Month: June 2025

HM Revenue & Customs is to dramatically cut the number of physical letters it sends, announcing plans to eliminate most outbound post — unless it directly generates revenue — as part of a broader shift to digital-first communications.
The move, confirmed as part of Wednesday’s spending review, is expected to reduce HMRC’s post output by 75% by the 2028-29 tax year and save £50 million a year.
Taxpayers will still receive letters about unpaid taxes or compliance issues, but most other correspondence, including general updates and notifications, will be moved online.
The government said the change was a key step toward making HMRC a “digital-first organisation”, with at least 90% of customer interactions to be handled online in the coming years.
Tax professionals have voiced concern that the shift could alienate vulnerable customers. Lindsay Scott, spokesperson for the Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT), warned the change “risks further damaging customer service” unless safeguards are introduced.
“Plans to phase out post must be handled with care,” Scott said. “About seven million people in the UK still need help to navigate digital services, and they can’t simply be left behind.”
Despite HMRC reporting that 70% of customer interactions are now handled digitally, many taxpayers still rely on paper. Last year alone, more than 300,000 tax returns were filed using traditional paper forms.
The move follows widespread criticism of HMRC’s past digitalisation efforts. The Making Tax Digital initiative has run eight years behind schedule and gone more than £1 billion over budget, according to the National Audit Office.
Digital services under strain
While HMRC champions its webchat and online systems, industry surveys suggest taxpayers remain frustrated. According to a December report by CIOT and the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW):
• HMRC’s webchat service connected less than half the time
• Satisfaction with webchat was just 28%
• Satisfaction with phone services stood at 56%, with average wait times of 23 minutes
• 34% of callers gave up before being connected — more than double the department’s 15% target
The new funding package also includes £1.6 billion over four years to overhaul HMRC’s core technology and data infrastructure, plus a further £500 million aimed at boosting online service performance.
Revenue pressure driving reform
The digital transformation is part of a wider push by the Treasury to boost tax receipts without raising rates. The government estimates the changes, along with 7,900 new compliance and debt recovery staff, will bring in an extra £7.5 billion a year by 2029-30.
An HMRC spokesperson said: “Reducing the number of letters we send and communicating in different ways instead will provide a better service for our customers in line with modern-day expectations, as well as deliver savings of £50 million by 2028-29.”
However, critics say it’s telling that revenue-generating post – such as tax bills – will remain untouched, while helpful or explanatory letters are phased out.
As one tax adviser put it: “It seems HMRC only wants to write when it’s chasing you for money.”
With pressure mounting to raise tax revenue while improving service, the success of HMRC’s digital-first ambitions may depend on whether the most vulnerable customers are kept in the loop — or simply left behind.
Read more:
HMRC to slash physical post – unless you owe them money

The second day of the £122 million High Court showdown between PPE Medpro and the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) saw intense cross-examination of two key civil servants, exposing contradictions, confusion, and admissions of oversight within the government’s emergency PPE procurement process.
Richard James, a Cabinet Office official who worked in the DHSC’s Covid-era “PPE Cell”, was first to give evidence. He confirmed that he had emailed PPE Medpro in June 2020 to say that its sterile surgical gowns had been “approved by Technical”, referring to the government’s internal Technical Assurance team . This approval was a key turning point that allowed the controversial supplier’s £122 million order to progress.
But under questioning, James admitted that PPE Medpro had never supplied the certification required under EN 556-1 — the European standard for terminally sterilised medical devices — nor a CE mark with an accompanying Notified Body (NB) number, which is generally required under medical device regulations .
When challenged on this, James said the approvals were granted on the basis of a “capability to meet the technical standards” and not necessarily full compliance at the time. The documents provided by PPE Medpro were uploaded to the government’s Mendix platform, and the Technical Assurance team assessed their adequacy remotely, without physical access to the products, which were being manufactured in China during the pandemic’s global supply chain chaos .
Repeated references were made to the Essential Technical Requirements Document (ETRD), which allowed for “equivalent technical solutions” during the pandemic if a product could not meet usual standards. PPE Medpro later argued in submissions that it was operating under this clause, although James’s emails suggest he continued to request EN 556-1 compliance until the very end .
The court then heard from William Clarke, a senior member of the Technical Assurance team, whose role was to review the sterilisation credentials of PPE Medpro’s offer. Clarke admitted under questioning that he had mistakenly approved the submission without spotting the absence of a Notified Body number next to the CE mark — a key requirement for Class I sterile medical devices .
“I should have spotted it,” Clarke told the court, accepting that his review was flawed and conceding that PPE Medpro’s submission “did not evidence the requirements in the ETS [Essential Technical Specification]” as claimed in his signed witness statement .
Pressed further, Clarke acknowledged that PPE Medpro never supplied certification showing conformity with EN 556-1 and admitted he had relied in part on a Certificate of Free Sale issued by the MHRA, the UK’s medicines regulator. Yet, remarkably, he also said he “didn’t know what a Certificate of Free Sale was” at the time and still couldn’t explain its significance beyond it being “valid-looking” .
The hearings laid bare how decisions about contracts worth hundreds of millions were based on fast-moving exchanges of emails, assumptions about technical standards, and documentation that was often incomplete or misunderstood.
At one point, Clarke told the court he believed a sterilisation certificate for ISO 11137 (a radiation sterilisation standard) sufficed for EN 556-1. But when questioned, he admitted ISO 11137 does not include the sterility assurance level (SAL) of 10⁻⁶ required under EN 556-1. “Not at all,” Clarke eventually agreed .
Meanwhile, PPE Medpro’s representative, Anthony Page, had repeatedly shown signs of confusion in emails, misreading the specification and wrongly thinking the standards were either EN 13795 or EN 556, rather than both. James and Clarke both confirmed that this misunderstanding persisted throughout their exchanges .
The courtroom exchanges painted a picture of a procurement system overwhelmed by urgency, dependent on rapid decisions and stretched resources. James admitted he often gave guidance to suppliers like PPE Medpro based on conversations with technical colleagues, rather than his own expertise.
Although DHSC’s case rests in part on claims of invalid CE marking and lack of sterility, both witnesses for the department conceded that PPE Medpro’s documentation never included proof of compliance with the relevant EN 556-1 standard, and yet approval was still granted.
Clarke’s testimony appeared to support PPE Medpro’s wider defence — that it acted in good faith and was allowed to proceed because DHSC officials signed off on its documentation. However, his candid admission that he made a “mistake” approving the submission could prove pivotal as the trial unfolds.
The hearing continues on Monday.
Read more:
PPE Medpro legal battle intensifies as civil servant admits approval ‘mistake’ over sterile gowns

Apple has taken its movie marketing to a whole new sensory level.
As it builds hype for F1: The Movie, starring Brad Pitt and directed by Top Gun: Maverick’s Joseph Kosinski, Apple has launched the world’s first haptic movie trailer—a short film preview that you can actually feel.
Thanks to the iPhone’s Taptic Engine, users can experience vibrations synced with the on-screen action. As F1 cars roar down the track, speed through corners, or pull into the pit lane, your phone vibrates with varying intensities—letting you feel the thrill of the track in the palm of your hand.
It’s a natural fit for the film, which brings the visceral experience of Formula 1 to life. And it’s a clever way for Apple to flex its hardware-software ecosystem by marrying immersive tech with cinematic storytelling.
How to watch the haptic trailer
To try it for yourself:

Make sure your iPhone is running iOS 18.

Open the Apple TV app.

Look for the F1: The Movie haptic trailer at the top of the home screen or scroll down to find it.

Tap to watch—and hold on tight.

Apple says this is just the beginning of how haptics could enhance storytelling, with the technology offering a new dimension to mobile entertainment. While only compatible iPhones will deliver the tactile experience, it’s another example of Apple finding new ways to elevate its content in a crowded streaming market.
Apple’s biggest movie bet yet
F1: The Movie, due in cinemas on June 27, is Apple Original Films’ most ambitious project to date. With Brad Pitt behind the wheel, real F1 teams involved, and unprecedented trackside access, Apple hopes the film will be a breakout box-office success ahead of its eventual release on Apple TV+ later this year.
Whether the haptic trailer signals a broader trend in film marketing remains to be seen. But for now, it’s a turbocharged innovation—one that makes movie trailers not just something you see and hear, but something you actually feel.
You can check out the non-haptic trailer for F1 The Move below:

Read more:
You can literally feel Apple’s new ‘F1: The Movie’ trailer starring Brad Pitt

The High Court has ruled against a legal challenge brought by families and private schools seeking to overturn Labour’s new policy applying 20% VAT to private school fees.
Judges this morning rejected all claims brought forward in the judicial review, marking a significant defeat for the families of private school pupils, many of whom argued the tax violated human rights and unfairly targeted vulnerable groups.
The policy — a cornerstone of Labour’s education funding reforms — came into effect in January 2025, and is expected to raise £1.5 billion in its first year, rising to £1.7 billion annually by 2029/30, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
The case was launched by three groups of families, most of whom remained anonymous, alongside a coalition of independent schools. Their lawyers claimed that the VAT breached children’s right to education under the European Convention on Human Rights and was discriminatory against:

Pupils with special educational needs (SEN)

Families seeking faith-based education

Children needing single-sex learning environments

One of the few named claimants, Stephen White, whose four children attend Bradford Christian School, joined a protest outside the High Court in April alongside other parents. The demonstrators highlighted the lack of suitable state alternatives for their children, particularly those with SEN or specific religious requirements.
Families of SEN children were particularly vocal, arguing they had no option but to pay for private provision due to the failure of the state system. They noted that a National Audit Office (NAO) report described state SEN services as “unsustainable”, a position echoed by Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, who called the system “broken”.
However, the court ruled that evidence from the NAO report was inadmissible, as it constituted proceedings in Parliament — a legal technicality that undermined part of the claim.
In court, government lawyers, led by Sir James Eadie KC, defended the policy as necessary, proportionate, and fair. They noted that exemptions for SEN or religious education had been considered during consultations but were rejectedon the grounds they would be “revenue diminishing, unfair, unworkable and/or administratively onerous.”
They argued the VAT was part of a broader goal to fund public services, including state schools and teacher recruitment, while enhancing the fairness of the tax system.
Children with an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) remain exempt from the VAT, but critics argue this covers only a small proportion of SEN pupils, leaving many families without support.
The ruling comes amid political controversy over how the revenue raised from the VAT will be used. Labour had originally pledged to use “every penny” for education, including hiring 6,500 new teachers. But in a post following the Spending Review, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer suggested the funds would now also support affordable housing.
The shift drew criticism from opposition parties. Kemi Badenoch, Conservative leader, wrote on X:
“You said ‘every penny’ would go into state schools… but now it’s housing?”
Labour insists that the funding supports broader social investment to ease pressure on the public sector, including housing that indirectly benefits the education system by reducing overcrowding and pupil mobility.
The Office for Budget Responsibility previously estimated that 35,000 pupils — around 7% of all independent school students — may leave the sector due to the VAT. Many independent schools are now considering fee restructuring, bursaries, or cost-cutting measures to retain students.
Faith schools, single-sex institutions, and smaller independent providers catering to niche or vulnerable communities could be particularly affected.
Despite the setback, legal experts suggest further appeals are unlikely to succeed, though political pressure is expected to continue.
Read more:
High Court rejects challenge to Labour’s private school VAT policy, dealing blow to parents and schools

Pod Point, one of the UK’s early pioneers in electric vehicle charging, has been acquired by French energy giant EDF for just £10.3 million, marking a dramatic fall from its £352 million valuation when it floated on the London Stock Exchange in 2021.
The deal, announced alongside full-year results, sees EDF offer 6.5p per share, a 24% premium to the company’s share price before takeover interest became public in April — but a far cry from its 225p IPO price less than four years ago.
EDF, which already owned a 53% stake in Pod Point, will now take full control of the loss-making company. The board of Pod Point said the EDF offer represents “the only realistic prospect” of the business continuing as a going concern.
In results for the year to December 31, 2024, Pod Point reported a 17% fall in revenue to £52.9 million, while pre-tax losses widened to £84.5 million. The company blamed low consumer confidence, cost of living pressures, and persistent challenges with EV infrastructure investment for its financial difficulties.
CEO Melanie Lane admitted 2024 had been “a transitional year” with a “disappointing financial performance,” but maintained there was still “a clear trajectory” towards UK electrification.
Pod Point was among the so-called “Class of 2021” — a wave of tech and green energy firms that floated during the pandemic-fuelled boom, only to see valuations crash in the face of inflation, soaring interest rates, and falling investor appetite for loss-making growth stocks.
Founded in 2009 by Erik Fairbairn, Pod Point had once been seen as a cornerstone of the UK’s EV infrastructure rollout. Fairbairn stepped down in July 2023, handing the reins to Lane as the business sought a fresh strategic direction.
Despite the financial headwinds, the company signed new contracts with major brands including Honda, Bupa, Taylor Wimpey, Roadchef and Rentokil, and extended agreements with BMW and Jaguar Land Rover. It also expanded its device network by 14% to 258,000 chargers, while delivering £6 million in cost savings.
EDF said the acquisition aligns with its long-term EV strategy. Managing director Philippe Commaret said the deal would provide “stability and enhanced operational support”, helping Pod Point serve customers more reliably.
“Electric vehicles offer consumers the chance to save money and carbon,” Commaret added. “Electrification of transport, heat and industrial processes strengthens Britain’s energy security and protects consumers from volatile fossil fuel prices.”
Pod Point has played a key role in supporting UK EV rollout over the past decade, but the acquisition highlights the difficult economics of the EV infrastructure sector, where high capital requirements, slow adoption, and low short-term profitability remain barriers to sustainable growth.
The sale also reflects the ongoing malaise in UK public markets. Pod Point was one of more than 100 companies that listed in London in 2021, but the mood has since soured following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, surging energy costs, and persistent inflation. The London Stock Exchange has struggled to attract and retain growth companies as global investors turn cautious.
Pod Point’s retreat into private ownership under EDF signals a potential wave of consolidation in the EV charging space, as smaller or early-stage firms seek the stability of large backers to survive a capital-intensive transition to electrified transport.
Read more:
EDF buys EV charger firm pod point for just £10m – four years after £352m london float

You’ll hear a lot of nonsense these days about “British jobs for British people”, as though talent stops at Dover and genius requires a passport. I’m here to tell you—rhetorically, floridly, perhaps even provocatively—that if we carry on down that road, the only thing we’ll be exporting is our future.
Because here’s the cold, unapologetic truth: some of the best companies in Britain right now weren’t started by blokes from Bromley or lasses from Loughborough. They were built—boldly, brilliantly—by immigrants. Entrepreneurs who came here with no old-school tie, no Oxford college affiliation, no seat at the Garrick. Just vision, stamina, and a burning need to build something better.
Take Revolut, the digital bank that made high-street banking look like dial-up internet. Started by Nikolay Storonsky (pictured), born in Russia and schooled in physics and hustle, Revolut tore through the crusty layers of traditional finance like a chainsaw through suet. Or Monzo—built with help from a multicultural team whose mission wasn’t British tradition, but global innovation.
Then there’s ElevenLabs, the AI voice tech company that’s gone from zero to warp speed in less time than it takes HMRC to answer a phone call. Co-founded by Piotr Dąbkowski, who’s Polish, and Mati Staniszewski, who is—whisper it—also not from Guildford. They’re building the future of media from a country still arguing about Radio 4.
And Synthesia. God bless it. A startup so cool, even the Americans are jealous. An AI video platform used by companies all over the world—led by a team of immigrant founders whose collective ambition makes the Houses of Parliament look like a village fête. They didn’t come here for the weather or the late trains. They came here to build something. And thank God they did.
Now, imagine for a moment if we’d told them all to bugger off at passport control. “Sorry mate, can’t let you in. We’ve got a lad in Swindon with a Raspberry Pi and a dream.” Ludicrous, right? But that’s the direction we’re drifting in. A little more visa red tape here, a little more rhetoric about “taking back control” there—and suddenly, the UK becomes a nation of heritage rather than a hub of invention.
I’m not saying British-born entrepreneurs don’t deserve praise. They do— many of them are sensational. But if we want to build a truly great entrepreneurial economy, it’s not about geography. It’s about gravity. The UK must become a gravitational centre for the best minds in the world. The brightest thinkers. The hungriest founders. The wildest dreamers. Not just the ones born within the sound of Bow Bells.
We don’t win by narrowing the gate. We win by making the UK the best bloody place on Earth to start a company. That means generous and intelligent visa schemes. That means startup tax incentives with real teeth. That means investment channels that don’t require your uncle to be in the House of Lords. And it means—crucially—a culture that doesn’t sneer at ambition or treat innovation like an awkward dinner guest.
If you ask me, the Home Office ought to be handing out platinum-tier welcome packs at Heathrow. “Welcome to Britain, here’s your Innovator Visa, a coffee, and directions to the nearest co-working space.” Let’s treat entrepreneurs the way we treat Premier League footballers: as indispensable imports that raise the whole game.
Instead, we get Nigel-from-Twitter banging on about “taking our country back”, while the most talented people on the planet quietly buy one-way tickets to Berlin, Austin, or Dubai.
Do you know what makes Silicon Valley what it is? Not just code and venture capital. It’s the constant influx of people who don’t give a monkey’s about status quo. People with accents, ambition, and absolutely no sense of when to quit. Sound familiar? It should. That’s the same spirit that built the UK’s best startups.
And yet, for all our history of trade and talent, empire and enterprise, we now seem more interested in walling ourselves off than inviting brilliance in. It’s short-sighted, self-defeating, and stupid. Like unplugging your router because the internet’s “a bit foreign”.
The truth is, we’re in a global arms race for innovation. AI, biotech, climate tech—it’s all moving at warp speed. If we want to be in the room where it happens, we need to open the door.
And no, this isn’t about immigration versus opportunity. It’s about immigration as opportunity. About recognising that talent is our last competitive advantage in a world where supply chains are broken, politics is polarised, and interest rates are doing the Hokey Cokey.
So let’s be bold. Let’s be a magnet for ambition. Let’s stop pretending that greatness wears a particular passport and start building a Britain that says to every global innovator: “Yes. Here. Now.”
Because if we don’t, the Revoluts and ElevenLabs of the future won’t be British. They’ll be Belgian. Or Balinese. Or based in Boston.
And we’ll be left here, proud and poor, wondering why all our best ideas now come with a return address in Zurich.
Read more:
We must make Britain the best place to build companies for the world’s best talent

Georgina Badine is not your typical entrepreneur. Having spent 14 years in the cut and thrust of the finance industry, she saw first-hand how people were often held back — not just by circumstance or skills, but by a lack of confidence and belief in themselves. Today, as founder of Invicta Vita, she’s on a mission to change that.
“We all have the potential to be great,” she tells me, sitting in her bright, book-lined office. “The trouble is, not everyone knows how to tap into it. That’s where Invicta Vita comes in.”
What is Invicta Vita?
Invicta Vita – Latin for ‘unconquered life’ – is more than just a coaching service or a consultancy. It’s a platform for personal transformation. At its heart, the company offers a bespoke, highly personal approach to unlocking people’s potential.
“No two clients are the same,” says Badine. “So I never use a generic format. I take each person through a deep dive of who they are – their personality, their strengths, their fears, their comfort zones – and I tailor everything to that.”
It starts, she explains, with 60 questions. Not just box-ticking or surface-level prompts, but carefully crafted queries designed to unearth the truth of a person’s capabilities and blockers. “Once I know who you are at your core, we can build from there. It’s about playing to your strengths and working on what’s holding you back.”
What inspired you to launch it?
Her motivation for launching Invicta Vita came from a combination of frustration and hope. Frustration with the corporate world she knew well – a space where inappropriate behaviour, bullying, and power imbalances often went unchecked. And hope – in the form of clients and colleagues who believed she had more to offer.
“I was in finance for 14 years,” she recalls. “And I saw things – and experienced things – that really didn’t sit right. But in my twenties, I didn’t have the confidence to call them out. I didn’t feel I could. That’s a big part of why I do this now – I want other people, especially women, to find their voice earlier than I did.”
Another lightbulb moment came when clients started asking for her help beyond her day job – usually for their children. “People would come to me and say, ‘Can you help my son get into work? Can you help my daughter find some direction?’ I realised this wasn’t just a one-off. There was a need, and I had something to offer.”
She later worked as Director of Admissions for a company helping young people into employment. “That’s when it became clear to me that my approach – more personalised, more values-led – was very different from what others were doing. That gave me the confidence to go out on my own.”
Who inspires you?
When asked who she admires, Badine doesn’t hesitate. “Julie Deane, founder of The Cambridge Satchel Company. She started that business in 2008 with just £600 to her name, and now it’s a global brand employing over 140 people and selling in more than 120 countries. And she did it all to fund a better education for her kids.”
It’s the blend of purpose, pragmatism, and resilience that resonates. “She’s a champion for small businesses, especially women-led ones. And she’s proof that if you build something around a clear, heartfelt mission, the rest can follow.”
What would you do differently?
It’s a question Badine has clearly reflected on. “I would be more cautious about who I trust in the early stages,” she says. “When you’re starting out, it’s easy to get excited and want to work with everyone who shows interest. But not everyone shares your ethos or values. And that can lead to problems.”
Building a business, she says, isn’t just about helping clients – it’s also about the internal structure, the people you partner with, the admin, the systems. “It’s all-consuming at first. So choosing who you bring into that world is crucial.”
What defines your way of working?
At Invicta Vita, it’s all about energy – positive, aligned energy. “I want to work with people I genuinely believe I can help. And with colleagues who share my outlook. I’m inclusive by nature, and I want people around me to have a say, to feel ownership.”
This collaborative ethos extends to clients too. “You don’t come to Invicta Vita to be told what to do. You come to explore who you are, and what you can become. I’m here to guide that journey, not prescribe it.”
What advice would you give to others starting out?
Badine’s advice to aspiring entrepreneurs is simple, but not easy. “Know your mission. That’s your compass. And then surround yourself with kind, honest people who have integrity.”
In a sector where there’s no shortage of coaches and mentors making big promises, Badine’s focus on character over credentials stands out. “Technical skill is important, of course. But kindness, honesty and shared values – those are the things that make a business last.”
So what’s next?
Badine isn’t in a rush to scale for the sake of it. “Growth is great, but it has to be intentional. Right now, I’m focused on deepening the work – refining our processes, helping more clients unlock what’s already inside them. That’s the real win.”
And for those still finding their voice? “It’s never too late,” she says. “Confidence isn’t something you’re born with. It’s something you build. One brave step at a time.”
Read more:
“Unlocking potential is my purpose”: how Invicta Vita founder Georgina Badine is helping people find their voice

The government will have to significantly raise taxes to cover the sweeping increases in public spending announced in today’s Spending Review, according to leading audit, tax and business advisory firm Blick Rothenberg.
Robert Salter, a director at the firm, warned that headline commitments such as the £11 billion annual uplift in the defence budget would likely require a 1.5p hike in the basic rate of income tax, if funded directly.
“Given the size of the government’s planned spending increases, significant tax rises are inevitable in the coming months,” said Salter. “The increase in the Defence budget alone is equivalent to a 1.5p rise on the basic rate of income tax.”
The Spending Review, announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves, included a series of headline-grabbing investments across defence, skills, infrastructure and housing. Among them was a £1.2 billion boost to training and apprenticeships, designed to support Labour’s pledge to create 120,000 new skilled workers by 2030.
While the funding increase is likely to be welcomed by businesses, Salter raised concerns about accessibility: “Sadly in many cases this additional funding may not reach the organisations who need it, because many firms are unable to access training due to the restrictive conditions associated with the apprenticeship levy.”
On energy policy, Salter praised the government’s ambition to increase domestic energy capacity and improve security, including investment in nuclear and carbon capture technologies. However, he warned of the risk of spiralling costs and delays.
“There is a real risk that the costs of these major nuclear and carbon capture and storage facilities will significantly overrun, and that delivery deadlines will be missed. This has happened in the past, and the government must ensure history does not repeat itself.”
Despite the Spending Review being framed by the Chancellor around themes of economic growth and security, Blick Rothenberg highlighted a disconnect between this narrative and some of the government’s recent tax decisions—most notably the rise in employers’ national insurance contributions earlier this year.
Salter said: “While Rachel Reeves talked consistently in her Spending Review about economic growth, economic security and the importance of these issues for workers, many measures that the government have previously announced—such as the increase in employer NICs—have actually increased unemployment.”
The remarks come amid growing pressure on the Chancellor to explain how the government will fund its long-term capital commitments without further increasing the tax burden on households and businesses.
With borrowing costs elevated and debt interest at record levels, tax policy decisions taken in the coming months are likely to shape the credibility of Labour’s broader economic programme—especially ahead of the next Budget and any fiscal rule assessments by the Office for Budget Responsibility.
Read more:
Government’s spending surge to trigger significant tax rises, says leading advisory firm

A summit held at the House of Lords during London Tech Week has sounded the alarm over a looming “skills cliff edge” in the UK workforce, as artificial intelligence (AI) continues to reshape the economy and redefine job roles across industries.
Chaired by Steven George-Hilley, founder of Centropy PR, the summit brought together thought leaders from across the tech, legal, financial and cybersecurity sectors for a wide-ranging discussion on the challenges and opportunities presented by AI.
The consensus? The UK risks falling behind international competitors unless it urgently accelerates efforts to build an AI-literate workforce, safeguard data integrity, and adopt ethical guardrails in AI deployment.
Achi Lewis-Dhaliwal, AVP UK, EMEA & India at Absolute Security, warned that AI is dramatically escalating the scale and sophistication of cyber threats, particularly for data-rich sectors such as financial services.
“The financial services industry houses vast quantities of sensitive data that is constantly subject to threats from malicious cyber actors, especially with the rise of AI-powered attacks,” he said. “These discussions must be grounded in real-world cyber risk scenarios if we’re to future-proof UK critical infrastructure.”
Leigh Allen, Strategic Advisor at Cellebrite, highlighted how AI is already proving transformative in digital forensics, stating: “AI is a critical enabler in unlocking digital evidence and significantly reducing investigation times, greatly aiding police forces and combating national security threats.”
She added that combining AI with ethical access to digital evidence is key to creating safer communities and stronger digital justice systems.
James Tuttiett, Sales Director UK & EMEA at FDM Group, pointed to a strategic disconnect across UK industries: “There’s a lack of a united vision and strategy when it comes to AI. Most organisations are still experimenting—there’s no ‘one size fits all’ yet—but what’s clear is that integration is imminent.”
He stressed that as automation reshapes careers, more emphasis is needed on teaching “how to ask the right questions of AI—not just accept the answers.” Understanding prompt engineering, he added, will be vital to preparing a resilient and agile workforce.
Arkadiy Ukolov, founder of Ulla Technology, flagged the data privacy risks surrounding popular AI tools that send user data to third-party providers for model training.
“When it comes to sensitive meeting discussions or client information, this creates significant risk of data leakage. Ethics must be at the centre of House of Lords discussions if we want AI that serves society rather than undermines it,” Ukolov said.
Stuart Harvey, CEO of Belfast-based analytics firm Datactics, urged policymakers to focus not just on AI adoption but on data quality itself.
“In the rush to adopt AI tools, many organisations overlook the foundational issue of fragmented or inaccurate data. Without high-quality, reliable datasets, AI models will produce unreliable or even damaging outputs,” Harvey warned.
Chris Davison, CEO of NavLive, showcased the positive applications of AI, such as using real-time 2D and 3D building modelling to enable sustainable construction.
“By creating accurate real-time spatial data across the lifecycle of a building, architects, engineers and construction professionals can save significant time and money,” he said. “This is where AI can power real economic growth.”
Read more:
House of Lords AI summit at London Tech Week warns of ‘skills cliff edge’ threatening UK’s competitive future