Question follow-through · 115531
Data Centres: Energy
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the capabilities of UK data centres to meet the energy usage required with the increasing use of AI.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
- Tabled
- 24 Feb 2026
- Target answer date
- 26 Feb 2026
- Answer
- 12 Mar 2026 · 16 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 4 · 1 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 2 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
24 Feb 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the capabilities of UK data centres to meet the energy usage required with the increasing use of AI.
26 Feb 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
12 Mar 2026
Answer published
The Government keeps UK data centre capability under review and works closely with energy regulators, network operators and industry.Through the AI Energy Council, Government is assessing system‑wide impacts, promoting energy efficiency and clean power so...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.