Dear Sir Keir, re: UK tech policy…
Paul Foster MP, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA
cc The Prime Minister, The Rt. Hon. Sir Keir Starmer MP, 10 Downing Street, London SW1A 2AA
16 April 2025
Dear Paul,
Re: Current UK government technology policy
As agreed at my surgery appointment with you on 1 March, I am following up regarding UK technology policy, as we briefly discussed. This is a joint letter with a colleague and friend, Prof. Ian Brown, who has worked on these issues at Oxford University, within the UK civil service, and with many other national and inter-governmental organisations. We have copied Prof. Brown’s MP, Sir Keir Starmer.
The appointment of a technology investor to author the UK’s AI Opportunities Plan and the decision taken by the government to endorse all its recommendations on the day of launch were both of significant concern to us.
We recommend four specific actions with regards to the UK’s current approach to technology policy based on our combined 40+ years of expertise in this field. These points are also relevant for any potential US-UK trade deal that is focused on technology.
1. Understand and begin to mitigate the national security risks from our reliance on US technology companies
National defence and technology are deeply interconnected. As the strong relationship between US tech firms and the Trump administration now makes clear, it is a national security risk for any government or organisation to be strengthening their ties with US tech firms at this moment. Our European allies are already aware of this.
Building a complete picture of our current dependency and identifying ways to reduce it should be the priority. Palantir’s role across government and the hosting of some of GCHQ through Amazon Web Services are just two examples of our vulnerability.
The recent security violation with regard to the use of the Signal messaging app by the most senior members of the US security establishment highlights the current risks of reliance on the US and also the disdain felt for Europe in many parts of this US administration.
2. Adopt a precautionary approach to the adoption of AI to reduce unnecessary harm to the public
We already know from the way social media has developed that harms are likely to result from the widespread adoption of technology when the relevant incentive or regulatory structures are inadequate. Laws passed in the last few years are designed to belatedly try and correct this — your colleagues are already looking at the Online Safety Act, while the Competition and Markets Authority is poised to start using its new digital markets powers. Weakening these powers in a futile attempt to hold off US tariffs would be a poor way forward for the U.K.
It would also be wise to take a different approach to the adoption of AI throughout the provision of public services, given the documented cases that already exist showing how people can be harmed — for example, the over-representation of certain groups in the machine learning programme used by the DWP to detect fraud in Universal Credit payments.
3. Make the external messaging on AI consistent with the thoughtful government documents already produced
Your government’s AI Opportunities Plan, along with the hyperbolic messaging from the Technology Minister Peter Kyle, are a disappointment. And we are concerned that the UK government will trade away the rights of UK citizens chasing a trade deal with the US that is focused on technology.
However, several thoughtful, useful documents on how to implement AI carefully across government already exist. These include the AI Playbook and the Blueprint for Modern Digital Government, both produced this year by the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology. This suggests that there is knowledge within government on the need for the careful use of these powerful technologies, and a ready source of information to craft more accurate, sensible government messaging.
Anything that starts to look like the boosterism of the Johnson days or the efforts of Elon Musk’s DOGE in the US will go down very badly here. And current government messaging on AI looks perilously close to both.
4. Incorporate an understanding of the broader vision that US technology leaders have into the UK’s technology policy. Their vision is profoundly at odds with Labour Party values and vision
Ideas such as the Networked State or Effective Accelerationism, which a few years ago would have been seen as fairly fringe discussions, are now influential at the heart of the US administration. Vice-Presidential advisers Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen are key figures.
Central to these ideas is the notion that states in the future will adopt a “technology first” approach – being cryptocurrency and cloud-led. The underlying philosophies draw much from Ayn Rand, focus on the individual to the exclusion of the community, and are deeply inconsistent with the history and values of a Labour Party that has championed collective action and a supportive state.
The beguiling promises of AI turbo-charging productivity and growth must not be seen in isolation, but as part of a much bigger picture to reimagine what a state could be. This resides firmly on the ideological right.
The role and influence of those funding the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change has to be understood. Over the years, the Institute has taken many millions of dollars from Larry Ellison, co-founder of Oracle, who openly embraces the idea of a surveillance state in which pervasive surveillance is used to make people “behave”. These ideas are anti-democratic, and the Labour Party needs to be much more aware of the dangers posed by them than it currently seems to be.
We are of course very happy to provide more detail on our concerns or discuss them directly. We also plan to post a copy of this letter on Prof. Brown’s blog to promote public discussion of these important issues.
With best wishes,
Susan Morgan,
Ian Brown.
Cc: Sir Keir Starmer, Prime Minister and MP for Holborn and St Pancras (and Prof. Brown’s MP.)
