Unlike the polarising topics of immigration, climate change or the economy, AI data centres create a unique discussion that cuts across the traditional factions of left and right. Could this be the topic that encourages greater cross-ideological discourse?
Other than the Green Party, most political parties in the UK generally agree on the importance of AI data centres. They argue such centres will boost the economy, improve cyber security and give the UK an upper hand in the AI revolution. Yet, there are arguments across the political spectrum questioning the impact of constructing such energy-intensive infrastructure, and there is a risk of internal party fractures.
Take Google’s contentious new $1bn data centre in Waltham Cross, Hertfordshire. Since it opened in September last year, local residents have raised concerns regarding noise and light pollution along with a lack of proper consultation before its approval was granted. Despite investing in the local economy with over 250 companies working on its construction, the centre emits 16,549 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year (the equivalent to 8,000 round trip flights from London to New York). This raises questions as to whether the benefits of such centres will outweigh the negatives.
The left/right divide isn’t so simple
For some progressives, environmental issues surrounding data centres are the most concerning. According to the Local Government Association (LGA), “environmental and infrastructure impacts are not being adequately accounted for in current national planning”.
Water and electricity are significant issues. The Government Digital Sustainability Alliance (GDSA) has warned that “The water demand of AI technologies is likely to threaten global and national water security.” Already climate change and population growth mean “global freshwater demand is predicted to exceed supply by 40% by 2030“. For areas that lack an abundant water source, data centres could profoundly impact the local water supply.
However, the GDSA also recognises that there are measures we can take to mitigate the negative impacts of AI data centres. These include, “locating new data centres in areas that are not under water stress”, “prioritising data centres that utilise rain water” and using “alternative cooling methods, such as air cooling”. Such measures could provide a convincing alternative rather than simply restricting the construction of data centres.
The Waltham Cross data centre is one such example that reduces water consumption through “advanced air-cooling technology” and is even “equipped to support off-site heat recovery” which means excess heat from the data centre can be “re-routed and provided free of charge to help warm local homes, schools, or businesses.”
Nevertheless, although the Green Party distinctly opposes AI data centres, many across the centre-left, including within Labour, argue that the significant energy demand could threaten net-zero plans. Backbench Labour MP Toby Perkins raised concerns as to whether the carbon emissions from AI data centres had been accounted for. The government replied that they would include them in future carbon budgets.
Some on the right are also concerned, but for different reasons. Traditional Conservatives argue the need for preserving the green belt. Backbench Conservative MP Joy Morrissey criticised plans for new data centres in South Buckinghamshire believing, “they will scar our countryside, destroy local character, and place enormous pressure on roads, services, and communities.” Although she was directly criticising Labour’s plans, her perspective contradicts the pro-growth argument of her party’s official stance.
The question is whether the investment will deliver sufficient growth. How many permanent jobs will actually be created as a result of building data centres? A study conducted by environmental charity Action To Protect Scotland found that most data centres will only employ 20–50 people long-term, and 1000–2000 people short-term for 12–18 months during construction.
Greater discussion is needed
Despite differing views, there is already a form of cross-party dialogue. Established at the start of this year, the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Data Centres, according to their website, “make evidence-based policy recommendations that support sustainable growth while addressing infrastructure, energy, and planning considerations”. While this dialogue enables better coordination between parliamentarians, government and data centre providers, the group mostly consists of Conservative and Labour MPs, with only one Liberal Democrat. Neither the Greens nor Reform UK have signed up, which could reduce potential objections.
Greater discussion at a local level could also benefit communities. A 2025 poll by YouGov found that 69% of adults supported building data centres in the UK but this dropped to 56% when proposals were in their local area. Participants were more likely to support local developments if more jobs were created. Yet if few permanent jobs are produced, it brings into question whether support could drop further.
A modern enigma
Greater transparency around data centres is arguably needed in order for the public (and politicians) to understand their full impact, given that 89% of the UK public report having “little to no knowledge about data centres” according to research group SEC Newgate.
This lack of knowledge can also provide fertile ground for misinformation and conspiracy theories on social media. Take a post on X from a conspiratorial account, ‘The White Rabbit’, which implies climate change can’t be real if data centres exist. As AI continues to dominate our lives, data centres will continue to present a nuanced challenge that will increasingly test political divides. Even experts don’t know the full extent of AI’s impact on our water supply. Informed discussion is needed now more than ever to help balance economic growth, environmental sustainability and local needs.
More from East Anglia Bylines
Bylines Network Gazette is out!
The latest Bylines Network Gazette is out now. Become a Friend of Bylines Network or upgrade to a paid Substack subscription, and you will get access to a vital collection of citizen articles and stories.
Journalism by the people, for the people.
