Not just for geeks - the UK’s tech policy blitz should matter to us all

You may not have known it was London Tech Week but it has consequences for everyone

Last week, the Prime Minister stood on stage at London Tech Week and declared Britain must be “masters of our fate” in technology. It capped off months of relentless tech related announcements: the £86 billion R&D accelerator programmes in the 2025 Spending Review, the £2 billion AI Opportunities Action Plan with its 50 measures, £1.2 billion for digital transformation across public services, £1 billion to expand Britain’s compute capacity twentyfold by 2030, and a rebranded AI Security Institute. Add in £187 million for workforce training and £25 million to attract elite AI talent, and you have possibly the most comprehensive tech policy blitz in British history.

I was in the audience and couldn’t help smiling as I watched, because the PM’s autocue broke. So while he was doing his best to paint a picture of a country powered by innovation, he had to contend with the most low key tech barrier. He did pretty well and was helped by Jensen Huang, the rockstar founder of Nvidia who joined him on stage. But beneath the razzle-dazzle, a deeper question lingered in my mind: why should any of this matter if you don’t run a startup, work in tech, or dabble in VC deals?

I think there is one simple reason - because tech policy is now national policy. It is shaping how your NHS appointment is booked, how your local authority approves planning permission, how your child’s homework might be marked. It determines how we spend public money, how we compete with global economies, and how safe or exposed we are as a nation. This isn’t just about apps and gadgets, it’s about power, sovereignty, and the future of public life.

When the government pledges billions for AI in public services, that’s money being spent on the systems you use every day. The NHS booking system that crashes when you need an urgent appointment? The council planning portal that takes months to process applications? The benefits system that seems designed to frustrate? These are the frontlines where technology policy meets real life— and we have so much to improve.

The AI Opportunities Action Plan is full of practical measures: expanding public compute capacity, piloting AI for NHS diagnostics to cut waiting times from weeks to hours, and using AI to tackle benefits fraud—potentially freeing up billions for genuine claimants. This work is bolts of how the government could serve you better.

Why the sudden flurry? Because Britain knows it can’t outspend the US or China, but it can be smarter. While America throws hundreds of billions at semiconductors and China deploys AI at vast scale, the UK is betting on its moderate regulatory frameworks, nurturing talent, and positioning ourselves as a responsible home for breakthrough tech.

We urgently need strong domestic tech companies - these aren’t just good for shareholders—they’re essential for national resilience. Britain’s track record is mixed: we’re brilliant at invention, but struggle with scale. Take Wayve, the British company pioneering AI for self-driving cars. It’s a fantastic example of homegrown innovation with global potential. But too often, our brightest companies either get snapped up by foreign giants or fail to reach the scale needed to compete worldwide. DeepMind, for instance, made world-changing breakthroughs in AI, but its acquisition by Google means much of the strategic value now flows to the US.

When we let our best companies get acquired or collapse, we’re outsourcing our future prosperity. We’re choosing to be consumers of technology, not creators—and that’s a fast track to economic irrelevance. The real test isn’t whether we can attract a few hundred AI researchers to London—it’s whether we can build and keep companies that compete with Google, Microsoft, and Tencent. It’s whether a brilliant algorithm developed in Cambridge stays here and grows into a world-beating business, rather than being snapped up before it scales. Without that, even the best AI infrastructure becomes an expensive monument to missed opportunity.

There’s another challenge too : trust. While the government champions “pro-innovation” regulation, 72% of the public want clear legal guardrails for AI. This isn’t abstract anxiety—it’s practical concern. When AI helps decide benefit eligibility, university admissions, or medical diagnoses, people want to know the rules and who’s accountable when things go wrong. The government has made some adjustments—like rebranding the AI Safety Institute as the AI Security Institute—but tough questions remain about how public data will be used, who’s liable for mistakes, and how we protect people’s rights in a digital age.

And what about skills? The government’s investment in training is welcome, but 84% of British Chambers of Commerce members say they don’t know how to use AI. These aren’t tech startups—they’re logistics companies, care providers, regional manufacturers. If we don’t help everyone adapt, we risk creating a two-tier system: technological benefits flowing to the already-advantaged, while everyone else gets left behind.

The countries that disseminate these innovative technologies will dominate the global economy for the next fifty years. AI isn’t just changing how we book doctor’s appointments—it’s reshaping entire industries, creating new jobs, and deciding which nations will be economically sovereign. The jobs of the future, the companies that will employ your children, the industries that will drive prosperity—they’re all being shaped by choices made now.

The next few years will determine whether Britain’s tech ambitions translate into better public services, higher productivity, and real economic growth—or whether billions disappear into projects that never scale. The ambition is real, the investment substantial, but the gap between policy and delivery remains the danger.

You might not have noticed London Tech Week or care about compute clusters, but this is your money, your data, your public services, and your job prospects. The question isn’t whether you’re interested in technology policy—it’s whether you’re prepared to engage with decisions that will shape how you interact with government, access services, and navigate an increasingly digital economy.

The stakes are too high for this to remain a conversation among insiders. Whether these investments deliver stronger businesses and better public services will depend on whether citizens hold the government accountable for turning ambition into tangible improvements in daily life. Accountability has never been more necessary.