Building Britain’s National Data Library

Public services in the UK are drowning in data but starved of actionable insight. Our data infrastructure is fragmented and unfit for purpose, which means valuable public sector data go underutilised. Labour’s manifesto commitment to build a National Data Library (NDL) could change that, however, making public data faster and easier to access and use. But for it to actually work, it needs more than just good intentions – it needs a clear vision and a solid plan.

This week, in a joint paper – Governing in the Age of AI: Building Britain’s National Data Library – our Head of Science and Technology Anastasia Bektimirova together with co-authors from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change delivered that detailed plan.

They leave nothing to chance, setting out in detail what needs to be done in the short, medium and long term. Getting this right would represent a transformative upgrade in the relationship between government and its citizens, while unlocking innovation opportunities for academia and businesses.

In academia, the NDL could revolutionise medical research by enabling scientists to assess treatment effectiveness more rapidly through NHS and social care records. Environmental researchers, meanwhile, could integrate air-pollution and health data to develop more effective public health interventions. By providing seamless and secure access to vital information, the NDL would empower researchers to tackle pressing societal challenges with greater precision and speed.

In the private sector, the NDL could fuel R&D. Startups and established firms alike could benefit from streamlined access to high-quality data sets, reducing the time and resources currently wasted navigating complex bureaucratic processes. This could, for example, help edtech companies build more effective personalised learning platforms.

In government, the NDL could improve policy design by enabling better data-sharing between Whitehall – for instance facilitating closer collaboration between HMRC, the NHS, and the Department for Work and Pensions to identify health-related barriers to employment and shape more effective welfare policies. Local councils, too, could use the NDL to deliver better public services, proactively identifying at-risk families and intervening before crises escalate. By streamlining data access while maintaining security and privacy, the NDL would enable smarter decision-making across the public and private sectors.

The paper offers over 40 detailed recommendations to make the NDL a reality. Among my favourites is to have dedicated National Data Librarians within government departments. Collectively, they would act as cross-government advisers who ensure data is accessible and aligned with real-world needs. Another great recommendation is that the UK should introduce a unique personal identifier to enable accurate data linkages across public services, following successful models from Estonia and Finland where such identifiers have transformed digital government while strengthening citizens’ control over their data.

The paper paints the NDL not as a giant data lake centralising all government data in one place. Instead, it should enable secure, federated access while ensuring departments retain control over their own data. It won’t function as a commercial marketplace selling government data, but rather as a facilitator of responsible and ethical use of public-sector information. The NDL’s true value lies in transforming data access by making it easier, faster, and more secure to link and use government data while standardising and simplifying data-sharing processes.

Entrepreneurs’ ingenuity will be critical to ensuring that the NDL’s full potential is realised – but first the Government needs to get on with delivering on the promise in (and of) its manifesto.

Food for Thoughts
Yesterday we hosted Parmy Olson for a dinner with Fora about her bestselling book Supremacy. It tells the behind-the-scenes story of the battle between OpenAI and DeepMind, and won the Financial Times and Schroders Business Book of the Year Award. You can find out more and get a copy of Supremacy here.

We’re busy planning our next Fora dinner. If you’re an Adviser, drop me an email with the names of who you’re keen to hear from.

As you’ll see below, we’ve got a lot of events planned and have just brought on a new team member to help us keep up with the demand. This is a roundabout way of suggesting: now’s the time to join us as a Supporter or Adviser to ensure you can come to as many of these as you want, while supporting our efforts to make the UK the best place in the world to start and grow a business. It only takes a few clicks.

Tiny Experiments
On the theme of books, Adviser to the network Anne-Laure Le Cunff, has one out: Tiny Experiments: How to Live Freely in a Goal-Obsessed World. In this transformative book, neuroscientist and entrepreneur Anne-Laure reveals the easier, proven method to achieve our ambitions: an experimental mindset.

You can find out more and get Tiny Experiments here. Anne-Laure’s also hosting an experimental supper club on the evening of the 18 March, which you can buy tickets for here.

Three Big Ideas #22

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives advocates for zonal electricity pricing, Philip Salter discusses IQ and entrepreneurship, and Jessie May Green writes about the health of the UK’s net zero economy.

Employment Rights (& Wrongs)

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) has come out swinging this week, warning the Government that the Employment Rights Bill could “wreak havoc on our already fragile economy.”

As James Hurley writes: “One of the most radical changes is the planned removal of a two-year qualifying period for protections from unfair dismissal. Other changes that are concerning some small employers include granting new rights on sick pay from day one of employment.”

The Bill, due to return to Parliament for further debate, has sparked widespread concern. Entrepreneurs across our network have voiced serious reservations, which we’ve communicated to the Government. Finding the right balance is crucial to prevent widespread negative impacts.

The FSB’s numbers are stark: two-thirds of surveyed small companies indicate the plans would restrict their hiring capabilities, while one-third anticipate reducing their workforce before the measures take effect in 2026. The CIPD’s recent survey of over 2,000 employers reinforces these concerns: 32% are cutting headcount through redundancies or reduced recruitment, while 24% are either cancelling or scaling back business expansion plans.

The government’s own analysis projects annual costs to businesses in the billions. This economic burden won’t remain contained to businesses alone - an imbalanced approach risks creating exactly what the legislation aims to prevent: fewer and less secure jobs. Beyond job cuts and reduced hiring, the legislation may inadvertently encourage employers to shift toward temporary, casual, and self-employed workers.

The government doesn’t need to back down on every measure. A case can be made for fairer compensation for last-minute shift cancellations, appropriate bereavement leave for workers, and reforms to the practice of fire and rehire.

However, history demonstrates that sustainable workers’ rights improvements are intrinsically linked to economic growth. Economic expansion periods have consistently driven dramatic improvements in wages and job quality, enabling major advances in workers’ rights – from minimum wage laws to union rights and reduced working hours.

The Government doesn’t need me to tell them we’re not expanding now. That’s why in the final three months of last year, 32% of small employers expected to reduce staff, up from 17% in the previous quarter, while the proportion of companies looking to hire fell from 14% to 10% over the two quarters.

Now’s the time to double-down – nay, triple-down – on its pivot to growth.

Sovereign Albion
In a thought-provoking Substack article, friend of the Network Andrew Bennett advocates merging scientific and technological advancement with a renewed connection to British land, lore, and folk traditions. He backs our proposal to create a new chivalric order for innovation, but it’s mostly worth reading for a fresh perspective on thinking about progress. It also serves as an antidote for thinking too much about employment regulation!

Ecosystem Builders
Our good friends at the Global Entrepreneurship Network invite you to apply to join the UK delegation at the Global Entrepreneurship Congress (GEC) in Indianapolis.

The GEC brings together over 5,000 global leaders – entrepreneurs, investors, policymakers, academics, and support organisations – for four days of intensive networking, workshops, and keynote presentations. Find out more on their website and this deck.

The UK delegation, led by Marc Ortmans and Matt Smith, currently comprises 35 members with plans to expand to over 60. Contact Matt Smith to learn more and receive a GEC registration fee waiver code.

Pitch in Parliament
Startup Coalition (also friends of the Network) will be hosting a Pitch in Parliament on 17 March. They’re looking for startups that have raised over £500,000 and are solving a problem in Public Services with AI. Find out more.

Three Big Ideas #21

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives questions Reform’s latest policy idea, Anastasia Bektimirova discusses how the UK can become a global leader in AI-powered scientific discovery, and Jessie May Green ponders the right approach to thinking innovatively when it comes to decarbonising the economy.

Sense on Security

As is increasingly the case, our cousins across the pond managed to grab the headlines this week. Specifically Vice President JD Vance, who told world leaders at this week’s AI summit in Paris that the “AI future is not going to be won by hand-wringing about safety.”

To some people’s surprise, the US refused to sign the international AI declaration. To most people’s surprise, so too did the UK – choosing instead to side with the US over 60 other countries. The UK Government stated: “We felt the declaration didn’t provide enough practical clarity on global governance, nor sufficiently address harder questions around national security and the challenge AI poses to it.”

While some will attempt frame this as a sign that the UK and US don’t care about safety and regulation, it would be more accurate to see this as a move to clarify priorities. That’s why the UK’s AI Safety Institute has just rebranded as the AI Security Institute. As Ian Hogarth, Chair of the AISI, wrote on X: “It’s time to properly reflect that we see the most serious risks as being those to security.”

Our Substack readers might have seen this coming. In our most recent interview, Herbie Bradley, former member of the technical staff at the AISI, said on the AISI’s future: “It would be quite wise to focus more on AI security – specifically, securing training and deployment data centres against cyberattacks and working closely with the US through mechanisms like Five Eyes. AI security will become much more critical in the years to come, as I expect many capable cyber actors to want to attack highly capable AI systems.”

Maybe this puts us at odds with the EU, but until they upgrade their compass the choice is simple. While it might sound a little overblown, this is really all about the ‘free world’ prevailing. Of course, for this to make sense we must hope that Sam Freedman is wrong in predicting that the US might no longer be part of the free world (paywall) – though we’re less pessimistic.

The prize of getting this right is huge, and is underlined by today’s announcement that the government has signed a memorandum of understanding with Anthropic on AI opportunities. This points towards a future where AI will revolutionise the way that governments serve their citizens. Watch this space for more.

Makers Not Takers
Welcoming the launch of the AI Opportunities Action Plan last month, we noted that the true test will be in its execution. Part of the responsibility is on the AI sector itself.

To help drive engagement from the AI community, we’ve joined Phoenix Court, Faculty, Founders at the University of Cambridge, and other ecosystem players as a partner on the AI Forum.

The first meeting of the AI Forum brought together 68 leaders from across the ecosystem – researchers, startup founders, policy experts, civil society, and government officials. Attendees broke into six groups to focus on the key pillars of the plan: Infrastructure, Data, Talent & Skills, Governance, Go-To-Market, and how to ensure the UK is a nation of AI “makers.”

The next meetings of the AI Forum will take place on 30 April, 1 July, and 19 November. Whether you’re working on infrastructure, talent development, building AI models, or thinking about governance, now’s your chance to get involved.

The Action Plan sets an ambitious vision for UK leadership. You can help shape the next phase of the UK’s AI journey through a community survey.

What’s Up?
We’ve just launched our WhatsApp community. With a network of well over 10,000 entrepreneurs and even more people supporting them, this is a bit of a leap into the unknown.

You’ll see that there are a few groups already active there which are ongoing projects. Please feel free to request to join them, although there will be a more formal process for accepting people for privacy reasons. Do also feel free to suggest new groups. It’s going to be a process of trial and error (hopefully not too many of the latter).

As well as sharing updates, we’re going to use the groups to source ideas for those at the coalface. Managing a community requires a lot of work, so we’re weighing up the value of partnering with organisations, companies and individuals who can help us run specific groups.

In summary: join our community today and drop me an email if you want to help us run a group.

Please note that if you join the community, only The Entrepreneurs Network will be able to view your phone number, but if you are accepted to a specific group, your number will be visible to the other members of that group.

Three Big Ideas #20

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives discusses how to ensure policy change doesn’t simply create business uncertainty, Anastasia Bektimirova explains why staying ahead in sensor tech advances is critical, and Philip Salter makes the case for unbundling universities.

Lost Youth

Last Sunday, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper ruled out plans to negotiate a Youth Mobility Scheme with the European Union. Let’s hope others in the Government convince her otherwise.

It won’t come as a surprise to regular readers that we support youth mobility. As we argued in Job Creators: 2024, since leaving the EU, we’ve made it unnecessarily hard for a relatively well-educated and skilled population with a broadly common set of values, culture and interests to contribute to our economy and forge ties with the UK.

Britain already has Youth Mobility Schemes – which allow those aged between 18-30 years old (or 18-35, depending on the country) to easily come and work in the UK – with many countries, including Australia, New Zealand, Canada, San Marino, Monaco, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Uruguay and Taiwan.

When weighing up the economics, it’s something of a no-brainer. Youth Mobility Schemes help address labour shortages, ease inflationary pressures and support economic growth. They drive innovation, internationalisation and exporting for firms that employing these young people. By the Home Office’s own calculations, the average contribution of Youth Mobility visa holders to the exchequer in direct and indirect taxes annually is £10,000 today (adjusted for inflation).

Beyond economic benefits, the scheme promotes cultural exchange, strengthens international ties, enhances the UK’s soft power and fosters long-term collaboration that can lead to more economic benefits through future foreign direct investment.

But what about the politics of all this?

Well, nearly seven in ten Brits – including 55% of Leave voters – would support a scheme that would allow 200,000 18- to 40-year-olds from the UK and EU to travel, study and work freely in each other’s countries for up to four years.

And while the Conservatives – with Reform on their backs – will be unlikely to endorse the move, former Chancellor George Osborne makes the point on Political Currency that in negotiating a business-friendly arrangement with the EU, the Labour Party would set a trap for his Party. After all, the changes will be cemented in by the election, meaning Conservative opposition to them would put the Party at odds with Britain’s powerful business lobby.

Of course, the net migration figures terrify the Government. However, just 23,000 people came to the UK on Youth Mobility Visas in 2023, with as many young Brits going the other way (particularly to Australia). Also, most of these schemes are capped – Uruguay at 500 people, Canada at 8,000, and Australia at 45,000. We could negotiate for a capped EU Youth Mobility Visa scheme to offset the political risk associated with unexpectedly large numbers.

Nuclear Options
Keir Starmer has vowed to “rip up the rulebook” to accelerate new nuclear power, including small modular reactors (SMRs), which promise faster and cheaper deployment than traditional gigawatt-scale plants.

Reforms include increasing the number of sites on which power stations can be located, widely seen as one of the most important things for the industry, setting up a Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce (see here for more on this), and better aligning the UK with international partners so reactor designs approved abroad could be green-lit more quickly.

This was music to our ears, and surely to those of Britain’s energy-intensive businesses too. In Small Wonders, our Research Director Eamonn Ives’ number one recommendation was around increasing the number of sites, and he also recommended international mutual recognition.

Far be it for us to look a gift policy in the mouth, but we would add that this should just be the start. We also proposed allowing local authorities which approve the construction of new nuclear power stations to capture more of the business rates they pay, and increasing the resourcing of the nuclear regulators to deal with more applications.

Regardless, a nuclear renaissance in Britain has never looked so likely.

Getting to Know You
If you scroll down you’ll see we’ve got lots of events in the pipeline. Some of these are close to full already, so if you want earlier invites, you’ll need to spend a couple of minutes telling us a bit about you and the sorts of events you want to be invited to.

As part of our growing activities, we’re also looking for new places around the country to host us. If you or your company would like to partner with us, drop us an email.

Breaking Barriers
The Disability Policy Centre are conducting a new project around disabled CEOs and business leaders, for which they’re interviewing entrepreneurs across a range of businesses.

Do you know someone who has a great story to tell about the barriers they faced in getting to the top and how they’re working to remove them? If so, feel free to drop Chloe and Louie a line.

Three Big Ideas #19

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives takes stock of President Trump’s latest barrage of tariffs, Anastasia Bektimirova discusses bridging the science-policy gap, and Jessie May Green examines what DeepSeek’s ultra-efficient AI model could mean for future energy demand.

Arc of History

As Our World in Data informs us, extreme poverty around the world is plummeting. There are more than a billion fewer people living below the International Poverty Line of $2.15 per day today than in 1990. On average, the number declined by 47 million every year, or 130,000 people each day.

This isn’t to excuse the poverty that still blights our world – exactly the opposite. It’s proof that progress is possible, and a motivation to work all the harder to help the remaining 650 million people – roughly one in twelve – who still live under that line.

So how does this happen? To radically simplify, the world gets richer through productivity increases – in other words, doing more with less, with entrepreneurs the driving force behind this. This doesn’t just happen in isolation – an entrepreneurial society is a social phenomenon. As Alfred Marshall set out in 1890 in Principles of Economics, agglomeration economies benefit from being close to one another due to knowledge spillovers, shared suppliers, and a concentrated labour market.

In other words, an entrepreneurial society thrives when businesses, talent, and infrastructure reinforce one another. This is why the Oxford-Cambridge Arc has long been seen as a potential growth engine – and why we’ve been long-standing supporters of it. As some readers may remember, the original plan under Boris Johnson was to build a new ​​rail link, new homes and a new expressway – but bit by bit, the project fell apart.

In a turn towards growth, Rachel Reeves has revived the Arc. And it’s worth quoting her at length – both for the all-too-rare pleasure of reading political statements that we can wholeheartedly endorse, but also to set it down as a marker to judge words against action.

The Chancellor said: “To grow, these world-class companies need world-class talent who should be able to get to work quickly and find somewhere to live in the local area. But to get from Oxford to Cambridge by train takes two and a half hours.”... “There is no way to commute directly from places like Bedford and Milton Keynes to Cambridge by rail. And there is a lack of affordable housing across the region.”... “Oxford and Cambridge are two of the least affordable cities in the UK. In other words, the demand is there but there are far too many supply side constraints on economic growth in the region.”

As Stian Westlake, Executive Chair of the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) and one of our Advisers, said back in 2022: “If you’ve got lots of smart people doing great research, if you make it easy to build housing and offices near those people, the magic of the free market will do its thing. People will set up businesses and economic growth will happen.”

“The tragedy in the UK,” he goes on to say, “is that we channel lots and lots of public money into two very beautiful towns – Oxford and Cambridge – where it is almost impossible to build anything. The arc is an attempt to solve this by allowing people to build things in between – Milton Keynes, Bedford – link it up with roads and rail, so it gets easier for entrepreneurs to set up the things they want to.”

As we wrote in Building Blocks: “Too few people subscribe to an agglomeration-led approach to growth. The political focus of late has shifted away from championing dynamic hotspots like the Golden Triangle, most obviously, but also even regions like Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Edinburgh and Bristol.”

I’ll end with the words of Reeves: “It has the potential to be Europe’s Silicon Valley. The home of British innovation.” (Though in the long run, actions speak louder than words.)

The Codemakers
Hot off the press, we’ve just released an interview with Herbie Bradley, AI governance and policy expert and former member of the technical staff at the AI Safety Institute (AISI).

The interview with Anastasia Bektimirova, our Head of Science and Technology, covers a lot of ground, which defies summarising. Instead, I will point to one lesson Bradley says he learned from his experience at AISI that could be applied to getting other existing and future projects off the ground and scaling them effectively within DSIT, or government more broadly (excuse the long quote, but I think the insight deserves it):

“When you’re trying to build state capacity or launch a new initiative that needs to be impactful and move fast, you basically need to start a new team. If it’s an existing team, it’s probably too enmeshed in bureaucracy.

Secondly, you need significant political backing. In our case, we were fortunate to have great support from Henry de Zoete, who was then the Prime Minister’s Adviser on AI, and others in No. 10 and DSIT, particularly the minister at the time, Michelle Donelan. This means you can get around normal bureaucracy when needed, like hiring someone in a way that hasn’t been done before within the department.

You also need an incentive to perform well. This could be internal motivation from team members believing in the ideal or mission, a tight deadline like a Summit organised on very short notice, or competitive pressure from overlapping mandates with existing teams.

And finally, try to hire from outside government – people who are used to moving fast from industry and the startup world. That’s also effective.

There is an inevitable effect where a new, fast-moving, high-entropy team gradually gets pressed down by bureaucratic systems like HR, contracting, and finance. The general systemic incentive is to reduce fast-moving teams to a low-entropy state and make them more similar to the rest of government.

To counteract this, you need political backing and might need to start a new team or initiative if the first one becomes too slow. This explains why politicians often like to start new teams. There is an analogy here to the fractal startup model in industry. OpenAI scaled their ChatGPT team by creating conditions mimicking a pre-seed stage startup – totally new Google Drive, getting the new product team together in person five days a week, creating a separate office space – and that works surprisingly well.”

I strongly recommend reading the interview in full.

The Codemakers

In our latest interview, Anastasia Bektimirova spoke to Herbie Bradley, AI governance and policy expert and former member of the technical staff at the Artificial Intelligence Safety Institute. Among other things, they discussed building Britain’s AI advantage and what the AI Safety Institute can teach us about state capacity.

Three Big Ideas #18

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives looks at the results of a new paper on the benefits of the sharing economy, Anastasia Bektimirova gives her take on the new Science and Technology Venture Capital Fellowship, and Philip Salter argues that fully unleashing academics’ innovative potential will take more than just building.

Constructive Comments

Britain needs to build. Actually, it’s been ‘time to build’ for a while now, which is why we’re encouraged by recent Government announcements and news reports suggesting those in power are taking it seriously. Better late than never.

First, plans were set out to reform the process developers have to go through to address any environmental impacts projects might cause. Under current rules, these have to be done in advance in order to receive planning permission. Under the proposed changes, developers will be able to pay into a Nature Restoration Fund, pooling contributions and putting them towards larger, more effective environmental projects.

Second, no-hope legal challenges that cost the taxpayer a fortune and delay critical infrastructure projects could be consigned to history. As Labour MP Dan Tomlinson writes on X: “The independent National Infrastructure Commission finds that an astonishing 58% of projects are being JR’ed [judicially reviewed] up from 10%.”

The Government is streamlining the planning process for major infrastructure projects – such as nuclear plants, wind farms, and transport networks – by limiting speculative legal challenges to one stage instead of three. This reform aims to cut delays, lower costs, and drive economic growth by removing unnecessary obstacles that hinder progress.

Third, Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to announce the approval of a new runway at Heathrow next week, while the Treasury is also considering whether to back a second runway at Gatwick and increased capacity at Luton Airport. Our friends at UK Day One have a timely paper out on why Heathrow is the most capacity-constrained transport hub in the world. In Britain’s Runway to Growth, they argue that expanding it could boost nationwide economic growth while still meeting the commitments on climate, air pollution, noise, and regional growth.

As with the AI Opportunities Action Plan, however, the Government must move at pace. They can and must go further too. In Small Wonders, for example, our Research Director Eamonn Ives explained how small modular reactors could provide cheaper, more reliable energy, while helping us cut carbon emissions too.

Our paper contains numerous policy recommendations that should be implemented to get the industry off the ground. These include allowing local authorities which approve the construction of new nuclear power stations to be entitled to capture more of the business rates they pay – creating a powerful incentive for them to green light development. It also suggests we should be able to mutually recognise the decisions of nuclear regulators in other allied countries when it comes to approving new nuclear designs, as already happens in pharmaceuticals, medical devices, aerospace, financial services and many other critical areas. Importantly, this would free up our own regulators to concentrate on issues that apply specifically to Britain, rather than simply duplicating work that has already been done elsewhere.

Labour’s Choice
If those growth policies aren’t enough, this week our Advisers Sam Bowman and Sam Dumitriu set out 11 more for Labour to choose from. The final recommendation is based on a paper by our Head of Innovation Research, Anton Howes. It deals with the thorny (but critical) issue of using copyright for AI development. Bowman as Dumitriu write:

“The best short-term solution to this is the one proposed in Matt Clifford’s AI Opportunities Action Plan: allow training without a license unless the rightsholder explicitly requires one. This is the EU’s approach, and while we think we should aspire to be better than the EU on tech regulation, it’s a lot better than the status quo. Instead of announcing yet another consultation, as the government has done, it should adopt Clifford’s proposals immediately and, in the medium-term, aim to set up an API standard for contract terms that reduces transaction costs between AI companies and rightsholders, so dealings between them can be fast and inexpensive.”

Paper Over
As I wrote in my latest Big Idea over on our Substack, according to the Government’s State of Digital Government Review, the public sector spends £26 billion annually on digital technology, yet nearly half of central government and NHS services still rely on paper forms and manual processes.

It doesn’t need to be like this. The report mentions Estonia in passing, which offers an online option for 99% of its services. As I wrote alongside Kirsty Innes, now of Labour Together, in our essay on building a digital state for our Way of the Future collection, the future of government services shouldn’t be only about moving forms online; we need to copy the likes of Estonia and Singapore which automatically provide services to citizens instead of requiring them to apply.

Read more and subscribe to our Substack here.

Need-to-know Basis
Our Adviser Harriet Green has just launched Basis, which is kicking off with private investment in early-stage companies that are building where the state is failing. If you are working in this space and the Basis thesis resonates with you, Harriet and team would love to hear from you. Message her here.

Three Big Ideas #17

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Philip Salter urges the public sector to think big on embracing digital technology, Anastasia Bektimirova wonders about how we label innovators, and Eamonn Ives puts forward ideas for spurring agglomeration in London.

Does Compute

Matt Clifford’s long-awaited report finally landed this week. The AI Opportunities Action Plan packs a punch, delivering 50 recommendations to the Government.

For a deep dive, our Head of Science and Technology Anastasia Bektimirova offers a thorough analysis of the Plan on our Substack. As she said to Sifted (paywall): “The plan has a lot of very constructive recommendations... but this is something that was supposed to arrive much sooner, and at the moment it feels like we’re playing catch-up.”

The proof of any plan is in the execution. But as Anastasia said for another Sifted article (paywall): “It’s a very good sign that Matt Clifford will be overseeing the delivery of this plan.” It’s clear that the necessary infrastructure development, sustained funding commitments, talent attraction, and changes to procurement will all require tough political decisions to be made. As she writes in our Substack analysis, “the responsibility is also on the AI sector itself to demonstrate how it can deliver on the Government’s aims. The success of the Action Plan depends on sustained political support. Ministers want something to feel positive about and to champion, so articulating the opportunity is important – and this will be our task.”

As our Adviser Richard Mabey, founder of the AI-powered contract automation platform Juro, responds: “The key now is not the recommendations in the report, it’s in the delivery. To stand a chance of getting ahead, the Government must implement the recommendations at breakneck speed. Can Government move at the pace of AI? Let’s see.”

Janan Ganesh isn’t convinced we can. Ever the provocateur, he writes in the Financial Times (paywall) that Britain should stop pretending it wants more economic growth: “Tories want growth, but not if it means building things, aligning with Europe, or much exposure to China. Labour wants growth, but not if it incommodes the unions, or ‘leaves people behind’ or some such NGO press release inanity. What growth policy is left over, then?”

I’m more optimistic (and I suspect Ganesh might be too). Just this week, politicians across the political spectrum endorsed a National Priority Infrastructure Bill from the Looking For Growth group. These included Chris Curtis, co-chair of the Labour Growth Group, which has around 100 Labour MPs as members. Looking For Growth is run by friend of the Network Dr Lawrence Newport (and author of an essay for us on Inspiring Innovation) – it’s a social movement dedicated to making Britain grow. He is one of many people working on policy to increase the size and dynamism of our economy.

A decade ago, being unashamedly pro-growth and pro-progress could be a lonely place to be. This is no longer the case. Time to get involved.

Join us for an evening of networking with like-minded, pro-growth entrepreneurs in Soho this Wednesday. Spaces are limited, so sign up now.

On Your Mind
We want to hear from founders! What barriers are holding your startups back? Here’s a message from Eamonn Ives, our Research Director setting out what he’s looking for:

“At The Entrepreneurs Network, we’re here to solve problems. But in order to do that, we first need to know what those problems are. And there’s nobody better placed to tell us than the founders who have to deal with them each and every day. Our pipeline of research for the year ahead is taking shape but we’re still eager to know what issues you think we should be focusing on to ensure Britain’s startups have the best shot at success. Maybe it’s a regulation that stymies your sector, or something that cuts across the breadth of the economy – whatever it is, drop me an email and let’s chat further.”

Three Big Ideas #16

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives asks whether Elon Musk is a genius, Philip Salter writes about the disruption AI could spell for the labour force, and Anastasia Bektimirova discusses the myth of objectives.

Calling It

Peter Drucker once said that the only thing we know about the future is that it will be different. Far be it from me to correct the founder of modern management theory, but at least in the short term, we aren’t entirely clueless.

Although precise predictions are impossible, our experience can guide us toward likely outcomes, something that both entrepreneurs and policymakers need. While we don’t know what a second-term President Trump will look like, we have more knowledge than we did when he was elected for his first term. We know, for example, to take his words seriously despite claims back in 2016 that we should take them symbolically. That’s not to say he will – or can – do everything he wants. And we also know that he’s quick to change his mind. This underscores how uncertain the global policy landscape will be under Trump’s leadership – and why entrepreneurs and policymakers alike must stay agile.

As our Research Director Eamonn Ives argued last year following the election, the lesson for many European countries, including the UK, is that we’ve grown too accustomed to relying on external actors. Whether that’s the US for technological innovation and security, or Russia and China for cheap energy and goods – without adequately considering the vulnerabilities this creates. Rather than retreating into economic insularity, Eamonn makes the case for smarter policies that prioritise resilience and recognise the true foundations of growth. Whether that’s in policy areas where we can work more closely with our allies, or in areas where we need to build our own capabilities – like producing our own cheap, clean energy.

On this side of the pond, we now know a lot more about our new Labour Government. It’s fair to say that not everything has gone the way that Britain’s entrepreneurs would have wanted, but we – and Labour – should remember that there’s still four and a half years left before the next election needs to be held, which is ample time to turn things around.

That won’t happen on its own, however, and as the warning lights of the economy flash a darker shade of red, Starmer should be minded to look back to the record of the last man to break the Tories’ stranglehold on power. In his first term alone, Tony Blair managed to enact a host of reforms that materially changed the political fabric of Britain. Many of these he gripped early on in his premiership, meaning that the benefits had time to accrue by the time voters next went to the polls. Short-term news cycles have certainly changed how politics works, but they haven’t rendered long-term governance a thing of the past just yet – Labour can’t forget that they have the power to act. On this, Anastasia Bektimirova shares Blair’s insights on X, taken from his recent book On Leadership.

So what else should entrepreneurs be thinking about this year?

The elephant (not playing chess) in the room is artificial intelligence. The only challenge is predicting the timeline. However, this isn’t entirely a black box; there are people with proven insights. Rodney Brooks, for example, has been making predictions since 2018. While he hasn’t always been spot on forecasting the timeline for AI, robotics, self-driving cars and human space travel, his deep knowledge combined with his self-awareness makes his 2025 update a must-read.

He’s not the only one worth reading to get a better understanding of how AI will evolve in 2025. Read Herbie Bradley to understand what Trump could mean for AI. Read Simon Willison for a comprehensive update on LLMs and AI, with a few hints at likely directions for the future. And read Austin Vernon for a view on how AI agents may be integrated into companies (this one is a short, essential read for all entrepreneurs).

There’s room for disagreement. That is why AI sceptic Gary Marcus has made a bet with Miles Brundage, formerly of OpenAI, on whether AI will be able to pass ten tests – including writing Pulitzer-caliber books, coming up with Nobel-caliber scientific discoveries, writing cogent, persuasive legal briefs – by 2027.

In reality, the truth likely lies somewhere between these extremes. The Pulitzer test may miss a more immediate shift. AI is already reshaping how influential thinkers approach their work. Economist Tyler Cowen says he is now writing primarily for AI as a target audience. So is researcher Gwern Branwen. (For my part, I’m still writing for humans.) What we can be sure of is that reality will be transformational for everyone reading this.

It’s time
If you’re one of the thousands of people reading this, wondering how you can get more involved in 2025, here are three ways.

First, if you haven’t already, join us as a Supporter, Adviser, Patron or Corporate Partner. We wouldn’t be able to do all the work we do without this. You can join online in a couple of minutes. Along with the warm glow of supporting us, you’ll also receive invitations to many more events.

Second, we’re collecting testimonials and case studies from our supporters and collaborators. If you’d like to contribute, please drop me an email. Your input will help us showcase our impact to new audiences.

Third, we have a survey that helps us tailor opportunities to your interests. It only takes a few minutes to complete and really helps us focus our efforts.

We’re looking forward to seeing you in 2025!

Three Big Ideas #15

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Eamonn Ives highlights an innovation arms race going on in the food industry, Anastasia Bektimirova discusses revolving doors in the world of AI, and Philip Salter espouses the potential of pilots.

Summary Time

In 2024, The Entrepreneurs Network turned ten. Given that only around a third of businesses survive beyond a decade, perhaps we’re doing something right. Ultimately though, there is only one metric that matters: are we making the UK a better place than it would otherwise be for entrepreneurs? I’ll leave it to others to make that ultimate judgement, but as you’ll see below it’s not lack of effort – and our plans for the next year are even more ambitious. We hope you’ll remain part of our journey.

Unless something extraordinary happens in the next few days, the UK’s biggest political event of the year was July’s General Election. While we don’t take sides on politics – we do take a keen interest in policy. And there has been plenty of policy to get stuck into.

Most vocally, we got over 1,250 entrepreneurs to sign a letter against the negative impact that rumoured changes to Capital Gains Tax and Business Asset Disposal Relief would have. The Chancellor took note, but there is more work to do. As Richard Tyler wrote in The Times: Gordon Brown’s tax break for entrepreneurs survives — but for how long?

Back to Basics
Every year we release at least one wide-ranging report that aims to influence – or at least capture – the zeitgeist. In March, we released Building Blocks, which argued that the fundamentals of what makes for a competitive economy have been neglected for too long. We focused on four areas to fix: our chronic under-agglomeration, looming fiscal headaches, obstacles to innovation and a failure to fully harness domestic and international talent. There is still much to do on all four fronts, but the narrative that we and others have called for – fixing the foundations – has cut through.

Another wide-ranging report was June’s Backing Breakthrough Businesses, which was driven by our new Patron Steve Rigby through his leadership of the Private Business Commission. We launched it in Parliament with Jonathan Reynolds MP, Secretary of State for Business and Trade, and it picked up coverage in The Times and elsewhere, with many of the policy recommendations in train.

In September, our Research Director Eamonn Ives got to the core of small nuclear reactors in Small Wonders. As the report argues, abundant energy is crucial for economic growth, particularly with the rise of energy-intensive technologies like AI, and achieving climate goals requires significantly expanding clean generation.

Big Society
While entrepreneurship isn’t for everyone, we should aspire to live in a country where nobody faces social impediments when starting and growing a business.

We want to take everyone on this journey with us. Whether that’s the neurodivergent in March’s Neurodiverse Founders, the next generation in June’s Empowering the Future, the regions in September’s United Growth, or anyone no matter where they’re born in February’s Entrepreneurs Unwrapped.

As many of you will have seen, this week we launched Gaining Altitude in the House of Lords – the latest report from our Female Founders Forum. For this one we partnered with the Invest in Women Taskforce to better understand Britain’s female angel investor community around the UK. Yesterday, Hannah Bernard OBE set out in City A.M. what needs to be done.

Global Britain
We’ve long argued that if we are to remain competitive we must remain open to talent. In August’s Job Creators 2024, we reveal the proportion of founders behind Britain’s fastest-growing companies that were born overseas: 39%.

British companies also need to expand internationally. In December’s Towards A More Special Relationship we examined what challenges exist for British founders looking to do that in the US, and set out a clear raft of policy recommendations for the Government to address them.

Science Superpower
I’m delighted to announce that Anastasia Bektimirova has been promoted to become our Head of Science and Technology to build out our work portfolio in this area. Her main interests include AI policy, strategy and delivery of the National Data Library, research commercialisation, alongside broader topics related to the health of the UK’s R&D ecosystem. She is also thinking about how institutions can improve their delivery of national science and technology objectives. If you share these interests, reach out.

As such, we will be engaging with the Government as it is consulting on copyright and AI. We believe in a policy environment which enables responsible access to high-quality input needed to develop AI models in the UK, and have already set out some potential options in January’s Can the UK Become Competitive on Text-and-Data Mining for AI? We are keen to hear your thoughts on how the Government can strike the right balance. Feel free to drop Anastasia a line.

White Heat of Technology
This year we joined Substack. Check out our interviews with: Station F Director, Roxanne Varza; former DSIT Policy Adviser Ben Johnson; and ARC Accelerator Co-Founder Chris Fellingham. We also revived our Three Big Ideas series – where we and experts in our community pitch our weekly hot takes on things that have piqued our curiosity – and written up more digestible analysis about the research we publish.

Ten More Years
Last but certainly not least, I want to thank our Patrons, Advisers, Supporters, Corporate Partners, and event hosts. This includes everyone here, as well as American Express, Arbuthnot Latham, Barclays, Barclays Eagle Labs, Beauhurst, Blick Rothenberg, Bradshaw Advisory, Britain Remade, Enterprise Nation, Evelyn Partners, FieldHouse, Fora, Fragomen, Gatsby, Growth Hub Global, Jobbatical, Kingsley Napley, LSE IDEAS, MDRx, Milltown Partners, OakNorth, Octopus, Rathbones, Rigby Group, Sumer, UCL, University of Bristol, YBI, and almost certainly one or two I’m forgetting.

We can only do what we do with support from our partners. If you would like to help us deliver on our mission, support us here or book a time to chat over Zoom. We look forward to working with you.

Three Big Ideas #14

Three Big Ideas is our weekly roundup of ideas (and our takes on them) in entrepreneurship, innovation, science and technology, handpicked by the team.

In this week, Philip Salter reflects on mirrored life, Anastasia Bektimirova discusses launching startups inside of government, and Eamonn Ives argues the case for paying CEOs like footballers.

Growing Concerns

For a government that came into office with the laudable if stretching ambition of making Britain the fastest growing economy in the G7, today’s growth figures do not make for pretty reading. I say growth figures, but they’d perhaps more accurately be described as contraction figures – with the economy as a whole shrinking by 0.1% in the month of October, mirroring September’s languid performance.

Of course, far from all of the blame lies with the new Government. They inherited a sluggish economy plagued by decades of cumulative underinvestment in the fundamental building blocks of prosperity. Turning the ship around will take time, and credit should be given to the commitment to shake up areas like planning policy, which we know have an outsized influence on growth.

But nor are the occupants of Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street entirely without fault. Just this week, a number of stories splashed the concerns bosses continue to have following the most recent Budget. OakNorth founder Rishi Khosla warned that tax changes are already causing wealth creators to leave the country, while at a roundtable between the Chancellor and senior business leaders, reports say almost all were pessimistic about the year to come. If Labour are to hit their growth goal, something needs to give.

Never ones to sit on the sidelines in this debate, on Monday we launched our latest report. In Towards A More Special Relationship, supported by our Patron Steve Rigby, we examine how to strengthen the entrepreneurial ties between Britain and its old ally America (the economy of which, if you needed reminding, is up a healthy 2.8% on the year prior). The report saw us talk directly to entrepreneurs who’ve made the hop across the Atlantic, investors who’ve ploughed money into startups stateside, and other key players involved in the growth journeys of similar companies. As well as mapping out the benefits the US market presents, we were also interested in understanding the barriers that prevent those benefits from being seized – and how to subsequently dismantle them.

One of the common themes we heard from those we interviewed was that for all the preconceptions of America being the land of the free, finding a foothold in the US market can be a bureaucratic nightmare. Whether it’s getting insurance or navigating immigration frameworks, founders told us that the administrative aspect of expansion can be a more costly experience than you might imagine – both financially and time-wise. Efforts to simplify this could prove especially helpful for the growth of companies who spot an opportunity.

In terms of our recommendations to foster greater Anglo-American economic integration, we set our sights high. At the top of our list is an appeal for the Government to prioritise a free trade agreement (FTA) with the new US administration once President-elect Trump is sworn in next January. Though certainly ambitious, it would not be unthinkable – when he was last in the White House, Trump appeared keen to strike a deal, and five rounds of negotiations were undertaken in his final year in office. Rachel Reeves, meanwhile, has made a number of positive noises about one in recent weeks and months.

Rarely does a lever for growth quite like an FTA with the world’s biggest economy present itself, but if the Government can yank it, their objectives will be made all the easier. Here’s to hoping they manage to.

Action Stations
On Tuesday, my colleague Anastasia published her fascinating interview with Station F director Roxanne Varza. Among other things, the two discuss how Station F has become a focal point for the French startup scene, what trends European artificial intelligence legislation is setting in motion, and whether there are any policy lessons Britain can learn from across the Channel to boost its own entrepreneurial ecosystem. Highly recommended – all this and more can be found on our Substack.