content into AI software. - Sensitive materials contain information which, if disclosed without authorisation, could cause harm to an organisation, individual, or national security. These may include but is not limited to: - legal analysis documents, - confidential cal trials for inquiry-adjacent tasks such as submission analysis support, proofing and document handling (subject to governance and approval). The group is also considering legal-specific tools (for example, LexisNexis AI+ and Westlaw Edge) for porate information, - personal staff information, - stakeholder consultations, - judicial reviews for ALRC papers, - outcomes of Commissioner meetings, - ALRC internal discussion papers. The above is in line with the [ALRC Privacy Policy](https://www.alrc.gov.au/about/policies/privacy-policy/). The ALRC is participating in the Pilot Australian Government AI assurance framework. Through our participation in this pilot, we are exploring the potential for AI to be used by our staff and by our ICT systems. The ALRC will use AI in the domain of Corporate and Enabling, and usage pattern of Workplace Productivityssible future legal research support, noting these tools are not currently used for inquiry work. We have internal guidance and a SharePoint page on the use of AI tools. Staff are required to confirm and acknowledge they are familiar with this guidance before accessing AI tools. Our guidance reminds staff to verify AI-generated content and to avoid sharing or copying sensitive material into AI tools, consistent with relevant Australian Government security and privacy requirements. ## **AI Ssafety and Ggovernance** Within the ALRC, all AI use cases are recorded in an internal register to track their progress and status. For new and emerging potential uses of AI, it is the responsibility of the AI Accountable Authority to: - Ensure that any AI is implemented safely and responsibly - Monitor the effectiveness of the deployed AI system - Ensure legal and regulatory compliance of the ICT system - Identify potential negative impacts of the AI use case - Implement measures to mitigate potential harms from AI It will be updated as our approach to AI changes, and at least every twelve months. For further information or enquiries about the ALRC’s adoption of artificial intelligence, you can contact us directly at## **Classification of AI system use cases** The DTA standard requires agencies to classify AI use by usage pattern and domain. The ALRC’s current AI use is classified as: - Usage pattern: Workplace productivity using Microsoft CoPilot and Copilot 365. - Domain: Corporate and enabling. If the ALRC’s AI use expands to additional usage patterns or domains, we will update this statement accordingly. ## **Updates to this statement** This statement will be updated as the ALRC’s approach to AI changes, and at least every twelve months. It may also be updated sooner when the ALRC makes a significant change to its approach to AI, or when any new factor materially impacts the statement’s accuracy. ## **Contact** For enquiries about the ALRC’s adoption of AI, contact: [info@alrc.gov.au](mailto:info@alrc.gov.au).
    ecb63ae
  4. first tracked+5061

    First tracked revision.

    c6ef5b8