Launched by party leader Sir Ed Davey in the wake of Reform’s success in the May 2025 local elections, and chaired by a group of 3 senior Lib Dem councillors – Leader of Hull City Council Mike Ross, Leader of the Durham County Council Opposition Amanda Hobden, and Leader of the Kent County Council Opposition Anthony Hooke – Reform Watch is a campaign calling on grass roots activists and councillors to report back to the party on the activities of Reform UK in their area.

On Monday afternoon, the initiative’s 3 chairs spoke with Tom Morrison, MP for Cheadle and the Liberal Democrats’ Deputy Chief Whip in Westminster, and took questions from party members about the scheme, the party’s future, and the potential threat of Reform.

All 3 panelists were highly critical of Reform, with Anthony Hooke claiming that Farage’s party are ‘building a record of failure,’ Mike Ross saying that he is ‘fundamentally opposed to everything Reform stand for,’ and Amanda Hobden accusing them of deliberately misleading people during this year’s local election campaign.

However, despite attacking the party itself, the panel avoided being overly critical of Reform voters, with Ross stating that Reform’s success is largely due to the failures of Labour and the Conservatives, and expressing understanding that people want an alternative to the current two party system, but stressing that it was imperative for the Lib Dems to convince the masses turning their back on Labour and the Tories that they, and not Reform, are the best alternative.

Morrison agrees with this sentiment, and claimed that of all the Westminster parties, the Liberal Democrats are ‘in the best place to tackle Reform head on.’

When it came to how this could be done, the panel had plenty to say, with Anthony Hooke saying that the key to beating Reform in local elections is campaigning on local, rather than national issues. Amanda Hobden added to Hooke’s point, accusing Reform of spending far too much campaigning effort in the build-up to May’s local elections focusing on national issues, rather than the local and regional matters that councils and local authorities actually have control over, expressing confusion as to why the Reform branch in her area campaigned on ‘stopping the boats,’ when there are no asylum seekers trying to cross the North Sea and enter Britain via County Durham.

Hobden also accused Reform of being deliberately misleading and ‘populist’ in their campaign, complaining that earlier in the year they accused the then-Lib Dem-led County Durham Council of having one of the largest debts of any council in the country, without factoring in the fact that they also had one of the highest populations of any council.

She also expressed dismay at the media’s coverage of Reform, calling on them to make sure that they are fair and transparent when reporting on the party, and ensuring that the screen time they give them is proportionate to the size of the party; Hobden claims that Reform, who at present only have 5 MPs in Westminster, receive far more media coverage than the Liberal Democrats did when they were in a similar position prior to last year’s general election; however this apparent disparity could arguably be justified based on the fact that Reform leader Nigel Farage is a far more well-known figure than Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey, who the panel were full of praise for.

At the very beginning of the panel, host Tom Morrison described him as ‘the UK’s most popular political leader,’ referring to YouGov polling which gives Sir Ed Davey a higher approval rating than Kemi Badenoch, Nigel Farage, or Sir Keir Starmer.

This polling is caveated by the fact that the Lib Dem leader is much less well-known than his 3 main competitors, however when asked whether this lack of name recognition could pose a problem for Davey and his party, the panel seemed dismissive, with Anthony Hooke claiming that when canvassing people often tell him how much they like his party’s leader. Mike Ross added that this relative lack of recognition when compared to other party leaders could work in Ed Davey’s favour, claiming that Nigel Farage’s status as one of Britain’s most famous politicians is actually a weakness for Reform, as most people are voting for Farage, not Reform, and thus without him the party will ‘crumble.’

Clearly, whilst the Liberal Democrats are certainly taking the rise of Reform and appearance of a new political rival seriously, they are also optimistic about their own prospects for the future. The mood from Brighton was not one of fear or despair, but rather one of determination and hope. They pointed to recent by-election victories and record-breaking local election results as proof that the Lib Dem message still resonates when delivered effectively.

Reform Watch, they stressed, is not simply a defensive tool but part of a broader effort to show voters a constructive, liberal alternative—one rooted in patriotism defined by service to communities rather than isolationism.

If the panel’s upbeat mood is any indication, the Liberal Democrats believe they have both the strategy and the resolve to turn voter dissatisfaction with the status quo into the continuation of their party’s resurgence. From the panel, the message was clear: Reform may be riding high in the polls today, but the Lib Dems are preparing for the long game and are convinced that they can come out on top.

In a statement to Parliament, the Home Secretary stated the group would be proscribed following the attack, with a draft measure to placed before MPs before the end of this month.

She said that the group has “long history of unacceptable damage”, and noted that their action had increased in frequency and severity since 2024.

Legislation and Proscription

Cooper intends to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000, which allows the Home Secretary to ban groups they reasonably believe to be “concerned in terrorism.” To do so, the Home Secretary must lay a statutory order before Parliament, which must be approved within 40 days to add the group to Schedule 2 of the Act.

Proscription would make it a criminal offence to be a member of, or to invite or express support for, the group, with breaches risking up to 14 years’ imprisonment or unlimited fines (Sections 11–12). It would also become illegal to display any symbols associated with the group in a way that creates suspicion of membership, with breaches risking up to six months in prison and a fine of up to £5,000 (Section 13).

Proscription offences have limited legal defences in case of breach, with recent amendments reducing the defence of ignorance by adding “reckless support” as a form of contravention.

In order to reverse proscription, the group would have to appeal to the Proscribed Organisation Appeal Committee. Advocating for de-proscription outside journalistic or official channels risks breaching Section 14 of the Act, which prohibits inciting support for banned groups. Only one successful appeal has been made against a proscription order – by the People’s Mojahedin of Iran in 2008.

The Act has been used to proscribe over 80 organisations since its passage. Initially targeting international Islamist groups including Al-Qaeda and its affiliates, the Act later covered a new wave of organisations, including ISIS and its offshoots, and has been used to combat a rise in domestic radicalisation. After their support for the murder of MP Jo Cox in June 2016, National Action became the first far-right political group to be proscribed under the Act. Since 2016, several other right-wing groups and their affiliates have been added to the schedule.

Typically, radical protest groups have been handled under public order laws rather than terrorism legislation. However, this approach has shifted in recent years.

In May 2024, Lord (John) Woodcock, then the Independent Advisor on Political Violence and Disruption, presented a commissioned report to the Commons encouraging the government to consider the proscription of groups he termed “extremists.” Appointed in 2020, Woodcock argued that the rise in extreme and aggressive political protests has inhibited the “rights and freedoms of the general public and their representatives.”

The report referred to specific groups, including Palestine Action and Just Stop Oil, as “extreme political activists.” It cited rising public frustration and the need to protect democracy and MPs from threats and intimidation.

Having scrapped Woodcock’s position, the government has since appointed Robin Simcox as Commissioner for Countering Extremism, who has echoed these recommendations. Simcox has warned that London had become a “no-go zone for Jews” due to pro-Palestinian protests and urged the government to “accept higher legal risk” in combating political extremism.

Simcox’s statements were supported by the Campaign Against Antisemitism and the Community Security Trust, which both cited increased safety concerns of British Jews in public areas.

What is Palestine Action?

Palestine Action was created in July 2020 following the storming of Elbit Systems HQ in London, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, which has since become the group’s primary target.

The group pursued Elbit’s other UK premises in Bristol, Oldham, Tamworth, and Somerset between 2020 and 2025, repeatedly employing the same signature tactic, which left buildings sprayed with blood-coloured paint. The group has also targeted UK facilities linked to arms exports, including the Italian aerospace company Leonardo and the American firm Teledyne, terming them “corporate enablers.”

In May 2024, activists occupied an Elbit/Thales drone factory in Leicester for six days. Ten people were arrested; two faced criminal damage charges but were ultimately acquitted after a jury accepted that their actions were necessary to prevent greater harm.

Co-founder Huda Ammori has stated that the group will “continue until the rest of their sites are gone” and is pursuing an end to the British government’s “collusion” with alleged war crimes in Gaza. Their campaigns of disruptive action have led to the closure of Elbit’s London and Oldham sites.

Many of these actions were taken in conjunction with other protest groups, including Extinction Rebellion and Animal Rebellion. The group has also targeted companies they deem linked to Elbit, including its subsidiaries and suppliers, as well as other targets such as Trump Turnberry Golf Course and major insurer Allianz. Palestine Action has amassed over 600,000 combined followers on their platforms on X and Instagram.

Responses

The group’s solicitor described the proposed ban as “unlawful, dangerous and ill-thought-out,” while human rights groups Amnesty International and Liberty released a joint letter condemning the move. Amnesty stated they are “deeply concerned at the use of counter-terrorism powers to target protests” and believe that criminal law is sufficient to deal with such acts. Both the Shawcross Prevent Review (2023) and Lord Walney’s independent report (2024) have been criticised by human rights organisations and the United Nations for discriminatory and overly broad definitions of terrorism.

An emergency protest was held on Tuesday, 24 June, backed by 35 protest groups, including the Stop the War Coalition. The protest saw 13 arrests following clashes with police; 7 have since been charged. Initially planned for Parliament Square, the protest was restricted by Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley, who praised the proscription as a necessary step to counter an “organised extremist political group” whose actions “go beyond what most of us would consider legitimate protest.”

Government criticism of the group referred specifically to the recent action against a Jewish-owned business in North London, which the group has stated is registered as a landlord of Elbit’s Kent-based factory.

At the protest, a Palestine Action spokesperson accused Cooper of avoiding questions about the RAF’s ongoing role in Gaza, describing the ban as an “unhinged reaction.” They also criticised Keir Starmer’s stance, pointing out his past defence of the 2003 anti-Iraq War protests at RAF Fairford.

Former Scottish First Minister Humza Yousaf condemned the move as an abuse of anti-terror laws. Former Justice Secretary Lord Falconer questioned whether the group’s known actions—such as the Brize Norton incident—are enough to justify proscription, suggesting the government may be relying on undisclosed intelligence.

Lord Walney, by contrast, described the decision as “long overdue,” alluding to “very serious criminal trials which involve serious violence against individuals.

Geri Silverstone

Chief Executive and Founder, Silverstone Communications

The 2025 Spending Review (SR25) has set out the narrative for the Government’s spending priorities.

For businesses, local authorities, and residents in the South of England, the question remains: Has the region lost out compared to the rest of the country?

Where did the money go?

The Government’s spending plans include:

• £15.6 billion for city region transport, primarily targeting metro mayors in England’s largest city regions.
• £39 billion for a new 10-year Affordable Homes Programme, the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation.
• Targeted investments in local growth funds and deprived communities, with a clear emphasis on the North and Midlands.

Did the South lose out?

Communities such as Blackpool, Leeds, Bradford, Merseyside, and Lincoln all got their fair share of mentions in the Chancellor’s speech. What all these communities have in common is that they have strong Mayoral Combined Authorities.

Recent data shows that national research funding is now flowing more rapidly outside of the Greater South East, with the rest of the country overtaking the South in UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) spending for the first time. This shift reflects a broader policy drive to ‘level up’ regions perceived as needier or lagging economically.

The South has been hampered by a view that they “don’t do Mayors”, and that MCA wouldn’t work for the region. Given the success of the Northern metro-mayors, and the significant investment they are now receiving, is it time for a rethink?

Transport and infrastructure

The lion’s share of new transport funding was directed at Mayoral Combined Authorities in the North and Midlands, with Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, and other northern city regions receiving billions for tram networks, mass transit, and bus reforms.

While London secured a £4.1 billion settlement for Transport for London, the wider South saw less headline investment in new transport infrastructure compared to these “turbo-charged” mayoral authorities.

Social housing: A win for the South?

Social housing was a clear winner, with £39 billion committed over the next decade.

This investment will benefit all regions by supporting new builds and the regeneration of existing stock.

The economic impact of such investment is substantial: Research shows that building 90,000 social homes could generate over £50 billion for the UK economy, supporting jobs, reducing homelessness, and improving health outcomes. 

For the South, where housing affordability remains a critical challenge, this could ease pressures on local economies and provide much-needed stability for workers and families.

Has the South been complacent?

There is a perceptible shift in government policy towards addressing regional imbalances, with new local growth funds and targeted investments in the North and Midlands.

The South, long seen as the UK’s economic powerhouse, is now receiving a smaller proportion of new infrastructure and research funding relative to other regions. 

This reflects both the government’s desire to rebalance the economy and the political reality of supporting areas with higher perceived need.

The emergence of powerful mayoral authorities in the North and Midlands – conceived under Conservative governments and now being expanded by Labour – has given these regions a strong, a voice in Whitehall.

In contrast, the South (outside of London) lacks a similarly co-ordinated approach. This fragmentation may have contributed to the region’s relative under representation in recent funding rounds.

United we stand, divided we fall

Given the context of devolution and the rise of regional advocacy, there is a compelling case for businesses, local authorities, MPs in the South to collaborate more closely.

A unified regional campaign could help articulate the South’s needs – whether for infrastructure, skills, or innovation funding – and ensure the region does not fall behind as new Combined Mayoral Authorities come to the fore.

Time for the South to step up

While the South of England benefits from national investments in social housing and continues to enjoy a strong economic base, the direction of travel is clear: Government funding and devolution are increasingly favouring regions with co-ordinated leadership and clear strategies for growth.

To avoid complacency and ensure continued prosperity, the South needs to be more confident in championing the area as a place to do business, a place to live and a place to visit.

The South cannot afford to be parochial. If you can have the Northern Powerhouse, then why can’t the South have the same.

All must pull together – across business, civic, and political spheres – to make the case in this era of regional devolution.

We will be watching closely as the new funding and devolution landscape unfolds, ready to help southern businesses and local authorities navigate the challenges and opportunities ahead.

Featured image via Anna Jastrzebska / Shutterstock.

The UK’s public sector faces ongoing pressures posed by budget limitations and growing demand for essential services. With stretched resources, maintaining adequate levels of service delivery has become increasingly challenging.  

In a bid to address these issues, the government has laid out its AI Opportunities Action Plan to shape the application of AI across the UK, with a particular focus on improving the public sector – introducing tools like ‘Humphrey’, an AI assistant to support the Civil Service.

This move signals a clear and essential recognition of the power of AI and generative AI to transform public services, which was highlighted in a recent report by Public First, commissioned by Google Cloud.

This report found that the key benefits AI and generative AI bring to the public sector include freeing up time, improving service quality, and even unlocking up to £38 billion in annual savings by 2030. 

Accelerating efficiency through AI will be essential to unlocking public sector productivity – including reducing waiting times for essential services and improving appointment access – while enhancing working conditions and driving innovation.

How the government acts now will be crucial to securing a better future for our public services, ensuring that outdated technology is left in the past.

The Resource Issue

The government’s plans come at a critical time when public sector workers are under sustained pressure. In fact, 61 per cent of public administration workers report that overwork has increased in the last five years, while 70 per cent say morale has decreased. Such low levels of morale impact employee retention, creating a vicious cycle where burnt-out employees abandon work, further exacerbating staff shortages and reducing service delivery capacity. 

The increase in waiting lists in the NHS, currently sitting at 7.5 million, is resonant of such challenges. The government’s moves to address these challenges with new reforms, alongside the AI Opportunities Action Plan, highlight an understanding of the value AI can provide in the delivery of healthcare. With the introduction of AI, Google Cloud’s research estimated that an extra 3.7 million GP appointments may be created. 

With the ability to automate up to a third of daily tasks, such as taking meeting notes, filling out paperwork, and performing basic analysis, AI can free up employee time for higher-value work. For example, by streamlining healthcare admin, healthcare workers can focus more broadly on delivering patient care and improving appointment availability for patients.

These efficiencies will revolutionise the delivery of other key public services too, potentially enabling a 16 per cent increase in the teacher-to-student ratio while freeing up the equivalent of over 160,000 police officers in emergency services.

Barriers to Adoption

Despite the progress being made through the AI Opportunities Action Plan, its success will hinge on addressing critical barriers to adoption. Reliance on legacy systems presents significant challenges, preventing organisations from taking advantage of modern solutions. Siloed data further complicates the implementation of new tools, limiting them from being used effectively. At the same time, vendor lock-in hinders growth by trapping billions of pounds in outdated technology solutions. This money could be reinvested in cutting-edge innovations if it weren’t tied up in legacy systems.

Additionally, the public sector faces a range of legal and regulatory challenges with the handling of sensitive citizen data. Responsible AI use will be critical, while transparency around how data is being used and stored is central to gaining public trust – 60 per cent of public administrators reported they would be cautious using AI tools more extensively. 

Insufficient digital skills also pose another obstacle. Employees must be trained to take full advantage of AI, while procurement teams must understand AI’s productivity and cost-saving potential. Risk-averse organisational cultures and outdated procurement processes often limit the adoption of new technologies, making it harder to overhaul legacy workflows and embrace new approaches. 

Realising the Benefits

To ensure the AI Opportunities Action Plan is successful and ensures the public sector feels the benefits of AI’s full potential, effective delivery of its Scan, Pilot, Scale model will be essential. Through this, better collaboration between AI industry leaders and governments can be fostered, ensuring cutting-edge technologies can be brought into public service design at the earliest possible stage. 

As part of this, necessary knowledge sharing will ensure government officials understand how they can best take advantage of AI, including the important role of a secure, cloud-based system to support the development of the integrated and standardised datasets needed to power AI tools.

More so, by providing digital skills training, employees can learn to use these AI tools effectively, ethically, and securely. At the same time, procurement teams can be educated on the productivity, efficiencies, and cost gains to be made with AI use, helping to foster a culture that embraces innovation.

With ongoing regulatory challenges, governments must provide legal clarity on use cases to give clear guidance on safe, secure, and responsible adoption. Transparency will also be critical in building public acceptance of AI adoption and countering public concerns around data use. 

The Path to Maturity

By taking these critical steps, the aims of the AI Opportunities Action Plan can be delivered, seeing the public sector advance beyond early-stage AI adoption – such as using tools for administrative tasks and extracting information – to truly impactful use cases that have the potential to change lives. 

For example, AI has the potential to support the NHS to provide bespoke healthcare plans and automate prescriptions for common illnesses. This can further support cost saving by limiting reliance on human doctors, allowing them to focus on treating complex issues. 

At maturity, AI will play a core role in how the public sector operates, augmenting current roles and reshaping workflows. Through this, public sector leaders can transform decision making, optimise resource allocation and experiment with new models of service delivery that drastically improve outcomes for citizens.

An Outlook for the Future

While challenges remain in the public sector’s digital transformation journey, the rewards of AI adoption are profound. AI presents a lifeline to overburdened services, with the potential to save billions annually, alleviate pressure on staff and elevate citizen experiences. 

The AI Opportunities Action Plan signals the beginning of this journey. By overcoming existing barriers through modernising infrastructure, upskilling employees, and addressing regulatory challenges with robust data security measures, the aims of the plan may be realised, and public sector organisations can start to reap the benefits of AI. 

Then, as AI exceeds the early adoption phase to be at the core of operations, its impact will extend beyond solely productivity gains. It will redefine how services are delivered, reshape roles and enable innovations that have the ability to change lives. By embracing AI, the UK can establish a truly citizen-centric public sector, suited to meet the needs of today and those of the future. 

Featured image via raker / Shutterstock.

Iain Burgess

Designation

UKI Public Sector Leader at Google Cloud

The UK is on the cusp of a digital revolution in government. While central government has made significant progress in ensuring the wider public sector utilises technology effectively – namely through the AI Opportunities Action Plan and the Blueprint for Modern Digital Government – it is local government that holds the key to unlocking the true potential of artificial intelligence (AI).

This potential isn’t simply about digitising existing processes; it’s about fundamentally reshaping public services to improve lives, build stronger communities and drive economic growth. 

Local authorities are already demonstrating their potential as leaders in AI-driven innovation. Their deep understanding of community needs, trusted relationships with residents, and access to extensive datasets make them ideal innovators.

Councils are pioneering the use of AI to improve lives and boost local economies, showcasing its potential to transform public services. By embracing AI, councils are proving that technology can be a powerful force for good in local communities. 

To understand this potential, we need to acknowledge the scale and diversity of local government. In England alone, over 1.3 million people work in this sector, delivering over 800 services and managing vast amounts of resident data.

Local government encompasses a wide range of authorities – from district councils with modest budgets to county councils managing billions – interacting with almost every government department.

Despite this diversity, common goals unite them: creating digitally enabled councils, digitally equipped communities, and digitally empowered residents. 

Building the Foundations for AI-driven Transformation

Imagine a future where AI empowers public services to deliver truly resident-centric solutions. AI can transform libraries into even more vibrant community hubs, offering AI-powered learning tools, personalised reading recommendations, and interactive workshops on coding and digital literacy.

Councils can leverage AI-powered data analytics to identify individuals at risk of social isolation, proactively connecting them with relevant support services and community groups. Social workers, equipped with AI-powered assistants on their tablets, can automate administrative tasks like notetaking and scheduling, freeing them up to focus on building relationships and providing personalised support to families.

Residents can use AI chatbots to report issues like potholes, schedule repairs and access council services 24/7, while AI-powered platforms facilitate meaningful online engagement in local decision-making by summarising diverse perspectives and identifying common ground. 

Achieving this vision requires more than just technology; it demands a shift in mindset, a commitment to innovation, and a willingness to embrace new ways of working. This transformation also requires strong partnerships between local authorities and innovative technology providers, especially SMEs.

These businesses, often at the forefront of AI development, bring agility, specialised expertise, and fresh perspectives to address the unique challenges faced by local government. 

Initiatives like the LGA’s Technology Innovation Showcase, in partnership with digital transformation partner PUBLIC, demonstrate the power of collaboration. By bringing together councils and SMEs, it fosters co-creation, knowledge sharing, and the development of tailored solutions for local communities. This approach accelerates digital transformation and ensures responsible, ethical, and safe AI development and deployment. 

The LGA is committed to supporting councils on their AI journey. Our AI hub provides resources like a use case bank, explainer videos, and e-learning modules.

The LGA has established dedicated AI networks for council staff, fostering peer learning and knowledge sharing. We are also actively engaging with government and regulators to ensure local government’s voice shapes national AI policy, and we’re collaborating on practical guidance for councils on how to deploy AI safely. 

Overcoming Barriers to Unlock AI’s True Potential

Local government’s embrace of AI can also be a powerful engine for UK industrial growth. By harnessing data and AI, councils can analyse local economic trends to identify emerging sectors for investment and support.

They can model and optimise local infrastructure to ensure it supports economic activity, analyse skills gaps and future workforce needs to develop targeted training programs and foster vibrant innovation ecosystems by connecting businesses, researchers, and investors. 

Despite this potential, significant challenges remain. Funding constraints, skills gaps, and capacity limitations are hindering wider AI adoption. To unlock the true potential of AI in local government, a coordinated national approach is crucial. This must include 

1. A Seat at the Table: local government must have a strong voice in shaping national AI strategies and guidance. These challenges and priorities must be recognised and integrated into public sector-wide support programmes, with a direct relationship between the sector and DSIT being essential. 

2. Targeted Support: councils need tailored support to drive digital innovation, including funding for new technologies and approaches to service delivery. This should involve working with technology company partners to develop scalable solutions and modernise legacy IT systems. Additionally, funding should be allocated to equip council staff with essential digital skills. A centralised body, such as the proposed Local Government Centre for Digital Technology, could efficiently channel this support. 

3. Robust Assurance: responsible AI deployment hinges on trustworthy development. Mandatory adherence to standards like the DSIT’s AI Management Essentials, coupled with third-party verification, is vital to ensure public trust. An enhanced role for public buying organisations could streamline procurement and assurance processes. 

4. Fostering Competition: concerns exist regarding market concentration. Local government can play a pivotal role in fostering competition in the AI market, particularly by supporting SMEs and encouraging innovative solutions. 

5. Digital Inclusion: AI can be a powerful tool for digital inclusion, but its implementation requires careful consideration to avoid widening existing inequalities. Local authorities are crucial partners in achieving national digital inclusion goals, and they require adequate resources to implement effective programmes. 

6. An Integrated Approach to Infrastructure: local government supports the UK Government’s digital connectivity ambitions to drive economic growth, stimulate local economies and ensure all regions benefit from next-generation digital infrastructure.

In line with the Government’s digital transformation ambitions from analogue to digital public service delivery – particularly in the NHS over the next ten years – and the objectives of this Opportunities Action Plan, connectivity and sustainable AI infrastructure are essential. 

AI infrastructure must be considered in an integrated way with other forms of digital infrastructure plans and connectivity ambitions the Government has, and local government should be considered a key partner in delivery.  

7. Regulatory Clarity: the current AI regulatory landscape is fragmented and confusing. A centralised, proactive approach led by DSIT is needed to provide clarity and foster innovation.

This approach should include clear guidelines on the ethical use of AI, ensuring responsible development and deployment with appropriate oversight mechanisms to mitigate potential risks and societal harms. 

Final Thought: Empowering Local Authorities to Lead the AI Revolution

AI has the potential to revolutionise local government, driving efficiency, improving services, and boosting productivity. As the Government pushes for growth and innovation, local authorities must be empowered to harness the transformative power of AI.

This requires investment, skills development, risk mitigation, and a collaborative approach that puts local government at the heart of the UK’s AI revolution. Only then can we ensure everyone benefits from the potential of AI innovation. 

Cllr Louise Gittins

Designation

Chair of the Local Government Association

Featured image via The LGA.

The report Transforming Care, Saving Lives: Revitalising UK Life Sciences and Diagnostics brought together leading experts from industry, academia, and the NHS to look at ways in which the sector can innovate and transform to improve patient outcomes. 

At the event in Portcullis House, the audience heard speeches alongside a panel discussion that shed light on the transformative potential that better collaboration, innovation, and regulation can have on healthcare. These themes underlined the collective efforts required to shape a health system that not only meets current challenges but also anticipates future needs.

Our speakers and panellists included:

• Simon Opher MP, Member of Parliament for Stroud (host) 
• Andrew Gwynne MP, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health and Prevention, Department of Health and Social Care
• Professor Lucy Chappell, Chief Scientific Adviser, Department of Health and Social Care
• Professor Sir Stephen Powis, Medical Director, NHS England
• Dame Lyn Chitty, Deputy Director of the National Institute for Health and Care Research, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust Biomedical Research Centre
• Helen Dent, CEO, BIVDA
• Professor Sir Mike Richards, CBE MD, DSc, FRCP, Chair, UK National Screening Committee
• Dr Stuart Adams, Honorary Associate Professor at UCL and Consultant Clinical Scientist at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust
• Dr Richard Scott, CEO of Genomics England 
• Martin Keil, Vice President and General Manager Europe Commercial, Revvity

Collaboration: A pillar of healthcare progress

The recurring emphasis on collaboration highlights its critical role in advancing outcomes across life science and healthcare sectors. Across various speeches, leaders praised the UK’s ability to unite academia, the NHS, industry, and charity sectors to drive innovation and improve patient outcomes.

Sir Stephen Powis, Medical Director of the NHS, argued how on this front, the UK is a world leader, saying: “It does have the ability that other health systems don’t have – to come together as one very large health system and act collectively.”

In his speech, Powis gave examples of some of the ways in which this takes effect, showcasing programs such as the NHS Innovation Accelerator and Clinical Entrepreneur Program, which nurture small enterprises and startups to develop groundbreaking solutions. 

However, there were many calls at the event for collaboration to go further to improve outcomes and create greater efficiency in the system. During the panel, Sir Mike Richards, Chair of the UK National Screening Committee, urged researchers to work more with the regulators, saying: “One of the ways we’re doing that is for the screening committee to work closely with researchers and say, is the research going to answer the sort of questions that the screening committee is going to want to have?

“Because what you don’t want is to do a research study and then say, oh damn, we haven’t answered the questions we need. So, we are working really hard on that”, he added.

Innovation: Transforming healthcare delivery

Innovation emerged as a central theme, with discussions spanning cutting-edge technologies like AI, genomics, and digital health tools. Leaders expressed optimism about the NHS’s capacity to integrate these advancements into everyday healthcare.

AI was frequently spotlighted for its potential to enhance productivity and patient outcomes. Andrew Gwynne MP, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Public Health and Prevention, described his experience with AI assisting with a mock consultation, recalled: “I had the privilege on Sunday of visiting Great Ormond Street Hospital, and I had a mock consultation where we talked about football and politics and my family. And the AI automatically dumped all the irrelevant rubbish stuff about football and politics and my family and picked out all the stuff about my health that I chatted about with the consultant.

It wrote the consultant’s notes, and they were perfect, and sent me a letter, probably before Id left the hospital, outlining not only what the consultation was about and what was found and what the doctor’s opinion was, but also the date for my next appointment.” 

“It is literally science fiction becoming science fact,” he remarked, emphasising how such technologies have the potential to revolutionise healthcare delivery.

However, the use of AI was cautioned as needing the right regulatory framework to go alongside it. During our panel, Sir Mike Richards argued how AI needs to be trained to work effectively across diverse populations to be able to take account of people’s different ethnicity or body type.

Richard Scott of Genomics England also stressed the importance of an AI regulatory framework, emphasising the need to protect patients’ data when AI learns of data sets.  

Diagnostics: Enabling earlier and accurate healthcare interventions

Diagnostics took centre stage as a critical area for enhancing healthcare outcomes. Speakers emphasised the importance of diagnostic tools to facilitate early detection and intervention, which can significantly improve patient outcomes. 

Screening programs in particular were highlighted as an important tool in improving diagnostics in the UK. Richards noted how offering targeted screening is working to diagnose people earlier; he pointed to the success of the Targeted Lung Check for those with a history of smoking, as well as the Jewish BRCA testing program. Alongside targeted screening, Richards also advocated for trials regarding widening participation in other screening programs, such as the Breast Screening Programme. 

Richards pointed out that currently, the proportion of cancers diagnosed by screening is low, but with improvements to these screening programs, it could rise, saying: “The answer is actually a surprisingly small number. It’s 5 or 6 per cent. But I believe that we’ve got the possibility of really increasing that to 10 per cent, 15 per cent.” 

This rise in diagnosis via screening is beneficial for both patients and the NHS, ensuring that a patient can receive a diagnosis quicker and through a less invasive process, which in turn, reduces the burden on the NHS.     

Putting patients first: Building trust and participation in healthcare

A more patient-first approach was a theme that was spoken about throughout the event. In his speech, Andrew Gwynne MP spoke of Labour’s 10-year mission for the NHS. A key part of it was a pledge to not only reduce health inequalities in the UK, but to move to a more preventive approach to healthcare. Gwynne highlighted the importance of this, telling the audience that 40 per cent of NHS spending was on illness that could be prevented. 

Gwynne also promoted a shift towards more localised healthcare, saying: “Firstly, from hospital to community, there is so much more that can be done within a community setting, or even, dare I say it, in the home setting, that needn’t be done in hospitals.

“Now, of course, there will always be a need for specialisms, there will always be a need for emergency healthcare, and there will always be a need for hospitals. But still, in our healthcare system, far too much is currently being done in hospitals that could be done in other more convenient settings.”

Following on from this patient-first theme, there was consistent reference to how to make healthcare more user-friendly for patients. Lucy Chappell, the Chief Scientific Advisor and CEO of the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), gave examples of how the NIHR is working to invest in medical devices, such as wearables, so patients can better track their health and speed up diagnostics.  

Simplifying processes, such as switching to user-friendly screening tests, was also cited as an effective strategy. For instance, replacing the faecal occult blood test with a single-sample FIT test increased participation by 10 per cent. 

Another topic discussed by the panel was how to better gain public approval for sharing and use of their data. Richard Scott of Genomics England gave a successful case study on how the NHS can better do this, saying: “I think the NHS Change Programme is a key example of public engagement on the shift in general. That includes a shift in how our data is used and held, and we need to do that.

“We found with our work, data is at the heart of it. Before we design programs and, actually, our newborn genomes programme, a really big component of it is engagement – about people, people’s attitudes to it, both on the acceptability of joining a program and also looking to the future and saying ‘What would the models be that you’re comfortable with?’ It’s not just, ‘How do we influence the public?’ it’s the public also influencing and helping design the system.” 

Final Thought

The launch event for Curia’s parliamentary report showcased some of the big achievements and successes of the life science industry, not just in innovation, but in securing better patient outcomes.

The speakers and experts at the event celebrated how the UK is one of the best in the world in how it supports the industry with its framework and operating model. A key theme of the evening was how this could be harnessed further to revitalise the industry as well as the NHS. 

For this to happen, the Government must take on board the key concerns of the industry and healthcare experts, namely, to reduce regulatory hurdles, foster better collaboration not only within the industry but also data sharing within NHS Trusts and, finally, to promote a greater shift to preventive healthcare and earlier diagnostics to reduce pressure on the NHS as well as improve patient outcomes.

In doing this, the Labour Government can not only fulfil its 10-year plan for the NHS but achieve economic growth alongside saving lives.    

To watch the videos, please visit: https://youtu.be/AqZi7lzX_uE 

However, there is hope. Change is rarely linear; it is often exponential. With enough people pushing in the right direction, significant progress can be made against climate change. 

The Power of Education: A Call To Action

I explained that if, as students, they can learn what society needs to do to decarbonise, and then share that knowledge with their parents, they can help accelerate the pace of combat against climate change.

With two billion young people in the world, each one needs only to persuade just three adults, and we can change society fast enough. This approach is why we think educating and empowering our children is key to stopping climate change.

I urge everyone to consider what small actions they can take to push the needle further and accelerate the pace of change.

Joanna Singleton, a Year 8 student at St Christopher’s CE High School said: “A lot of people just don’t realise what issues there are, so we need to raise awareness that the planet is being destroyed, temperatures are rising, ice caps melting, and much more. And we need to let people know about the changes that they can make to help.”

Funding Sustainability Education

To support this education, we developed a means to fund it by installing solar panels on schools. This initiative not only harnesses the sun to fund education, but the solar also serves as a practical learning tool and an example of how to achieve sustainability.

In the UK, the Government could fund sustainability education in schools relatively easily with various motions, such as those led by Lord Jim Knight that advocate for its inclusion in the curriculum. However, many parts of the world struggle to teach basic subjects like maths and literacy, let alone climate change, energy and decarbonisation. By funding solar panels on school buildings, we can deliver this crucial education globally.

Overcoming Bureaucratic Challenges

We built a software platform and a funding mechanism to facilitate this process by bringing funders, installers, and schools together to go solar – enabling us to deliver decarbonisation education. Yet despite the technical and financial feasibility, bureaucratic challenges have limited our progress to about 250 schools in the UK over nearly nine years.

The process involves persuading numerous stakeholders, from headteachers to local authorities, making it incredibly slow. It takes 20 people to install solar panels on a school: One person to install the solar panels and 19 to get out of the way. A sad but rather true joke.

The current process requires convincing each headteacher that installing solar panels is beneficial, cost-free, and provides educational resources. Despite the clear advantages, the bureaucratic hurdles remain significant. Schools enter into a finance agreement with a society of schools, joining a club – run by the schools themselves –that manages these systems.

To make these projects viable, we raise funds from individuals, parents, and contributors, and through grants – for example, school grants totalling £2.7 million across five years from National Grid Electricity Distribution.  

The Potential of Solar Power

The UK has the potential to install about two gigawatts of solar power across its educational estate, requiring around £2 billion in funding. This investment could save between £2 billion and £6 billion in electricity costs over the next 25 years, after covering all maintenance and funding costs. Furthermore, the funding could be raised from the private sector if needed, enabling individuals and the local community to invest in these projects safely, and without imposing a burden on taxpayers. 

For Politicians

For politicians, this means examining and simplifying the processes involved in implementing sustainable solutions and climate change prevention strategies.

Many departments have started, but much more is still needed. MPs should look at their constituencies to identify opportunities for solar installations on public buildings and, in particular, schools, and Solar for Schools can help with this.

In addition to saving money and reducing carbon emissions, installing solar will also inspire young people and empower them to contribute to the battle against climate change. 

For Companies

Companies can also play a role by funding projects that need a financial boost, similar to the support provided by National Grid Electricity Distribution, which provides grants when needed to enable solar to happen when it would otherwise not be commercially viable.

For Individuals

Finally, as individuals, we can make a difference by choosing where to invest our money. Many of us keep our money in banks that fund the status quo, but we can move our funds to banks that support decarbonisation efforts.

Triodos Bank works hard in numerous decarbonisation efforts aimed at tacklong climate change, such as solar on schools, and there are over 300 community energy groups across the country working to deploy solar power on suitable buildings. Join one of these groups to fund solar locally, or join the Solar for Schools Community Benefit Society – a not for profit entity funding solar on schools across the country by offering five-year 5.5 per cent interest-bearing bonds.

Further details can be found at www.solarforschoolscbs.org.uk and there’s also a short video about how the solar itself engages and empowers students as a learning opportunity.

Final Thought

Ultimately, we must all consider how we will answer the question posed by future generations, “What did you do to stop climate change?” I encourage you to work on the answer. 

Robert Schrimpff

Designation

Co-founder and CEO of Solar for Schools

Although first patented nearly a century ago by Joseph Robinson in the US, electronic cigarettes, or vaporizers (vapes) have become a mainstay in the public consciousness as an alternative to smoking following the introduction of flavoured disposable vapes in 2019.

Since then, vapes have been the subject of public scrutiny for several reasons. Some say their colourful packaging and wide array of flavour choices are intended to bag a younger demographic of customers. Others say that the departure from naming them based on their ownership is deceptive and intended to wash away the bad reputations of “big tobacco.”

June 1, 2025 marks the official disposable vape ban in the UK. However, Westminster’s stance on the matter was not always so rigid. It seems not long ago under the Tory-Lib Dem coalition that then PM David Cameron encouraged the use of vapes.

Famously, a 2015 independent report commissioned by the government claimed that vaping was “95 per cent less harmful,” than smoking. The Tory stance on the matter did not shift under Prime Minsters Theresa May or Boris Johnson. It was not until 2020, under PM Truss’ brief leadership that vapes were under scrutiny. This coincided with the mass-market release of disposable vapes in a wide range of flavours.

But it was not until Prime Minister Sunak’s leadership that any legislative efforts were made to address the problem. The Tory government from 2023 introduced the Tobacco & Vapes Bill, aimed at further regulating the industry.

However, the snap-election was called, campaigning was underway and the bill did not make it during the “wash-up” period following the election’s announcement. It appeared to be tabled, indefinitely. As the dust settled on the election, the King’s speech that opened parliament re-introduced the Tobacco & Vapes bill.

This time however, their goals went beyond just banning disposable vapes, 260 million of which are thrown out annually in the UK. They intend on curbing the packaging, flavours available and points-of-sale, in an effort to make the whole affair less attractive to consumers.

But – will these steps actually curb vaping? With corner shops selling vapes that retail for nearly £5.99 at a fraction of the price, consumers can hoard vapes to skirt the ban, at least until their personal supply runs out.

They cannot go back to disposables after; they will have to settle for refillable vapes available only in a few flavours. Some researchers warn that this sudden tightening of regulations may lead to users turning to more dangerous cigarettes to get their nicotine fix.

Despite the act of vaping mostly being associated with younger Gen-Z consumers, research from tobacco free nicotine retailer Haypp, suggests that 89 per cent of middle-aged male vapers will be stockpiling the banned substance.

While not illegal, it brings into question the aspect of black-market retailers. This is a common problem in countries like Bhutan, where a total tobacco ban (cigarettes or otherwise,) came into effect in 2010, but resulted in a fledgling black market for the products. Is this the future for the UK’s vapers too?

This vape ban could not come at a worse time for the tobacco industry either. British American Tobacco (BAT), one of the world’s largest tobacco manufacturers, reported in late 2024 that they were on track to make more profits from selling vapes than any other tobacco product.

BAT also sponsored research in Toxicology Letters, which resulted in a favourable analysis of vapes as containing “fewer harmful substances,” than cigarettes. BAT is not the only one taking part in this shady practice. The aforementioned 2015 report commissioned by PM Cameron’s government was also alleged to be biased, and authored by those with ties to tobacco giants.

The Lancet Journals criticized the report as a guesstimate at best. They wrote that the PHE report suffered from a “lack of hard evidence for the harms of most products on most of the criteria.”

Retailers like off-license shops and product-specific vape shops are also to blame for selling vapes to underage customers. A University of Edinburgh report showed that the profit margin for vapes was nearly 4 times higher than that of tobacco products.

The number of products sold has also increased nearly tenfold in the three years they studied. The Met Police recently conducted a raid on one such corner shop only to find several thousands of pounds worth of illegal vapes hidden away behind the shops.

What stops stockpilers from doing the same and creating a vast black market beyond the vape ban?

The harms of vape are obvious and abundant. Teenagers end up in hospital on what seems to be a weekly basis with vaping-related conditions, be they a collapsed lung or a life-threatening lung infection. The government’s steps to address youth overconsumption of vaping may end up a success, but, what about the issue’s source? Tobacco companies like Philip Morris International (PMI), or R.J.

Reynolds and British American Tobacco who sponsor major sports teams like McLaren Motorsports in the UK or British American Tobacco sponsoring Tomorrowland, a music festival popular with the younger generations?

How effective will the vape ban really be: If big tobacco can change their product’s name and wipe their reputation clean and appeal to a younger generation once, can’t they do it again? It was disposable vapes yesterday; might it be heated tobacco tomorrow? And vape Juices for refillable vapes the day after?

Featured image via B..Robinson / Shutterstock.

Author: Adithya Dattatreya

The stark reality is that 4 million people are out of work due to ill health – a situation that not only impacts individual well-being but also burdens our health system and national productivity.

Compounding these issues is a concerning trend in the UK life sciences sector. In recent years, we’ve witnessed a significant drop in inward investment from global life science companies.

Between 2021 and 2023 alone, there was a staggering 58 per cent decrease in foreign investment. Life sciences is one of the most valuable sectors in the UK, so this decrease represents a missed opportunity for economic growth at a time when we need it most.

However, amidst these challenges lies an incredible opportunity. I welcome the Prime Minister’s recent proposals for modernising the NHS, including leveraging AI to optimise NHS operations.

If harnessed effectively and responsibly, these innovative technologies could help to address some of the pressing issues facing our NHS whilst also driving economic growth.

The Future of Innovation in Healthcare

AI has the potential to transform the entire value chain in pharmaceuticals – from the initial discovery of molecules to testing in clinical trials, manufacturing and supply, and the delivery of care to patients.  

To put this in perspective, consider the traditional drug development process. On average, it takes 12 years to take a molecule from initial discovery in the lab to becoming available to patients.

Behind that one success is a series of sometimes 5,000 candidates that were assessed and ultimately deemed unsuitable. At Sanofi, we’re at the forefront of the AI healthcare revolution. Our goal is to halve the time needed for this process so that new medicines and vaccines can reach patients faster than ever before. 

In drug discovery, we’re using AI to analyse vast quantities of data and identify the most promising molecules. For example, our BioAIM program uses AI to identify high-quality candidates that fit the right profiles of need in areas like cancer and rare diseases.

It functions like a flight control hub guiding a spacecraft to the moon. Just as a mission control team gathers data to adjust the spacecraft’s path for success, BioAIM helps carve out the drug discovery route that has the best possible chance of success before we take off.

In clinical trials, AI is helping us to identify trial sites that reach and engage a more diverse range of patients. This means that communities that have historically been underrepresented can take part in clinical research, such as older adults, ethnic minorities, and people with disabilities.

Lastly, we’re using AI to accelerate patient pathways. We have a number of pilot projects in partnership with the NHS across the UK. For example, we’re using AI to analyse data from electronic health records and identify people at risk of rare genetic conditions. This helps to speed up diagnosis times, support individual patients and reduce strain on the overall healthcare system.   

The UK is well-positioned to lead globally in AI application to healthcare. We boast the world’s third most valuable tech sector, a wealth of NHS healthcare data to leverage, and globally renowned academia in science and technology. However, successfully launching this innovative technology – and indeed, reaping the rewards of the new medicines it can help discover – will require significant investment from global life sciences companies. To make that happen, we need to fix the medicines access environment and make the UK an attractive place for investment. 

Improving the UK Life Sciences Environment to Harness AI

Currently, there’s a significant gap in access to new medicines between the UK and other European countries. When a doctor prescribes a medicine to a patient, they assume they will be getting the best. In reality, they will receive only the best medicine available in the UK.

For every 100 patients receiving a new medicine in its first year of launch in EU countries, only 21 patients in the UK will do so. This disparity is not just a statistic; it represents missed opportunities for better patient outcomes and improved quality of life. The UK sees poorer health outcomes versus comparable countries, with significantly worse results for many conditions, including cancer, heart disease, and stroke. It also impedes economic growth and puts additional challenges on our healthcare system.

So, how can we improve things? 

Other countries have implemented forward-thinking policies and flexible approaches to medicine access, enabling swift launches of new treatments. In the UK, we need to update the NICE appraisal process and improve the commercial options available for companies bringing forward new medicines for use in the NHS. The ABPI and the NHS Confederation estimate the economy could be enabled to achieve productivity gains amounting to almost £18 billion through improved uptake of innovative medicines – and that estimate is across just four classes of medicines. 

Final Thought: Kick-starting a Virtuous Circle

We now have a genuine opportunity for our industry to collaborate with government, harness the power of AI and create a virtuous circle of health and wealth. 

By improving access to and uptake of innovative medicines, we can create a healthier and more productive population. This improved operating environment will also, in turn, make the UK an attractive place for investment from global life sciences companies and enable the adoption of new and innovative technologies such as AI. Our sector was worth over £94 billion to the UK economy in 2021 and employed 280,000 people – a contribution that could grow substantially with a re-energised operating environment. 

Together, we can make the UK a healthcare and life sciences powerhouse, benefiting patients, the NHS, and the economy as a whole. The future of healthcare is here, and it’s powered by AI and innovation. Let’s seize this opportunity and lead the way. 

Cover image via Shutterstock AI/ Shutterstock: Other Images supplied by Sanofi.

Rippon Ubhi

Designation

Country Lead, Sanofi UK & Ireland

The investment includes £470 million dedicated to making schools and six form colleges safer: Removing asbestos and fixing damaged roofs.

This comes as part of the wider £2.1 billion investment intended to maintain and improve school and sixth form buildings outlined in the 2024 budget.

Hospitals, mental health units and ambulance sites will see an investment of £750 million to repair piping and electrical issues and improve poor ventilation in many sites, with maternity units being awarded an additional £100 million to replace outdated equipment and improve safety measures and environmental conditions for children and mothers.

The government claims that poor building quality and infrastructure decay led to over 4,000 disrupted or cancelled hospital appointments last year, and the Liberal Democrats found that 49 per cent of people felt unsafe in their local hospital, or did not know if it was safe or not.

The party referred to these findings, calling for a “crumbling hospitals taskforce” to “protect patients from the deteriorating NHS estate”.

Helen Morgan MP, the Liberal Democrat Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “It’s shocking that so many patients no longer trust the buildings they rely on to get better, fearing the very walls they’re treated in might crumble. Patients should only worry about their health—not whether the roof will cave in on them.

“The previous Conservative government’s neglect of the NHS brought us to this disgraceful point. Yet, the Labour government has failed to act fast enough to protect patients from these decaying buildings.

“Ministers must tackle this crisis head-on by creating a dedicated taskforce to drive urgent repairs and safeguard patients.

“We should be rebuilding the NHS to be the envy of the world it once was, but until these decaying hospitals are fixed, patients will keep paying the price.”

Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Wes Streeting, said: “A decade and a half of underinvestment left hospitals crumbling, with burst pipes flooding emergency departments, faulty electrical systems shutting down operating theatres, and mothers giving birth in outdated facilities that lack basic dignity.   

“We are on a mission to rebuild our NHS through investment and modernisation.   

“Patients and staff deserve to be in buildings that are safe, comfortable and fit for purpose. Through our Plan for Change, we will make our NHS fit for the future.”  

The government has also committed to provide school facilities that are “not just energy efficient but fit for all pupils needs”, building new sports halls, IT rooms, kitchens and playgrounds while repairing and improving existing buildings and provisions.

Education Secretary, Bridget Phillipson, said: “The defining image of the school estate under the previous government was children sitting under steel props to stop crumbling concrete falling on their heads. It simply isn’t good enough.  

“Parents expect their children to learn in a safe warm environment. It’s what children deserve, and it is what we are delivering.   

“This investment is about more than just buildings – it’s about showing children that their education matters, their futures matter, and this government is determined to give them the best possible start in life.”   

A further £1.4 billion will be injected into rebuilding and refurbishment projects as part of the School Rebuilding Programme. The programme, first announced by Boris Johnson in 2021 aims to deliver 50 rebuilds per year, with a focus on schools identified as containing the dangerous crumbly RAAC concrete.

The funding announced at the 2024 budget constitutes a £550 million increase on what was invested in the previous year, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves saying: “This government’s first budget will set out how we will fix the foundations of the country.

“It will mean tough decisions, but also the start of a new chapter for Britain, by growing our economy through investing in our future to rebuild our schools, hospitals and broken roads.

“Protecting funding for education was one of the things I wanted to do first because our children are the future of this country. We might have inherited a mess, but they should not suffer for it.”

Featured image via Monkey Business Images and Shutterstock.

Author: Jamie Calder.

Today, a golden opportunity exists, via genomic prevention, to deliver Wes Streeting’s health system of the future. Genomic prevention is a ground-breaking innovation that will shift the NHS from reactive treatment to proactive, personalised prevention.

This approach will enhance NHS efficiency and optimise NHS spending. It will also provide wider economic benefits and enhance the growth agenda by boosting workforce productivity – successfully preventing disease, or catching it early when outcomes are better, will dramatically reduce working hours lost to ill health across the economy. 

Genomic prevention as a breakthrough innovation

Until a few years ago, if you had the entire DNA sequence of a healthy person in early middle age, you would learn something medically actionable in only 1–2 per cent of cases. 

Recently, that position has changed dramatically. Now, if you have genomic information on that same person, you learn something medically actionable in 70 per cent of cases. 

Genetics has traditionally played into healthcare via what is called Genomic medicine, in which, a single genetic change has major health consequences. Examples of these conditions include cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s Disease, and muscular dystrophy.

The UK is a world leader in this area, through the 100,000 Genomes project and now Genomics England and the Genomic Medicine service within the NHS. These conditions are often very serious, but thankfully, they are individually rare and also collectively rare. Many of them manifest early in life, so for a healthy middle-aged person, there are unlikely to be any single genetic changes of major impact to be discovered.

In addition to these rare conditions, genetics turns out to be fundamentally important for all the common diseases as well – diseases like heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, and prostate cancer – the conditions that cause most of the sickness and premature mortality in our populations, and which use 70-80 per cent of healthcare budgets. The economic and systemic benefits of being able to prevent such common diseases would be extraordinary.

It is only in the last few years that we have learnt how to measure, and quantify, the genetic component of risk for each of the common diseases. We now know that for each disease, there are a million or more places in our DNA that affect our chance of developing the disease.

This can be summarised for each disease by what is called a polygenic risk score (PRS), with a single genetic test – taken once in a person’s life and revealing their risk scores for all the common diseases. 

The impact of genetics is large. For example, some people are 30 times more likely than others to develop diabetes, or 20 times more likely to develop heart disease, because of their genetics. For breast and prostate cancer, there are 15- and 40-fold differences, respectively.

Obesity also has a major genetic component. For people with healthy BMI at age 25–35, those with unhelpful genetics are 10 times more likely to transition to obesity in middle age than those with helpful genetics. 

This presents a totally different, and new, opportunity, which has been called genomic prevention. Each of us will be at high risk for a few diseases, because of our genetics, but neither we – nor our doctors – will know which.

But with genomic prevention, we can now measure and understand those risks when a person is still healthy, years before any symptoms develop.

This allows us to give advice to individuals about the particular steps they can take to help them live a longer, healthier life. But critically, the information will allow the health system to target all its current screening and prevention programmes more effectively – we can get the right people into the right programmes at the right time to help avoid disease entirely, or to catch it early when outcomes are best.

Getting prevention right, through the use of powerful personalised risk estimates, could be a game-changer – the UK is leading the world in this ground-breaking new technology. 

Genomic prevention requires different skills, different technology, and different deployment via clinical pathways. It provides a route to a health system that is smarter, more efficient, and more personalised, with substantial improvements to people’s health and longevity and related financial benefits in terms of NHS spend and workplace productivity. 

Delivering Wes Streeting’s vision for a health system ready for the future

Genomic prevention is the route to bring into reality the vision of the Health Secretary. As he stated at the Labour Party Conference, September 2024, “Advances in genomics and data mean the healthcare of the future will be more predictive, more preventative, and more personalised than ever before.”

And this approach works. We have already seen a successful trial within the NHS in cardiovascular disease prevention, where more than 90 per cent of GP responses agreed that genomic risk tools could be easily incorporated into routine primary care. It was also really popular with patients, with 98.5 per cent of them finding the information useful for their health.

The approach both changed the management of a significant number of patients (13 per cent) and changed the nature of the GP-patient conversation about prevention. Bupa will be deploying genomic risk MHRA-registered technology early in 2025. It is already being deployed in the USA. 

Integrating genomic risk and genomic prevention into public health programmes – including initiatives to address our biggest challenges, such as obesity, heart disease, and cancer – would also be significantly more effective in helping people stay healthier and productive for longer. 

Genomic prevention: Shaping the future of the nation’s health

Integrating genomic risk into the NHS will support early disease prevention and provide a more equitable healthcare service – prioritising those who need the most help, regardless of background.

Genomic prevention can facilitate all the future directions identified by Lord Darzi, including community care expansion, technological innovation, and contributions to national prosperity.

Giving individuals information early in life about some of their long-term health risks offers them the opportunity to become co-pilots on their health journey rather than just passengers.

In particular, it equips them with the information about which behavioural changes will be most effective for them and how they can complement the efforts of the NHS to actively improve their health outcomes.

We should aim to move to a culture in which younger and middle-aged adults invest as much in their physical and mental health in retirement as they currently do in their financial health.  

And for this to happen, investing in genomic prevention is the way forward. Genomic prevention is a strategic investment that will fuel both better health outcomes and long-term economic growth.

Featured image via angellodeco / Shutterstock.

Professor Sir Peter Donnelly

Designation

CEO and Founder of Genomics

For a long time, the idea that AI can make us better off has felt like just that – an idea.

A promise of growth that’s out of reach for much of the country, driven by a technology that doesn’t have meaning in people’s everyday lives.

If anything, AI has been seen as something to fear, not welcome. In December, we ran research into how people really feel about AI. The three most common words that came up were “robot”, “scary”, and “worried”. In my role in government, it’s those last two I want to change.

I want to take AI from the lofty heights we see in films, or when we’re doom-scrolling on social media, and bring it into the real world. Working with devolved administrations and local governments, we’ll show people and businesses, from Salcombe to Stirling, how AI will actually improve their lives and give their balance sheets a boost. 

Because AI Should Be a Leveller. Something that gives people access to a more personalised education for their kids, faster care in our hospitals, and for small businesses, innovations that might otherwise only exist for companies with deeper pockets.

Let’s look at how the AI Opportunities Action Plan can promote economic growth

The IMF estimates that, if we embrace AI fully, it can boost productivity by up to 1.5 percentage points a year. How will it actually do that?

Businesses that adopt AI spend less time on admin, and more time doing work that improves their bottom line. AI leads to faster scientific advancement. And it can reduce the cost of our NHS, cutting paperwork and leaving missed appointments in the past. These improvements could be worth up to an average of £47 billion to the UK each year over a decade. That’s more than enough to pay for every primary school for a year.

So how do we make sure that growth is shared across the country?

The Golden Triangle of London, Oxford, and Cambridge is rightly a source of huge pride for us. It adds £94bn to our economy, and that value will only grow as the AI Opportunities Action Plan brings more investment and infrastructure. But we have so many other pockets of AI innovation across the country that I want to celebrate and strengthen.

Wales is the global leader in semiconductors. Bristol is home to the Isambard supercomputer – we’re opening access to that for SMEs and researchers. And IT leader Kyndryl announced an AI hub, bringing 1,000 new jobs to Merseyside. 

As a government, our job is to make sure the benefits of AI are evenly shared.

Through the AI Opportunities Action Plan, we’ll increase the UK’s public computing power twentyfold by 2030. And we’ll create AI Growth Zones across the UK. These hotspots will get faster planning permissions to build data centres, attracting more AI firms to the region. We’ll work with devolved administrations and local governments to decide where the new Growth Zones should be. And together, we’ll think about how we can support regional growth opportunities, so growth is felt locally, as well as nationally.

We can’t talk about AI and growth without talking about jobs

I know the fear of AI affecting people’s jobs is very real. But we can think of many jobs not as disappearing but as changing. Automation speeds up admin, so we get to spend longer on the parts of our jobs that need the qualities that make us human. Social skills. Judgement. Empathy.

And as we keep attracting AI expertise – by helping top talent move here from overseas – that means a host of new jobs. Like the 13,250 committed by leading tech firms as part of the AI Opportunities Action Plan announcement.

AI is already saving lives and opening doors to new opportunities

Recently, I Went to Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge where they’re using AI to diagnose kidney cancer and Alzheimer’s earlier. This means patients with a disease are being diagnosed before it progresses too far – meaning they gain more time to get treatment.

This is just one example of where AI is already touching our daily lives, without us even realising.

I get why “scary” and “worried” are words that came up when we asked people about AI. Safety and opportunity are two sides of the same coin, and rolling out AI safely will always be on my agenda.

But look further down that list, and you see other words – “good”, “curious”, “exciting”. By growing our economy, creating jobs, and improving public services, AI gives us so much to be excited about – in our real lives, in real homes and offices across the UK. We’ll make sure every part of the country gets to share that.

Featured image via Benjamin Britworth Collier / DSIT on Flickr.

Feryal Clark MP

Designation

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.