Here is what's happened in the UK over the last decade. UK has some of draughtiest and least efficient housing stock in Europe
Here is what @theCCCuk said about heat & buildings strat in Oct: “the lack of an integrated offer on home retrofit for the majority of households remains a real source of concern”
CCC and others have made the comparison with Germany - where a decades long scheme backed by the German national development bank KFW has led to very high deployment rates, grown mkt, brought down costs, and now *pays for itself*
Fine if the UK wants to take a different route, and £200m per year may not have been transformative
But HMT shouldn't pretend that UK continuing to have *no plan* on this doesn't seriously undermine objectives of any credible energy strategy
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ The problem: govt started writing this strategy a month ago in response to an immediate security and affordability crisis. It ended up producing a long-term supply strategy that does little to address security or affordability in next 5 years at least
Some big announcements that are new (and many that are not). But the overall impression is of a quite confused product of casting around, bartering, lobbying… rather than any clear strategic vision about tackling the problem faced.
NEW: joint report out today from @instituteforgov and @involveUK argues UK govt needs to adopt a much stronger approach to public engagement if it is to make a success of net zero (short thread)
There are many ways the UK could reach net zero. But all are going to involve big changes in people’s lives - their homes, their cars, most likely their diets, for some their jobs. That is unlike progress on emissions to date.
These changes will bring big benefits & could be part of a hugely positive story - of becoming a more modern, healthy and productive economy. There will also be costs involved, and these will need to be fairly distributed.
The difference between SAGE's approach to the March lockdown and now is striking. Quick thread:
In March, SAGE was pretty hesitant. Data was poor, there was lots of uncertainty about adherence and how long measures could be sustained, SAGE struggled to model impact of specific measures. See instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/…
It called for “more intensive actions” 10 days before & additional social distancing measures “as soon as possible” 7 days before. But it struggled to make argument for lockdown until it had clear evidence of risk of hospitals being overwhelmed.
In other news today... we @instituteforgov have a report out on another of the massive challenges government faces - net zero. Thread with some key points:
More than a year on from adopting the target, and with little over a year to go until it hosts COP26, the UK is a long way off track and lacks a credible plan for meeting its target
The UK has reduced emissions substantially in the power sector. But to get on track, emissions will need to fall in much more difficult sectors, where progress stalled. Unlike with the progress so far, these changes will go to the heart of people’s lives.
Robert Buckland has just announced that government will bring the whole probation service in-house from June 2021. That will mark the end of a badly failed experiment in outsourcing probation services, launched by Chris Grayling in 2013. Quick thread:
Worth reiterating that there has been massive disruption and confusion over the last seven years. Poor probation services have caused real harm to people trying to rebuild their lives. instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/ministry-…
Many (inc. @instituteforgov and several suppliers) warned at the time that outsourcing wouldn't work - there were few good providers & it was impossible to design and manage contracts that would hold companies to account. Grayling ignored & pushed ahead on a rushed timetable.