The UK technology department faces an uncertain future as Andy Burnham’s plan to scrap the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology triggers an angry backlash from MPs, Whitehall officials, and tech experts. The incoming prime minister has asked officials to draw up plans to abolish the department as part of a wider Whitehall shake-up, causing significant disquiet among experts inside and outside government.
These plans have not yet been signed off, but they are already raising concerns within the Labour party about some of Burnham’s early decisions, including the likely appointment of Shabana Mahmood as chancellor. Matt Clifford, an adviser on AI to outgoing prime minister Keir Starmer and his predecessor Rishi Sunak, posted on X: “This would be a big mistake. Right now is a critical moment for tech as an economic and national security issue. Tying up our most senior science and tech officials in a reorganisation wastes time and energy that’s desperately needed for the actual substance.”
Get the #1 Wireless Door Camera
REOLINK Bestseller: 2K Weatherproof Video Doorbell, No Monthly Fees.
Why the Tech Department Matters
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology was established to drive the UK’s global competitiveness in AI, advanced manufacturing, and scientific research. Its potential abolition threatens to undermine years of progress in these critical areas. One Labour MP referred to the plans as “getting rid of the department of the future.”
Key Concerns from Tech Experts
- Loss of focused leadership for AI policy and regulation
- Disruption to ongoing science and innovation funding programs
- Risk of the UK falling behind in the global tech race
- Wasted time and resources during a critical economic period
Comparison: Current Structure vs. Proposed Changes
| Aspect | Current Structure | Proposed Change |
|---|---|---|
| Department | Department for Science, Innovation and Technology | Abolished, merged into Business Department |
| AI Oversight | Led by a dedicated minister | Handed to Cabinet Secretary Antonia Romeo |
| Policy Focus | Dedicated science and tech strategy | Subsumed under broader business policy |
| Expert Reaction | Support for focused tech leadership | Widespread alarm and backlash |
Sources familiar with the plans say Burnham’s advisers asked officials to work up plans to hand over much of science and technology policy to a more powerful business department, to be led by chief whip Jonathan Reynolds. Responsibility for overseeing the use of AI in the public sector would be given to the cabinet secretary rather than a minister.
Impact on AI and Innovation
People within the technology sector have reacted with alarm, saying AI and advanced technology are likely to dominate many of the government’s policy decisions over the next few years. Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, recently said she thought AI would be the major foreign policy question of the next two years. In a speech last year, Starmer called AI “the defining opportunity of our generation.”
AI enthusiasts point to the success of the British company DeepMind, which was bought by Google in 2014, as evidence the UK can play a global role in technology leadership. The potential dismantling of the tech department risks squandering this advantage at a critical moment.
Key Takeaways
- Burnham’s plan to scrap the tech department faces fierce opposition from MPs and experts
- AI and science policy would be absorbed into a larger business department
- Critics warn of wasted time and lost focus on national security and economic growth
- The UK’s tech sector could lose its competitive edge globally
FAQ
Why does Andy Burnham want to scrap the technology department?
Burnham aims to streamline Whitehall by merging science and technology policy into a more powerful business department, but critics say this undermines focused tech leadership.
What would happen to AI policy under the proposed changes?
AI oversight in the public sector would be transferred to the cabinet secretary, Antonia Romeo, rather than a dedicated minister, raising concerns about reduced priority.
How have tech experts reacted to the plan?
Tech experts and MPs have expressed alarm, calling the plan a mistake that wastes time and energy needed for critical tech and national security issues.