Updates to AI transparency statements

Question

In response to a question on notice asked during SBE25-26 with portfolio question number F292, DTA advised that "[a]gencies must update their [AI transparency] statement at least once a year, or sooner if there is a significant change to the agency's approach to AI or new factors that materially impact the existing statement's accuracy...If an agency has not updated its transparency statement since February 2025, it will need to do so in February 2026." 1. As of April 2026, it would appear that the following agencies and departments did not update their statement within the required timeframe: Office of Parliamentary Counsel, Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Australian Institute of Criminology, Seafarers Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Authority, Cancer Australia, National Health and Medicine Research Council, National Health Funding Body, Office of the Inspector-General of Aged Care, Geoscience Australia, Commonwealth Grants Commission, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Office of the Official Secretary to the Governor-General, Workplace Gender Equality Agency, Australian Transport Safety Bureau and National Capital Authority. For each of these agencies and departments, please identify whether DTA believes the agency/department did not update their statement within the required timeframe. 2. In addition, it appears that the following agencies may not have updated their statement within the required timeframe: Attorney-General's Department, Office of the Special Investigator, Safe Work Australia, Australian Trade and Investment Commission, Organ and Tissue Authority, Sport Integrity Australia, Net Zero Economy Authority and Australian Communications and Media Authority. For each of these agencies and departments, please identify whether DTA believes the agency/department did not update their statement within the required timeframe. 3. Since February 2026, which agencies not covered by the above lists did DTA identify as having not reviewed their AI transparency statement within the required timeframe? 4. For all agencies which did not review their AI transparency statement within the required timeframe, identify when this noncompliance was identified by DTA, when this was communicated to the agency and when the agency's AI transparency statement was updated. 5. At the estimates hearing on 28 May, DTA's CEO gave evidence that "We have 94 entities that are in scope of the policy framework of responsible AI. All 94 are compliant with the policy as at today." A week on from that hearing, the National Health and Medicine Research Council's statement had still not been updated and the Professional Services Review's website still displayed an 'access denied' message when attempting to access their statement. Given that the policy provides that AI transparency statements "must be reviewed and updated annually or sooner, should the agency make significant changes to its approach to AI", were all 94 entities compliant with this requirement on the day this evidence was given to the committee? If not, how many were and will DTA correct its evidence?

Answer

Please see the attached answer.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• F102.pdf (opens in a new tab)