ZACK Polanski has urged the UK Government to be transparent amid concerns over the links between its AI policy and the Tony Blair Institute.
The Green Party of England and Wales (GPEW) leader raised concerns that the UK Government's AI policy may potentially be being influenced by the Tony Blair Institute, which has itself accepted more than £250 million from the billionaire owner of AI firm Oracle, Larry Ellison, since 2021.
It comes after former prime minister Blair published a 5700-word essay on Wednesday which was highly critical of the Labour Government , in which he said that AI "will revolutionise the private sector and should in time revolutionise public services and government".
Meanwhile, Tony Blair Institute AI director Laura Gilbert is one of five panelists set to appear on a BBC Question Time special on AI on Thursday evening.
The programme has already drawn significant backlash , with Polanski suggesting Gilbert's appearance shows how the BBC had allowed a "billionaire" – Ellison – to buy "an entire episode".
Polanski has now gone one step further, and has called on the UK Government to disclose "all formal and informal contacts between representatives of the Tony Blair Institute and government departments", so that the public can know "whether there is a link" between Ellison's donation and Blair's advocacy for more government funding for AI.
In a letter sent on Thursday addressed to Cabinet Office parliamentary secretary Chris Ward MP, Polanski said that Blair's essay "contained some important points", including "a call to switch to an AI focussed economy with more government investment in AI, which he argued would be facilitated by cuts to welfare spending, reductions in the minimum wage and reduced workers' rights".
The GPEW leader said: "It has been widely reported that Larry Ellison the owner of Oracle, which specialises in AI, funded the Tony Blair Institute with over £250m, and also that the Tony Blair Institute has significant contacts and influence within the government.
"We are sure you will agree that it's important for the public to know whether there is a link between Larry Ellison's donations and Tony Blair's public advocacy for more government funding of AI.
"We therefore request that all formal and informal contacts between representatives of the Tony Blair Institute and government departments (officials and ministers) are disclosed."
Polanski added: "It would be bad for public confidence if there was a suspicion that large corporate interests are buying access to the government via the Tony Blair Institute."
It would be bad for public confidence if there was a suspicion that large corporate interests are buying access to the Government via the Tony Blair Institute. My letter to the cabinet office. 👇🏼 pic.twitter.com/M67DLeA6Xf
— Zack Polanski (@ZackPolanski) May 28, 2026
Meanwhile, on Thursday evening Prime Minister Keir Starmer published a 3000-word essay on his personal Substack in response to Blair, which was titled, "Tony Blair might not like my plan, but he's wrong: it's changing Britain for the better".
Responding to Blair's comments on AI, Starmer wrote: "Far from being left behind on artificial intelligence, Britain is at the front of the pack.
“This isn’t rhetoric. Britain is widely recognised by the leading lights of that sector as being a growing and sovereign AI player.”
Starmer pointed to investment into datacentres in Loughton, Essex, and Blyth, Northumberland, as evidence of a nationwide investment into tech.
“It is improving our public services, particularly the NHS,” he said.
“And as we build this future, we are taking measures that strengthen our sovereignty; making sure we are an AI rule-maker, not a rule-taker.
“It is our principles in action, once again. Not just passively accepting our economic fate, but actively shaping the future. Taking control. Unlocking the potential of the whole country.”
A UK Government spokesperson said: "Government engages with a wide range of stakeholders in the development of policy.
"The Government publishes, quarterly, details of ministers' and certain senior officials' meetings with all external individuals and organisations."
It is understood that the letter will be responded to in due course.
.png?w=600)
