UK Government Met 137 Businesses on AI Datacentres but No Environmental Groups, Investigation Finds

Policy Development Lacked Environmental Input

An investigation by the nonprofit organisation Spotlight on Corruption has revealed that the UK government developed its policy on artificial intelligence (AI) datacentres without holding any formal meetings with environmental groups. Over a 12-month period, the organisation filed 40 freedom of information requests to 18 government agencies, seeking details of meetings and investment figures related to the government’s policymaking on AI growth zones between July 2024 and June 2026.

The findings show that ministers, permanent secretaries, and directors general involved in shaping the policy met with 137 businesses — some multiple times — while engaging only two community groups and no environmental organisations during the same timeframe.

Revolving Door Concerns

The investigation also highlighted what Spotlight on Corruption described as a “considerable revolving door” between government and the private sector. Between July 2024 and September 2026, 38 senior officials — including ministers, senior civil servants, and special advisers — moved into roles within AI companies. Nine of those were from the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT), which has played a central role in shaping Britain’s national AI strategy.

Among those who transitioned into industry roles were a former minister for AI and intellectual property, a former AI adviser to the prime minister, and several senior figures from DSIT’s AI divisions. Some took up positions at prominent firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic shortly after leaving public office.

AI Growth Zones: Ambition and Criticism

AI growth zones were introduced as part of former Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s broader economic and technology agenda. The policy aimed to accelerate the construction of large-scale datacentres across five regions in England, positioning the UK as a global leader in AI infrastructure. Starmer described the initiative as a way to “turbocharge the economy” and bring thousands of jobs through partnerships with major tech companies.

However, reporting by The Guardian has raised questions about the assumptions underlying the policy. These include unverified energy projections, lack of audited financial data, and overly optimistic job creation estimates. Concerns have also emerged regarding how these datacentres will be powered, particularly given discrepancies between departments on projected electricity demand and associated environmental costs.

Community Opposition Mounts

Public resistance to datacentre developments has grown across the UK, with protests reported in locations ranging from Auchtertool, a rural village near Edinburgh, to Brick Lane in East London. Chi Onwurah, Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West, warned that the lack of meaningful consultation mirrors issues seen in the United States, where datacentre projects have faced significant pushback.

“It is critically important that AI benefits communities and is also shaped by them,” Onwurah said. “We can see the backlash influencing the midterms. It’s really important that communities are involved in datacentres and AI growth zones and see the benefits.”

Limited Transparency and International Comparison

Many interactions between businesses and the Starmer administration may not have been disclosed due to the involvement of special advisers like Jade Leung, whose roles are subject to less stringent transparency requirements than traditional civil servants. This limits public visibility into how decisions were made.

Spotlight on Corruption compared the UK approach with policies in Canada, Germany, and Australia, finding that these countries engaged more broadly with stakeholders and implemented stricter environmental criteria when planning datacentre expansions. The report concluded that the UK had “fallen behind equivalent jurisdictions” in developing an equitable and transparent strategy.

Government Response

A government spokesperson responded to the findings by stating: “We are clear that datacentres should create British jobs, strengthen supply chains and deliver benefits for the communities that host them, while prioritising clean power and using water responsibly – and meet with these companies to make sure that happens.”

The spokesperson added that the government intends to continue working closely with industry, local authorities, environmental groups, and communities. They noted that community benefits are typically assessed through local planning processes and that new measures allow local authorities hosting datacentres in AI growth zones to retain additional business rates generated by the developments.

What Readers Can Verify

Readers interested in verifying this information can access the full investigation published by The Guardian at [https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/27/uk-government-environmental-groups-ai-datacentres-expansion-plans-investigation](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/oct/27/uk-government-environmental-groups-ai-datacentres-expansion-plans-investigation). Additionally, individuals may submit their own freedom of information requests to relevant UK government departments to obtain further documentation on stakeholder engagement related to AI and datacentre policy.

Uncertainties Remain

While the investigation provides substantial insight into the policymaking process, certain aspects remain unclear. For example, the exact scope of undisclosed meetings involving special advisers cannot be fully determined without additional disclosures. Likewise, discrepancies in energy usage projections across departments suggest ongoing uncertainty about the environmental impact of future datacentre projects.

As the debate continues, pressure is likely to increase on the government to expand consultations beyond the tech industry and ensure greater accountability in how AI infrastructure policies are developed moving forward.