ECONOMY

DETAILS

4-DAY WEEK

1. GOVERNMENT-LED EXPANSION

• A. National 4-Day Week Challenge Fund

  • Funding: Allocate £50m-£100m (similar to innovation grants) to subsidize 5,000+ companies (prioritizing SMEs) to test the 4-day week.

  • Criteria: Firms must commit to:

    • 100% pay for 80% time (28 hours max).

    • Share productivity/well-being data.

  • Model: The Autonomy Institute’s pilot but with 10x more participants.

• B. Public Sector Pilots

  • NHS, councils, civil service: Launch trials in low-risk departments (e.g., admin, IT).

    • Example: Scotland’s proposed public sector trial (delayed but could be revived).

  • Schools: Test 4-day weeks with staggered schedules (e.g., Finland’s shorter hours for teachers).

• C. Sector-Specific Trials

  • High-potential sectors: Tech, finance, creative industries (easy to adapt).

  • Challenging sectors:

    • Healthcare: Rotate staff to ensure coverage (like Iceland’s hospitals).

    • Retail: Split weekends (Team A: Fri-Mon off; Team B: Tue-Fri off).

    • Manufacturing: Offer overtime pay for 5th-day work (like German unions).

________________________________________

2. BUSINESS INCENTIVES & SUPPORT

• A. Tax Breaks & Grants

  • NI Reduction: Cut employer National Insurance by 2-5% for 4-day week firms with greater cuts for early adopters.

  • Productivity Grants: Cover costs of tech/training (e.g., automation tools).

• B. Certification & Branding

  • "4-Day Week Accredited" label (like Fair Trade) to attract talent and consumers.

  • Public leaderboard of participating companies (competitive incentive).

• C. Legal Safeguards

  • Right to Request: Legally empower employees to ask for a 4-day week (like Belgium’s 2022 law).

  • Anti-penalization: Ban retaliation against workers who propose or reject shorter weeks.

________________________________________

3. DATA & RESEARCH SCALING

• A. Unified Metrics

  • Mandate tracking of:

    • Productivity (output per hour).

    • Well-being (stress, burnout surveys).

    • Economic impact (absenteeism, turnover).

• B. Independent Oversight

  • Task ONS (Office for National Statistics) or a new Work-Time Institute to analyse results.

  • Publish annual reports (like New Zealand’s Wellbeing Budget).

________________________________________

4. CULTURAL & POLITICAL MOMENTUM

• A. Cross-Party Coalition

  • Labour’s 2019 manifesto backed a 32-hour week; push for all-party support.

  • Devolved governments: Scotland/Wales could lead (e.g., Wales’ ‘Well-being of Future Generations Act’).

• B. Media Campaigns

  • Highlight success stories:

    • Atom Bank: 500% spike in job apps after switching.

    • Pressure Drop Brewing: Sales rose 21% during the UK pilot.

  • Debunk myths (e.g., "It’s only for tech firms" – trials included fish-and-chip shops, recruiters).

• C. Union Partnerships

  • Unite, TUC: Bargain for 4-day clauses in collective agreements (like IG Metall’s deal in Germany).

________________________________________

5. PHASED ROLLOUT PLAN

• Year 1: Mega-Pilot - 5,000+ firms, low-risk public sector teams

• Year 2: Public Sector Adoption - Remaining teams/departments

• Year 3: Legislation - "Right to Request" law, tax incentives

• Year 4: Full Implementation - Norm for 50%+ of workforce

________________________________________

OBSTACLES & SOLUTIONS

• "We Can’t Afford It": Subsidies + productivity gains offset costs (UK pilot firms averaged 1.4% revenue growth).

• Shift Work Barriers: Stagger schedules e.g. 3-day weekends on rotation.

• Political Resistance: This would be a productivity boost (UK is 19% less productive than Germany and shorter hours could close the gap).

________________________________________

WHY IT WOULD WORK

• Evidence: Iceland - 86% of workforce are now on shorter hours; Portugal - trial cut burnout by 40%.

• Demand: 78% of UK workers want a 4-day week (YouGov 2023).

• Global trends: Spain, France, Japan, and California are all testing versions. The UK could become the first G7 country to make the 4-day week mainstream.

TIMELINE 1/2

(Hybrid Incentive Model: Fair, Data-Driven, and Geographically Balanced)

PHASE 1: TURBOCHARGED PILOTS (2029–2030)

POLICY ACTIONS:

• Sliding Scale NI Cuts:

  • Year 1 (2029): 5% NI cut for all pilot participants.

  • Year 2 (2030): 4% cut for new joiners (FOMO effect).

• SME Boost: +1% extra cut for small firms (<250 staff).

• Productivity Bargain: Pilot firms get +0.5% bonus cut if productivity rises 5%+.

• Regional Adjustment:

  • London/Southeast: Base 4% cut (higher wages).

  • North/Wales/NI: 6% cut (5% base + 1% "Levelling Up" bonus).

GOAL:

• Maximize early adoption in diverse sectors/regions.

________________________________________

PHASE 2: RIGHT TO REQUEST & TIERED INCENTIVES (2031–2032)

POLICY ACTIONS:

• 1. "Right to Request" Law Passed:

  • Employees can demand 4-day weeks (32h/100% pay).

  • Employers must justify rejections.

• 2. NI Cuts Become Conditional:

  • Base Rate: 3% cut for compliant firms.

  • Tiered Add-Ons:

    • SMEs: +1% (total 4%).

    • High-Productivity Sectors (tech/finance): –1% (total 2%).

    • Struggling Sectors (retail/care): +2% (total 5%).

  • Regional Bonuses:

    • "Red Wall" areas: +1% (targeted economic revival).

ENFORCEMENT:

• HMRC audits to verify:

  • No pay cuts

  • Genuine productivity efforts e.g. training, automation

GOAL:

• Prevent gaming, prioritize equity.

________________________________________

PHASE 3: UNIVERSAL ADOPTION (2033–2034)

POLICY ACTIONS:

• All UK firms eligible for 2% NI cut if meeting 4-day week standards.

• Productivity bonuses sunsetted as firms should be self-sufficient by now.

• Public sector: NHS, schools, and councils must offer 4-day options with no NI cuts.

FISCAL EXIT RAMP:

• NI cuts taper by 1% per year (2% > 1% in 2035; 1% > 0% in 2036).

GOAL:

• Transition from subsidy-driven to productivity-driven model.

________________________________________

PHASE 4: POST-GDP ECONOMY (2035+)

OUTCOMES:

• 4-day week is the new norm (60%+ workforce coverage).

• Happiness metrics replace GDP in policy audits.

• Global leadership: UK exports "well-being economy" framework.

________________________________________

INCENTIVE STRUCTURE SUMMARY TABLE

• Early Adopter (2024)

  • NI cut adjustment: +5% (sliding scale)

  • Example firm: Tech startup in Manchester

• SME (<250 staff)

  • Adjustment: +1%

  • Example: Family-run restaurant

• High Productivity

  • Adjustment: –1%

  • Example: Investment bank in London

• Struggling Sector

  • Adjustment: +2%

  • Example: Care home in Newcastle

• "Levelling Up" Region

  • Adjustment: +1%

  • Example: Manufacturer in South Wales

________________________________________

WHY IT WORKS

• 1. Behavioural Economics:

  • Early-mover rewards on a sliding scale creates urgency and FOMO.

  • SME and regional bonuses creates fairness.

• 2. Anti-Gaming Safeguards:

  • Productivity audits prevent fake adoption.

• 3. Political Balance:

  • Conservatives get tax cuts and business autonomy.

  • Progressives get improved worker rights and regional equity.

Cost Estimate: £10b–£12b total (2024–2031, but ultimately irrelevant for a currency-issuing government), offset by £6b–£8b in productivity and GDP gains.

________________________________________

ADJUSTABLE LEVERS

• If uptake lags: Extend sliding scale (keep Year 1 rates).

• If inflation spikes: Cap cuts for high-profit sectors.

• 1. Pilot Participation (2029–2030):

  • Early adopters get 5% NI cuts (6% for SMEs).

  • Others get 2% to seed culture change.

• 2. Productivity Bargain (2030 Audit):

  • Firms proving efficiency gains lock in extra cuts.
    

• 3. Right to Request (2031):

  • Non-pilot firms must now comply to access 3%+ tiered cuts.

• 4. Universal Phase (2032–2036):

  • Subsidies fade as the model becomes self-sustaining.

WHY IT WORKS

• Clear triggers (e.g. audits, law passage) prevent chaos.

• Tiered rewards balance speed & fairness.

• Self-weaning subsidies ensure fiscal sustainability.

TIMELINE 2/2

(Electorally Viable, Incentive-Driven, and Sector-Tailored)

YEAR 1 (2029): SHOCK & AWE LAUNCH

POLICY ACTIONS:

• Immediate 4% NI cut for all firms adopting 28h/100% pay.

  • Bonus cuts:

    • +1% for SMEs (less than 250 staff) (total 5%).

    • +1% for "Red Wall" regions (total 5–6%).

• Right to Request Law: Fast-tracked alongside cuts (no delay).

• Public Sector First Movers: NHS, local councils, and Civil Service shift 20% of low-risk staff (IT, admin etc.) to 4-day weeks.

TARGET:

• 15% of UK workforce covered by 2030.

________________________________________

YEAR 2 (2030): CARROTS & STICKS

POLICY ACTIONS:

• Productivity Bargain: Firms proving +5% output get 2-year NI freeze (no taper).

• Penalties: Companies with >50 rejections of 4-day requests face 1% NI surcharge.

• Sectoral Bargains:

  • Tech/Finance: 3% cut (lower due to higher wages).

  • Retail/Care: 7% cut (crisis sectors).

TARGET:

• 35% coverage, including 50% of SMEs.

________________________________________

YEAR 3 (2031): TAPER & SCALE

POLICY ACTIONS:

• NI cuts taper to 3% (base rate), but:

  • Productivity stars keep 5%.

  • Non-adopters lose R&D tax credits.

• Local Councils: Fined if >30% of local workforce lacks 4-day access.

TARGET:

• 55% coverage, including 80% of public sector.

________________________________________

YEAR 4 (2032): HARD DEADLINE

POLICY ACTIONS:

• Mandate for all firms with 250+ staff: Offer 4-day option or pay 1.5x NI rate.

• Job Guarantee: Extra genuine-Living-Wage-level work always available to low-wage 4-day workers.

TARGET:

• 75% coverage with universality in white-collar jobs.

________________________________________

YEAR 5 (2033): LEGACY LOCK-IN

POLICY ACTIONS:

• NI cuts sunset, but:

  • 4-day firms get 2% "happiness tax credit" indefinitely.

• GDP replaced: ONS publishes Wellbeing Growth Rate quarterly.

LEGACY:

• 4-day week = default UK standard, 85%+ adoption.

________________________________________

WHY IT WORKS IN 5 YEARS

• 1. Electoral Maths:

  • Year 1–2: Visible wins (SMEs, NHS) secure re-election.

  • Year 3–4: Opposition can’t roll back entrenched norms.

• 2. Sector Sequencing:

  • Easy wins first (office jobs), then heavy lifting (shift work).

• 3. Fiscal Escape Valve:

  • Tapered cuts fund themselves via productivity boosts.

________________________________________

5-YEAR METRICS

• 2029

  • NI Rate Cut: 5–7%

  • Adoption Target: 15%

  • Key Lever: Shock incentives

• 2030

  • NI Cut: 3–7%

  • Adoption: 35%

  • Lever: Sector deals

• 2031

  • NI Cut: 3–5%

  • Adoption: 55%

  • Lever: Carrot/stick balance

• 2032

  • NI Cut: 0% (mandate)

  • Adoption: 75%

  • Lever: Legal force

• 2033

  • NI Cut: –2% (tax credit)

  • Adoption: 85%+

  • Lever: Cultural lock-in

ANTI-PRICE GOUGING & FAIR PRICING ACT 2029

A BILL TO
Regulate excessive pricing during economic crises, ensure transparency in essential goods pricing, and protect consumers from exploitative practices.

SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS

• 1. "Essential Goods and Services" means:

  • Food, bottled water, and baby formula.

  • Energy (electricity, gas, heating oil).

  • Fuel (petrol, diesel).

  • Medicines and medical equipment.

  • Housing (rental costs).

  • Any other items designated by the Secretary of State.

• 2. "Economic Crisis" means:

  • A declared national emergency (e.g., pandemic, war, major inflation surge).

  • A supply chain disruption lasting 30+ days.

  • A period of inflation exceeding 60%* annually.

    • *60% annual inflation = 4% per month for 12 months:

      Annual Inflation Rate = (1 + 0.04)¹² - 1 = 0.6010 = 60.1%

• 3. "Price Gouging" means:

  • Increasing prices for essential goods/services by 10%+ above pre-crisis levels without a demonstrable increase in supply costs.

  • Engaging in "shrinkflation" (reducing product quantity while maintaining price).

  • Imposing exploitative contract terms (e.g., mid-crisis rent hikes).

SECTION 2: PROHIBITED CONDUCT

• 1. Unjustified Price Increases

  • No seller shall increase prices for essential goods/services by more than 10% (or a variable cap set by the CMA) during an Economic Crisis unless:

    • They prove the increase is directly tied to rising supply costs.

    • The increase is approved by the Price Monitoring Office (PMO).

• 2. Anti-Circumvention Measures

  • Bans "shrinkflation" without clear labeling.

  • Prohibits "predatory bundling" (forcing consumers to buy unnecessary items).

SECTION 3: ENFORCEMENT & PENALTIES

• 1. Price Monitoring Office (PMO)

  • A new regulatory body under the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) to:

    • Track real-time pricing data.

    • Investigate complaints.

    • Issue fines and enforcement orders.

• 2. Penalties

  • First offense: Up to 5% of annual turnover or £500,000 (whichever is higher).

  • Repeat offenses: Temporary trading bans + 10% of turnover.

  • Whistleblower rewards: Individuals reporting violations may receive 10-30% of fines collected.

SECTION 4: TRANSPARENCY & CONSUMER RIGHTS

• 1. Public Price Dashboard

  • The PMO must maintain a live database of essential goods pricing.

  • Retailers with 50+ employees must report price changes weekly.

• 2. "Fair Pricing" Certification

  • Businesses that voluntarily limit price hikes receive:

    • Tax credits.

    • Government procurement priority.

SECTION 5: TRIGGER & SUNSET CLAUSE

• 1. Activation

  • Automatically triggered upon:

    • Declaration of a national emergency.

    • Inflation exceeding 4% for 3 consecutive months.

• 2. Deactivation

  • The above provisions shall deactivate 3 months post-crisis unless extended by Parliament.

SECTION 6: AMENDMENTS TO FIDUCIARY DUTY

• 1. Companies Act 2006 (Amendment)

  • Adds "consumer welfare during crises" to directors’ duties (Section 172).

  • Protects firms from shareholder lawsuits if they prioritize fair pricing over short-term profits.

WHY IT WORKS

• Clear rules define gouging and sets thresholds.

• Strong deterrents in the form of major fines and trading bans.

• Only active during crises.

• Allows justified increases if proven.

BONUS AWARD CRITERIA

• Universal Credit recipients have to demonstrate they meet certain performance metrics such as a specified number of hours applying for jobs, engaging in skills training etc. Those desiring a bonus must submit evidence of their own performance metrics, company profitability etc. to a central system to justify why they deserve their bonus.

  • Issuance will be linked to long-term company stability with criteria including:

    • Multi-Year Vesting Periods: 50-75% of bonus will be deferred over 3-5 years – if the company under-performs or fails, the unpaid portion is forfeited. Bonus to be held as restricted stock that cannot be sold until waiting period is over.

    • Environmental, Social, Governance Targets: Bonuses to be tied to goals like carbon footprint reduction, employee retention rates, debt-to-equity ratios (already in place in Shell, BP, Unilever) rather than share price or annual profits.

    • Failure Penalties: e.g. if layoffs occur; the company goes bankrupt within 5 years; fraud/misconduct is discovered; shareholders lose more than 20% of value due to mismanagement; leakage, pollution, customer service, investment etc targets are not met - any bonus received in the previous 12 months, and any due to be received in the next 12 will be forfeited.

    • Worker & Shareholder Approval: Shareholder votes should be binding, employee representatives should be elected by workers and given a vote on bonus structures.

    • Relative to Worker Pay: Legally capped at 5 times the median employee’s salary.

• UC recipients are forced to wait up to 6 weeks before receiving any money. Therefore, those desiring a bonus must also wait 6 weeks before receiving the portion of the bonus not restricted by the MYVP described above. If performance criteria are later deemed to not be met, the bonus will be reclaimed just like UC is.

• Benefit recipients’ payments are capped at a maximum regardless of their assessed need (£22,020 in London; £18,330 outside London). Bonuses should be taxed in a similar manner e.g. any bonus will be taxed at the top rate of income tax on the entire amount, and will become ineligible for salary sacrifice schemes or charitable donations as a way to reduce tax bills.

• Benefit claimants are regularly audited and punished if fraud is detected. Excessive or unjustified bonuses should be audited by HMRC with penalties for non-compliance.

• Anonymised data on benefit allocations will be published so the public can see how much is allocated to a particular category (UC, PIP, pensions etc.). Bonus issuers will be required to disclose their bonus structures for public scrutiny.

COMMUNITY OWNERSHIP OF PUBS

1. FUNDING & FINANCIAL SUPPORT

• Community Pub Grants: Establish a dedicated fund (similar to the Plunkett Foundation’s support for rural pubs) to help communities buy and renovate struggling pubs.

• Low-Interest Loans: Offer government-backed loans or match-funding schemes for community groups to acquire pubs.

• Business Rates Relief: Extend or increase the current 75% discount for community-owned pubs (currently available in England until 2025).

2. LEGAL & POLICY MEASURES

• Asset of Community Value (ACV) Expansion: Strengthen ACV rules to give communities more time (beyond the current 6 months) to raise funds before a pub is sold.

• Right to Bid/Buy: Allow councils to block the sale or conversion of pubs unless community groups are given first refusal.

• Planning Law Reforms: Make it harder to convert pubs into housing or retail without local approval.

3. SUPPORT FOR COOPERATIVE & COMMUNITY MODELS

• Pub Co-op Development Fund: Provide grants for feasibility studies and business planning for community-run pubs.

• Training & Mentorship: Partner with organizations like the Plunkett Foundation to train locals in running a pub as a cooperative.

• Tax Incentives: Offer capital gains tax relief for owners who sell to community groups rather than developers.

4. PARTNERSHIPS & LOCAL AUTHORITY SUPPORT

• Council-Led Acquisitions: Allow local authorities to purchase at-risk pubs and lease them to community groups.

• Pub Protection Policies: Encourage councils to adopt policies that prioritize pub retention in local plans.

• Crowdfunding Support: Government-backed crowdfunding platforms (like Community Shares) could help raise capital.

5. DIVERSIFICATION & MULTI-USE SPACES

• Multi-Functional Hubs: Encourage pubs to incorporate post offices, libraries, or coworking spaces to boost viability.

• Government Contracts: Allow community pubs to bid for local services (e.g., hosting council meetings or adult education classes).

• Successful Examples:

  • The Old Crown (Hesket Newmarket, Cumbria) – First community-owned pub, saved by locals in 2003.

  • The Ivy House (London) – Saved via ACV status and crowdfunding.

  • The George & Dragon (Hudswell, Yorkshire) – Thrives as a co-op with a shop and library.

CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY & PUBLIC WELL-BEING ACT 2029

SECTION 1: PURPOSE

This Act reforms the fiduciary duties of company directors under the Companies Act 2006 to ensure that businesses operate in a manner that promotes long-term environmental sustainability, social welfare, and equitable stakeholder interests, alongside shareholder value.

SECTION 2: AMENDMENT OF DIRECTORS' DUTIES (COMPANIES ACT 2006)

• (a) Revised Duty to Promote the Success of the Company (s.172) –

  • Directors must act in a way that balances:

    • (i) shareholder interests with those of employees, customers, suppliers, communities, and the environment;

    • (ii) short-term financial returns with long-term sustainability and public welfare.

  • Directors must not prioritise shareholder profits where doing so would cause significant harm to public health, workers’ rights, or the environment.

• (b) New Duty of Environmental & Social Stewardship –

  • Directors must take reasonable steps to minimise negative environmental and social impacts, including climate risks, pollution, and inequality.

• (c) Legal Safeguards –

  • Directors shall not be liable for breach of duty solely for prioritising environmental or social welfare over immediate shareholder returns.

SECTION 3: MANDATORY PUBLIC INTEREST REPORTING

• (a) Enhanced Strategic & Sustainability Reporting –

  • All large companies (as defined by the Companies Act 2006) must include in their annual reports:

    • (i) A Public Impact Statement, detailing environmental (carbon, waste, biodiversity), social (pay ratios, worker conditions), and governance impacts;

    • (ii) A Long-Term Resilience Plan, outlining how the company will adapt to climate change and social risks.

  • These reports must be independently audited by a Financial Reporting Council (FRC)-approved sustainability auditor.

• (b) Alignment with Existing Frameworks –

  • Reporting must comply with the UK Sustainability Disclosure Standards (SDS), derived from ISSB and TCFD guidelines.

SECTION 4: ENFORCEMENT & PENALTIES

• (a) Corporate Responsibility Office (CRO) –

  • A new regulatory body under the Department for Business & Trade (DBT) and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) will:

    • (i) Monitor compliance with this Act;

    • (ii) Investigate complaints of violations;

    • (iii) Impose fines (up to 5% of annual turnover) for false or misleading reporting.

• (b) Citizen & Worker Enforcement –

  • Trade unions, NGOs, and affected individuals may bring claims against companies for breaches of this Act.

SECTION 5: INCENTIVES FOR COMPLIANCE

• (a) Tax Benefits –

  • Companies meeting verified sustainability benchmarks (e.g. B Corp certification, Science-Based Targets) will receive:

    • (i) Reduced corporation tax rates;

    • (ii) Green investment allowances.

• (b) Public Procurement Advantage –

  • Compliant companies will be prioritised in government and local authority contracts.

SECTION 6: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REFORMS

• (a) Worker & Stakeholder Representation –

  • All listed companies must have:

    • (i) At least one employee-elected director on the board;

    • (ii) One independent public interest director (nominated by civil society groups).

• (b) Investor Accountability –

  • Institutional investors (pension funds, asset managers) must disclose how their investments align with UK net-zero and social equity goals.

SECTION 7: SECTOR-SPECIFIC RULES

• (a) High-Impact Industries (Oil, Banking, Fast Fashion, etc.) –

  • Must submit transition plans to align with the UK’s 2050 net-zero target and UN Sustainable Development Goals.

SECTION 8: COMMENCEMENT & TRANSITION

• This Act will come into force six months after Royal Assent with provisions enacted in stages as follows:

  • Revised s.172 Directors’ Duties

    • 6 months after Royal Assent

      • All companies

  • Mandatory Public Impact Reporting

    • 12 months after Royal Assent

      • Large companies (as defined by Companies Act 2006)

    • 24 months after Royal Assent

      • SMEs (fewer than 250 employees, turnover <£36m, balance sheet <£18m)

  • Worker Director Requirement

    • 18 months after Royal Assent

      • FTSE 350 companies

    • 36 months after Royal Assent

      • All other companies with > 250 employees

  • Sector-Specific Transition Plans

    • 12–24 months after Royal Assent (as set by DBT & DEFRA Secretaries of State)

      • High-impact sectors (energy, finance, extractives, fashion, etc.)

• (2) Grace Period for Penalties

  • No financial penalties shall apply for reporting non-compliance in the first 12 months of a provision’s effective date if the company demonstrates good-faith efforts toward implementation.

• (3) Review & Adjustment

  • The Secretaries of State for DBT & DEFRA shall conduct an 18-month review of compliance challenges and may extend deadlines for specific industries by statutory instrument, provided such extensions do not exceed 12 additional months.

• (4) Early Adoption Encouraged

  • Companies may voluntarily comply with any provision ahead of schedule and shall receive expedited tax incentives for doing so.

CREDIT REFORMS IN UK BANKING

1. REFORM CREDIT SCORING BY BROADENING DATA SOURCES

Problem: Traditional credit scores exclude many reliable borrowers (e.g. renters, young people, immigrants).

Solutions:

• Mandate "Open Banking" for Credit Assessments

  • Include real-time data on rent, utilities, council tax, and even savings habits (with consumer consent).

  • Example: Credit Karma already uses some alternative data.

• Recognize "Non-Financial" Reputation

  • Allow community references (e.g., employer, landlord, or local credit unions to vouch for reliability).

  • Inspired by historical "5 Cs of Credit" (Character, Capacity, Capital, Collateral, Conditions).

2. INTRODUCE RISK-SHARING LENDING MODELS

Problem: High-risk borrowers face extortionate APRs (e.g., payday loans at 1,000%+).

Solutions:

• Profit-sharing loans for small businesses, banks earn returns only if the business succeeds.

• Lease-to-own for mortgages/vehicles, no interest, just gradual ownership transfer.

• Community Microfinance

  • Expand credit unions (e.g., London Mutual Credit Union) offering low-cost loans with social underwriting.

• A State-owned retail bank along the lines of New Zealand’s Kiwibank that offers mortgages, loans, credit cards, and savings – forced private banks to lower fees and improve service.

  • Could offer loans at wholesale rates, lower APRs and limited mid-contract interest rate adjustments.

  • More options available for borrowers that suffer financial hardship – aim to not repossess where possible

3. STRICTER USURY LAWS & APR CAPS

Problem: The UK has no strict APR cap (unlike the EU’s 10–25% limits in many countries).

Solutions:

• Cap APRs at 25% maximum (including fees)

  • Scotland already caps payday loans at 0.8% daily interest (~292% APR which is still high but better than England’s unlimited).

• Ban "Fee Harassment"#

  • Prohibit excessive late fees (as in the EU’s Consumer Credit Directive).

4. FAST-TRACK CREDIT REPAIR FOR RESPONSIBLE BORROWERS

Problem: A single missed payment can ruin credit for years.

Solutions:

• "Clean Slate" Rule

  • Wipe defaults after 12 months of good behaviour instead of the current 6 years.

• "Credit Rehab" Loans

  • Government-backed low-interest loans to help rebuild credit (similar to US Credit Builder Loans).

5. ETHICAL UNDERWRITING: BAN PREDATORY LENDING

Problem: Banks profit from debt traps (e.g., overdraft fees, high-cost short-term credit).

Solutions:

• Force Banks to Assess "Affordability, Not Just Credit Score"

  • Require income/expense checks for all loans (as with UK mortgage rules).

• Ban Loans for Gambling/Payday Lenders – Like Islamic finance’s ethical screens.

6. PUBLIC BANKING ALTERNATIVES

Problem: Commercial banks prioritize profits over fairness.

Solutions:

• Expand "Post Office Banking" – Offer low-cost loans via public infrastructure.

• Local Authority Lending – Councils could provide emergency loans (like the UK’s "Household Support Fund" but structured as credit).

7. TRANSPARENCY & FINANCIAL EDUCATION

Problem: Many borrowers don’t understand loan terms.

Solutions:

• Standardised "Loan Facts" Labels

  • Like food nutrition labels, showing APR, total cost, and risk.

• Ban teaser rates on financial products

  • Interest rate must remain the same throughout the product's lifecycle.

• No upfront fees (however worded or disguised) on financial products

  • Borrowers should be given the term of the loan and an interest rate, resulting in a cleaner and simpler system.

• Methodology for calculating interest rates should not arbitrarily change on debt products for the duration of the customer lifecycle.

  • Stops lenders raising rates after a year because their models have magically decided the borrower is now a higher risk, or because they simply just want more money from them.

• Mandatory "Cooling-Off Periods"

  • 3-day wait for high-cost loans (as with EU consumer credit rules).

POTENTIAL CHALLENGES

• Banks will claim improvements reduce profitability.

• Open banking must be opt-in only to protect personal data and privacy.

• Risk-sharing models require regulatory adjustments which might be complex.

CONCLUSION: A FAIRER CREDIT SYSTEM

• By combining alternative credit scoring, APR caps, risk-sharing, and public banking, we could reduce exploitation while keeping credit accessible.

• Our goal: Lending that serves people, not just profits.

FINES PROPORTIONAL TO INCOME

THE PROPORTIONAL FINES ACT 2029

This Act shall replace fixed fines with income-based penalties for certain offenses, ensuring fairness and deterrence across all income levels.

SECTION 1: SCOPE OF THE LAW

• Applicable Offenses:

  • Traffic violations (speeding, parking)

  • Public order offenses (littering, noise violations)

  • Low-level criminal fines (e.g. petty theft, minor environmental breaches)

• Exclusions:

  • Custodial sentences (already judge-discretionary)

  • Corporate fines (separate rules for businesses)

SECTION 2: CALCULATION METHOD

• Base Fine = Daily Disposable Income × Fine Units

  • Daily Disposable Income (DDI):

    • Calculated as (net annual income – essential living costs) ÷ 365

    • HMRC shall provides real-time income data, with privacy safeguards.

  • Fine Units:

    • Minor offenses: 1–5 days’ income

    • Serious offenses: 5–20 days’ income

    • Caps: Minimum (£10 per day) and maximum (£100,000 per day).

SECTION 3: ENFORCEMENT

• Automated System:

  • Police/courts input offense severity and the system calculates appropriate fine using HMRC data.

  • Defendant can submit alternative income proof (e.g. if self-employed).

• Appeals Process:

  • Disputes over income assessments go to a tribunal.

SECTION 4: PILOT PHASE (3 YEARS)

• Test in:

  • Scotland, which is already exploring similar ideas.

  • English cities (e.g. London, Manchester).

• The pilot scheme shall evaluate:

  • Compliance rates

  • Public perception

  • Revenue neutrality (vs. current fixed fines)

SECTION 5: SAFEGUARDS & PUBLIC TRUST

• An online calculator shall be available for self-checking potential fines, ensuring transparency.

• There shall be anti-avoidance rules to penalise those hiding income.

• Protection for low-income offenders to ensure justice is served without causing undue hardship.

SECTION 6: BENEFITS

• It's fair: A £100 fine hurts a cleaner more than a CEO, this fixes that.

• A bigger deterrent for high earners who can’t now treat fines as 'parking fees'.

• It's popular: Polls show most Brits back income-adjusted fines.

FUEL PRICE PASS-THROUGH ACT 2029

SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS

In this Act:

• "designated fuel" means unleaded petrol and diesel fuel intended for road use;

• "forecourt price" means the retail price per litre including VAT;

• "major retailer" means any business operating 10 or more fuel retail outlets in the UK;

• "wholesale price" means the daily Platts European benchmark price plus applicable transport costs;

• "pass-through period" means 48 hours for major retailers or 72 hours for other retailers.

SECTION 2: DUTY TO PASS ON WHOLESALE PRICE REDUCTIONS

• (1) Where the 7-day rolling average wholesale price of a designated fuel decreases by 2% or more, retailers must reduce forecourt prices by no less than 80% of such decrease within the pass-through period.

• (2) Where the decrease exceeds 5%, the required pass-through increases to 90%.

• (3) The Secretary of State may by regulations adjust these thresholds following consultation with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

SECTION 3: MONITORING & REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

• (1) All major retailers must submit daily reports to OFGEM/a new Energy Prices Regulatory Authority (EPRA) containing:

  • (a) Current forecourt prices at each outlet;

  • (b) Wholesale purchase costs for the preceding 24 hours;

  • (c) Any factors preventing price adjustments.

• (2) OFGEM/EPRA shall maintain a publicly accessible dashboard displaying:

  • (a) Current wholesale and retail price trends;

  • (b) Compliance performance by retailer.

SECTION 4: ENFORCEMENT

• (1) OFGEM/EPRA may impose financial penalties not exceeding the greater of:

  • (a) 1% of daily UK revenue for first violations; or

  • (b) 5% of daily UK revenue for repeat violations.

• (2) Persistent offenders (3+ violations in 12 months) may be subject to a 14-day price freeze order.

SECTION 5: WINDFALL PROFIT CHARGE

• (1) Where any retailer maintains margins exceeding 10p per litre for 10 consecutive days during periods of wholesale price decline, a charge of 15% shall apply to excess profits.

• (2) The charge increases to 30% for subsequent occurrences within the same financial year.

SECTION 6: EXEMPTIONS & SPECIAL CASES

• (1) This Act does not apply to:

  • (a) Retailers operating fewer than 10 outlets in the UK who shall have 72 hours to comply.

  • (b) Sales in designated remote areas (see Schedule 3) that shall have 96 hours to comply;

  • (c) Periods where Brent crude prices fluctuate more than 10% in 48 hours.

• (2) Retailers may apply for temporary exemptions due to:

  • (a) Supply chain disruptions;

  • (b) Fixed-price supply contracts.

SECTION 7: REVIEW

• (1) The Secretary of State shall commission an independent review of this Act's operation within 18 months of commencement.

SECTION 8: COMMENCEMENT & EXTENT

• (1) This Act comes into force six months after Royal Assent.

• (2) This Act extends to England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

SCHEDULE 1 - PRICE REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

[Detailed specifications for data submission formats and timelines]

SCHEDULE 2 - CALCULATION METHODOLOGY

[Formulas for determining rolling averages and pass-through percentages]

SCHEDULE 3 - DESIGNATED REMOTE AREAS

[List of postcode areas qualifying for extended deadlines]

EXPLANATORY NOTES

This Bill creates a regulatory framework to ensure reductions in wholesale fuel prices are promptly passed through to consumers, while maintaining flexibility for retailers during periods of exceptional volatility. The hybrid approach combines mandatory pass-through requirements with windfall profit disincentives, supported by enhanced price transparency measures.

FINANCIAL EFFECTS

• £300m - £500m annual consumer savings from faster price reductions

• £50m - £100m annual windfall charge revenue

• £15m setup costs for EPRA monitoring system

MAXIMUM SALARY RATIO OF 10:1

• A 10:1 ratio ties executive pay to the well-being of their lowest-paid staff, preventing excessive profit accumulation at the top.

• Capping executive pay incentivises bosses to raise staff pay so they can also receive an increase. Being forced to raise employee pay means better living standards for the employees.

• Bosses have a stronger incentive to improve the company’s overall performance which promotes teamwork, cohesion, loyalty, productivity, and shared purpose, rather than prioritising short-term goals like stock boosts or personal bonuses.

• Excessive executive pay is often funded from stock buybacks, accounting trickery, or cost-cutting which harms the long-term growth of the company. Limiting their pay would promote reinvestment in wages, training and innovating instead of funnelling the excess value of your work to people who did nothing to earn it.

• There is precedent for pay ratios. Japan currently has a 20:1 ratio and the United States had a similar pay ratio in the 1950s and 1960s.

• A cap would not deter top talent, just those only motivated by greed. 10 times the median salary is c. £350,000. If that isn’t enough for someone, then they need to see a psychiatrist.

MODERN MONETARY THEORY BASIC PRINCIPLES

• MMT is not an ideology or regime that a country can move to. It is a lens for analysing and understanding how modern economies work today, the capacities of a currency-issuing government, and the myths used to suppress those capacities and limit policy options. It is not inherently left-wing or right-wing and requires one to overlay their personal values on to this understanding. Governments/politicians of either persuasion with an understanding of MMT will come up with very different policy prescriptions as a result.

• Any government that issues its own currency, owns their own central bank, has a floating exchange rate for the currency, and does not issue debt denominated in foreign currencies is never financially constrained and can never go bankrupt because they create new money via the act of spending which, in a modern economy, is done by the debiting of the government’s bank account and the crediting of others.

• Because the government holds a monopoly on money creation as a consequence of it owning the central bank (retail banks also create money but they require a licence to operate from the government, therefore they are acting as agents of the State), it does not have to fund its spending beforehand by collecting taxes or borrowing from financial markets. Indeed, it is physically and logically impossible for taxpayers to pay tax until they have acquired the government’s money in the first place, just like it is impossible to drain a bath until it has first been filled, or for a football stadium to collect tickets from supporters until it has issued them.

• The limit of government spending is therefore not financial/monetary limits, but the limits of the productive capacity of the economy i.e. how many real resources there are available to buy. Trying to buy more than is available would likely cause inflation to rise because the economy is running at full capacity. The government should either stop spending at this point or increase taxation to free up more resources for public use.

• Taxation has many purposes, primarily to create demand for the currency by requiring taxpayers to obtain it in order to settle their tax liabilities to the government, but also to control inflation by offsetting previous spending, free up resources for public consumption by reducing the spending power of the private sector, and influencing consumer behaviour.

• Government debts and deficits are not inherently bad because they add net assets to the private sector, and surpluses are not inherently good as they do the opposite and drain assets from the private sector. This is because of the principle that one entity’s spending is another’s income and therefore all transactions must sum back to zero – e.g. if the government spends £100 and taxes back £50 in a year, the private sector is left with £50 in savings. The ‘national debt’ that the media scaremongers about can therefore also be thought of as ‘national savings’. Eliminating the national debt also means necessarily eliminating the national savings on the other side of the national ledger i.e. taking away your savings.

• The unemployment rate is the deliberate result of government policy and insufficient levels of public spending because demand levels have not been maximised to the point where all idle labour has been hired. The government can either try to increase its spending to the point where the private sector hires all workers that are looking for a job, or it can hire those workers on to a Job Guarantee programme doing socially-beneficial work in their local communities for a genuine living wage.

• The Job Guarantee is a key MMT concept because labour is a cost to the private sector which they rightfully try to minimise as much as possible, so obtaining full employment via simply increasing spending may not be possible. MMT argues the government should then act as the employer-of-last-resort by offering jobs to anyone who wants to work and cannot find employment elsewhere, preventing that person from experiencing financial ruin.

• A Job Guarantee acts as an inflation stabiliser by operating counter-cyclically to the economic cycle, allowing inflating sectors to lower demand levels by reducing their workforces which causes the Job Guarantee workforce to expand, and rehire them in boom periods causing the JG workforce to shrink, thereby acting as the equivalent of a thermostat for the economy. Spending goes up when the economy is cold, and down when it is hot. The spending on JG work is targeted exactly where it is needed and for the exact time it is needed so there is no waste. Anyone who is unemployed/underemployed does not have to fear falling into poverty and can continue to consume at their usual level which keeps prices and demand stable. It allows full employment without inflation, which the traditional Phillips Curve/NAIRU policy of fighting inflation by increasing unemployment does not do.

• The payment for Job Guarantee work will always be set at the minimum level required for workers to receive a genuine living wage and no higher. This ensures it does not compete with the public and private sectors for staff, making it easy for those sectors to hire people back when demand in their sector picks up again.

• Currency-issuing governments do not need to ‘borrow’ from financial markets because they create new money when they spend. Financial markets, in fact, borrow from the government as they are currency users in order to buy the bonds in the first place. When a government issues debt in the form of gilts/bonds, they do so to help them manage interest rates by adding or draining reserves from accounts held by banks at the central bank.

• As mentioned above, retail banks also create money in the form of credit and loans. However, they do not loan out the savings of others to create these new deposits. When a new loan is approved, the loan amount is credited to the borrower’s account and the bank then acquires the equivalent number of reserves either through inter-bank lending or from the central bank directly to cover themselves. Loans therefore create deposits, not the other way around, as confirmed by the Bank of England in 2014. This means the money supply is ultimately not controlled by the government, but by the private sector’s demand for credit and their creditworthiness.

• Regarding trade, imports are a benefit and exports are a cost. Imports are the result of exporters sending the importing nation real resources that the exporting nation could use to improve its own standard of living but chooses not to do so. The real wealth of a nation is everything it produces and keeps for itself, plus imports, minus what it must export. If a nation wants to export cars to us, and they are happy to accept our money in return, we are the winners in that trade. We have received a material good that we can use to improve our lives while the exporter has received money that settles their account and can only be spent within our country at some point in the future. Everyone is happy with the arrangement otherwise the trade would not have happened. Therefore we can consider Sterling to be an export good in its own right.

REPLACING ENTERPRISE ZONES WITH LAUNCHPADS

• Class U (Universities):

  • Businesses will be encouraged to hire students on a part-time basis which gets them into good jobs and focuses their attention on the future, while teaching them practical skills that apply in the real world alongside their academic work.

  • Students will receive a Class-U income tax exemption for any part-time salary up to £15,000 during their studies, and 50% for 1 year after graduation if they stay employed with the same company.

  • Work must be carried out locally to the university (no remote or from another city).

  • Companies will get a business rates rebate up to 25% of student’s salary.

  • The job cannot be menial or manual work.

  • Universities will get a new Launchpad funding round from the government to encourage them to integrate it into the curriculum to make university education less theoretical and more applied so students learn skills they will need in the real world of work.

  • After graduation, any student on a Class U programme will get access to special Class U mortgages and car loans, with mortgage risk (including negative amortisation) underwritten for the lenders by the government, and rules on past income verification relaxed. With car loans (up to £30,000), 50% of the risk will be covered by government to the lender.

  • Shall also apply to students who start their own companies to encourage them to continue their work.

• Class M (Manufacturing): 8-mile radius around Belfast, Bradford, Doncaster, Dundee, Glasgow, Hull, Middlesbrough, Newport, Scunthorpe, Sheffield, Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, and Wrexham. These are all historic manufacturing locations with existing infrastructure but have been in decline.

  • Manufacturing premises will receive a 50% discount on business rates if they set up within the zone.

  • Industrial areas meeting requirements on a minimum number of manufacturing employees will also have childcare facilities on site and 50% of the cost of these will be subsidised by the government to encourage parents into work in a seamless manner. Local education schemes or the Job Guarantee can train the necessary staff for anyone wanting to work in childcare.

  • The government will offer manufacturers 0% loans to install large-capacity battery deployments so they can use power at lower net rates and not have to shut down at peak usage times.

  • Superfast fibre will be provided to all premises within 2 years.

  • Apprentices will be exempted from income tax for one year and get a 50% exemption in the 2nd year (per person, not per job) to help young people get their first job, car, deposit etc. and capped to a total income of £35,000 to prevent high-earners being classed as apprentices by the owner.

  • One condition on receiving the above benefits is that they must stamp ‘Made In [City]’ on their products so the scheme is marketed worldwide.

• Both Classes will receive an additional 10% exemption on business rates for 5 years.

• Participating companies within these launchpads whose turnover is less than £2m will be eligible for a Launchpad Tax Offset:

  • Can use the sum of all income taxes paid by the employees and the net VAT, business rates, and any other applicable taxes paid by the business can be used to offset corporation tax liability.

    • Example: Turnover of £1m with net profit of £200,000, employing 5 staff paying £60,000 in tax per year, business rates are £20k and net VAT is £10k - £90,000 out of that £200,000 would not be subject to corporation tax.

STATE-OWNED RETAIL BANK

OBJECTIVE

• To provide affordable, ethical, and accessible financial services while fostering competition in the UK banking sector.

SECTION 1: OVERVIEW

• A state-owned retail bank, operated in the public interest, would offer low-cost loans, mortgages, and savings products to individuals and SMEs, reducing reliance on profit-driven commercial banks. Drawing from successful models like Kiwibank (NZ), Sparkassen (Germany), and NS&I (UK), this institution would prioritize financial inclusion, fair pricing, and economic stability.

KEY GOALS:

• Provide lower interest rates on loans/mortgages than private banks.

• Offer ethical alternatives to high-cost credit (e.g., payday loans).

• Increase competition, forcing private banks to improve terms.

• Reinvest profits into public services or financial literacy programs.

SECTION 2: GOVERNANCE & STRUCTURE

• A. Legal Form & Ownership

  • Wholly owned by HM Treasury (similar to NS&I), with operational independence.

  • Oversight by the Financial Conduct Authority & Prudential Regulation Authority to ensure regulatory compliance.

• B. Delivery Channels

  • Digital-first platform (app/online) for efficiency.

  • Branch network via Post Offices (4,000+ locations) for accessibility.

  • Partnerships with credit unions for local underwriting.

• C. Funding Model

  • Initial capital: £2–5bn from Treasury (repaid via profits).

  • Deposit-taking: Offers competitive savings rates to attract retail deposits.

  • Wholesale funding: Government-backed bonds at low rates.

SECTION 3: CORE PRODUCTS & SERVICES

• Mortgages

  • Key Features: Fixed rates (3, 5, 10, 20 years), up to 100%* LTV; no early repayment penalties.

  • Target Group: First-time buyers, low-income households.

• Personal Loans

  • Feature: APR capped at 10–15%, unsecured (up to £15k) and secured options.

  • Target: Those excluded by high-cost lenders.

• Business Loans

  • Feature: Low-interest SME loans (3–7% p.a.) with local authority guarantees.

  • Target: Small businesses and startups.

• Basic Banking

  • Feature: Fee-free current accounts; no overdraft charges (only pre-agreed interest).

  • Target: Financially vulnerable users.

SECTION 4: CONSUMER PROTECTIONS & RISK MANAGEMENT

• A. Responsible Lending Rules

  • Debt-to-income (DTI) caps (e.g. max 40% of income for loan repayments).

  • No punitive fees (e.g. late payments capped at £5).

  • Mandatory financial health checks before loan approval.

• B. Default & Hardship Policies

  • 6-month payment pauses for unemployed/ill borrowers.

  • Debt restructuring instead of immediate collections.

  • Write-offs for extreme hardship cases (subject to independent review).

• C. Taxpayer Safeguards

  • Risk-sharing with private insurers for large loans.

  • Conservative underwriting (e.g., income verification, asset checks).

SECTION 5: EXPECTED IMPACTS

• A. For Consumers

  • Savings of £500–£1,000 per year for the average borrower vs. private lenders.

  • 1.5m+ under-served Brits gain access to fair credit.

• B. For the Market

  • Private banks pressured to lower rates and fees (as seen with Kiwibank in NZ).

  • Reduced reliance on payday lenders (Wonga-style APR exploitation).

• C. Fiscal & Economic Benefits

  • Profits can be reinvested into public services (est. £200m+ per year after 5 years).

  • Job creation (5,000+ roles in banking and financial technology).

SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION

• Phase 1 (Year 1): Set up legal framework, Treasury funding, pilot digital platform.

• Phase 2 (Year 2): Launch basic products (savings accounts, personal loans) via Post Offices.

• Phase 3 (Year 3): Expand to mortgages, SME lending, and nationwide rollout.

SECTION 7: POLITICAL & INDUSTRY CONSIDERATIONS

• Arguments for:

  • Aligns with "levelling up" and consumer protection agendas.

  • Popular with voters.

• Counterarguments & Mitigations:

  • "Market distortion" - Markets operate in the environment we give them, not the other way around. If the public elect a government promising market alterations, that is their prerogative.

  • "Taxpayer risk" - Taxpayers don't fund anything in a fiat currency system.

SECTION 8: CONCLUSION

• A UK state-owned retail bank would break the dominance of profit-driven lenders and offer fairer finance. By leveraging the Post Office network and digital innovation, it could become a cornerstone of inclusive economic growth.

*ADDENDUM: SHOULD THE BANK OFFER 100% LTV MORTGAGES?

1. The Current Landscape: Why 100% LTV Mortgages Vanished

Historically, UK banks offered 100% loan-to-value (LTV) mortgages (no deposit required), but these largely disappeared after the 2008 financial crisis due to:

• Risk of negative equity - If house prices fall, borrowers owe more than their home is worth.

• Regulatory tightening - The Mortgage Market Review (2014) forced stricter affordability checks.

• Bank capital rules - Lenders must hold more reserves against high-LTV loans, making them costly.

Today, only a few niche products exist (e.g., Barclays Springboard, Northern Ireland’s Co-Ownership Scheme), but most require:

• A family guarantor (e.g., Lloyds’ "Lend a Hand").

• Higher interest rates (~5-6% vs. ~4% for 90% LTV).

2. Our Case for a State-Backed 100% LTV Mortgage

A state-owned bank could reintroduce 100% mortgages responsibly by:

• Mitigating Risks:

  • Price Stability Clause: Limit eligibility to regions with stable/rising prices (e.g., exclude speculative markets).

  • Income-Linked Repayments: Ensure borrowers’ monthly payments never exceed 35% of disposable income.

  • Shared Equity Option: The bank retains a 5-10% stake, reducing losses if sold at a loss.

• Targeting the Right Borrowers:

  • First-time buyers with strong credit but no deposit (e.g., young workers trapped in renting).

  • Public sector workers (teachers, nurses) in high-demand areas.

• Economic Justification:

  • Break the renter trap: Help 2.6m UK renters who can afford repayments but not deposits.

  • Stimulate construction: Demand could incentivize more housing supply.

3. Potential Downsides & Safeguards

• Negative equity

  • Require 5-year minimum ownership before selling (to ride out downturns).

• Defaults

  • Use government-backed insurance (like Canada’s CMHC).

• Market distortion

  • Cap volume (e.g. max 5,000 loans per year) to avoid overheating.

4. International Precedents

• Netherlands (NHG Scheme): 100% mortgages guaranteed by the state (defaults covered by a national fund).

• Canada (CMHC): Insures high-LTV loans, keeping rates low.

• France (Prêt à Taux Zéro): Interest-free loans for first-time buyers.

5. Proposal: Pilot a "Deposit-Free Mortgage" Scheme

Eligibility Criteria:

• Minimum 2 years’ residency in the UK.

• Credit score > 650 (low risk of default).

• Stable income (e.g., 2+ years in current job).

Loan Terms:

• Fixed rate for 5 years (e.g. 4.5%, slightly above 90% LTV rates).

• Shared appreciation: Bank takes 10% of any price gains upon sale.

Pilot Phase:

• Test in stable markets (e.g. Scotland, Midlands) with 1,000 loans.

• Monitor defaults/equity risks before scaling.

6. Conclusion

A state-owned bank could responsibly revive 100% LTV mortgages, but only with strict safeguards to protect borrowers. By learning from past mistakes and international models, the UK could bridge the deposit gap without recreating 2008’s risks.

WELL-BEING & HAPPINESS INDEX TO REPLACE GDP

1. BHUTAN - GROSS NATIONAL HAPPINESS

• Bhutan measures progress through GNH, based on four pillars: sustainable development, cultural preservation, environmental conservation, and good governance.

• Policies are evaluated based on their impact on happiness (e.g., banning plastic bags, maintaining forest cover, free education/healthcare).

• Results:

  • High levels of reported life satisfaction despite low GDP.

  • One of the few carbon-negative countries in the world.

________________________________________

2. NEW ZEALAND - WELL-BEING BUDGETING

• Since 2019, NZ’s government budgets are structured around five well-being priorities: mental health, child poverty, Māori & Pacific Islanders' well-being, digital inclusion, and climate change.

• Every spending decision must prove its impact on well-being (e.g., increased mental health funding, school lunches for poor children).

• Results:

  • Reduced child poverty rates.

  • Increased mental health accessibility.

________________________________________

3. ICELAND - STRONG WORK-LIFE BALANCE & GENDER EQUALITY

• Prioritizes gender equality, parental leave, and shorter workweeks.

• Heavy investment in community resilience (e.g., after the 2008 crash, Iceland focused on social recovery over pure economic growth).

• Results:

  • Ranked among the happiest countries (World Happiness Report).

  • 86% of fathers take paternity leave, reducing stress on families.

________________________________________

4. WALES - WELL-BEING OF FUTURE GENERATIONS ACT

• Legally requires all public bodies to align policies with 7 well-being goals (e.g. reducing inequality, sustainable living).

• A Future Generations Commissioner holds the government accountable.

• Results:

  • Shifted infrastructure spending toward green energy and social housing.

________________________________________

5. FINLAND - HAPPINESS AS POLICY

• Free education, healthcare, strong social trust.

• Experimental policies like universal basic income trials (2017-2018) to reduce stress.

• Results:

  • Consistently ranks #1 in World Happiness Report.

________________________________________

6. COSTA RICA - HIGH WELL-BEING, LOW GDP

• Abolished its military in 1949, redirecting funds to education, healthcare, and eco-tourism.

• Measures success via Happy Planet Index (combines well-being, life expectancy, and sustainability).

• Results:

  • Higher life satisfaction than many wealthier nations.

  • 99% renewable energy use.

________________________________________

7. UK – NATIONAL WELL-BEING DASHBOARD

• The dashboard monitors well-being using 10 broad domains, including:

  • Personal well-being (life satisfaction, happiness, anxiety)

  • Health

  • Relationships

  • Education & skills

  • Work & finances

  • Housing

  • Environment

  • Governance & trust

  • Personal security

  • Economic well-being

• Data Sources

  • The ONS collects data from surveys like the Annual Population Survey (APS) and other official statistics to assess trends over time.

• Purpose

  • To inform policy decisions by focusing on long-term well-being rather than just economic growth (GDP).

  • To provide a holistic view of societal progress.

• Results:

  • 1. Personal Well-being (Life Satisfaction, Happiness, Anxiety)

    • Life satisfaction and happiness have remained relatively stable since 2021 but are still below pre-pandemic (2019) levels.

    • Anxiety levels rose during the pandemic and have not fully recovered, with younger adults (16-29) reporting higher anxiety than older groups.

    • Key stats (2023):

      • Average life satisfaction: 7.5 out of 10 (similar to 2022).

      • People reporting high anxiety: 20.3% (up from 18.9% in 2019).

  • 2. Health & Mental Well-being

    • Mental health has worsened since the pandemic, particularly among young people and women.

    • Economic strain (cost of living crisis) is impacting well-being, with lower-income households reporting higher stress.

    • Key stat:

      • 1 in 6 adults (16%) experienced moderate to severe depressive symptoms in 2023.

  • 3. Work & Finances

    • Unemployment is low, but job quality (e.g., job security, pay satisfaction) affects well-being.

    • Cost of living crisis is a major concern:

    • 45% of adults reported difficulty affording energy bills (2023).

    • Lower-income households saw the biggest drop in financial well-being.

  • 4. Relationships & Community

    • Loneliness remains a challenge, particularly among older adults and young renters.

    • Expensive housing results in people being unable to buy and being unable to start a family. If people are unable to own property and have a stake in society, they will feel like they have nothing to lose which is bad for stability.

    • Trust in government has declined since 2020 (linked to political instability and scandals).

  • 5. Environment & Green Spaces

    • Access to nature boosts well-being, but disparities exist (urban vs. rural areas).

    • Climate anxiety is rising, especially among younger generations.

  • 6. Economic Well-being vs. Personal Well-being

    • GDP growth has been weak, but well-being metrics show that economic recovery doesn’t always mean happier citizens.

    • Inequality persists: The richest 20% report much higher life satisfaction than the poorest 20%.

• Policy Implications

  • The UK government is under pressure to focus more on mental health support, affordable housing, and income inequality in policy decisions.

  • Some experts argue for a "well-being economy" approach like New Zealand’s model.

SUBSCRIBE

Subscribe to our mailing list to hear about news and policy announcements