Tag Archives: Government

The Warm Homes Plan and the government’s green agenda

GK’s Hugo Tuckett examines the government’s publication of its Warm Homes Plan and what it means for the government’s green agenda

January 2026 saw the publication of the government’s long-awaited Warm Homes Plan. The plan, which is backed by £15 billion of funding and was originally due for publication in 2025, represents the sum of the measures that the government believes will deliver on its commitment to lower household energy bills by £300 over the course of this parliament (2024-29). It is also one of the government’s most entrenched policies, dating back to Labour’s time in opposition when Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves announced in 2021 that a future Labour government would deliver billions of pounds worth of new funding to support upgrades to the UK’s green infrastructure.

The Warm Homes Plan seeks to deliver a significant expansion of solar panels and heat pumps, marking a departure from previous efforts to improve the insulation of homes. Despite its original billing to improve households’ energy efficiency, the final publication of the plan sets out the energy secretary Ed Miliband’s ambition to deliver a ‘rooftop revolution’ and includes a range of measures designed to support a much greater uptake of solar panels. This has led to some concern amongst charity and industry groups who have warned that shifting to clean heat and electricity generation (including heat pumps and solar panels) before dealing with the scale of draughty homes is only going to lead to an increase in bills in the short term. It does though demonstrate the government’s shift in approach from seeking to reduce household energy consumption to increasing energy generation from renewable sources.

Ministers are eager for households to adopt a range of green measures to substantially lower bills and, in some cases, deliver ‘zero-bill’ households. The government’s thesis is that investing in the roll out of new technologies now, including heat pumps, will drive down costs further in the medium-to-long term. It also becomes much cheaper and more efficient to use a heat pump when combined with battery storage systems and solar panels. Critics will say that the government should be thinking much more radically about how it plans to rebalance the levies on energy, so that it can bring down the cost of electricity for all if it really wants to see people make the shift from gas to electricity. Aside from the government reiterating its decision to remove £150 worth of levies from energy bills through the abolition of the Energy Company Obligation (ECO), this plan does not tackle that more intractable problem.

The funding included in the plan is predominantly aimed at low-income households, but there is some financial support available to all homes. The plan will administer £4.4 billion in grants to low income households and social landlords. This will include fully funded upgrade schemes, including solar and heat pumps, depending on the assessment of the building. It will also establish a £5.3 billion Warm Homes Fund which will be available to all households. This includes £2 billion in low-and-no-interest consumer loans and £2.7 billion for innovative finance products in the home upgrade system. The government aims to upgrade five million homes by 2030 and lift one million homes out of fuel poverty through the plan, which will be overseen by a new government body, the Warm Homes Agency.

The publication of the plan is a significant moment for the government and for energy secretary Ed Miliband. Despite previous climbdowns on the amount of funding that would be made available to support the government’s green agenda, Miliband has deftly navigated both HM Treasury and the Cabinet to retain a sizeable portion of funding to deliver on his ambitions in the sector when other departments are experiencing real-terms cuts. As the 2029 general election approaches, there will be real pressure on the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero to deliver on the ambitions of the plan, which sits in an area of public policy where the government will be hoping to draw a clear dividing line with Reform UK. The government has spent a lot of its first 18 months in power talking up its efforts to boost the UK’s green credentials and lower household energy bills – now it’s all about delivery.

GK Look Ahead: Health and Social Care Policy

GK Strategy is pleased to share its ‘Look Ahead’ report which sets out some of the key health policy and regulatory trends to watch out for in 2026.

The report includes insights from GK Strategic Adviser Steve Brine on the government’s policy plans for health sub-sectors, such as dentistry and community pharmacy. Steve is a former Health Minister and was Chair of the Health and Social Care Select Committee.

The report can be accessed here: https://gkstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/GK-Look-Ahead-Health-and-Social-Care-Policy-January-2026.pdf

Risk-based or sector led? How we can expect the government to regulate AI

Elon Musk’s AI chatbot, Grok, has received significant backlash in recent weeks after its ability to create sexualised images of women and children generated widespread media headlines.  The scale of the public outcry has sharpened concerns about how quickly AI capabilities are outpacing existing safeguards. This has increased pressure on the government to more stringently regulate AI, which is reshaping industries at an unprecedented pace, bringing both opportunities and risks.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer previously suggested that the government would move away from the last Conservative administration’s ‘pro-innovation regulatory framework’ for AI, as set out in its white paper on AI published in 2023. Instead, Starmer has publicly emphasised the need for an overarching regulatory framework with additional protections in specific areas. He has also expressed concerns about the potential risks and impacts of AI, while acknowledging its transformative potential for society. In January 2025, the government published its AI Opportunities Action Plan, which set out its ambitions to use AI to ‘turbocharge’ economic growth and create AI growth zones to speed up planning processes for AI infrastructure.

The government’s approach to AI differs from the EU’s risk-based framework, which classifies AI systems into four categories: unacceptable risk, high risk, limited risk, and minimal risk. Each category has a different set of regulations and requirements for organisations developing or using AI systems. UK-based organisations with operations in the EU or those deploying AI systems within the bloc are likely to fall under the jurisdiction of the EU AI Act, requiring UK organisations to keep abreast of legislative changes and any potential future misalignments between the UK and EU in this area.

Although Starmer has pledged to turn the UK into an ‘AI superpower’, ministers have so far struggled to find the right balance between regulation and harnessing AI’s economic potential. At the end of 2024, the government proposed relaxing copyright laws to allow developers to train AI models on any material they can legally access. The plans received widespread criticism from creatives and high-profile musicians who would be required to opt-out of having their work used. Ministers have since acknowledged that the move was misguided and announced that the associated legislation would be delayed while they develop a more extensive policy framework.

It is likely that we will see new legislation announced in the form of an AI and Copyright Bill at the King’s speech, which is due to take place in May 2026. This presents an opportunity for businesses to engage with the government at a key stage of the policymaking process.

The legislation is likely to focus on safety, copyright protections, and transparency. The government has been clear that it does not want to introduce measures that could drive AI investment out of the UK. Appearing before the Digital and Communications Committee in January 2026, technology secretary Liz Kendall stated that many of the larger AI companies are opposed to ‘onerous burdens’, suggesting the government is likely to adopt a cautious approach in its efforts to more stringently regulate AI to avoid deterring potential investment in the UK.

This means we can expect the government to attempt to tread a line between the EU’s risk-based framework and the deregulatory approach taken in the US in order to strike the right balance between innovation and oversight. Despite both the EU and UK focussing on principles such as accountability and transparency, the diverging approaches observed so far in practice mean a consistent approach to the regulation of AI is unlikely, at least in the near term.

If you would like to discuss AI regulation in more detail, please reach out to Annabelle Black at annabelle@gkstrategy.com.

Beyond the battlefield: Britain’s drone strategy as a lever for economic growth

Lessons from the battlefields of Ukraine, combined with rapid technological innovation, have pushed drones firmly into the centre of UK defence policy. Yet, the implications of this shift extend far beyond military capability and the defence sector. By scaling domestic manufacturing and considering drone technology within wider growth strategies, there is potential to unlock growth across many sectors in the UK economy.

The pace of technological development seen in Ukraine has demonstrated how quickly drone capability can evolve when innovation is tested under real-world conditions. Low-cost drones, AI-driven autonomous systems, and advanced first-person view drones have challenged traditional defence strategies. For the UK, this has underscored the importance of building domestic drone capability to enhance national security.

To build these capabilities, the Ministry of Defence’s 2024 Defence Drone Strategy and 2025 Defence Industrial Strategy set out a vision that includes drones as a central component of military capability. This has been reinforced by the 2025 Strategic Defence Review, in which the government recognised that drones will be central to future conflicts and outlines its ambition to support innovation and growth in the drones sector.

For defence contractors, the implications are immediate. The government’s desire to deliver progress at pace on these strategies means that businesses that can demonstrate resilient and tested technologies are positioned to win contracts. However, the effects of this industrial strategy will be felt far beyond defence, with these moves creating large spillover effects to the civilian drone market.  Defence procurement can help firms scale production, de-risk investment, and move more quickly into civilian markets. In addition, many of the technologies that are useful as defence capabilities will assist in commercial settings. For instance, advanced first-person view drones will allow drones to be used more easily for law enforcement and infrastructure inspection. Counter-drone technologies also have clear commercial value, Systems developed to detect and neutralise hostile drones can be deployed to protect airports, prisons, critical national infrastructure, and other sensitive sites.

Together, these applications illustrate how defence-led innovation can unlock the sector’s wider economic potential – estimated by government-commissioned analysis to reach up to £103 billion by 2050, as we highlighted in our recent article. This demonstrates the scale of the commercial opportunities now emerging for businesses and investors, as technologies initially developed for defence are increasingly able to scale into regulated civilian markets, supported by a growing ambition within government to be a world-leader in drone technology.

However, despite this opportunity, risks remain. Defence procurement is politically sensitive and shifts in budget priorities over the course of a parliament could constrain investment. This means that businesses must continue to engage with government to reduce regulatory barriers to create a favourable regulatory environment. Businesses who engage with the government’s existing work on regulatory innovation and help government understand where other challenges exist will reap the benefits of the UK’s focus on the drones sector.

If you’d like to discuss the drones sector and related policy in more detail, please reach out to Jacob on Jacob.walsh@gkstrategy.com

Tiny Humans, Big Lessons: Early years under Labour a year on

GK’s Thea Southwell Reeves examines how Labour has placed early years at the heart of its social mobility agenda by focusing on high-quality, education-led provision.

 

Early years is a priority for government and has been since it first entered office last year. High quality early years education is a cornerstone of the equal opportunities ‘mission’ to break the link between a child’s background and their future success. Bridget Phillipson had championed early years long before the election and the appointment of the first ever early years minister was an indication of the priority it would have in the new Department for Education (DfE).

Although several of Labour’s early years policies have continued the work of previous governments, this government’s key ideological shift is away from seeing childcare as simply an economic issue to a focus on the provision of high-quality early education as a driver of social mobility. Addressing regional gaps in childcare provision known as ‘childcare deserts’ is fundamental to this, as is increasing the focus on quality to close the growing disadvantage gap in school readiness.

During its first year, the government’s priority has been implementing the final stages of the funding entitlements roll outs, which were completed this month. Now, eligible working parents of children aged 9 months to 5 years are entitled to 30 hours of funding per week. Overall, the expansion of funding has driven demand for spaces. The government had set a target of creating 85,000 new early years childcare places by September 2025 to support the roll out of funding expansions. It is not yet clear whether this target has been met, butInitial analysis suggests that most of this additional capacity has been concentrated in areas where provision already exists rather than creating new capacity in childcare deserts.

The government’s schools-based nurseries programme is designed to focus new provision in disadvantaged areas with 189 of the 300 government-funded new or expanded in-school settings opening this month. About 10% of school-based nursery provision is delivered by a PVI partnership. The second phase of funding is now open for applications and is prioritising high quality bids from schools in the most disadvantaged communities.

What’s next for early years?

The funding rates to deliver the government-funded childcare have always been contentious, with the industry maintaining that the funding simply does not reflect the true cost of provision. This has led many providers to use additional charges to ‘top up’ their income but the government has pushed back on this, revising the guidance around chargeable extras earlier this year. In its new strategy for the sector, published in July, the DfE announced a full review of early years funding, including the merits of national funding formulae. It will consult on proposals by summer 2026 and businesses should be monitoring and contributing to this process. The strategy also includes plans to increase the funding available to providers to support children with SEND and improve the way funding is allocated as part of the government’s wider reforms to the SEND system. More detail will be set out on this in the schools white paper this autumn.

The early years strategy, for the first time, raises DfE concerns about a rise in large providers backed by private equity. These providers, according to DfE, ‘are less likely to operate in deprived areas…and over time this can result in price rises and disruption to services.’ At the heart of this is a concern about market exits that could destabilise regional childcare provision. Policymakers will continue to monitor the financial sustainability of the early years market and may take further steps to increase market transparency if appropriate. This could include measures like those being taken in adult or children’s social care, such as a financial oversight mechanism. For businesses and investors, monitoring the development of this policy thinking and engaging with the policymaking process is vital to minimising any risk associated with such policy change, as well as realising commercial opportunities.

If you’d like to discuss early years policy in more detail please reach out to Thea on thea@gkstrategy.com

Why building 1.5 million homes isn’t as simple as it sounds….

Building 1.5 million new homes over the course of this parliament was a flagship policy commitment in Labour’s general election manifesto. The recently appointed housing secretary Steve Reed initially echoed the government’s ambition with the slogan ‘build baby build’. Reed has gone onto say the rate of construction is ‘unacceptable’ and has promised to increase the pace of housebuilding to deliver on Labour’s ambitious pre-election pledge.

The housing industry is facing a series of skills shortages. The Office for National Statistics warned that there are over 35,000 job vacancies in construction, many of which remain unfilled due to a lack of qualified workers. The Construction Industry Training Board (CITB) has stated that 61,000 new workers are needed each year to meet the government’s housebuilding target. Ministers have heard the calls of the CITB and in March announced that they would be investing up to £600 million to support training in the construction sector. This includes £165 million to help colleges deliver more construction courses and £40 million to support new foundation apprenticeships (launched in August). The £40 million includes an incentive of £2,000 per foundation apprentice hired and retained by employers which has been widely welcomed by the construction industry. The government has signalled that there could be continued investment, although this is likely to be restricted due to the current pressure on the public finances.

Another hurdle is the planning process. The number of new homes built in the UK has fallen during the government’s first year in office. Ministers have conceded there are ‘excessive rules’ delaying construction. The government is attempting to streamline the planning process through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill which is currently before parliament. Ministers claim that the bill will create a more decisive planning system and increase the amount of land available for developers. Whilst the bill is a step in the right direction, the impact is unlikely to be immediate.

Despite these barriers, there are some clear opportunities for the construction sector. Increases to training investment, new apprenticeships and the promise of reforms all signal the government’s continued prioritisation of the sector. The changing environment and the development of a potential second planning bill present stakeholders with a wide range of opportunities to engage with policymakers, shape regulation and improve relations between the government and sector.