Will Scrapping DSIT Finally Deliver Real Tech Business Outcomes?

Jan de Vries · 2026-07-23

Let's cut through the acronyms and Whitehall red tape to connect government policy with real tech business outcomes. Before our new UK Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, started commuting to Number 10 on Monday, tech bosses, policy leads, and government officials were both celebrating and catastrophizing in fairly equal measure. The reason? Plans to axe the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT). DSIT is still a newbie when it comes to departments with seats at the UK government's top table. It was only announced in February 2023. Pledges, plans, and outcomes have had a mixed reception. Folding DSIT into the newly created Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade (DBIST), or Department for Business and Trade (DBT), has triggered concerns about policy structure, implementation, and delivery. Plus, it's also an irritating game of musical chairs courtesy of department-based acronyms and some new branding. But maybe, it makes some sense. ### What Was the Purpose of Creating DSIT? Originally, DSIT promised to do all sorts to make the UK a science and technology superpower by 2030. Chief among pledges? A multi-million-pound increase in public investment in R&D capable of turbocharging the five technologies of tomorrow: Quantum, AI, Engineering Biology, Semiconductors, and Future Telecoms, together with life sciences, space, and green technologies. But reality didn't match the rhetoric. The UK Semiconductor Strategy was delivered over a year later than planned and without specifics, pending feasibility studies. The UK Quantum Strategy, also delayed, was widely criticized for failing to map how to support moving from research and innovation to commercialization, backed by sovereign infrastructure, and meet that 2030 goal (which likely seemed far off enough in 2023). The 2024 effective merger of schemes for UK R&D Tax Credits, with guidelines presided over by DSIT, received equally mixed reviews. Ringfencing most, if not all, eligible R&D to take place onshore helped with fraud and was generally good. But doing away with the structure specifically supporting UK SMEs, where the scheme could have provided meaningful relief to innovative and scaling tech businesses, well, this turned it into a bureaucratic Rubik's Cube. It's also worth remembering that the UK has had four Prime Ministers since DSIT came to be; Burnham being our latest. Each of his predecessors has left their own indelible and opposing mark despite, likely, attempting to post-rationalize the department, packed with talented civil servants, but overwhelmed or dysfunctional. ### Scrapping DSIT and Connecting Business Outcomes I love the UK, working with incredible entrepreneurs here, and have had the privilege of collaborating with many governmental departments. There are some, not least DBT and Treasury, the economic and finance ministry, that are established supporters of founders. They connect Tech Transfer Offices, Academia, and other vital institutions with scaling our business community. For me, DSIT never nailed it. DBT and Treasury send informed and influential individuals to our summits. They respond to emails, listen, and convene meaningful in-person and (even on weekends) meetings with those of us who want the UK to truly support entrepreneurs and founders developing revolutionary technologies that can change the world for the better. I have checked my inboxes and have not received a single email from a named contact at DSIT, despite repeated attempts to engage. Over the past decade and more, I have helped found five UK companies and raised approximately $117 million (converted from EUR), alongside a further $20 million in the last three years for founders supported through Venture.Community. I would reasonably expect to be within DSIT's field of awareness. My background includes building liquid-cooled GPU clusters for inference as early as 2013, contributing to the EU Exascale program, and advising on tech policy. Given this track record, the silence from DSIT speaks volumes. ### What This Means for European Startup Incorporation For professionals following EU Inc news and the EU Inc proposal, this UK saga offers a cautionary tale. The UK's struggle to align government policy with real business outcomes highlights the importance of clear, actionable frameworks for startup incorporation. The EU Inc proposal aims to simplify cross-border company formation across Europe, avoiding the bureaucratic pitfalls that have plagued DSIT. Key takeaways from the UK experience: - Policy stability matters more than grand promises. - Direct engagement with founders beats top-down mandates. - Bureaucratic reshuffles often create more confusion than clarity. The EU Inc proposal could learn from these mistakes. By focusing on practical outcomes and listening to entrepreneurs, it has the potential to create a more supportive environment for tech startups across Europe. ### The Road Ahead Scrapping DSIT might be the right move if it leads to better coordination between departments that actually support tech businesses. But the real test will be whether this reset delivers tangible results for founders. Without meaningful engagement and streamlined policies, it's just another round of musical chairs. For now, I'm cautiously optimistic. The UK has the talent, the capital, and the ambition to be a tech superpower. What's been missing is the political will to cut through the red tape and focus on what matters: helping entrepreneurs build world-changing companies.