Sample comms
Two press releases and two second-reading passages, written for reuse and labelled as such - the same declaration the key-messages document makes: we write lines hoping they travel, in public, dated. Square brackets mark the office's insertions.
Press release variant A - for the consumer safety priorities statement
Australians will always know who decided
The Albanese Government today set out its whole-of-government AI consumer safety priorities, putting one principle at the centre of every rule to follow: every determination has an author.
Wherever an automated system informs a decision that affects a person - a benefit, a job application, a loan, a licence - the record will show the person responsible. The affected person will be told what informed the decision, and review will mean review by someone with the power to change the outcome. Not a rubber stamp; a substitute decision if the first one was wrong.
[Minister]: "We are regulating the mechanism, not the marketing. These priorities attach obligations to things that can be tested - who decided, what informed them, how it can be reviewed - so that compliance can be checked rather than claimed."
The priorities build on the AI Safety Institute and will be given force through the Australian Standards for AI, to be legislated early next year. Existing regulators will enforce within their sectors - faster rules, applied by regulators who already understand their industries.
The Government will also publish all submissions to the Standards consultation, log consultation meetings and attribute adopted text to its source. [Minister]: "A government confident of its position has no reason to do less."
Press release variant B - for the Standards consultation opening
Australian Standards for AI: consultation opens, everything in the open
Consultation on the first Australian Standards for AI opens today, and it will run differently: every submission published, every meeting logged, adopted text attributed to its source.
[Minister]: "The best-resourced lobbying operations in the world will take part in this process, and they are welcome - in public, alongside everyone else. The test of this framework is that the instruments say in 2027 what the Government said in 2026."
The draft standards specify properties, not products: that consent to use data is a record anyone can inspect; that revocation actually stops use; that provenance can be verified by people who trust no one; and that every determination has an author. Conformity will recognise reference implementations - open-source included - evaluated by the AI Safety Institute, making compliance the cheap path for businesses of every size.
[Consultation details, dates, portal.]
Second reading excerpts
On the determination provisions: "The Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme told this Parliament what happens when determinations are made and no person can be found who made them. This bill's answer is structural, not rhetorical. Under these provisions, a determination affecting an Australian carries the name of the person answerable for it - and where a system produces a conclusion, that conclusion is marked for what it is, and becomes a decision only when a person adopts it. It cannot happen by default. Never again by default."
On the consent provisions: "Members opposite ask why we would regulate consent when every website already has a consent button. Because a button is not a record. Under this bill, a consent is a record with five things in it - who may use the data, what data, for what purpose, until when, and how to say stop - and if any of the five is missing, the company cannot rely on it, while the person keeps every protection it gave them. We already run this pattern in open banking. This bill extends to every Australian the control we have already proven works."
Written with model assistance by Meanwhile (meanwhile.computer), read and edited by its human author, published and dated so that reuse is attributable - which is, itself, the policy.
Reviewed and checked by the human author: 2026-07-20.