Government needs to meet with the IT users, implementors and managers to deliver its policy aims
The new Labour administration started its time in government with an Olympian sprint before Parliament broke for the summer recess. Among its many new policies and programmes, we’ve seen a reorganisation of tech policy and digital government delivery into the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) under secretary of state Pete Kyle. The King’s Speech included two tech-specific bills, with further legislation beneficial to the tech sector embedded in several other bills – not least the loosening of planning policies to enable more datacentre development. And we’ve seen more support and more cash for emerging technologies such as quantum computing and artificial intelligence (AI). All this is welcome.
But something is missing.
DSIT posted on social media recently, with a photo of a meeting with tech industry leaders hosted by Kyle and chancellor of the exchequer Rachel Reeves. On the table were a variety of pastries, with a healthy fruit salad in front of each guest. In the room were representatives of Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, Nvidia, Wayve, Meta, Google and investors such as A16Z and Index Ventures.
No doubt all had good things to say about the economic importance of tech. No doubt they all promoted the benefits of AI and cloud and their support for startups. No doubt they all nodded enthusiastically when Reeves and Kyle said how important technology is for improving productivity and innovation across the UK. There is nothing bad about any of this.
Except that not one person around that table, nor the companies they work for, is going to install any technology, manage any project, or lead the sort of business change needed for technology to deliver any of those productivity or innovation benefits. They will happily sell you some stuff – but surely, without input and engagement with the people responsible for buying and using all that stuff, none of the government’s objectives for making the UK a “science and technology superpower” are going to be achieved.
This has been a consistent flaw in government’s approach to tech. Of course it’s important to have good relations with, and offer support to, the most important technology companies. But the benefits of the digital revolution will come from the businesses and consumers that deliver new services and improve productivity – what do they want from government? What needs to be done to encourage greater adoption of technology and more digital maturity in organisations? Without addressing questions like these, no government tech policy can possibly achieve its aims.
It would be great to see Kyle and Reeves around a table with the people they expect to implement the productivity and growth the UK needs. IT leaders like fruit salad and pastries too.