The report 'London schooling: lessons from the capital' measures the academic attainment of pupils with similar characteristics (the same income background, ethnicity, language and gender) across London and the rest of England.
It concludes that London's pupils are achieving better-than-expected results at most ages and levels of attainment. That is, pupils in the capital at Key Stage 1 (ages 5-7) are performing no better or worse than those in other regions of England, but then start to pull away from their non-London counterparts at Key Stage 2 (7-11), with the results gap remaining at Key Stage 4 (14-16).
Download the full report.
Click here to view table showing pupil performance by English local authority.
"This study underlines an argument we have been consistently making. Deprivation need not be destiny. There are some superb state schools in disadvantaged areas generating fantastic results, such as Mossbourne Academy in Hackney or Burlington Danes in Hammersmith."
- Rt Hon Michael Gove MP, Secretary of State for Education
In Budget 2011, George Osborne announced that the government will be piloting Community Land Auctions, an idea first put forward by Tim Leunig in 2007.
The report 'Community land auctions: working towards implementation' sets out this idea in more detail. It uses real figures from developers to show that in the south east, where housing is most needed, Community Land Auctions would raise at least £45,000 per house for the community that allowed them to be built.
CentreForum believes that this step-change in incentives will persuade people to back more housing in their area, rather than oppose it.
Download the full report.
"Land auctions are a radical way to change the community's incentives toward accepting development. It's time to test their practical value."
- Kate Barker, Chair of the UK Government Barker Review of Housing Supply
"Tim Leunig’s proposals would be a major step forward to solving land supply problems and give the community a real incentive to welcome development"
- Sir Stuart Lipton, Deputy chairman of Chelsfield Partners LLP and founding chairman of the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE)
"Innovative and essential"
- Martin Wolf CBE, chief economics commentator, FT
"The economics are clear that Britain needs more houses, but reforms to the planning system have been consistently blocked by politics. Tim Leunig’s proposals show how to cut the Gordian knot."
- Professor John van Reenan, London School of Economics
"In real terms the Swiss have had stable house prices for 40 years; Swiss local authorities get real tax incentives to encourage them to allow building. The Swiss also have a strong economy. Tim Leunig’s highly original but simple idea could inject real incentives into house building in Britain. Maybe our economy could become more Swiss!"
- Professor Paul Cheshire, London School of Economics
"Were it not for arbitrary planning constraints, Britain would get the house building it desperately needs. Tim Leunig’s pathbreaking work shows how to remove the planning logjam without providing unearned windfall profits for existing landowners."
- Chris Giles, Economics Editor, FT
"Tim Leunig makes a compelling case that Community Land Auctions are both desirable and feasible"
- Professor Paul Klemperer, leading UK auctions expert, Oxford University
"The best idea for growth"
- Sir Samuel Brittan, economic commentator, FT
"Tim Leunig’s analysis is typically excellent. He has played a key role in highlighting current planning failure."
- Alex Morton, Policy Exchange
"The significance of this proposal is that it creates a mechanism for capturing the rises in land value that come with the granting of planning permission. As such it is a very valuable contribution to the housing debate."
- Anna Minton, author 'Ground Control'
"In the UK, all methods of expressing economic preferences on land-use planning issues are completely excluded by our planning system. This has disastrous results from the point of view of those who cannot afford housing and unsatisfactory results from the point of view of preserving environmental amenities. This proposal is an important attempt to rectify this long-standing defect."
- Professor Philip Booth, IEA
"A major step forward in making us a better housed nation"
- Professor Stephen Nickell, Office of Budget Responsibility and former head of the National House Planning Advisory Unit
"Britain’s housing shortage clearly needs some radical solutions. Dr Tim Leunig always argues his case very powerfully, and in this instance makes innovative and challenging proposals about how the problem could be solved."
- Trudi Elliott CBE, Chief Executive of the Royal Town Planning Institute
"Community land auctions offer a promising alternative, capturing for the local community value created through the planning system."
- Andy Hull, Senior Research Fellow, IPPR
This report compares the success of Public Sector Research Establishments (PSREs) that are privately owned or operated with those still in public hands. It finds that
- privately owned or operated PSREs are particularly effective in employing technology transfer at the heart of their business models to drive profitable growth and increase employment.
- the main difference in performance between government owned, government operated (GOGO) establishments and those now in the private sector is financial and organisational. One GOGO laboratory (Forensic Science Service) has made significant losses in a highly competitive market, and is due to close in 2012. By contrast, privatised laboratories like LGC and QinetiQ have grown strongly and profitably since privatisation.
- the success of some of the privatised establishments, and to some extent those under private management, stems directly from the removal of public sector operating constraints including slow decision making, high overheads and a lack of access to capital.
- removing these constraints would yield value for money benefits and savings. However, CentreForum believes some activities need to remain in the public sector for reasons of security and the need for impartiality.
- there is evidence that former public sector scientists were positive and enthusiastic about furthering their careers in the private sector.
- clarity about the advice and services government needs from public sector research establishments is key to getting the best performance from them, but this clarity has not always been present.
Conditions in the 1930s were very similar to those found today: interest rates were already low, the government deficit needed to come down, and the world economy was in disarray. Yet the UK economy grew by almost 20 per cent between 1933 and 1937. This success was built on the government announcing that prices would rise and interest rates would remain low, which gave consumers and firms confidence to borrow and spend. This in turn stimulated the economy.
Today, Britain is in the same position and needs to achieve the same result. In a new report for CentreForum, Professor Nicholas Crafts looks at what the government did then – and what we can learn from history...
Download the full report.
The tax relief permitted on pension lump sums disproportionately benefits the wealthy at taxpayers’ expense. The result is a regressive system where those with the most generous entitlements also receive the highest rate of tax relief. At a time when the public finances are under strain wealthy individuals are able to shelter considerable amounts of pension income from the tax system.
This report proposes that those individuals taking lump sums above the higher rate tax threshold (£42,475) should have to pay tax analogous to income tax at the higher rate. This would mitigate the regressive outputs of the current pension system whilst ensuring that the average pensioner can still benefit from the flexibility that a tax-free lump sum provides at retirement.
Download the full report.
"A close inspection of this issue is long overdue. Tax relief on pensions must not be ring-fenced from efforts to make the overall tax system fairer."
- Lord Newby, Co-chair of the Liberal Democrat Treasury Parliamentary Policy Committee