artificial intelligence law

Office of AI announced by Federal Government

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

4–6 minutes

On 15 July 2026, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (Prime Minister) announced by media release an expansion of the Federal Government’s (Government) existing artificial intelligence (AI) governance framework, including the establishment of a new Office of AI as well as plans to legislate national standards governing large-scale data centres, AI training and the use of Australian copyright material.

The Government expects to introduce the proposed laws into Parliament in early 2027.

Establishment of the Office of AI

The Office of AI commenced operation within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet on 15 July 2026.  The Prime Minister said in his media release that the Office of AI will coordinate the Government’s AI policy across departments and oversee the development of the proposed Australian Standards for AI.  Those standards will build on an existing body of voluntary guidance under the Government’s National AI Plan, including the National AI Centre’s Guidance for AI Adoption and its earlier Voluntary AI Safety Standard, as well as international standards adopted by Standards Australia.  These standards remain voluntary unless incorporated into legislation, regulation or contractual obligations.

Mandatory standards for large data centres

The proposed standards will establish nationally consistent rules concerning where large data centres may be built and how they use electricity and water.

The Government intends to create a legal obligation for the next generation of large-scale data centres to fund new electricity generation, pay their full grid-connection costs and contribute at least as much electricity to the grid as they consume.

The Prime Minister described the intended approach as requiring data centres to become “net-generators, not net-users.”

Data centres will also be required to minimise their water consumption, maximise energy efficiency and pay for additional water infrastructure required for their operations.  The Prime Minister said in his speech that these measures are intended to ensure that the rapid expansion of data centres does not increase household and business electricity costs.

 AI training and use of copyright material

In his speech, the Prime Minister made the following statements:

“Australian writers, musicians, artists and journalists must retain ownership and control of their work.
Our laws will spell that out, plain as day.
An artist’s creative endeavour is their work and their property.
No company should use Australian books, music, art or news to build or train AI without the artist’s control.
That includes the artist’s control of the price and value of their work.
Anything less, is theft”.

The Government’s proposed standards are therefore expected to address whether copyright material may be used for AI training and the conditions or compensation for rightsholders applying to that use, though no legal model has been released.

What the announcement means for businesses

The proposed changes have not yet been legislated so this announcement does not alter existing legal obligations of data centre operators, AI developers or businesses adopting and using AI. 

More useless red tape or necessary guardrails?

Here’s hoping that the Office of AI doesn’t stifle the very innovation they state they intend to foster by adding to the significant administrative and compliance burden on businesses adopting AI by requiring them to:

  • register with the Office of AI;
  • conduct a risk assessment of the AI System adopted;
  • develop an AI Compliance System;
  • appoint an AI Compliance Officer;
  • assign a “risk rating” to the AI System implemented;
  • consider the impacts of the AI System adopted on disadvantaged or vulnerable consumers;
  • conduct risk assessments into whether or not consumers and employees could be affected by the adoption of AI and keep records about the risk assessment process undertaken; and
  • complete technical risk assessments into the security of any personal information collected and stored in an AI system;

That said, it seems inevitable that one of the consequences of this “innovation” at least in part will be consequential amendments to the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) and the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) to introduce offences that relate to irresponsible implementation of AI Systems by businesses. 

What happens next?

National Cabinet is expected to consider the proposed framework in August 2026.  The Government will then consult with industry, state and territory governments, trading partners, copyright owners and other stakeholders before introducing legislation, which is presently expected in early 2027.

Further details are also expected concerning the Government’s broader AI consumer-safety priorities and the relationship between the Office of AI and Australia’s $30 million AI Safety Institute which became operational in June 2026.

Links and further references

Federal Government publications

Media release, ‘AI in Australia’s Interests’, 15 July 2026.
Speech, ‘AI in Australia’s Interests’, 15 July 2026.

Existing voluntary Australian AI guidance

National Artificial Intelligence Centre, Voluntary AI Safety Standard: Guiding Safe and Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Australia.
Australian Government, Guidance for AI Adoption: Implementation Guidance.

Standards Australia Information Technology standards

Standards Australia, Artificial Intelligence — Management System standard, AS ISO/IEC 42001:2023 (2023).
Standards Australia, Artificial Intelligence — Guidance on Risk Management standard, AS ISO/IEC 23894:2023 (2023).
Standards Australia, Governance of IT — Governance Implications of the Use of Artificial Intelligence by Organizations standard, AS ISO/IEC 38507:2022 (2022).

Legislation

Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) sch 1.

Further information

If you need advice on the legal obligations when implementing AI into your business, please contact us for a confidential and obligation‑free discussion.

Doyles Recommended TMT Lawyer 2024


Related insights

  • Domain name disputes – a summary of the process

    Domain name disputes – a summary of the process

    A domain name is a string of text that maps to an alphanumeric IP address, enabling users to access websites through client-side software.[1]  Domains can be valuable business assets, and they frequently become the subject of disputes regarding the legitimacy of their registration among organisations with competing rights.

    Read more …

  • New OAIC guidance on Artificial Intelligence

    New OAIC guidance on Artificial Intelligence

    On 21 October 2024, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) published two (2) new guides on artificial intelligence (AI), purportedly in effort to make privacy compliance easier for business.

    Read more …

  • Artificial Intelligence defined – why no uniform approach?

    Artificial Intelligence defined – why no uniform approach?

    Artificial Intelligence (AI) is commonly thought of as the capacity of computer systems to execute tasks that usually need human intelligence, such as learning, reasoning, and making decisions.[1]  It covers a range of specialised fields, each focusing on different functions.  For example, machine learning allows computers to learn from data, computer vision enables them to…

    Read more …

  • Updated USPTO guidelines on AI assisted inventions

    Updated USPTO guidelines on AI assisted inventions

    In response to the Biden administration’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence on 30 October 2023, which outlined policies and principles to promote responsible Artificial Intelligence innovation and competition, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued inventorship guidance for artificial intelligence (AI) assisted inventions.  These…

    Read more …

  • Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Justice Burley of the Federal Court of Australia in the case of Siemens Industry Software Inc v Telstra Corporation Limited [2020] FCA 901 ordered that Telstra, within fourteen (14) days, provide to Siemens all documents in its control relating to the identity of certain Telstra Account holders.  Those account holders were suspected by Siemens of…

    Read more …

  • The Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) – key points

    The Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) – key points

    On 30 November 2023, the Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) and the Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023 (Digital ID Bills) were introduced in the Australian Senate.  Digital IDs are designed to provide individuals with a convenient way to verify their identity when completing certain online transactions and dealing with government and certain…

    Read more …

  • What are adequate cybersecurity measures?

    What are adequate cybersecurity measures?

    The adequacy of cyber security measures was considered in the case of Australian Securities and Investments Commission v RI Advice Group Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 496 (ASIC v Ri Advice Group).  One of the issues raised was whether the respondent had adequate cyber security and cyber resilience in place across its network of financial advisors. …

    Read more …

  • National Classification Scheme – proposed federal changes

    National Classification Scheme – proposed federal changes

    Albanese Government announces intention to reform National Classification Scheme, proposing R18+ for games simulating gambling and M for computer games with paid loot boxes/in-game purchases linked to chance. Learn more about proposed reforms and if simulated gambling needs to be addressed.

    Read more …

  • Digital Platform Services Inquiry – submissions sought

    Digital Platform Services Inquiry – submissions sought

    The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is investigating the activities of digital platform service providers and their impact on competition, consumerism, and business. Have your say and make a submission by 5 April 2023. Learn more in the seventh report of the Digital Platform Services Inquiry.

    Read more …

Related cases

  • Rana v Google Inc (No 3) [2023] FCA 199

    A Federal Court of Australia decision could have major implications for legal proceedings. Get the full story by reading the judgement referenced in the article.

Send this to a friend