Revealed: “Shocking” scale of Big Tech’s influence over Labour
Science and technology secretary Peter Kyle asked Google boss to “sense check” AI policy and told Amazon he’d “advocate” for them to competition watchdog
Keir Starmer is a big believer in the power of technology. The Prime Minister said that AI will “turbocharge” Britain.
But critics say his Labour government is far too close to Big Tech.
That concern was laid bare this week in a tense House of Lords debate over AI and copyright. One peer urged ministers to “stop listening to the large tech companies in America”.
Labour’s Baroness Jones defended Number 10, saying that the “assertion that government only ever listens to big tech is as unfair as it is unfounded.”
But is it?
New figures obtained by Democracy for Sale reveal that Labour ministers and senior civil servants met with tech industry executives and lobbyists an average of six times a week during the government’s first six months in office.
Between July and December 2024, ministers held 90 meetings with executives from Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft. Senior officials at the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) and the Cabinet Office met them on 47 more occasions.
Lobby groups TechUK and the Startup Coalition also secured 24 ministerial meetings during the same period.
In total, there were 161 recorded meetings between tech representatives and government officials during Labour’s first half-year —the most recent period for which data is available.
Some of those meetings raise serious questions about access and influence.
Just weeks after the general election, Google’s AI chief was invited to “sense check” Labour’s new AI policy, according to documents we obtained.
In another case, technology secretary Peter Kyle said he would “advocate” for Amazon at the UK’s competition regulator—at a time when the regulator was actively investigating the company. That case was later dropped.
Campaigners told us they were “alarmed” at the influence of these ‘Big Five’ tech giants, which each gave $1 million to Donald Trump’s inauguration fund.
Gina Neff, Professor of Responsible AI at Queen Mary University, called the scale of the access we uncovered “shocking.”
“This shows how deep these connections run between ministers and Big Tech,” she said. “A lot of people in civil society have pointed out that it’s harder to talk to this government about tech than the last one. It’s as if the only people who have something to say are the ones with something to sell. That’s the conflict of interest.”
On 24 July—just 19 days after Labour’s landslide election win—Kyle met with Demis Hassabis, the London-born founder and CEO of Google DeepMind.
Joined by half a dozen DSIT civil servants, the 25-minute meeting covered Labour’s plans to embed AI across the public sector, particularly in health.
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (and posted below this story) show that during the meeting Hassabis agreed to “act as a ‘sense check’ from industry regarding the work the government is doing on AI opportunities, legislation and safety.”
This wasn’t a one-off. In the second half of 2024, Google met with ministers and senior civil servants 46 times—more than any other tech company— as Labour crafted new AI legislation and launched its AI Opportunities Action Plan.
In January, Hassabis was given a formal advisory role within the government’s AI plan.
Google has not been the only big tech firm with privileged access to Labour ministers.
In September, Kyle and Chancellor Rachel Reeves held a virtual meeting with four Amazon Web Services executives. The call was billed as an “introductory meeting to discuss priorities for the government across tech, competition, and online safety.”
Kyle “underlined the level of engagement with Amazon whilst in Opposition,” referencing his “visit to Seattle,” Amazon’s corporate headquarters, earlier in the year.
The discussion soon turned to regulation. Amazon Web Services boss Matt Garman asked for Reeves and Kyle’s views on the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which was then conducting two investigations—one into AWS’s dominance in UK cloud computing, and another into Amazon’s £3 billion investment in AI startup Anthropic.
Kyle said that while the CMA was an independent regulator, he had “met the CMA” and that ministers and special advisers “engage with them regularly.” He described himself as the “sector’s champion” and said he “would advocate” for Amazon.
Later that month, the CMA announced it would not pursue its investigation into Amazon’s investment in Anthropic. The other probe, into AWS, remains ongoing.
In January, the CMA’s new interim chair was announced: Doug Gurr, Amazon’s former UK boss. According to widespread reports, Gurr replaced Marcus Bokkerink, who was pushed out by Labour ministers seeking to send a “pro-growth message.
Rosa Curling, co-director of Foxglove Legal, told Democracy for Sale that the revelations show Peter Kyle is “acting as the honourable member for Silicon Valley.”
“Our government should be working to ensure the CMA has the power and independence to stand up to multibillionaire tech barons, not tilting the playing field even further in their favour,” Curling said.
“It’s particularly alarming to see how eager Mr Kyle is to take Big Tech’s side against the UK’s competition regulator.”
The Labour government has come under increasing scrutiny for its tech ties—especially in the fast-moving world of AI.
As Democracy for Sale previously revealed, the government’s AI tsar Matt Clifford holds almost 500 private business interests, mainly in tech and AI—including in firms that sell software to the NHS.
And in Parliament this week, Labour’s AI copyright policy came under fire with critics accusing the government of enriching tech firms at the expense of British creators.
Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the Commons Culture Committee, called the plans “the biggest copyright heist in history.”
“How long will it take before the Government clamp down on what is basically the whitewashing of the behaviour of Big Tech?” she asked. “Who is really pulling the strings here?”
A spokesperson for the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology defended the government’s approach, telling us that it made “no apologies for regularly engaging with the sector.”
“Whether discussing investment, partnerships, smart regulation or recent new laws for a safer online world, we will always act in the public interest,” the spokesperson said. They noted that the government had secured £44 billion in AI investment over the past year.
Google declined to comment. Amazon Web Services did not respond to our questions.
Many of the documents used in this investigation were heavily redacted by officials. Democracy for Sale will continue to challenge this secrecy.
If you aren’t already, become a paid subscriber to help us fight for transparency and to hold Big Tech and government to account.
And here are all the documents this story drew on:
Genuinely shocking to see how cheap it is for billionaires to buy influence:
'Campaigners told us they were “alarmed” at the influence of these ‘Big Five’ tech giants, which each gave $1 million to Donald Trump’s inauguration fund.'
Tech companies have got experience and they have got something to say. But where is the counterbalancing voice of citizens and companies which are directly impacted by AI?
In "The Price of Civilization", Jeffrey Sachs makes the point that in the Obama medicare debates, there was input from insurers, pharmaceuticals and healthcare organisations. Nothing from the patients that would be affected!
Surely we need that here...
The only reason they want to sell AI to us is because they (big tech) want to establish global control so that our countries are run by them to profit THEM! Our privacy and security is at risk! Wake up Starmer, they are not your friends. AI is the future I grant you that but I'd rather finance a British company than rely on other, mostly American companies to get it. We have the smart people in this country who are not just out to enrich themselves and to hell with everything if it goes tits up. They paid millions to get trump elected for one reason. HE WILL SELL OUT TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER!