Sir Paul Nurse, a Nobel Prize-winning geneticist and president of the Royal Society, told the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee this week that the reorganisation, which followed Andy Burnham becoming Prime Minister in July, was 'actually quite a big mistake'.
The government abolished DSIT—created by former Conservative Prime Minister Rishi Sunak—and split its responsibilities. Science went to BIST, while technology functions related to digital were moved to the renamed Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). Kanishka Narayan was given a Cabinet-attending role as Minister for Artificial Intelligence, working jointly in the Cabinet Office and BIST. Chris McDonald was named Minister of State for Science, Innovation and Investment, working jointly across BIST and the Department for Health and Social Care without a Cabinet role.
Nurse argued that science intersects with business, health, defence, transport, energy and the environment. 'Giving it just to business — there are ways through that — is restricting just what it can do, and that is a mistake,' he said. He added that AI should have been kept with science, calling AI 'in fact science' and lamenting that the technology is often reduced to large language models rather than its potential to promote creativity in science.
He also expressed concern that civil servants in a business-focused department would prioritise narrow commercial applications over broader scientific goals, noting his past experience with similar arrangements: 'Every time I had to speak to them, it was always about application to particular business objectives. They couldn't get off that.'
Alicia Greated, executive director for the Campaign for Science and Engineering, warned of a lack of connection between the science portfolio and the Department for Education, which oversees universities. She said members were 'asking for stability' and feared a 'deprioritisation' of basic research, as well as short-term thinking around skills and infrastructure.
In a letter to the committee, ministers from the Cabinet Office, BIST and DCMS defended the changes, stating they were designed to 'rewire the state to deliver a stronger, more strategic centre' as an engine for economic growth. They argued the restructuring reflected the need to adapt to unprecedented global changes.