Growth and light-touch regulation: Labour’s vision for UK AI

Reflections from the Labour Party Conference in Liverpool

The Labour Party Conference in Liverpool offered the clearest sense yet of how the government intends to weave artificial intelligence into its economic agenda. The headline message was unmistakable: growth first, reform second, and regulation only where necessary.

While technology and AI were not the mainstage attractions, the broader atmosphere of deregulation — and the way it framed the conversation — speaks volumes about what might lie ahead for UK AI policy.

A conference defined by growth and renewal

The mood in Liverpool was pragmatic and relentlessly focused on delivery. “Cut through red tape”, “unlock growth”, and “remove barriers” were recurring refrains.
The Institution of Civil Engineers observed that infrastructure, housing, and planning dominated the agenda, with repeated calls for reform to accelerate development and investment. These discussions illustrated the current tone from government — one in which regulation is increasingly portrayed as an obstacle to national renewal rather than a guarantor of stability.

As the Institute for Government noted, Sir Keir Starmer’s keynote speech “signalled another evolution of the government’s priority-setting” by naming economic growth as its defining mission. Other policy goals, from environmental transition to digital innovation, are now explicitly subordinated to that objective.

But crucially, when ministers and delegates spoke of deregulation, they almost always pointed to other sectors: housing, planning, medical devices, and infrastructure. The rhetoric was about systems that slow down building, not algorithms that might run out of control. AI regulation, in contrast, remained largely in the background — important, but still an open question.

AI on the margins — but not absent

There were, however, notable exceptions. At a Next-Gen Government: Data & AI in Public Service session hosted by LabourList and the LSE, speakers highlighted the potential for AI to transform policymaking and public administration, while recognising that government itself must overcome data silos and cultural barriers before AI can deliver real value.

More directly, Kanishka Narayan MP, the newly appointed Minister for AI and Online Safety, joined a Frontier AI fringe event where he described AI as both opportunity and risk — a technology that could “drive prosperity” but must be managed responsibly. His tone was not that of restriction, but of balance: “yes, and – not either/or.” That nuance reflects a growing confidence in AI as an engine for economic revival rather than merely a regulatory challenge.

Beyond rhetoric, the government has begun to sketch an enabling framework. The newly announced AI Growth Zone in the North East aims to bring together investment, infrastructure, and skills, backed by taskforce funding and a promise to “unblock” planning and energy constraints that hinder data-centre and compute capacity. The focus is on acceleration rather than risk management.

Regulation: light touch, frontier-focused, innovation-enabling

The government’s stance on AI regulation remains consistent with what was signalled in the King’s Speech earlier this year: a bespoke, proportionate regime that targets frontier risks while encouraging innovation elsewhere. In public remarks, Starmer and Narayan have both emphasised that the UK will “go its own way” on AI regulation — not replicating the EU’s AI Act, but crafting rules that support responsible experimentation and economic growth.

That likely means a light-touch framework, centred on three themes:

1. Frontier risk oversight – a focus on high-impact systems that could threaten safety or democracy;
2. Enabling legislation – creating conditions for AI sandboxes, testbeds, and responsible data sharing; and
3. Institutional strengthening – ensuring regulators can act swiftly when genuine risks emerge.

This approach echoes the wider conference mood: the state should enable, not restrain. Yet the government will need to walk a fine line. Too little oversight risks public trust; too much risks throttling the very innovation it hopes to unleash.

Looking ahead

The Labour government’s ambition is clear: to make AI a driver of growth, not a casualty of precaution. That entails new kinds of regulation — flexible, iterative, and collaborative — where industry and government test rules together before locking them into law.

Still, the path ahead is crowded with competing pressures: sector-specific safety rules (health, insurance, transport), environmental constraints from energy-hungry AI infrastructure, and the realities of international alignment. To remain credible, the UK will need both openness and coherence — and regulators with the resources to deliver on a lighter but sharper regime.

For now, the message from Liverpool is simple enough: the age of AI regulation in the UK will not begin with a bang, but with a balancing act — light on prescription, heavy on intent.