AI firms seek UK datacentre compact before opposition spreads

Taskforce proposes local benefit terms as Miller rejects benefit-linked acceptance

The Sovereign AI Leadership taskforce, a group including Nvidia, Microsoft and Cisco, told the Labour government that Britain has roughly 12 months to build a compact that earns public consent. The submission said successive dry summers and rising energy bills were increasing scrutiny of the large computer warehouses used to train and run AI models, while anti-datacentre activism was growing in the United States and Europe.

The taskforce said organised local opposition in the United States has stopped fully permitted datacentre projects and prompted moratoriums even in states otherwise described as pro-growth. It argued that AI itself was only a surface-level concern, pointing instead to distrust of corporate and government promises, fear of stranded assets and electricity costs. The taskforce said the same arguments had begun to appear in Britain. The submission said: “Britain has a window – we think of roughly 12 months – to build a compact that earns public consent before that pattern takes hold.”

The taskforce is calling for the government to create a clear framework for councils and mayors to follow, setting out recommended terms for local benefit. Those terms would include an indicative contribution, likely to be financial or to take the form of facilities, scaled to the size of each datacentre site. The taskforce also wants councils that host datacentres to retain more tax revenue, but it has not calculated the cost to central government if councils granting permission were allowed to keep all of their business rates.

Microsoft’s investment plans form part of the disputed expansion. The company has promised $30bn (£22bn) for UK AI infrastructure, built a datacentre in Acton, London, and has another under construction in Newport. Microsoft wants to build several more facilities and has been engaging local and national leaders, including Prime Minister Andy Burnham, over the balance between the potential benefit of AI to the economy and public opposition to datacentres. A photograph accompanying the report shows the Microsoft Park Royal datacentre in north-west London, credited to Raymond Tang of Alamy.

Widening public concern about the safety of AI systems is fuelling opposition to datacentre construction. The Guardian reported that some of the largest companies, including OpenAI, Anthropic and Google, appeared to lose control of some of their most cutting-edge AIs during the summer. Some protesters had begun using direct action, while membership in anti-AI campaign groups was growing rapidly. A Guardian photograph by Murdo MacLeod shows protesters opposing a datacentre in North Ayrshire.

Steve Rigby, the taskforce’s chair, said a clear agreement among government, industry and local communities could build infrastructure, equip the workforce with future-ready skills and advance Britain’s digital destiny. He said: “This taskforce’s goal isn’t another strategy document, but high-impact actions that materially accelerate the UK’s transition to an AI-enabled economy.”

Joseph Miller, director of PauseAI UK, which campaigns for a global pause to datacentre construction, rejected the idea that communities could accept facilities in return for industry benefits. He said: “People are going to feel it is undignified to be bought off by huge tech companies who do not share their interests.” Miller said the technology companies were right to be concerned that US-style opposition could grow in Britain.

Kat Jones, director of Action to Protect Rural Scotland, said companies had already “missed the boat on containing community opposition to hyperscale AI datacentres”. She said: “In Scotland, we have 15 community campaigns already working incredibly hard opposing these environmentally destructive developments locally, and a growing national campaign.” Jones said even extensive lobbying by US technology companies would struggle against public opinion that had shifted against hyperscale facilities.

Donald Campbell, director of advocacy at the technology-equity campaign Foxglove, said technology companies had spent years trying to push highly polluting datacentres through planning systems under secrecy and misleading information. He argued that public awareness of the facilities’ effects on resources and the climate had created the current problem. Campbell warned that retaining more business-rate revenue for hosting councils would not require technology companies to pay more, while increased funding for councils would come from central government services such as the NHS.

A government spokesperson said datacentres should create British jobs and supply chains, invest in host communities, prioritise clean power and use water responsibly. The spokesperson said most proposed developments consider community benefits through relevant local planning processes. The government also has measures allowing English local authorities hosting datacentres in AI growth zones to keep all additional business rates they generate.

The submission sets out a window of roughly 12 months and an indicative contribution scaled to each site’s size, but it does not price the wider fiscal effect of allowing hosting councils to keep all of their business rates. The government already supports community-benefit review through planning and full retention of additional rates in English AI growth zones; the taskforce is seeking a broader compact covering local benefits and public consent.

Earlier MSI reporting documented the conflict before the compact proposal: George Osborne dismissed UK data-centre protests as “nimbys” as demonstrations appeared in central London, rural Devon and outside the Scottish parliament, while campaigners in north Devon mobilized against Xlinks’ 1.5GW datacentre and 1.8GW battery proposal. The taskforce’s compact proposal now seeks a national response to that backdrop while leaving the scale and public cost of local benefits unsettled.