Revealed: Starmer AI advisor has financial interests in almost 500 tech firms

“Raises serious questions about whether the department is robustly managing these potential conflicts.”

PETER GEOGHEGAN AND LUCAS AMIN

Keir Starmer wants AI at the heart of government. This week, the Prime Minister unveiled plans to digitise the civil service using AI, claiming it could save up to £45 billion.

But while the government boasts about its ambitions, it has been less forthcoming about the business interests of the architect behind its flagship AI policy: Matt Clifford.

In January, we reported that Clifford’s public register had not included interests in several AI businesses, including a £40 million AI investment fund run by Hakluyt, a firm with close Labour ties. At the time, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) refused to publish a full list of his financial interests.

Now, we’ve obtained that list via Freedom of Information (FOI). The list – attached below – reveals venture capitalist Clifford holds investments in nearly 500 tech firms, including many in health-tech and life sciences—sectors set to benefit from the UK’s AI boom.

Entrepreneur First, the investment firm Clifford co-founded and co-owns, holds stakes in 449 tech companies. He also has dozens more holdings in his own name. Despite his central role in shaping AI policy, these financial ties were not publicly disclosed.

Transparency campaigners call this “extremely inadequate.” George Havenhand from Spotlight on Corruption said, “The department’s decision to withhold hundreds of declared interests from public scrutiny raises serious questions about whether it is robustly managing these potential conflicts.”

The FOI documents also reveal Clifford’s firm has stakes in at least eight companies involved in the Startup Coalition—an influential industry group funded by big tech. Entrepreneur First’s Chief Operating Officer, Tom Shinner, sits on the coalition’s board.

The Startup Coalition has lobbied in favour of the government’s controversial plan to exempt AI developers from copyright law—a move opposed by the media and music industries.

Labour ministers have met with the group to discuss AI regulation and copyright issues once a month, on average, records show. The coalition also receives funding from Google, which stands to benefit from AI exemptions.

Last month, crossbench peer and filmmaker Lady Beeban Kidron called the government’s copyright consultation “fixed” in favour of AI firms.

Gina Neff, director of the Minderoo Centre for Technology & Democracy at Cambridge University, told Democracy for Sale that government should talk to a wider circle of experts.

“There are many in civil society who are frustrated at the lack of access to tech policymaking in government. The UK has incredible expertise in AI, and we want to see that diversity reflected in decision-making.”

A spokesperson for the Startup Coalition defended its role, saying, “We advocate on behalf of UK startups—so it should come as no shock that we engage with ministers, officials, and ecosystem leaders regularly.” Entrepreneur First’s support for the coalition is listed on its website.

Clifford helped establish the UK’s AI Safety Institute—recently rebranded the AI Security Institute, reportedly to align with the Trump White House’s AI approach. He is widely regarded as a respected expert in the field. Starmer accepted all 50 recommendations from his AI plan, published in January.

However, some in the tech and media sectors are uneasy about his influence.

“Of course, you want entrepreneurs involved,” one industry source told Democracy for Sale. “But you don’t give one man—who runs the firm with the most AI investments in Europe—the job of writing the policy, then accept all his recommendations the same day he publishes his plan.”

Labour’s AI enthusiasm extends into government offices. New Scientist reported this week that Science and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle had asked ChatGPT for advice on why British businesses are slow to adopt AI.

So, we asked ChatGPT if the government has been transparent about its AI policymaking.

Its response? While “structures have been put in place to ensure responsible AI development,” details about lobbying efforts or external influences “have not been extensively disclosed.”

So there you have it.

DSIT and Matt Clifford have yet to respond to requests for comment.

---

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.