Politics
The House Article | We’re Going To Need A Bigger Stick: Britain Seeks AI Sovereignty
(Collectiva/Alamy)
10 min read
Britain has now made clear that it wants AI sovereignty, of a kind. But there are numerous hurdles in the way, reports Matilda Martin. For a seat at the table with the US and China, say experts, we’re going to need a bigger stick
The battle for tech supremacy has taken many forms: nuclear weapons in the 1940s; the space race in the Cold War. Today, it is artificial intelligence – and the stakes are high.
As Keir Starmer limits British involvement in the Iran war, President Donald Trump’s frustration grows – and the UK’s so-called “special relationship” with the US looks increasingly fractured. What would it mean, many wonder, if an irritable US President decided to ‘pull the plug’ on our access to American tech infrastructure?
When Trump placed sanctions on the International Criminal Court last year, officials lost access to email accounts and found their bank accounts frozen, bringing the tribunal’s work to a halt. The event was a small glimpse of how quickly a tech superpower can exert pressure.
Few believe Britain becoming the victim of such a scenario is likely, for the economic repercussions for the US would be hugely damaging. But in an era of geopolitical volatility – and a US President famed for his unpredictability – the UK is currently vulnerable to pressure and manipulation in a way that leaves many uncomfortable.
“Under the last government, they were very happy to say to the sector, particularly the big American companies, ‘You know this stuff better than we do. We trust you’,” says Labour MP Emily Darlington, who criticises this approach as “naïve”.
“We might not yet know how easy it would be for the US to pull our access to AI, but we do know the threat is real,” warns senior research fellow Roa Powell at think tank IPPR.
“Technology giants have repeatedly threatened to pull their services from countries which regulate their technology, while at the same time AI is beginning to be treated as a national security asset that cannot be shared with everybody.”
If UK access to US companies providing cloud services as well as other AI products were cut off, the results would be catastrophic. Could US companies stand independently from their government on such a decision?
“It’s not clear,” Darlington says. “The US has this weird law that essentially all those companies report to the US.” While companies like Amazon Web Services and Palantir have made repeated assurances to the UK that “we’re separate from the Americans”, she adds, this would be a true test of that premise.
At the end of April, Tech Secretary Liz Kendall delivered a speech signalling a step change in the UK’s approach to AI.
“This government believes AI sovereignty is not about isolationism or attempting to pull up the drawbridge and go it alone… For Britain, AI sovereignty is about reducing over dependencies and increasing resilience,” she told an audience at defence and security think tank, Rusi.
The government is clearly concerned about the UK’s future if it allows other larger players like the US and China to dominate the market. Experts say this anxiety is well founded. Powell of IPPR warns that “this government has a narrow window before the concentration of power in AI markets becomes irreversible”.
In 1901, the soon-to-be US president Teddy Roosevelt repeated a famous proverb: “Speak softly and carry a big stick.” It is an anecdote Irish political scientist and author Henry Farrell refers to when he speaks to The House from the US. “If you don’t have a big stick,” he continues, “search around as quickly as you can to find at least a medium-sized cudgel that will allow you to push back.”
Farrell, who co-authored Underground Empire: How America Weaponised the World Economy, has two suggestions for smaller powers like the UK.
“First of all, where they can sort of build up some degree of redundancy, some degree of alternative sourcing, they absolutely should do.
“And secondly, everybody ought to be thinking about their forms of counter leverage in a world where you might see… substantial amounts of pressure being applied upon you to go into one direction rather than the other.”
Kendall’s clarification of what sovereignty means for the UK is welcomed by the Tony Blair Institute (TBI).
“It’s okay for the UK to have some dependencies – no-one can go it alone in the age of AI. And it needs to have leverage. The UK does have great talent, great universities, great startups, but these are not enough to guarantee the country’s competitiveness and security. Britain must also build critical technologies that others depend on. The future global economy, and geopolitical order, is going to be built on technology,” says TBI director of science and technology Keegan McBride.
“For better or worse, this is the way of the world and how power and influence will be exerted. What’s important is that the UK responds now, otherwise it risks losing its seat at the table and the prosperity that will come from the AI revolution.
“The country must focus on becoming strategically important to its allies and embedding itself in the AI and frontier technology economy of the future – not the digital economy of today.”
The most famous example of a small and vulnerable nation dominating an area of the market is Taiwan’s chip industry, which also ensures America has an interest in the nation’s independence from China. Another is the Holland-based photolithography company ASML.
“They’ve got the Hormuz strait on AI technology,” says Dan Howl, head of policy and public affairs at the chartered institute of AI, BCS, referring to the vital shipping line in the Middle East that has allowed Iran to maintain a chokehold on the world’s oil industry.
We might not yet know how easy it would be for the US to pull our access to AI, but we do know the threat is real
While some countries have interpreted AI sovereignty as independence – for example, France’s efforts to build its own sovereign AI stack – the UK government’s approach is seen by some as more pragmatic. Experts say pursuing “full sovereignty” would require a huge injection of cash, mean less secure and competitive products and reduce the ability to influence global standards. Instead, they favour an approach that would allow the UK a certain degree of leverage and control, just like the “big stick” that Roosevelt was describing more than a century ago.
As with many aspects of its infrastructure, the overwhelming feeling among experts is that the UK has rested on its laurels somewhat when it comes to innovation. “The political establishment has failed to invest in and secure the foundations of our country’s sovereignty.
And what we need to make sure is that in the decades ahead, which are going to be so much about digital AI and data, we don’t fail again,” says former minister Josh Simons.
The Labour MP, who in the past worked for Meta in its AI programme, underlines the importance of sovereignty as a whole: “Sovereignty is the ability to, over relatively long periods of time, shape your own collective destiny.”
He believes that the vulnerable situation in which the UK now finds itself is the culmination of centuries of inaction: “It’s more than just the Tories. I don’t think it even just ends with the Labour government before that.
“For a long time now, we’ve assumed that trade will always be basically frictionless, that international financial markets will have very little interest in borders, and that the energy market will be a sufficiently efficient market that, provided we have diversity of supply, we’re fine. All those assumptions are just wrong – or are certainly becoming wrong.”
The UK has “an acute dependency”, as Howl puts it, on cloud services such as Amazon Web Services – integral to the functioning of the NHS, the Ministry of Defence, HMRC, policing and the courts. He explains how the experts at BCS do not think that risk is assessed “as much as it needs to be”.
While everyone can agree that the UK has fallen behind in the AI arms race, there is a live debate over where the nation’s efforts should be focused as it looks to build its arsenal.
For IPPR’s Powell, the UK’s comparative advantage lies in the AI applications layer – specialist products built on top of frontier models, like ChatGPT. She also thinks the UK should not see this approach “as a ceiling”, however, and look to strengthening areas such as chip design too.
Here, Kendall’s announcement of a new ‘AI Hardware Plan’, the details of which will be announced in June, comes into play.
Other experts highlight the UK’s strengths in aerospace, quantum technologies, health and sciences. While Kendall’s recent intervention indicates that the UK may be more decisive on where it wants to go, how it gets there could be more complicated. The House understands that government insiders are aware of how the UK’s high energy prices could discourage and hinder start-up growth, and push homegrown talent to look elsewhere.
In a recent interview with CityAM, former deputy prime minister and one-time Silicon Valley convert Nick Clegg said the UK’s energy is “too expensive” and the UK’s AI sovereignty debate is “slightly dishonest” due to its “marginal relevance”.
Emma McGuigan, AI expert at BCS, points out that the cost of running data centres is a key hurdle. If the UK hopes to achieve its AI sovereignty goals, she says, this must be addressed. A sustained reduction in energy costs would allow “the opportunity to bring the investment to build those sovereign cloud data centres”, McGuigan argues.
Energy sovereignty is thus also called into question. “Digital sovereignty is inseparable from energy sovereignty and energy is a real, physical, material constraint and precondition for the digital world,” says Simons.
Another hurdle facing the UK is its inability to keep homegrown innovators here. The most famous example is the well-documented acquisition of London-based AI firm DeepMind by Google for $400m in 2014. As Kendall hopes to encourage the scale-up of UK businesses through the launch of the Sovereign AI fund, the challenge will be keeping those companies in Britain.
Unless we secure it, there’s no guarantee that we can have the freedom that we’ve enjoyed for several hundred years
“There’s a culture within technology about selling things,” Howl says. “The real question is, what happens when the start-ups start getting bids from New York and California. That’s the real problem.”
He explains: “The reality is that the British market just isn’t big enough to be able to scale these really good companies to a way in which that would be advantageous to the owners, and that is compounded by the culture. But the solution to that would probably be to work with Europe and to genuinely get access to a much bigger market.”
What is at stake? Simons has a “slightly apocalyptic view of where the world is heading”. But he also insists Britain “can’t be gripped by the throat by those who don’t share our commitment to freedom”.
“The future economy and the future of warfare and the future of security, technology, and in particular, AI, data, is going to be one of the foundations of power. So, unless we secure it, there’s no guarantee that we can have the freedom that we’ve enjoyed for several hundred years,” says the Labour MP.
Kendall has fired the starting gun on the UK’s drive for its version of AI sovereignty. But can this middle power successfully insert itself into the supply chain and find Roosevelt’s “big stick” – or is the UK joining the race with too big of a handicap?
>
3 min read
Keir Starmer is fighting for his premiership after more than 50 MPs have called on the Prime Minister to resign.
At the time of writing 52 Labour MPs have called on Starmer to set out a timetable for a leadership election to take place.
Former minister Catherine West has emailed Labour MPs looking for names to support a leadership election that would see a new leader in place before September.
The list of names urging for the Prime Minister to resign includes Milton Keynes North MP Chris Curtis, co-chair of the Labour Growth Group, and North Northumberland MP David Smith, a member of the Blue Labour caucus.
On Monday, Starmer attempted to shore up his position with a speech focused on his vision for the Labour Party, saying his government must go beyond “incremental change” and be the party of a “stronger and fairer” Britain.
He promised a stronger youth guarantee for jobs and apprenticeships, to nationalise British steel and move Britain closer to Europe while maintaining red lines.
However, his backbenchers remain far from reassured, particularly those on the soft Left who have been calling for a more left-ward tilt.
At the Communications Workers Union conference, Angela Rayner criticised Starmer and the NEC from preventing the Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham from running as a candidate in the Gorton and Denton by-election. She told the audience “it was a mistake that the leadership of our party should put right.”
She also admitted the government’s agenda “isn’t working and it needs to change.”
Some Labour MPs told PoliticsHome Starmer’s decision to reject calls to allow Burnham back into Parliament has been “his greatest misstep”.
“[He] would have come out stronger if he said NEC shouldn’t block Burnham. That single line could have saved his premiership. That could have just been his greatest misstep,” said one.
Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has also said Andy Burnham would be an asset in Westminster. She told Sky News that Burnham was a politician who “goes out and fights for people and people see it and appreciate it”.
Meanwhile the mood amongst MPs – even those who have not called for the Prime Minister to go publicly – remains febrile, with a number of influential MPs telling PoliticsHome they remained unimpressed with the speech.
A furious northern MP told PoliticsHome: “I’m as pro-Europe as they come, but why is our solution to a Reform landslide (in very Leave areas) when they actually didn’t really breakthrough in Remain areas, to say we should be closer to Europe!? Total two fingers to people.”
“Needed to be back to basics, wages, prices, jobs, boats, security, common sense working class politics and instead it was for Guardian readers.”
Another Labour MP said: “Nothing new to be honest. Same old same old. Rather uninspiring. Note that he’s determined to hang on come what may. Basically no change so the ship continues to sink.”
Those of the soft left of the party were unimpressed by Starmer’s offering too. One told PoliticsHome the Prime Minister is “deluded”.
“Warm bath Keir. He thinks he’s right, but the man is deluded.
Another joked: “A speech so bad that Luke Akehurst has begun recruiting for the impending leadership contest.”
>
Catherine West will canvass MPs for support this afternoon (Alamy)
3 min read
Labour MP Catherine West will no longer launch a bid for her leadership on Monday afternoon and will instead canvass support for a timetable for Keir Starmer’s resignation and the election of a new leader in September.
She insists to PoliticsHome that she does not have a particular successor in mind.
West said on Saturday that she would challenge the Prime Minister if a cabinet minister did not put themselves forward.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4, she said: “My preferred option is for the cabinet to do a reshuffle within itself, where there’s plenty of talent, and for Keir to be given a different role, which he might enjoy, perhaps an international role.”
West was understood to be waiting to make her final decision until after Starmer had finished giving his speech on Monday morning setting out a reset after Labour faced a devastating set of local elections.
Speaking to PoliticsHome about the decision to not launch her leadership bid and instead canvass for a timetable for Starmer’s resignation, West said: “A lot of people might not have envisaged yours truly as walking into No 10 and I’m therefore happy to do something more vague.”
Asked if she had a particular leader in mind to take over from Starmer, West said: “No I genuinely want to keep it as open as possible. That’s why I have said by September [referring to her email], but that’s really not my job. My job was to get the ball rolling and test the temperature of the PLP. And so that is where we have got to. “
In an email to MPs seen by PoliticsHome sent after the speech concluded, West said: “I am hereby giving notice to No 10 that I am collecting names of Labour MPs to call on the Prime Minister to set a timetable for the election of a new leader in September.”
West said that while she welcomed “the renewed energy and ideas” in Starmer’s speech, she felt that it was “too little too late”.
“The results last Thursday show that the PM has failed to inspire hope. What is best for the party and country now is for an orderly transition.”
On the letter, West said there was no deadline for MPs to respond as such and while she had originally wanted to say by 10am on Tuesday, she felt that for some MPs who might be “a bit nervous that might be a bit pushy”.
West said that it would also allow MPs time to speak to their Constituency Labour Party.
She added that while she did not think anybody “dislikes” Starmer, “we are just in a different era now [from 2024] with Reform being like this.
“We need more of a street fighter, and I think people have stopped listening to us, and I think that is dangerous in politics.”
>
Politics
Politics Home | Keir Starmer Tries To Position Labour As The Party Of A “Stronger And Fairer” Britain
Keir Starmer gave a speech to try to defend his position as prime minister on Monday morning (Alamy)
5 min read
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has attempted to shore up his leadership of the Labour Party and of the country by saying Labour needs to go beyond just “incremental change” and be the party of a “stronger and fairer” Britain.
The Prime Minister is attempting to see off potential leadership challenges following Thursday’s local election results, which saw Labour lose the Senedd in Wales for the first time, fail to make inroads against the SNP in Scotland, and lose around 1,500 seats on local councils in England.
In a speech in London on Monday morning, he admitted that “like every government, we’ve made mistakes”, but insisted “we got the big political choices right”. It was a speech that was passionate, but lacking in policy meat on the bone.
What is the Labour Party for?
Starmer attacked both Reform and the Green Party, arguing that only Labour can “face up to the big challenges” and “make the big arguments”.
“Delivery is, of course, essential, but it’s not sufficient on its own to address the frustration that voters feel, with battling Reform and the Greens, but at a deeper level, with battling the despair on which they prey, despair that they exploit and amplify,” he said.
“And so analysis matters, but argument matters more. Evidence matters, but so too does the emotion. Stories beat spreadsheets. People need hope.”
He went on to say that the Labour Party would not be able to win going forwards as a “weaker version of Reform or the Greens”.
“We can only win as a stronger version of Labour… I will never stop fighting for the decent, respectful, diverse country that I love.”
The status quo is not enough
He appeared to argue for railing against the status quo in government, but did not set out any major new policies.
“Incremental change won’t cut it on growth, defence, Europe, energy,” he said.
“We need a bigger response than we anticipated in 2024 because these are not ordinary times, and this is a political challenge, just as much as it’s a party challenge.”
By way of hard policy, however, there was very little: the one major announcement was that legislation would be brought forward this week to give the government powers to take “full ownership of British Steel”, subject to a public-interest test.
Starmer has come under criticism by his own MPs for not spearheading the change that was promised to voters in the 2024 general election.
Senior Labour MP Sarah Owen told The Times over the weekend: “Unless Keir Starmer delivers tangible change and truly connects with the public on a human level, he can’t lead us into another election (locally or nationally). People want politics and politicians who are upfront and true to their values.”
Closer ties with Europe at the heart of the “Labour choice”
Starmer also set out a closer relationship with Europe as being at the heart of the “Labour choice” going forward.
“This Labour government will be defined by rebuilding our relationship with Europe, by having Britain at the heart of Europe, standing shoulder to shoulder with the countries that most share our interests, our values and our enemies,” he said.
“That is the right choice for Britain. That is the Labour choice.”
However, asked whether the next Labour manifesto would include single market or customs union membership, Starmer simply said the UK will take a “big leap forward with the EU-UK summit this year and take us closer, both on trade and the economy, and defence and security.
“That will then be a platform on which we can build as we go forward,” he said.
The PM announced legislation will be brought forward on Wednesday to give the government powers to take full ownership of British Steel, which he described as an example of a policy which will “show the Labour values we will be guided from, and the lessons we will learn”.
He said the government would also go “much further on our investment” in apprenticeships in technical excellence colleges and special educational needs.
Change in leadership would be too “damaging”
Addressing Thursday’s elections, the PM said Labour’s losses “hurt”: “I get it, I feel it”.
But many Labour MPs are already concerned that the speech listed the government’s achievements again and did little to shift the dial on either Starmer’s own leadership or the public perception of the Labour government.
Backbench Labour MP and former minister Catherine West has said she could try to launch her own leadership bid if no cabinet minister steps forward to challenge Starmer.
Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner has told Starmer that “what we are doing isn’t working”, calling for Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham to return to Parliament. Indeed, perhaps the most significant moment of Starmer’s speech came when he said that Burnham’s return would be a matter for the party’s National Executive Committee, rather than closing the door on him entirely.
Starmer had already insisted he will not step down as PM, and in his speech on Monday, he said he did not want to “plunge the country into chaos”.
“I’m not going to shy away from the fact that I’ve got some doubters, including in my own part,” he said.
“And I’m not going to shy away from the fact that I have to prove them wrong, and I will.”
In what was likely an appeal to his own MPs, he said that the government constantly changing their leadership was “damaging”.
“We tested it, we tested its destruction, and it inflicted huge damage on this country,” he said, in a reference to the changing of leaders under previous Conservative governments.
“A Labour government will never be forgiven if we repeat that and inflict that on the country.”
Labour deputy leader Lucy Powell sat on the front row during Starmer’s speech, with one of the PM’s PPSs Jon Pearce sitting on the row behind.
Labour MP for Ossett and Denby Dale Jade Botterill introduced Starmer on the stage, saying that it was clear to her that the Labour Party “is one of the greatest vehicles for changing the lives of working people this country has ever known”
“But yet, on the doorstep, people no longer believed it.”
>
‘Amri’ First Look: Anjali Sivaraman Stars In Mira Nair’s Next Film
Blue Jays place Addison Barger back on the IL, designate Eric Lauer for assignment
‘Reacher’ Receives Early Season 5 Renewal At Prime Video
-
Fashion9 years agoThese ’90s fashion trends are making a comeback in 2017
-
Fashion9 years ago
According to Dior Couture, this taboo fashion accessory is back
-
Fashion9 years ago
Your comprehensive guide to this fall’s biggest trends
-
Fashion9 years ago
Model Jocelyn Chew’s Instagram is the best vacation you’ve ever had
-
Fashion9 years ago
A photo diary of the nightlife scene from LA To Ibiza
-
Fashion9 years ago
Emily Ratajkowski channels back-to-school style
-
Fashion9 years ago
9 Celebrities who have spoken out about being photoshopped
-
Fashion9 years ago
The tremendous importance of owning a perfect piece of clothing