Make the most powerful AI companies disclose their models' risks

Where it stands

Nothing here yet.

Risks this could address

• AI governance failureAI governance failure fits this recommendation. 0 people said so.AI governance failure does not fit this recommendation. 0 people said so.
• Dangerous AI capabilitiesDangerous AI capabilities fits this recommendation. 0 people said so.Dangerous AI capabilities does not fit this recommendation. 0 people said so.
• Transparency & interpretabilityTransparency & interpretability fits this recommendation. 0 people said so.Transparency & interpretability does not fit this recommendation. 0 people said so.
• + Add a riskSuggest another risk for this recommendation

Who is calling for this

• PauseAI Australia

  Star this source to save it for later — kept in this browser, not sent anywhereSomething wrong with this source?

  Submission 126 to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence (2026) Read it ↗

  “The Australian government must insist on real oversight, which should include mandatory disclosure, regular inspections, unfettered investigations of incidents and enforceable shutdown mechanisms for breaches.”

• Good Ancestors Policy

  Star this source to save it for later — kept in this browser, not sent anywhereSomething wrong with this source?

  Submission 257 to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence (2026), Recommendation 6 Read it ↗

  “Create transparency obligations that require developers of the most capable models to disclose what their models can do and their risks.”

• Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU)

  Star this source to save it for later — kept in this browser, not sent anywhereSomething wrong with this source?

  Submission 282 to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence (2026) Read it ↗

  “A licensing regime would mandate ongoing transparency over AI products and models available in Australia, including regular auditing of their safety”

• Anthropic

  Star this source to save it for later — kept in this browser, not sent anywhereSomething wrong with this source?

  Submission 305 to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence (2026) Read it ↗

  “We support requirements (explored within the Office of AI’s consultation paper on the proposed Australian Standards for AI13) on developers of the most capable models to publish a safety framework, report on catastrophic-risk evaluations at regular intervals”

• Kitbag Consulting

  Star this source to save it for later — kept in this browser, not sent anywhereSomething wrong with this source?

  Submission 198 to the Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence (2026), Policy 14: What Compels Frontier AI Developers to Comply? Read it ↗

  “The transparency obligations in Policy 14 must therefore be enforced as conditions of market entry, not as ongoing reporting requirements that assume a cooperative relationship.”

Write to your representative about AI safety