Science, Innovation and Expertise committee chair questions UK’s tech sovereignty method
Chi Onwurah, chair of the Home of Commons Science, Innovation and Expertise committee, has launched correspondence with the Division for Science, Innovation and Expertise (DSIT) about UK know-how sovereignty coverage that raises basic questions.
On 10 March 2026, Onwurah, the MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West, opened a Expertise Sovereignty Debate within the Home of Commons, placing into query the independence of the UK’s know-how technique and method.
In the course of the debate, she spoke concerning the NHS’s involvement with US information administration provider Palantir, stating that its chairman and founder, Peter Thiel, holds “a political worldview which is at odds with British values”.
Following the controversy, Onwurah despatched a letter to Kanishka Narayan, minister for Science, Innovation and Expertise, searching for clarification about know-how sovereignty. In it, she requested concerning the authorities’s plans for technological self-reliance and information governance.
Her questions included: “Are you able to affirm that the UK doesn’t search to deal with the Massive Tech corporations as sovereign states?” and “have ministers or officers within the division [for Science, Innovation and Technology] mentioned the affect of the US Cloud Act, the Patriot Act, and entity record instruments, with Microsoft, AWS [Amazon Web Services], and Palantir in regard to UK information sovereignty?”
In a response letter, dated 15 April, Narayan mentioned: “Though some international know-how corporations function at important scale and throughout a number of jurisdictions, which can require a strategic and coordinated method, they continue to be personal sector actors and don’t possess sovereign authority. Firms working within the UK are topic to UK legal guidelines and regulatory frameworks, that are set by Parliament and enforced by impartial regulators.”
He highlighted DSIT’s ongoing and upcoming investments and investigations, such because the Competitors and Markets Authority’s (CMA’s) designation of Google and Apple with Strategic Market Standing in cellular ecosystems, which led the tech titans to decide to fairer app retailer practices.
Narayan wrote about financial methods to develop Britain’s place in worldwide tech. On 16 April, DSIT launched the Sovereign Al Fund to spend money on early-stage Al corporations, within the hope that it will entice startups to the UK.
Highlighting “foundational relationships” with the US, European Union, Japan, India, China and others, he insisted on the significance of worldwide collaborations in direction of AI. Nonetheless, Narayan didn’t reply whether or not the federal government intends to observe how a lot public service infrastructure is determined by “foreign-based cloud know-how”, and made no particular reference to Palantir.
In the course of the parliamentary debate, Onwurah talked about Elon Musk’s determination to flip off Ukraine’s Starlink capacities throughout an important assault towards Russia for example of the dangers of cloud dependance.
Presently, AWS and Microsoft dominate British cloud use, making up virtually 80% of the market, with Google coming in third.
An investigation into AWS and Microsoft by the CMA led UK cloud suppliers to demand stronger regulation. In July 2026, the Authorities Digital Service (GDS) will publish a Nationwide Cloud Technique.
Onwurah mentioned that Narayan’s letter fails to set out a “coherent technique for attaining know-how sovereignty”. As a substitute, she mentioned the UK should determine the way it can change into self-reliant, and what dangers are linked to conditions the place “interdependence is unavoidable”.
“It’s unimaginable to guage whether or not the £22bn spent yearly on public sector analysis and growth is serving the UK’s lengthy‑time period pursuits if we have no idea how it’s contributing to our know-how sovereignty,” mentioned Onwurah.
