OpenAI Joins Anthropic in Pressing Britain for Binding AI Rules
OpenAI urged British lawmakers on Sept. 14, 2026, to impose legislation reining in AI technology, immediately following a call by Anthropic to curb AI development. The Guardian
The appeal came from Tom Duff Gordon, OpenAI's head of policy in Europe. OpenAI stated: "We support stronger UK rules for the handful of companies, including OpenAI, developing the most powerful AI systems."
OpenAI said legislation should be narrowly focused on the most advanced AI labs and not startups working on less powerful systems. The line is deliberate. It would concentrate compliance on a small set of developers training the largest models while leaving smaller builders outside the scope of new duties.
Duff Gordon told Politico the UK government should "take advantage of this political window which is clearly opening up" to legislate on AI. His comment links OpenAI's position to parliamentary activity in Westminster on the same day.
The cross-party Joint Committee on Human Rights, comprising MPs and Lords, called for a new AI regulatory framework including an independent oversight body and legislation to protect the public. Its chair is Labour MP Alex Sobel. The committee said a new AI bill should establish a regulatory regime mandating more demanding obligations for higher-risk AI systems.
The committee's report, titled 'Human Rights and the Regulation of AI', was published by Parliament on Sept. 14, 2026. It follows an inquiry titled 'Human Rights and the Regulation of Artificial Intelligence', launched in July 2025 to examine what regulation is required to safeguard human rights when AI technologies are developed and used. UK Parliament
Anthropic had urged competitors and governments to coordinate a global slowdown in AI development in the weekend before Sept. 14, 2026. OpenAI, Google DeepMind and Elon Musk supported Anthropic's call for a slowdown. Anthropic researchers have separately warned that artificial intelligence could kill all of humanity by 2030.
More than 70 MPs and peers urged UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham to back a ban on the creation of artificial superintelligence (ASI). Downing Street rejected the call for an ASI ban but said it was exploring additional targeted interventions "to address the most significant AI-related national security risks".
A parallel track is developing in Washington. OpenAI urged the U.S. Congress to adopt capability-based national AI safety requirements, according to reporting published on Sept. 10, 2026. Those proposed requirements include testing standards and independent assessments. Reuters
Britain's data watchdog said on Aug. 3, 2026, that it was monitoring developments closely relating to OpenAI and Anthropic after rogue AI agent hacking incidents. That monitoring function is distinct from the legislative and human rights proposals now before Parliament, but it indicates regulatory attention on deployed agent behavior as well as model development.
The current debate has antecedents. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee that he supports guardrails for AI technology to minimize harms. OpenAI said in a submission to a UK committee that it would be impossible to create tools like ChatGPT without access to copyrighted material. Anthropic spent $910,000 on lobbying in the second quarter, up from $150,000 during the same period last year, as reported by Politico.
The broader context here is a shift from voluntary commitments to statute. London has relied on sectoral regulators and principles-based guidance. The Joint Committee proposal, combined with coordinated industry calls for binding rules on the largest labs, points toward a tiered regime where obligations scale with system capability and risk.
Looking at what this means for diplomats and policy planners, three questions will shape the next phase. First, how Parliament defines the handful of companies and higher-risk systems subject to demanding obligations. Second, whether a UK oversight body would have pre-deployment powers or post-deployment enforcement. Third, how any UK bill aligns with a U.S. capability-based standard and with Anthropic's proposed global slowdown, which would require coordination beyond any single jurisdiction.
