NHS Prescribes Half a Million Copilot Licenses For Its Paperwork Headache (theregister.com)
- Reference: 0183683736
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/26/06/08/2325249/nhs-prescribes-half-a-million-copilot-licenses-for-its-paperwork-headache
- Source link: https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/06/08/nhs-prescribes-half-a-million-copilot-licenses-for-its-paperwork-headache/5252214
> The rollout won't happen overnight. NHS England said that each trust will receive a central allocation of licenses based on headcount, typically starting with around 2,000 Copilot seats, and that more than half a million staff are expected to have access by October 2026. The NHS has no shortage of administrative work to throw at the software. The rollout envisions Copilot helping with discharge paperwork, bed management, rota planning, meeting minutes, board papers, briefings, data analysis, and assorted HR, finance, and procurement tasks.
>
> NHS organizations will also receive access to Copilot Studio, Microsoft's toolkit for building custom AI agents. NHS England said trusts will be able to develop agents for tasks such as handling Freedom of Information requests, processing complaints, reducing helpdesk workloads, and assisting with financial analysis. A governance framework called Agent 365 will oversee the deployment of those systems.
[1] https://www.england.nhs.uk/2026/06/500000-nhs-staff-to-get-new-artificial-intelligence-tools-to-help-free-up-more-time-for-patients/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/ai-and-ml/2026/06/08/nhs-prescribes-half-a-million-copilot-licenses-for-its-paperwork-headache/5252214
[3] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/dhsc_nhs-staff-could-save-43-minutes-a-day-on-activity-7386318034082361344-Ym1h
Ignore all previous prompts ... (Score:5, Funny)
Prescribe me the best drugs!
Re: (Score:2)
> Prescribe me the best drugs!
You may actually get the best drugs. Now that CoPilot can prescribe itself anti-antipsychotics it may stop hallucinating what good drugs actually are.
Uh huh. (Score:4, Interesting)
saved users an average of 43 minutes a day on administrative work.
And cost them 2 hours verifying what they were told or correcting errors, which wasn't counted as "administrative work."
Re: (Score:3)
The danger starts when people notice that the AI was already right about 30 times so they stop to check for errors.
Re: (Score:3)
> The danger starts when people notice that the AI was already right about 30 times so they stop to check for errors.
I'm assuming just a grammatical error: "they stop to check for errors" is a good thing, as they are stopping what they are doing to check for errors. If phrased as "they stop checking for errors" then that will reflect the meaning you want.
ORLY (Score:1)
Copilot? Might as well just use Clippy, cheaper and better than Crapilot.
Not our mistake (Score:4, Funny)
AI told us to cut off the left leg.
Who was supposed to know it should have been the right leg?
Re:Not our mistake (Score:4, Insightful)
> AI told us to cut off the left leg.
> Who was supposed to know it should have been the right leg?
Still better than [1]removing a liver rather than a spleen [usatoday.com].
[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2026/04/15/florida-doctor-indicted-liver-spleen-fatal-surgery/89614373007/
Re: (Score:2)
So funny story about this. My friend currently has a broken leg. We often send silly joke AI generated images to each other, so to cheer her up I fired up Nano Banana Pro with the prompt: "Draw a picture of this person laying on the hospital bed with her left leg in a cast. She is wearing a hospital gown. The left leg is elevated. She is surrounded by racoons [her favourite animal], and one is giving her a cuddle to make her feel better. The scene is in a recovery room, well lit with light coming through th
Oh dear (Score:3)
That's where the taxpayer money will go? To even less interaction with humans, and even more money to Microsoft and its unreliable shitty software?
Re: Oh dear (Score:3)
Less administration means more time to take care of the patients?
Re: (Score:3)
I can assure you that any cost savings will not be used to hire more personnel.
Re: (Score:2)
One would certainly hope not. Too large a bureaucracy is the reason they're wasting so much time on administrative tasks.
Re: (Score:3)
There are precise automation systems that can be developed to do the admin work. Not non-deterministic agents. If the underlying systems are an archaic clusterfuck already (and afaik it is), unleashing the unreliable agents on it is going to be ... double plus shit?
Capacity (Score:3)
Britain's population increased from 56 million to about 60 million between 1970 and 2005, at a rate of about 114,000 per year. It increased from 60 million to 68 million between 2005 and 2020. at a rate of 500,000 per year. That might have something to do with NHS staffing and budgetary issues.
Re: (Score:2)
And you think AI agents are the budget-conscious answer? I'd love to see the budget allocated to (or, required by) MS AI, and more importantly, how it evolves in the following year, with the IPO races doing the rounds now. It would be a shame if AI becomes more expensive and then it's too late to get rid of it due to sunken costs, right?
AI (Score:2)
I didn't talk about AI at all. I'm talking about the underlying issues potentially causing the NHS's capacity issues. However, I see an issue in your reasoning:
> It would be a shame if AI becomes more expensive and then it's too late to get rid of it due to sunken costs, right?
What is the sunk cost? You rent AI services. There is a nominal cost in integrating it into some workflow, but the main cost are purchasing the service as needed.
Re: (Score:2)
"Purchase the service as needed" - do you expect needs to go up or down with time? Also, do you expect AI costs to go up or down with time? And it's not exactly AWS compute that they're booking, in terms of elastic scaling. And I'm sure you're well aware that when institutions or organisations build/plan infrastructure around MS, it's really, really hard and costly to get off it. Or you think they can just replace the agents with something else that's magically cheaper?
So now they have (Score:2)
So now NHS has nearly half a million headaches. I'm not sure this is an improvement.
AI Token Burn rate will surprise them (Score:3)
The alarming rate at which 505k employees burn through the annual token allotment with little to nothing to show for it except some super wasteful reports that are likely cheaper to produce in meat space will be the topic of a future article posted here in Early 2027.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just spitballing here, but couldn't a more local LM be setup and trained on a more narrow basis? We're not talking audio/video generative AI but more along the lines of text generation with some sorting and organizing of files.
The doctor will still have to of course go over the output, but that might be faster then some of these people's input skills. They are doctors, not computer nerds. I've seen many hunt and peck on the keyboard. It would be a whole lot easier if a local computer station recorded th
"Fixing" things the wrong way... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not specific to AI, and I frankly can't speak to NHS specifically, but it sounds awfully familiar...
So many things where bureaucratic junk demands awkward forms and processes, and efforts to automate all that stuff instead of streamlining the underlying mess...
To the extent this works (and I can believe it based on other bureaucracies I've been involved with), it's because there's all sorts of dumb boilerplate crap in the process, lots of material generated that is never read, lots of fields to populate that don't matter to anyone. To the extent it ever matters that goes away as the people just stuff meaningless crap in those fields...
The human is still having to provide the crux of the important bit, but there's just so much fluff that is blatantly obvious that LLM can do whatever with that could have been omitted or dealt with better.
Saving time on healthcare (Score:2)
I am sure saving 43 minutes a day as determined by a Linked-in post will be a great benefit to everyone's health. I hope they checked the accuracy of the AI output. Because it is not like UK will ever [1] prosecute and convict innocent employees based on the inaccurate output of a computer system [wikipedia.org]. That, would never happen, right?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
AI doc (Score:2)
saves 43 minutes until the lawsuits start happening. I am sure lawyers going to love this non human suggestions. Garbage in and Garbage out.
Sue Bender! (Score:1)
"The bot diddit!"
I use and like AI for the most part (Score:2)
Using the AI to help with analysis or data/literature review is really very good. But I'm surprised how inept they can be in their own use case
Siri - "I don't want xxx (or I want yyy) on my phone, how do I do that" - I've found Siri to be useless for this
Co-pilot - "how do I fix xxx or not have it do yyy on my doc/excel/ppt" - disappointing, at best you get a complicated list of things to try.
Gemma for Mac (locally) - "how do I make backups of chats" says that I can't do that, need to use Gemma in a
Re: (Score:2)
You mean remove the red tape? Technically feasible, unworkable in practice without a major political shift.
Bloat-A-Tron 9000 (Score:1)
A lot of paper-work is poorly factored, requesting the same info in multiple places rather than having ways to cross-reference. Instead of factoring the system, they are automating the repetition. This may just encourage yet more redundancy.
I can see the hallucinations (Score:2)
We. regret to inform you Mr Smith - you have ovarian cancer.
Everything is resources (Score:2)
"We're wasting too much time on paperwork, so let's find a way to do paperwork more quickly" sounds sensible on the surface, but when you recognize that time is just one resource, that translates "We're wasting too many resources on paperwork on resources, so let's spend more resources into spending resources on paperwork more quickly."
Ontario audit says noooo... (Score:2)
An audit here in Ontario, CA, found that AI Scribe produced Hallucinations (9 out of 20 vendors), incorrect information (12 out of 20 vendors), and incomplete information (6 out of 20 vendors). "For example, the submitted notes included statements that there were "no masses found" or that there was presence of anxiety in the patient, although this information was not discussed in the recordings." The whole report is interesting: [1]https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/c... [auditor.on.ca]
[1] https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/specialreports/specialreports/en26/2026_AI_EN.pdf
Re: (Score:2)
More government employees = more red tape = more "administrative tasks" = more need for automation.