Key facts
- Tech chiefs urged the government to commit more than £20 billion to sovereign AI infrastructure.
- Prime Minister Andy Burnham appointed Kanishka Narayan as minister of state for artificial intelligence.
- Burnham abolished the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT).
- DSIT's responsibilities were integrated into a new Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade (DBIST).
- The AI Security Institute has moved to the Cabinet Office.
- The £500 million Sovereign AI Fund's governance is now split between DBIST and the Cabinet Office.
British technology leaders are urging the government to invest over £20 billion in sovereign AI infrastructure, citing concerns that recent departmental changes could undermine the UK's AI ambitions. Prime Minister Andy Burnham appointed Kanishka Narayan as minister of state for artificial intelligence, granting the role cabinet-level status. However, in the same move, Burnham dissolved the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), established in 2023, and integrated its functions into a new Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade (DBIST) under Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.
Industry figures expressed alarm, warning that such reorganizations create uncertainty and could stall crucial work. Matt Harris of Hewlett Packard Enterprises welcomed the cabinet seat for AI but cautioned against losing momentum. Dr. Andy Sellars of Cornerstone highlighted Narayan's potential to boost the UK's semiconductor industry, given his prior work on chip strategy and a £10 million semiconductor fund.
Several strategic initiatives previously anchored by DSIT are now fragmented. The AI Security Institute has been moved to the Cabinet Office, and the governance of the £500 million Sovereign AI Fund, launched in April 2026, is now split between DBIST and the Cabinet Office. Tom Glason of ScaleWise criticized the constant restructuring, stating that founders and investors need stability. Historical precedent, such as the creation and subsequent reversal of similar large departments, suggests potential operational complexities and inefficiencies, with the Institute for Government estimating significant upfront costs and lost productivity from such reorganizations.