Science secretary Peter Kyle has rejected criticisms?of?the Labour government¡¯s decision to?shelve plans for an ?800?million supercomputer, claiming that the project ¡°did?not exist in?the first place¡± because the Conservatives had failed to?allocate funds to?it while in?office.

In his first appearance before a?parliamentary committee as?secretary of?state for science and technology, Mr?Kyle said he?was annoyed by?the condemnation he?faced in?August when it?emerged that an?exascale computer at?the University of Edinburgh ¨C which was announced by?the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) under the Conservative government in October 2023 ¨C would?not go?ahead. A?further ?500?million promised for artificial intelligence research was paused at?the same time.

However, Mr Kyle told the House of Lord¡¯s Science and Technology Committee on 5?November that the criticisms of his decision ¨C which was labelled ¡°idiotic¡± and ¡°shambolic¡± by some business and academic leaders ¨C was unjustified given the lack of resources set aside by Rishi Sunak¡¯s government for the proposed machine, which was due to be 50 times faster than any existing UK computer.

¡°This is an intense frustration for me,¡± said Mr?Kyle. ¡°People have challenged me on this in the media, from opposition and elsewhere, but no?one has been able to point to a single piece of paper with ¡°DSIT¡± written on the top which confirms any of the funding in the first place.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°I did not come in and cut the programme because I?did?not like the programme ¨C I?did?not cut anything, because the programme did?not exist in the first place,¡± Mr?Kyle added.

Stressing that the supercomputer project ¨C on which Edinburgh had spent ?31?million in the expectation that the scheme would go ahead ¨C was ¡°unfunded, uncosted and without any allocated funding from the Treasury¡±, Mr?Kyle said he had ¡°three choices¡± to redress a ?1.3?billion shortfall in DSIT¡¯s budget.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°Did I cut ?1.3?billion ¨C or ?800?million ¨C from other parts of my budget? Did I?just carry on with the smoke and mirrors as the government had before? It was possible for me to act as though the programme was happening without admitting the money did?not exist,¡± he said, adding: ¡°Or?did I?go back to the Treasury and find the money for it, although the money was?not there?¡±

¡°I found myself apologising to people who believed the money had been allocated to the programme ¨C it?[should?not have been] my position to?apologise, because it was not my government that made this decision and acted in this way,¡± he concluded.

When his department did come forward with plans for digital infrastructure, they would be ¡°fully funded and fully costed¡±, he said.

Mr Kyle also criticised his predecessor at DSIT, Michelle Donelan, for telling a parliamentary committee in March that there was ¡°no?funding crisis¡± in universities, despite many institutions facing multimillion-pound deficits.

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

¡°My predecessor was wrong to say what she did back then ¨C we all know the financial stresses being experienced,¡± said Mr?Kyle, adding: ¡°To?the shame of our country, our universities were being talked down ¨C from the prime minister onward.

¡°That is why I?said the war on universities would end on day?one of a Labour government, and that war has ended,¡± said Mr?Kyle.

On his backing for the sector, he explained that the recent budget had confirmed that annual public spending on research would surpass ?20?billion for the first time thanks to an ¡°8.5?per cent real-terms increase¡± in DSIT¡¯s budget, which would see core research budgets protected.

Confirming that funding for Horizon Europe had been ¡°ring-fenced¡± as part of an additional ?1?billion for DSIT¡¯s settlement, he?said: ¡°I?hope this helps to make sure that some of the fears talked about over the summer and autumn are?not realised.¡±

ÁñÁ«ÊÓƵ

jack.grove@timeshighereducation.com