Centre for British Progress

1.3K posts

Centre for British Progress banner
Centre for British Progress

Centre for British Progress

@BritishProgress

The Centre for British Progress is a non-partisan think tank on a mission to accelerate and shape an era of British growth and progress; evolved from @UKDayOne.

London, United Kingdom Katılım Ocak 2024
201 Takip Edilen7.3K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Centre for British Progress
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress·
What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.
Centre for British Progress tweet media
English
16
30
114
78.8K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Julia Willemyns
Julia Willemyns@jujulemons·
We have built a vast, complex, interventionist state without building the political layer needed to direct it. A small number of ministers, advisers and MPs are expected to oversee sprawling departments, regulators, quangos, courts, statutory instruments and technical policy areas. If we feel like the 'blob' is running the show, it may simply be because there is not enough political capacity for anyone else to do it. New from me on Post Haste 👇
Julia Willemyns tweet media
English
2
7
89
4.8K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
David Lawrence
David Lawrence@dc_lawrence·
In Stockholm, when you turn 18, your parents honour the occasion by putting your name on the waiting list for a flat. If they are quick, you might enjoy the privilege of picking up the keys to your new flat on your 30th birthday – 12 years later. If they are slow, you could still be waiting in your 40s. The waiting lists are so long that some housing cooperatives allow parents to pay to register their children from birth. Indeed, there are 15,000 children between the ages of 0-10 on the waiting list for a single housing cooperative in Stockholm. In my latest piece for @ArguablyMag, I explore why rent controls tend to backfire. As the UK Government battles populist policies left and right, they should hold their nerve and stick to economic logic. There are far better ways to help households with the cost of living. Like protectionist tariffs or printing one’s way out of inflation, rent freezes are a policy that ought to be confined to history’s economic dustbin. 🌉 In San Francisco, rent controls reduced rental housing supply by 15%, and actually increased rents overall. 👑 In Catalonia, rent controls made the cheapest properties more expensive. 🥨 In Berlin, housing supply and labour mobility fell – workers moved to Potsdam, further from their jobs. 🦞 In Massachusetts, controls reduced rental supply and housing quality deteriorated. When prices are fixed below the market price, supply falls: landlords and housing developers take properties off the market, and new homes may not get built at all. This exacerbates the problem, creating longer and longer queues. Over the next few years, Labour will receive many invitations to entertain populist policies that don’t work, and will not deliver for British people. We must focus on building the homes, and the economic foundations, that Britain sorely needs. arguably.uk/p/why-a-rent-f…
English
25
48
321
221.1K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
George Eaton
George Eaton@georgeeaton·
The 62% tax rate on £100k+ and the childcare cliff edge are punishing work, aspiration and having children. I've written for @ArguablyMag on how Labour can make a progressive case for abolishing them. arguably.uk/p/britain-cant…
English
12
28
127
68.5K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Julia Willemyns
Julia Willemyns@jujulemons·
I am looking for someone who is excellent on clinical trials and understands the British system to do some work with us scoping how to get clinical trial abundance in 🇬🇧 Hoping the X network helps me here!
English
24
41
109
19.7K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Julia Willemyns
Julia Willemyns@jujulemons·
Have you ever wondered where the wonks wander?
Alys Key@alys_key

Introducing Pen Portrait, a new interview series on the @BritishProgress newsletter 🖋️ Each edition is a Q&A about life, work, and culture with someone who spends a lot of time thinking about the future. First up, @georgeeaton talks about his new venture, the posting-to-policy pipeline, and why the best debate happens on Bluesky (yes, really).

English
1
3
10
6.3K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
David Lawrence
David Lawrence@dc_lawrence·
Is there a progressive case for new North Sea exploration? In my first column for @ArguablyMag, I look at the case for and against. I argue that this could be Ed Miliband's "Nixon goes to China" moment: only he can credibly make the case that further extraction would not increase emissions. As has been argued by @CarbonBrief, importing LNG is 18% more carbon-emitting than extracting from the North Sea. Progressives should also care about where the money goes: instead of funding corrupt Gulf regimes, we could support jobs and investment in Scotland. Both left and right conflate increasing supply with increasing demand. We must cut demand for carbon by rapidly electrifying the economy. But that isn't inconsistent with securing our own supply. Restricting supply won't reduce UK demand – it just means we import gas from the US and Middle East instead. We must learn from other progressive governments like Norway and Canada. Even if we achieve Clean Power 2030, the UK will still use 35-40 million tonnes of gas each year, and a similar amount of oil for petrol. We should do we can to get demand for these fuels down, while building a resilient & cleaner supply chain. Read the full piece here: arguably.uk/p/the-progress… Thanks to @georgeeaton for editing, @watt_direction and @matthewg_stubbs for data, @pdmsero & @KaneEmerson for reviewing.
David Lawrence tweet mediaDavid Lawrence tweet media
English
10
23
133
41.2K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Pedro Serôdio
Pedro Serôdio@pdmsero·
Is AI killing jobs? New data shows that, more than three years after the release of ChatGPT, there is no evidence for a significant impact of AI on overall employment in the UK. In our new report, we break down the labour force into different occupations and use four measures of AI exposure to determine how likely they are to be affected by the technology. Surprisingly, occupations with higher exposure to AI have grown faster than least-exposed ones, not slower. This holds across all four measures, and across two different data sources. The wage picture is different. Pay in AI-exposed occupations has lagged the rest of the labour market since 2019. But that gap opened three years before ChatGPT, which makes AI an unlikely candidate for the observed wage compression. This flattening of the wage structure is visible across the within-occupation distribution and strongest at the top quartile, which is consistent with labour market dynamics that predate generative AI.
Pedro Serôdio tweet mediaPedro Serôdio tweet mediaPedro Serôdio tweet mediaPedro Serôdio tweet media
English
63
314
1.3K
457.1K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Alys Key
Alys Key@alys_key·
Introducing Pen Portrait, a new interview series on the @BritishProgress newsletter 🖋️ Each edition is a Q&A about life, work, and culture with someone who spends a lot of time thinking about the future. First up, @georgeeaton talks about his new venture, the posting-to-policy pipeline, and why the best debate happens on Bluesky (yes, really).
Alys Key tweet media
English
1
7
34
16.8K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Ed Hezlet
Ed Hezlet@watt_direction·
A couple of important announcements from @energygovuk today To put it politely, I am concerned There are two measures that are being pitched as “Decisive action to break the influence of gas on electricity prices.” 🪵 The stick is increasing the Electricity Generator Levy from 45% to 55%. The EGL is effectively a revenue tax that kicks in above a benchmark price of c. £83/MWh. It was introduced in January 2023 to claw back revenue from renewable and nuclear plants that were enjoying supernormal electricity prices, due to rising gas prices. It does not apply to assets under a CfD. 🥕 The carrot is a new voluntary fixed price contract for generators that aren’t under a CfD. Instead of relying on the wholesale power market, they can sign a “Wholesale Contract for Difference” (WCfD) and have the option to accept an (inflation linked?) fixed price for their wholesale power. In essence the messaging is - “We want to reduce the impact that gas has on electricity prices - please sign a fixed price contract or we will tax you via the EGL” More generators on fixed price contracts means gas has less impact on retail electricity prices. There is a case for this approach - consumers may favour more predictable power prices, and generators who are investing capital up-front want predictable revenues. But today's measure isn't about securing new investment - it's a potential handout to generators that have already enjoyed incredibly generous subsidy schemes. A few concerns:
English
10
72
154
41.8K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Centre for British Progress
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress·
Last night we celebrated our first birthday! It was wonderful to see old & new friends, and to celebrate the last year. There's lots more to do, but we're proud to have worked with allies & policymakers to do things like... 🏗️ Get the Planning & Infrastructure Bill through Parliament 🔋 Remove levies on electricity to cut bills & support electrification 🛫 Get the go-ahead for new runways in Heathrow and Gatwick 📈 Design new AI growth zones 🚉 Give mayors new powers to raise funds for local transport 👩‍💻 Design AI fellowships for exceptional talent to come to the UK ⚡️ Get the PM to accept all of the Fingleton nuclear recommendations. 🏘️ Get the go-ahead for a new town in Tempsford We need more! Until Britain finds a way out of stagnation, we will continue to struggle with zero-sum politics and economic decline. There is no progress without growth. We're incredibly grateful to all our fellows, advisers, supporters & friends, without which we would not be where we are today. Here's to year 2!
Centre for British Progress tweet mediaCentre for British Progress tweet mediaCentre for British Progress tweet mediaCentre for British Progress tweet media
English
1
5
116
15.4K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Max Mosley
Max Mosley@_maxmosley·
As a member of a planning committee I’ve seen how the system incentivises people to say what they don’t want, this would give people the ability to define what they do want Brilliant idea 👏
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
0
3
24
2.7K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Stella Tsantekidou
Stella Tsantekidou@Stsantek·
We CAN have nice things! This is a great plan and similar to what has worked in many other countries, including in some attractive places I know of in Greece where they had similar settlements. 2/3 of existing residents needed to give automatic planing permission, they get either an uplift or allowed to expand their own home, and have a say on aesthetic character of their neighbourhood. There is no need we should be at the mercy of the goodwill of developers.
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
4
2
29
3.1K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
JP Spencer
JP Spencer@JP_Spencer_·
Street Votes are a really interesting idea that could both give more power to local communities and promote better development of housing. 👇
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
3
6
10
2.9K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Ed Hezlet
Ed Hezlet@watt_direction·
Really interesting policy idea - allowing more housing to be built at the local level 👇
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
0
2
5
913
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
James Gradel
James Gradel@James_Gradel·
Community-led street votes would give local people the power to reshape the place they live in. This could look like home extensions adding more space for growing families, granny annexes for elderly relatives, improved green space, or new homes – all approved by the community.
James Gradel tweet media
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
1
2
8
829
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Matt Clifford
Matt Clifford@matthewclifford·
This is excellent!
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
1
8
36
6.1K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
Anya Martin
Anya Martin@AnyaM8_·
Brilliant case study in the new CBP/Labour Together report. Doubling of homes, increased space for and 100% support of existing residents. Nicer design too. Making easier pathways for residents to do this is a no-brainer, esp with so much ageing stock desperately needing work
Anya Martin tweet media
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
0
6
17
2.2K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
George Eaton
George Eaton@georgeeaton·
Smart idea here for turning Nimbys into Yimbys: “street votes” that allow communities to design and then agree on new development rules. Based on models in South Korea, Tel Aviv and Houston, this could deliver an extra 30,000 homes a year – govt should take it up now.
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
4
7
27
5.3K
Centre for British Progress retweetledi
David Lawrence
David Lawrence@dc_lawrence·
In our latest @BritishProgress x @LabourTogether collab, we make the case for STREET VOTES 🏘️🗳️ We think this is one of the most powerful, no-regrets levers that the Government could pull to help deliver 1.5 million homes by the next election. Street votes give communities a simple way to approve new homes without going through the usual planning processes, while guaranteeing local support. Read the full paper from @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & me here 👇
Centre for British Progress@BritishProgress

What if the residents of a street could collectively decide to build more homes on it - and share directly in the benefits? That's street votes. In our new paper with @LabourTogether we set out how community-led street votes could help @SteveReedMP build 1.5 million new homes. labourtogether.uk/all-reports/st… Street votes let neighbours come together, work with an architect, agree a new plan for their street, and vote. If they say yes, building happens with their consent, on their terms, with benefits flowing to the people who already live there. Building in towns and cities is vital - it adds much-needed homes where people want to live, it’s more sustainable and it grows a more resilient local economy. But building in cities and towns is difficult. Under street votes, instead of builders, councils, and residents fighting each other, the community can push for more homes themselves. And because ordinary people are driving the change on small sites, new homes can be built faster than the big schemes relying on big developers. Street votes learn from international schemes that have delivered tens of thousands of homes a year in cities like Seoul and Tel Aviv. Applied here, the evidence suggests up to 30,000 new homes a year in the places we need them most - with the first homes delivered before the end of this Parliament. Much of the work has already been done to put communities in the driver’s seat with street votes. MHCLG just needs to implement the rules. In this paper, @1jamesHowat, @KaneEmerson & @dc_lawrence set out the final steps that the Government should take to build thousands of new homes with popular support.

English
0
6
30
3.4K