4 min read13 min

What does a major capital city with no children look like? It’s a question policymakers in London are reckoning with.

The figures are stark. Reception pupil numbers have fallen in the capital since 2016, while Year 7 numbers have been declining since 2019. Around 90 schools have closed or merged in London over the last five years – and the decline shows no sign of slowing.

The birthrate is falling faster here than anywhere else in the country. London was also the only English region to see its population decline last year, according to recent Office for National Statistics figures. Outside the Covid pandemic, it was the first time London’s population had declined since the 1980s.

People’s decisions to leave or not have children in the capital are varied, but London’s affordability crisis is well known. On average, rent takes up around half of a worker’s income, while the housing ladder can feel impenetrable for first-time buyers. Coupled with soaring everyday costs, it’s no wonder many feel they cannot put down roots here.

Fewer children mean fewer pupils. For state schools, which are funded by government on a per-pupil basis, this can ultimately mean closures.

It’s easy to get lost in the numbers. But falling pupil numbers and school closures affect children, parents, staff and entire communities. I’ve seen how disorientating closures can be, leaving children and families feeling displaced and staff facing redundancy.

I’ve also seen the dedication of borough and school colleagues across London in supporting families and staff through these challenging experiences.

Local authorities have proved resourceful in using their existing powers to respond to falling pupil numbers.

For schools facing closure, mergers are often a solution and, with the right support, can help children integrate fully into their new school.

When St Mary’s CofE Primary School closed in Hackney last year, many pupils transferred to nearby St Matthias CofE Primary School. Before enrolling, St Mary’s children attended playtimes, lunchtimes and “meet the teacher” sessions at St Matthias, allowing friendships to form naturally. This phased transition was crucial to helping pupils and families adjust.

Falling pupil numbers have also left schools with empty classrooms and buildings. Boroughs are finding new uses for this space. In Hammersmith and Fulham, the council leased spare space to private and community organisations, generating more than £100,000 a year for one host school.

Rising demand for special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision means surplus space can also create opportunities. In Bexley, 122 new SEND places across nine local schools have been created, saving an estimated £8m by reducing reliance on costly out-of-area placements.

In Croydon, spare capacity now supports a unit helping asylum-seeking children settle into mainstream education.

These examples show what boroughs can achieve. But the closure process remains unnecessarily bureaucratic, unbalanced and opaque for families. Consultations for local-authority maintained schools can take up to six months, prolonging uncertainty. Conversely, families at academies are only notified once a closure decision has been made, leaving little opportunity to have their say.

London Councils, representing all London boroughs, is calling on the Department for Education to equalise the closure process across all school types, creating a more consistent, efficient and fairer system.

Councils should also have greater powers to decide how surplus school premises are used, avoiding unnecessary government approval delays and reducing the time buildings remain empty.

This is an opportunity for government to meaningfully deliver on its mission to rewire the state. Councils have the relationships and expertise to manage falling pupil numbers and resulting mergers or closures. Trusting them is central to what devolution can look like in practice.

Falling pupil numbers are here to stay. The response must be compassionate and collaborative, with children, parents and staff at its heart.

Una O’Halloran is the Labour leader of Islington Council and London Councils’ Executive Member for Children and Education 

This is what it looks like, if you’ve ever wondered.

It’s the police’s own version of a seven-hour “no comment” interview.

Let’s just remind ourselves of that letter of 20 August, because it was a pretty significant and serious piece of professional correspondence to have been tossed away in three sentences.

To which the response of Police Scotland – a public service paid for by, and theoretically answerable to, the people of Scotland – is essentially “Meh, whatever”. The sheer lack of respect, the lazy contempt, not for Wings or even our lawyer but for the electorate who pay their wages, is frankly nauseating. They couldn’t even be bothered to deliver it within the 14 days.

The reply leaves pretty much no option but to go ahead with applying for the judicial review, which our legal team is now working on. It’s a complicated process of several stages but we’ll keep you posted as it develops. (We may need to call on you for some support, but that remains to be seen.)

The one thing that’s certain is that Scotland deserves better than this, and if nobody but us is going to act to make that happen, then so be it.

Bonny Downs Community Association, in London, has been helping their local area since 1998

“We all have charities in our constituencies that are doing the most amazing work” said Andy Burnham as he set out the ‘Direction of Government’ during his first day in the Commons as Prime Minister. He continued, “My agenda is all about putting power in the hands of people at the community level, so that they can drive changes that are right for them.”

Civil society is critical in the shift towards greater local control and decision making in public services. Since entering office, ministers have rightly recognised that voluntary, community, faith, charity and social enterprise organisations (VCSEs) have the expertise, local knowledge and trusted relationships needed to tackle some of the country’s most pressing social challenges. As the government pursues devolution and greater public power, it is right that VCSEs are seen as central to these ambitions. They strengthen communities, foster belonging and provide vital neighbourhood services, often remaining when others have withdrawn.

Investing in the buildings from which these organisations operate is therefore critical to delivering the government’s ambitions. These community assets are essential infrastructure, yet many face high energy costs and poor energy efficiency. The Warm Homes Fund presents an opportunity to address this, helping community buildings become warmer, more efficient and more financially sustainable, strengthening the places and public services communities depend on.

Locally led change

The sector’s greatest strength lies in its deep roots within local communities. Government research found that more than 75 per cent of VCSE organisations deliver services in the communities where they are based, giving them an unrivalled understanding of local needs, and challenges. This close connection enables them to respond quickly, tailor services to local circumstances and engage people who might otherwise fall through the cracks of traditional provision.

As a result, VCSE organisations play a vital role in supporting some of the most vulnerable people in society. Across homelessness, employability, health and social care, disability support and countless other areas, they provide trusted services that are rooted in lived experience and long-standing community relationships.

Evidence clearly shows that investing in community organisations can generate significant returns for both society and the economy, too. Research by Social Investment Business on the Futurebuilders Fund found a clear relationship between investment in voluntary organisations and improved local outcomes. Areas receiving over £3 million of investment recorded Gross Value Added (GVA) levels 42 per cent higher than comparable areas without investment, while levels of deprivation improved by 12 per cent. Even smaller investments generated measurable benefits, with areas receiving more than £500,000 experiencing GVA growth 14 per cent higher than comparable communities.

These findings reinforce a simple but important principle: investment in civil society is not merely a social good, it is an investment in economic growth, prevention and resilience. Strong community organisations can help address problems early, reducing pressure on public services and limiting the need for more costly interventions later.

At the heart of communities

At the heart of this success are community buildings. Community centres, village halls, faith buildings, youth hubs and multi-purpose facilities provide the physical foundation from which civil society operates. Their value extends far beyond the activities they host. They act as neighbourhood anchors, bringing people together, creating a sense of place and providing some of the few genuinely accessible and inclusive spaces remaining in many communities. In many deprived areas, they are among the last shared civic spaces where residents can connect, access support and participate in community life.

Yet the long-term sustainability of community buildings is at risk. Research from Social Investment Business suggests that rising asset disposals from local authorities is associated with increased charity closures, and the rising pressure of energy costs and low energy efficiency is putting charity budgets under severe strain. Indeed, community spaces are some of the least efficient buildings in the country, with bills surging by 12 per cent since the start of the Iran war. When a community building closes, the consequences extend far beyond the loss of a physical asset. Services disappear, volunteers are lost, social connections weaken and residents can be left without vital sources of support.

Civil society is central to the government’s ambitions to end homelessness, improve outcomes empower local communities, and renew public services. To harness this potential fully, we must support not only the organisations themselves but also the infrastructure they depend on. Investing in them is therefore not an optional extra. It is a necessary condition for delivering stronger communities, more effective public services and sustainable local growth. The Warm Homes Fund provides an oven-ready route to strengthening the viability and sustainability of these buildings for the next generation.

3 min read20 min

As the hard deadline of the 28 October Budget approaches, despite a recent uptick in the opinion polls, the spectre of another fall in support cannot be ruled out.

Enter our latest research, which finds that a Labour manifesto commitment to full European Union membership would secure the most support from across the electoral coalition voters the Prime Minister must persuade to back him at the next general election.

The public have repeatedly made clear that they support far stronger ties with our closest allies and partners in the EU, on everything from trade to travel and defence, and will resoundingly reward parties who take the plunge.

This week, fresh polling by YouGov, commissioned by Best for Britain, and endorsed by former Labour leader, Lord Neil Kinnock, Burnham’s long-time mentor, and ex-European Commission vice president, both quantifies that support and makes the next step wholly unambiguous.

Committing to rejoining the EU in Labour’s next manifesto is vital for the party’s chances at the next general election.

Our research shows that it would significantly boost enthusiasm and inclination to vote for the party by a full 7 per cent across all voters in Great Britain (10K+ GB adults). British Future’s recent research added to the evidence base that the public wants the government to go beyond Keir Starmer’s ‘red lines’ on Europe. Our findings, based on clear data, take it further. It’s there in black and white – and red all over. 

There’s another reason that now is the time for bold action.

As Kinnock rightly highlights, “increasing numbers of people across Britain already know [this] to be the patriotic course”. On Monday, when the first ministers of the UK’s three devolved nations, including Plaid Cymru leader Rhun ap Iorwerth, signed a memorandum at Cardiff Castle, including the powerful commitment that “the future of their nations belong in the European Union”, the son of Tredegar made the unifying case. The argument for repairing the unnecessary damage caused by Brexit, for every person across all four nations of the UK. Not only that, but for Labour to lead the way, as both “public opinion and world realities make this advance essential”. Hear, hear. 

What’s more, the irrefutable growth case has also been set out in an independent econometric study by Frontier Economics, demonstrating that restoring our membership of the world’s largest, and our nearest, trading bloc can deliver a £92bn boost to the UK’s GDP, at the barest minimum, concentrated in the former industrial and manufacturing heartlands Burnham’s roots lie so deeply within. This is a route that can no longer be avoided, overlooked, or ignored. 

The siren calls – from crypto-cash funded populism and identity-driven nationalism – are all too real. The risks of dwindling public consent following a Budget feeding frenzy, coupled with emptying arms stores and public services running on fumes, are equally so.

But with a fair wind, for once, behind them, and an open goal in front, Burnham’s team must recognise that a narrow window of opportunity exists. A natural, likeable ‘every bloke’ with the necessary deftness to carry the country through a course correction occupies the highest office in the land, and is winning hearts and minds. A clear and conclusive path forward does exist which addresses both the political and economic conundrums the PM is confronted with, and can begin to right the wrongs of the past decade.  

It requires only bravery to reap its rewards.

Tom Brufatto is Director of Policy and Research at Best for Britain

Red lunulae have been associated with a range of health conditions

Zay Nyi Nyi via Getty Images

Does that mean I definitely have one of these conditions if I have red lunulae?

As part of our Policy Landscape 2026 report, Nicola McEwen considers the state of the political debate and the immediate and long-term challenges that need to be confronted when it comes to devolution in the UK.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has made it his mission to “take power out of Westminster and carry it into every postcode in the country”. But it is not clear the ‘devolution revolution’ will extend beyond England’s borders.

Of course, one might think there is less need to progress devolution to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, because they already have far more autonomy from Westminster than English regions.  But Scotland and Wales are nations, not regions. And following the elections in May, the Prime Minister must now face three First Ministers from nationalist parties whose ultimate goal is political independence or, in the case of Sinn Fein’s Michelle O’Neil (whose responsibilities in office are shared with the DUP’s Deputy First Minister), to secure Irish unity.

Both the SNP and Plaid Cymru were elected on manifesto commitments to increase self-government. Both emerged triumphant in contests that witnessed Labour’s continued decline in Scotland and its decimation in Wales. Ignoring their calls for further powers whilst championing devolution in England risks destabilising the Union itself.

There have been long-standing calls, including from successive independent constitutional commissions, to devolve further competences to the Senedd, most notably over policing and justice. Plaid Cymru’s manifesto reiterated these calls, alongside the devolution of powers over the Crown Estate, rail, port regulation, Air Passenger Duty, social security and some aspects of energy policy.

The SNP manifesto called for the devolution of energy policy, employment law, further fiscal autonomy, a Scottish visa scheme, and legislative competence for an independence referendum. These calls have the backing of the Scottish Green Party, whose 15 MSPs join the 57 SNP MSPs in the largest pro-independence majority to date in the Scottish Parliament.

But the Westminster parliament is the legal custodian of the Scotland and Wales Acts and of the future of the Union. The Prime Minister has already informally rejected a second independence referendum. Neither he nor the Secretary of State for Scotland, Douglas Alexander – whose relationship with the Scottish Government can best be described as grim – have responded positively to the other devolution demands. Secretary of State for Wales, Stephen Kinnock, professed himself unconvinced of the need for further devolution, suggesting that devolution could destabilise policing and the Crown Estate.

Both the SNP and Plaid Cymru focused on the cost-of-living crisis in the May elections, reflecting voter priorities. Constitutional battles may thus be seen as an unwelcome distraction from an electorate who want their governments to work together to get things done. Nonetheless, championing devolution in England while snubbing calls for devolution in Scotland and Wales does not bode well for intergovernmental relations.

Labour entered office in 2024 with a commitment to respect devolution and ‘reset’ the UK government’s relationship with the devolved governments, following a deterioration of intergovernmental relations under the Conservatives against the backdrop of Brexit.

This included bringing forward a statutory review of the 2020 UK Internal Market Act, legislation enacted despite considerable opposition from, and without the consent of, the devolved legislatures. The Act was intended to facilitate frictionless trade across the UK after Brexit. Exclusions from its ‘Market Access Principles’ can be sought, without guarantee of being granted, bringing complexity and uncertainty to the legislative process. Without such exclusions, some rules drawn up by devolved governments would not apply to goods and services from other parts of the UK, making it more difficult to realise policy goals. The Act also allowed the UK government to spend directly in devolved policy areas, bypassing the established system of territorial finance and often bypassing the devolved governments. The statutory review committed to environmental and public health benefits being evaluated alongside the economic costs of regulatory divergence in weighing up exclusion requests. But this is unfinished business for the devolved institutions, and there remains a lack of clarity about how, and by whom, these additional criteria will be considered.

The Labour government also promised to restore the Sewel convention – the process of securing consent from the devolved legislatures before enacting legislation in the Westminster Parliament on devolved matters. Long a pragmatic tool for coordinating legislation across governments, this was an important symbol of the authority of the devolved institutions within a constitutional framework otherwise founded upon the undiluted sovereignty of the Westminster parliament. But that symbolism was somewhat undermined during the Brexit process when withheld consent was largely ignored by the UK parliament. It was further undermined when the UK Supreme Court confirmed that the Sewel Convention, which was written into the Scotland and Wales Acts, has no legal effect.

These outstanding issues should be in the Prime Minister’s in-tray. If not, he will surely confront them in intergovernmental forums. Meaningful discussions over further devolution to Scotland and Wales may also be hard to dismiss while championing devolution in England. Such discussions may come with pressure on devolved governments to devolve powers to Scottish and Welsh regions, but devolution within Scotland, Wales or indeed Northern Ireland would ultimately be a matter for the devolved institutions themselves. Over the longer term, simply rejecting calls for an independence referendum may not be enough, especially if support for independence increases. There is an opportunity now to consider, dispassionately, what would constitute and trigger a legitimate process for determining the future of these islands.

The Prime Minister is undoubtedly committed to devolution. He may well prove to have a transformative impact on the governance of England. But to be an effective Prime Minister of the United Kingdom requires understanding and carefully managing the complex set of territorial relationships and identities between the nations of these islands.

By Nicola McEwen, Professor of Public Policy and Governance, University of Glasgow Centre for Public Policy.