Tech leaders warn against dismantling UK digital leadership as Burnham eyes Whitehall overhaul

Technology leaders have voiced concern over reports that incoming Prime Minister Andy Burnham plans to abolish the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), arguing the move could undermine the UK’s digital transformation ambitions despite proposals to create a dedicated Minister for AI.

According to multiple media reports, Burnham (pictured) is expected to dismantle DSIT as part of a wider Whitehall reorganisation, with its functions redistributed across government. The reported changes also include appointing a Minister for AI and halting the rollout of the government’s digital identity credentials and GOV.UK Wallet.

While none of the proposals have yet been formally announced by the new administration, the reported plans have prompted a strong reaction from business leaders and digital government experts, who argue that organisational stability will be essential if the government is to deliver AI-enabled public services and wider public sector reform.

Industry questions Whitehall shake-up

James Cobb, CEO and founder of British location intelligence company Crowd Connected, said abolishing DSIT would send the wrong signal about the UK’s ambitions for technology.

“Andy Burnham says this moment must be a circuit breaker for Britain. But if that is to mean more than a change in tone, the Government must also break with the false divide it has created between people, business and the technologies that will shape both.”

He added: “The expected scrapping of the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology, and filing it under ‘business’, would reinforce exactly that mistaken view. You don’t show you take AI seriously by appointing a minister while scrapping the department that understood it.

“Science, innovation, and technology are three different things and none of them is simply business. They’re how Britain creates the businesses, jobs and public services of the next future.”

Cobb also questioned whether a standalone AI minister could succeed without the institutional support previously provided by DSIT.

“A Minister for AI is welcome, but a minister without a department is simply a spokesperson. AI bolted onto a traditional organisation delivers very little. The step change really comes when you redesign around it. The same is true of Government. Appointing an AI minister while dissolving the department that understands the technology is a step backwards, not forwards.”

Instead, he argued the government’s immediate priority should be accelerating practical AI adoption across public services and the wider economy.

“If the new minister for AI wants a first job, it shouldn’t be frontier models. It should be adoption. Getting AI working in hospitals, campuses, councils and the millions of small businesses that make up the real economy is where the productivity gains are to be found first.”

Calls for continuity on AI and digital government

Others warned that another machinery of government change risks disrupting momentum built over recent years. Rich Giblin, head of public sector and defence at SolarWinds, said: “Government departments need clarity, not chaos.”

He added that while industry wanted the new administration to succeed, organisational upheaval should not come at the expense of continuity.

“We all want to rally behind our new leader and see this government succeed. That’s precisely why decisions of this scale should build confidence, resilience, and continuity – not create additional uncertainty when government departments are already navigating significant budgetary and organisational pressures.”

Giblin also warned against disrupting institutions that have helped establish the UK’s AI capability.

“Momentum is hard won and easily squandered. The UK has spent years building capability through initiatives like the AI Safety Institute and the Sovereign AI Fund. Breaking up those institutions risks putting years of progress into reverse just as global competition in AI is accelerating.”

The dangers of ‘deckchair shuffling’

Similar concerns were raised by Tom Loosemore, co-founder of the Government Digital Service (GDS), and Public Digital, who questioned reports that GDS could move from DSIT into the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) as part of the wider Whitehall reorganisation.

Writing on LinkedIn, Loosemore described the reported plans as “crazy”, arguing that another machinery of government change would consume valuable time when the government needs to focus on improving public services.

“Merging Whitehall departments causes at least a year of internal mayhem, distracting from what Ministers actually care about,” he wrote. “This government has barely two years to show voters improved services, and you want to waste a year shuffling deckchairs?”

Loosemore also argued that moving GDS into DCMS could weaken the leadership needed to deliver digital public infrastructure across central and local government.

He said devolution would require stronger backing for programmes such as GOV.UK One Login, while GDS was already delivering common platforms including GOV.UK Notify and GOV.UK Pay, alongside an ambitious roadmap for digital wallets and digital credentials. In his view, those programmes require central leadership capable of driving reform across government rather than oversight from a department focused primarily on culture, media and sport.

He also questioned whether the reported restructuring aligned with Burnham’s ambition to put AI at the heart of government.

“Making the most of AI to improve public services requires new AI-native common platforms,” he wrote. “You’re not serious about AI-driven reform if one ‘AI for public services’ platform team sits in Cabinet Office while the teams handling non-AI platforms and common data sit at the margins in DCMS.”

Loosemore concluded with a warning that repeated departmental restructuring risks losing experienced digital specialists from government.

“Finally, and most seriously, many of the best people will just leave.

“Deckchair shuffling is for the unserious.”