Kelly Edwards’ Post

This week at Instinctif our ‘Navigating Labour’ team hosted a dinner roundtable with CEOs and communications peers from leading financial services organisations to discuss, debate and share insights on what a Labour Government would mean for the industry. 💡 Our key takeaways 🌟 Labour’s big push will be the growth agenda needed to meet its fiscal and policy ambitions; the key question was what is the role of business in helping to realise this. 🌟 A Labour government will be focused on setting the ‘tram tracks’ for business to follow and then expect business to take the heavy load on delivering, particularly through unlocking capital. 🌟 Labour will be most open to engagement that focusses on delivering clear solutions and working with government, rather than ‘complaining’ without solutions. 🌟 Under Keir Starmer, there is greater recognition of business and the role it can play. 🌟 Questions may be asked of regulators and whether they are listening and engaging to all of the industry. If you are starting to think about what a Labour Government will mean for your business and how you could engage with them, do reach out to us at [email protected]. #Policy #LabourGovernment #Politics #Labour 

Was great to be part of our Navigating Labour for financial services event this week. 💡 Our key takeaways 🌟 Labour’s big push will be the growth agenda needed to meet its fiscal and policy ambitions; the key question was what is the role of business in helping to realise this. 🌟 A Labour government will be focused on setting the ‘tram tracks’ for business to follow and then expect business to take the heavy load on delivering, particularly through unlocking capital. 🌟 Labour will be most open to engagement that focusses on delivering clear solutions and working with government, rather than ‘complaining’ without solutions. 🌟 Under Keir Starmer, there is greater recognition of business and the role it can play. 🌟 Questions may be asked of regulators and whether they are listening and engaging to all of the industry.

What's Capturing My Interest: Labour Govt observations: https://lnkd.in/eg3mh4yN I think this podcast is worth a listen. And for those in the planning realm clocking the potential observations - for our own intel gathering. I am thinking: - the observations about "turning up to a knife fight with a water pistol" are very interesting (re: Downing Street COMMS team commentary) - the observation that it's a long time since Labour were an incoming Government and are the recent comms mishaps a result of that? The points around turning up equipped with right weapons are pertinent, I think, as we in planning digest the depth and breath of reform being discussed. (For example, I am concerned that there may be a risky game of buckaroo going on. If schemes are loaded up too high (with affordable housing, BNG, the need to have every report under the sun etc, plus site specific costs (like for example brownfield remediation costs, flooding becoming ever more crucial to work through more predetermination) then an unviable scheme = a dead in the water scheme*. I'm concerned how much I am hearing about the cogs of development not turning ATM or turning slowly in terms of some sectors of the market (some areas of resi, BtR) due to the amalgamation of issues affecting viability. So it will be interesting to see, post NPPF finalisation, if we see the cogs turning sensibly again.) - Finally, I'm concerned that if planning changes are made too quick / rashly/ without full and insightful consideration, it won't speed things up but will just add more complexity to an already infinitely complex system. So a plea to take stakeholders / communities / society with you on the 'reform journey' so that reform does produce speedier delivery. Please give concerns and practical implications due consideration. Trust needs to be built and earned. Meaningful engagement can produce a stronger scheme. Take this approach. I get the need for speed but a plea for intelligent reform building on the best of our acquired knowledge. Then trust with key stakeholders is built on the way so there are shared goals. Do this concurrently with 'turning up armed with the right weapons'. It's a tough gig out there - it's important to know the full landscape. (It's somewhat back to these 2018 observations**) (More on the viability point here* https://lnkd.in/eY2-U-56) (More on Collaboration here** See my featured article- taking a collaborative approach) #planning #bewareofbuckarooeffect

Labour’s first 100 days: a strategic policy success? We asked eight experts - Dr Hillary Briffa, William Freer, Robert Johnson, Timothy Less, Paul Mason, Victoria Vdovychenko, Mann Virdee and Richard Whitman - in today's Big Ask✍️ You can read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/eKXkzXyM #BritainsWorld #BigAsk

Still catching up(!) before the onslaught of Zooms, in-person meetings and the rest of working life returns tomorrow. I have enjoyed reading "People First, always" a manifesto for the next Government's engagement with the digital as a means to improve public services. It has been written by Dr. Natalie Byrom, Rachel Coldicutt and Sarah Gold and is packed with excellent ideas which should be read by everyone planning on making things better by using technology. In my field of civil justice reform I commend this important paper to those on the Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC) and those newly-appointed to the 2 sub-committees of the OPRC, of whose names we eagerly await announcement. 🔊 "People first, always" is a manifesto for change which, crucially, includes proposals about costs and how to pay those costs. To the extent the authors' proposals rely on Government funding I doubt they will find support. The next few years will be filled with boosting the economy with little, if any, of that money available for measures like those proposed. Although! Look at how a Ministry of Justice UK team, led by the very able Antonia Romeo, secured more money for Justice in the name of public productivity - a key theme of "People first, always". 💡 Their treatment of the travails of Government technology procurement is familiar but always worth reading, Martin Medforth. 📢 A proposed investment of £240m by UK Research and Innovation into a National Office of Technology Innovation (over 5 years) is definitely on the zeitgeist of much thinking at present, Martha de la Roche and Richard Susskind. Whether a more sustainable, aka reliable, funding mechanism is needed is something that is also under consideration. 🛡 The concept of trust in technology and data is another important idea this paper explores. It is especially important as that trust in data will be(should be??) at the heart of the new pre-action reforms which bring immense opportunity for empirical reform - a first in civil justice reform. I gently point out that data-led reform has been demanded since the 1850s but we may, just may, have a chance, if we seize it, to deliver empirical evidence led reform in the last half of the 2020s? Thank you to the authors (and their contributors) for these invaluable ideas. Let's see if we can make change happen. Christina Blacklaws (she/her) Rahim Shamji DDRS Masood Ahmed Bryan Clark Sue Prince Diana Wallis Clare Carter Law for Life (Advicenow) The Access to Justice Foundation #a2j #data #legaltechnology #legaltech #odr #change

Yesterday was Labour Day. After months of intense work pressure, I was grateful to have the day off—to take a pause and to reflect. As a public policy consultant, I am deeply committed to scrutinising policy initiatives and taxpayer-funded programmes to ensure they deliver real outcomes and genuine value. My role involves detailed data analysis and sense making—tasks that are as critical as they are demanding. The hours are long, the pressure from constant deadlines is intense, but the potential to drive meaningful change makes it all worthwhile. However, I see two troubling trends: clients demanding 'more for less' and setting unrealistic deadlines. Amid financial constraints, some public sector clients are compelled to seek more work within increasingly tight budgets. Let's be clear: this is not 'value for money' for the public sector; its a false economy that imposes costs on society—costs absorbed by self-employed consultants like myself and businesses. This de facto unpaid labour undermines the very principles of equity and respect for labour that should underpin all public service work. Moreover, setting unrealistic deadlines is not a sign of efficiency; rather, it demonstrates a lack of understanding of what it takes to produce thorough, meaningful and impactful analyses. Such practices can (and often do) lead to burnout and a decline in the quality of work—exactly opposite to the intended goal of any public sector project aiming for excellence and accountability. In a context of growing complexity and mounting societal challenges, cutting budgets and timelines for the evidence and insights needed to inform policymaking is counterproductive. True value for money is derived from respect for labour and realistic project goals that allow for high-quality work. Do you encounter similar issues in your area of work? How do you deal with these challenges? I’d love to hear your thoughts and experiences. Image generated by AI. #LabourDay #PublicPolicy #ValueForMoney #PolicyAnalysis

Are the public ready for change to a more innovative public sector? The COMMENTS section on this article make for for fascinating reading!! Quite a few people today have celebrated the announcement of a change in agenda of the UK public services to foster more creative thinking in public innovation in public services. For many of us in linkedin land who have worked in an with the public sector we couldn't agree more. I see so many people who love this new intiaitive. However, judging by the general publics comments on this article, there is fear and distrust of the very concept. 😖 They see it as a betrayal of the idea of public service. 🙃 They don't think the government understand business. 😕 They dont want 'risky' public services. 🤑 They worry it is the government selling out. 🧐 They think it's just government talk and will amount for nothing. What do you think? Do you think the public are correct? How can we change the narrative about this change? If the public don't understand how what chance that the changes will be implemented as intended if the public sector don't understand it either? https://lnkd.in/e3d6WVa2

If you are passionate about the growth and success of mid-sized businesses in today's dynamic market environment like I am, you might find this an interesting read. The new research findings from Grant Thornton highlight the impressive resilience and productivity of mid-sized businesses over the past six years and showcase ways in which we can support and empower these often overlooked but vital contributors to economic prosperity. Read the full article here – https://lnkd.in/eMxjx3SR #MidsizeBusinesses #Productivity #EconomicGrowth

Now the dust has settled - it’s time we get down to business. I was really pleased to get the opportunity to share with The Times my view of the post-election landscape and how business’ relationship with government needs to evolve. If we’re serious about growth, we need to be serious about how we all work towards it. Our PwC UK research shows business is up for the challenge. If you read this article I’d love to hear your thoughts. #IndustrialStrategy https://lnkd.in/eRaDQC33

Is the new UK government short of ideas? Labour's cautious campaign strategy has paid off. But the problems are big - if Starmer and his team don't have a few tricks up their sleeve, we are right to worry. Yet there is one reform that could touch (almost) everything the government does - which is not about killer policy ideas, but about the entire philosophy of governing. It is to focus less on 'what to do', and more on 'how to do it'. To illustrate just how important the 'how' is, we just need to look at what recent government failures have in common. The academic Christopher Hood defined three imperatives for public servants: keep it efficient, keep it fair, keep it resilient. For almost 50 years we've been favouring efficiency over fairness and resilience, and the chickens have finally come home to roost: the Windrush scandal, the Post Office scandal, Partygate, the water companies; NHS waiting lists over 7 million. What does this focus on efficiency feel like? It's a mix of powerful managers, performance metrics, incentives linked to 'results', more competition, use of PR and cost-cutting. When Hood wrote about this approach (called 'New Public Management') in 1991, it was already 15 years old, and already under constant attack. The good news is there a mass of ideas that seem to be coalescing into a new 'how'. The new how emphasises devolving power, restoring discretion at the frontline, listening to service users, allocating resources collaboratively, opening up decision-making and using relationships as the foundational currency of public service delivery. James Plunkett has called this the 'radical how' and written lots on it, most recently here: https://lnkd.in/gRyzhyPi. I've put some of my own contributions in the comments - all of which owe a great debt to other leaders of these ideas, including Polly Mackenzie who I work with at University of the Arts London. These ideas aren't new, but they have so far failed to displace (or even counterbalance) the old way. The intellectual scaffolding is there and it gives the ideas legitimacy, but that's not enough. For a new approach to prevail, what is needed is more disruptors *within the system*, and for those disruptors to win the argument with evidence that their way is better. Has the moment come? We don't know yet. I work in a large public bureaucracy which bears the sucker marks of the old way, and I hope to be part of bringing the evidence of how to do it the new way. And at UAL I have all the intellectual heft I could want - the principles of service design are foundational to the new 'how' and we teach them to hundreds of people each year. Image credit: UAL Graphic Communication Design alumna Samantha Leung