To improve international co-ordination on mitigating the most severe AI risks, the UK has expanded efforts to contribute to the AI global governance landscape, co-ordinating an international response. These efforts have been in collaboration with global stakeholders, feeding into different channels and mechanisms, such as the Hiroshima AI Process, and the Council of Europe Convention on AI. Within this wider international governance landscape, we are in agreement with the committee that the AI Summit series is now a key contributor to this objective. The Government agrees that a key aim moving forwards should be to sustain the consensus and momentum delivered at Bletchley Park, as we have been with the Seoul Summit and as we support the France AI Action Summit. The inaugural Bletchley Park AI Safety Summit took place in November 2023 to explore and build consensus on international action which promotes safety at the frontier of AI. It was followed by the AI Seoul Summit in May 2024. The summit series has elevated the global conversation on AI safety. It helped further consensus on enabling factors to unlock AI opportunities through the safe development and deployment of the most advanced AI systems. This includes emerging global scientific agreement on the risks and capabilities of frontier AI, safety testing agreements for the third- party evaluation of frontier AI systems, and voluntary agreements from global frontier AI organisations to publish safety frameworks pursuant to the Frontier AI Safety Commitments. We agree with the Committee that international fora should be used to address AI risks, including potential existential risks, and AI Summits are an appropriate place to do this. We are also pleased to take forward action to assess key frontier AI risks outside of the Summit series, including through evaluations conducted by the UK AI Safety Institute. The international network of AI Safety Institutes was agreed at the Seoul Summit between key partners and looks to build global best practice around AI safety evaluations among countries with established or emerging AISI capabilities. The establishment of the Network demonstrates the ongoing effort to share information about frontier AI models, their limitations, capabilities and risks to promote the safe, secure and trustworthy development of AI internationally. The establishment of AI Safety Institutes presents an opportunity to understand a spectrum of frontier AI risks and share best practice internationally. This work, paired with our commitment to international collaboration and through the Summit series, will drive forward the international conversation on AI risks, including appropriate international preparedness in the case those critical risk thresholds are triggered. Whilst the UK’s priority remains to continue the momentum we have built around international co-operation on frontier AI safety risks, the Summit series has never been narrowly focused. For example, while technical agreements on particular frontier AI risks were established at Bletchley and Seoul, a wider range of risks, and opportunities were also discussed to reflect that frontier AI systems can contribute to a variety of issues, including those that can impact global inclusion, innovation and access, as well as supporting progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals. We welcome the continued discussions which will take place at the France AI Action Summit in February 2025, as France has suggested a wide range of AI topics that represent the global impact of AI. This includes looking at how the world can harness the opportunities of AI in the public interest, e.g. strengthening access to data and compute. Finally, in the context of an increasingly populated and complex international AI governance landscape (e.g., network of AISIs, UN bodies and initiatives, G7 Hiroshima Process, OECD-GPAI integrated partnership, Council of Europe Convention on AI), we believe, in agreement with the committee, that the AI collaboration on AI safety among Governments, companies, academia and civil society to maximise the benefits of AI. We agree that harmonisation for harmonisation’s sake is not the aim, but rather that we should seek coherent, coordinated approaches to ensure we are effectively working together to mitigate the most critical frontier AI safety risks. Government response to Committee recommendation 60