Starmer’s adviser held 16 secret talks with US tech chiefs as £150bn investment looms

Varun Chandra serves as the prime minister’s chief business adviser and, since early 2025, also acts as the UK’s US trade envoy. Unlike ministers, political advisers are not required to publish details of their private‑sector meetings, although civil servants keep internal logs. It took a freedom‑of‑information request twelve months to obtain the meeting records, which the Guardian published.

- Chandra met sixteen senior executives from Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Oracle, Apple and Meta. - Discussions covered regulatory reform, artificial intelligence policy, datacentre incentives and the implications of a second Trump administration. - In at least one meeting he offered to help an Oracle executive arrange a direct audience with the prime minister; similar groundwork was laid for a potential Starmer‑Andy Jassy (Amazon) encounter. - The government cites a £150bn pledge from US tech firms as a cornerstone of its growth strategy, though analysts have flagged that some of the announced projects appear to be existing facilities rebranded as new builds. - Regulatory topics arose in at least four meetings, with Meta’s vice‑president Joel Kaplan sharing feedback on the UK’s regulatory landscape. - Shortly after Chandra’s talks with Apple executives, Chancellor Rachel Reeves ordered a reduction in anti‑growth regulations, a move that preceded the removal of the Competition and Markets Authority chair Marcus Bokkerink. - Trump’s presidency featured in two meetings with Microsoft’s Brad Smith, covering his priorities and the upcoming state visit to the UK. - Transparency International’s Rose Zussman warned that such undisclosed encounters amount to lobbying behind closed doors and raise accountability concerns.

The revelations show how a single adviser can shape the interface between Downing Street and Silicon Valley without public scrutiny. While the government argues that meeting business leaders is a normal part of the adviser’s role, the secrecy fuels perceptions of undue influence, especially when tied to major policy shifts such as regulatory rollbacks and AI‑zone planning. Critics call for greater transparency and a formal register of adviser‑industry interactions.