Andy Burnham’s AI Question
It's not a priority. Can that last?
The UK is changing Prime Minister again and the new face looks almost certain to be former Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham.
So: I’ve been trying to find out what Burnhamism looks like for AI.
American readers who aren’t that interested in that minutiae of British politics: treat this as a case study in how a “middle power” tackles AI. The decision by the Trump administration to cut off access to Fable has prompted a major panic among non-US thinkers on AI, who are urging their governments to take action. But the leading middle power for AI is otherwise occupied.
AI is not a priority for Burnham
He and his team are not ignoring the technology. But they do not see it as a priority in itself. Rather, they are trying to fit it into an existing agenda of decentralisation and public-service reform.
Principal Burnham advisors on AI are:
Josh Simons. Before becoming an MP he worked for Meta AI. He’s written a book called Algorithms for the People: Democracy in the Age of AI in which he calls for tech platforms to be regulated as “utilities for democracy”. Despite being forced to resign from his ministerial position after facing claims the think tank he used to run commissioned a report into journalists’ backgrounds, he is expected to take on a senior role in any new administration – Chief of Staff has been rumoured
Antonio Weiss. A writer and academic who is currently on the UK Digital Service Responsible AI Panel and has written a book called “AI Demystified”. He’s previously called for an “active” industrial policy and for greater use of tech in public services
The agenda is still very much in flux but according to multiple sources the main elements are:
A sense that government is getting a lot right on AI
A hope that AI can be used to reinvent public services - tech as “digital public infrastructure”. The aim is to get real practical benefits from AI
“Pro-decentralisation”: spreading AI’s economic benefits to the rest of the country. One question being asked is: which places outside London could have world-leading ecosystems?
Reducing US dependence in some way (yet to be defined but I’m told they’re “asking the right questions”)
I have some questions too
Such as:
Can you really decentralise without killing growth in London?
Will the “not a priority” policy endure an AI shock?
And of course: what will the next Chancellor do?
This last question is by far the most important. It is widely rumoured – correctly, I understand – that the Burnham camp would consider raising capital gains tax to the level of income tax, a change which would have a big effect on startup investment.
One of the rumoured candidates for Chancellor, Wes Streeting, has called for this, saying he wants “a wealth tax that works”, with carve-outs for entrepreneurs to ensure that risk-taking isn’t penalised.
I am by no means an expert in tax policy, but people who are say that there are ways to design this kind of policy in a way that protects entrepreneurship while also making the system both more fair and more efficient.
However, frontier AI is not ordinary entrepreneurship. It is a system built around rare, enormous outcomes, internationally mobile founders and aggressive US investors. Tax economists might very reasonably look at this system and say: this is labour income being disguised as capital.
Tech sovereignty folk look at the same thing and say: this is the prize structure that creates frontier companies – and if AI really becomes the crucial determinant of power both soft and hard, then frontier companies are the only game in town.
Or to put it another way: is AI something you shape, or is it something that shapes you?