91av

YOU only have to stick a UK politician on a TV sofa to chat about technology to see how well it is understood at a senior level. At best, you get empty platitudes about the importance of science, technology, engineering and maths (STEM) subjects in school. For anything more, it quickly becomes apparent that they either don’t understand the subject or don’t see the bigger picture, as amply illustrated by home secretary Amber Rudd’s plan to ban all encryption. Or by the suite of ill-advised surveillance laws.

Who is advising policymakers on technology? Other, forward-thinking countries have chief technology officers. Shouldn’t we?

The position has existed – technically – but in a whose primary function is getting Westminster’s digital infrastructure – including Wi-Fi coverage – up to speed.

There are numerous officers and advisors . But the approach is divided over departments, without coordination or accountability, when it comes to big strategic decisions on the UK’s line on issues where tech meets society. For example, Facebook and Google profiting from ever bigger chunks of our personal data, black-box algorithms making vital decisions with no oversight, and automation threatening jobs.

Peter Wells, head of policy at the Open Data Institute thinks it’s high time we had one place for the buck to stop. He believes the government needs a real position to coordinate tech policymaking, particularly with regards to data. “We certainly need a chief data officer with clout now, both to do the strategic stuff and with the ability to say no to bad stuff,” he says.

“You’ve got to change a culture that is almost anti-technological in its thinking”

It certainly seems to have paid off in Estonia where Taavi Kotka, a tech entrepreneur drafted into a senior political post launched the country’s much-feted e-residency programme, and helped to make Estonia the most technologically advanced nation in the world. Now his successor is preparing the country’s workforce and laws for labour automation and the rise of autonomous cars.

Too bad this solution will probably not scale to a country the size of the UK. “Just having someone with that job title isn’t the answer,” says Mike Bracken, a former executive director of digital in the Cabinet Office.

Instead of focusing on a single post, he thinks we should get the whole of the government up to speed – not just its infrastructure but its politicians’ grasp of the deeper issues of technology and society. “You’ve got to change a culture that is almost anti-technological in its thinking.”

While in the heart of government, Bracken found that decisions around big topics such as encryption were made without consulting anyone who grasped the basics. “These issues are central to how we run the country,” he says. “You need people who actually understand the details in power.”

Innovation charity Nesta is about to publish figures showing that just 9 per cent of contenders in the upcoming UK general election have a STEM degree. The charity points to the lack of tech issues on party manifestos as indicative of how the political elite view such subjects now. It also points out that “automation” was mentioned in just 31 parliamentary debates in the last year.

This is the situation that really needs addressing. “Never mind one CTO, put 100 in there and then see what happens,” says Bracken.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Why the UK needs a chief technology officer”