It says something of the UK that the incoming prime minister has ordered a rewrite of British foreign policy barely 18 months after the last one was published.
Liz Truss, who has become the fourth prime minister in Downing Street in six turbulent years, is not prone to risk aversion or offering bland reassurances. She made clear during the campaign for the Conservative leadership that she wants the 2021 Integrated Review redrawn with a far greater focus on combating the ‘growing malign influence’ of Russia and China. She has also pledged to increase defence spending from its current 2.1 per cent of GDP, to 2.7 per cent, and then to 3 per cent by 2030, which will include more support for the intelligence services and cyber security, a further £10 billion overall at a time when public finances are in dire straits.
Succeeding Boris Johnson at an exceptionally unpropitious time, most of her attention in her crucial first 100 days will be devoted to the domestic agenda, soaring energy prices, rampant inflation, a wave of strikes, an over-stretched legal system and a health service on its knees.
Yet several moments this autumn, some planned, others not, will propel her onto the global stage. The first, which will come almost immediately, will be the government’s next steps on the Northern Ireland Protocol. As Chatham House Director, Bronwen Maddox, points out, Truss may feel ideologically drawn towards further confrontation with the European Union, but such an approach will cause damage, not just with the UK’s neighbours, but in wider foreign policy arenas too.
Her biggest stage will be the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly – one of several institutions Truss’s team believe are stuck, compromised or have atrophied. Instead of, or alongside, these institutions, they are seeking to work with coalitions of the willing or small collections of states. They point to strong British relations over Ukraine with the Nordic and Baltic countries as well as parts of Central and Eastern Europe by way of example.
Partnerships will be crucial. It is expected she will be invited by the EU to a summit in Prague in October, dubbed the ‘European geopolitical community’, to discuss Ukraine. It would be churlish not to go but the tone she strikes will be crucial too.
A Thatcher-era politician in an Instagram age, Truss happily poses on a tank, just as the Iron Lady famously did. She has been extremely forthright on Russia, making clear that full withdrawal from all Ukrainian territory seized since 2014 must be the West’s only goal. She has also vowed to re-designate China from the Integrated Review’s present ‘systemic competitor’ to an ‘acute threat’.
Forthrightness, alongside agility and autonomy, may be laudable characteristics of her foreign policy, but what happens when they are infused with zero-sum doggedness? There is no shortage of global challenges facing the UK. In order to meet them, and to stake any credible claims to a ‘Global Britain’, Truss will need to seek long-term investment in alliance-building, not just instant opportunities to strike out.
John Kampfner, Executive Director, UK in the World Initiative, Chatham House.
Rising energy prices
The social and economic impact of high energy prices this winter may be greater than that of COVID-19. However, in contrast to the pandemic, there has been ample warning of the expected scale of this crisis.
The EU gets much more of its energy from Russia than the UK does, but we are all part of a, largely informal, European price zone which is why UK consumers are now facing, what would have been to many, unimaginable bills despite no longer importing energy from Russia.
Concern about energy prices has heightened recently and how the next prime minister reacts will be a baptism of fire. It will not only have a direct impact on the lives of UK citizens and the survival of many UK businesses but also affect perception of the competence of the government. The government therefore urgently needs to look at both immediate winter measures as well as longer term supply.
The EU has reacted with much greater purpose, proposing new legislative packages to diversify supply, accelerate the deployment of renewable energy, make adjustments to markets and put in place energy saving measures. With a further package of measures expected this month, these are unlikely to be enough, but they will make a difference.
The higher costs are unbearable for huge sections of society. In 2020, around 3.2 million households were in fuel poverty – spending 10 per cent of their disposable income on energy – which could rise to 12 million by January 2023. Many businesses will be in more dire straits, as there is no cap on their energy bills, and the government will have to find ways to directly reduce the costs of people and businesses. This will require the government to put a ceiling on the unit costs that consumers pay for their energy, leading to reform, particularly of the power market.
The role that government plays in assisting public and private sectors to save energy will be important. This is where it has wasted the last six months, where public information campaigns and small technology changes, such as refurbishing and resetting boilers and larger energy consuming products or insulating homes, would have made a difference.
Support for new supply needs to initially be given to new low-carbon technologies that can deliver both cheaply and rapidly, primarily onshore wind and solar, which also help to decarbonize the sector. While Boris Johnson, in his final days as prime minister, has reiterated his support for an additional nuclear power plant, it won’t operate for at least a decade. The UK will need to maintain, and increase, its relationship with the EU on energy as we continue to trade gas and electricity.
Other supply options and market restructuring will be needed and they all must balance affordability, security of supply and environmental considerations.
Antony Froggatt, Senior Research Fellow and Deputy Director, Environment and Society Programme, Chatham House.
The agenda on climate change
Climate change remains the most important challenge of this century and one that Liz Truss will rapidly need to get a grip of ahead of COP27.
The record temperatures this summer show how the changing climate is impacting the daily lives of UK citizens, however, although Truss has pledged to maintain the UK’s net zero 2050 target, environmental protection were not seen as a high priority in her campaign.
In one of her earliest responses to rising energy prices, Truss said that one of her first acts as prime minister would be to temporarily scrap the green levy, telling an audience in Exeter that, ‘[Our] fields shouldn’t be full of solar panels and I will change the rules…to make sure…we’re using our high value agricultural land for farming.’
She is also reportedly set to approve a series of oil and gas drilling licenses in the North Sea, raising concerns over the UK government’s approach to tackling the climate crisis since, if followed through, it would be regressive for climate action.
Hosting COP26 in 2021, along with Italy, was seen as an important post-Brexit opportunity for the UK in the climate space and ensured the development of many new multilateral sectorial initiatives, such as on climate finance, the Global Methane Pledge and on electric vehicles, while further supporting other emerging initiatives, such as on loss and damage. It will be important for Liz Truss, and the UK’s credibility, to continue to deliver on these.
Concrete things that are needed are a fast roll-out of renewable energy rather than fast-tracking more fossil fuel production, driving ahead the net-zero agenda particularly around land use and food and considering how to restructure markets to better deliver the long-term goals. Grasping the need to address the demand-side of consumption growth, and not just supply, is key. The UK has prided itself on being a global leader on the climate over the last 15 years but let’s hope that is now not in peril.
Professor Tim Benton, Director, Environment and Society Programme, Chatham House.
Russia and the war in Ukraine
Supporting Ukraine and confronting Russia are indisputable foreign policy priorities, where the new prime minister, Liz Truss, already has form and where her predecessor, Boris Johnson, had one of his rare but broadly acknowledged successes.
So, it is highly likely that Truss will look to continue on this path and go with popular expert consensus in assisting Ukraine generously and standing up to Russia.
The other question, though, is to what extent the UK’s position can continue to make a difference to the outcome of the war.
Bringing the waverers of western Europe more firmly on board is surely beyond any UK prime minister’s ability considering the UK’s post-Brexit behaviour where the UK still has its own questions to answer including over the failure to tackle the problems of Russian influence at home.
That said, Brexit may not always be relevant to shared hard security challenges. Other countries do see the difference training, money and weapons are making and, if these continue to bring success, it is possible even the waverers can be guilted into providing more aid and economic support.
However, supporting Ukraine is one thing. Truly understanding Russia and devising a coherent Russia strategy is another. What Truss needs to learn is that Russia, in its present incarnation, cannot be reasoned with whatever the state of the war.
James Nixey, Director, Russia and Eurasia Programme, Chatham House.
China and the Indo-Pacific tilt
Both Conservative leadership candidates argued during their campaigns that China was the biggest long-term threat to the UK’s national security. They both promised to call out China’s violations of human rights and international law and extend curbs on China’s access to sensitive technology.
However, if Prime Minister Liz Truss is to successfully respond to the scale of the challenge, she will need to do much more than say what she doesn’t want from Beijing. Truss needs to set out a convincing, positive vision for how the UK can navigate a world where the centre of global economic and geopolitical gravity is moving eastwards.
The Indo-Pacific ‘tilt’, which Truss oversaw as foreign secretary, was a good start. But tilting isn’t a strategy. So what comes next?
At a time when its in-tray is full of problems closer to home, her government needs to sustain enhanced levels of engagement in the Indo-Pacific, particularly in Southeast Asia, while investing at home in the UK’s Asia literacy.
That should include more support for research and education about China as well as the rest of this dynamic region. Labelling China a threat does not make it go away. The UK needs to learn how to live in a world where Chinese power and influence will continue to grow from Asia to Latin America and across the UN and other multilateral organizations.
Investing in the UK’s knowledge of, and relationships in, Asia will also support British businesses as they look for new opportunities in fast-growing but challenging emerging markets like India, Indonesia and Vietnam.
Ben Bland, Director, Asia Pacific Programme, Chatham House.
The UK’s Middle East policy
Liz Truss, and her new foreign secretary, must restore a distinct cabinet position for the Middle East and North Africa and reorient to give Iran’s regional role greater focus.
The Middle East portfolio remains hefty and complex and requires diplomatic engagement to match. No sooner had the UK merged the ministerial Middle East portfolio into the broader one of minister of state for Asia and the Middle East than the war on Ukraine began, directing Western attention to Gulf Arab countries as one potential energy source to offset the loss of Russian oil and gas. Yet Gulf Arab countries are hesitating to fully heed Western calls to increase energy production.
One key cause is Gulf Arab perceptions that the UK and other Western countries have overlooked their concerns of the threats that Iran poses to their security and political clout. Despite the UK’s characterization of Iraq as ‘post-conflict’, and of the situation in Syria as a ‘crisis’, recent clashes in Baghdad’s Green Zone and American and Israeli bombing of Iran-linked targets in Syria, as well as recurring attacks by Iran-backed groups on targets in Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries, underline Iran’s role in ongoing instability in the Middle East, which threatens the interests of the UK and its allies in the region.
Though the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office resources have been recently redistributed to further support response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK can, and must, use existing resources earmarked for the Middle East to engage more effectively. This, not only means restoring diplomatic cabinet distribution to give the region the attention it requires, but also revising its approach, putting Iran’s regional interventions high on the agenda and in parallel to efforts on the Iran nuclear deal.
Truss has confirmed that the UK sees GCC countries as a potential alternative source of energy to Russian oil and gas specifically and as important trade partners more broadly. UK foreign policy must not compartmentalize its approach to the Middle East. Diplomatic engagement on Iran’s regional role is a key factor in strengthening trust between the UK and its Middle Eastern allies, including in the GCC, which in turn supports the UK’s economic and security priorities. This means that UK policy must approach Iran not just more comprehensively, and coherently, but also as a component of the broader strategy of dealing with the geopolitical and economic threats presented by Russia.
Dr Lina Khatib, Director, Middle East and North Africa Programme, Chatham House.
Africa and the UK
Senior UK politicians often claim that Africa is a priority but UK prime ministers and foreign secretaries rarely visit the continent. Boris Johnson attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Summit in Kigali in August was his first as prime minister where he was accompanied by Liz Truss who was then his foreign secretary.
Despite saying she was an Africa enthusiast as secretary of state for international trade and president of the Board of Trade, Truss had never visited the continent. Her focus has consistently been on other parts of the world except for defending the UK’s contested partnership with Rwanda to repatriate to Kigali informal migrants to the UK. Her tendency to view global politics through the lens of great power rivalry has cast African states as second tier players, disrespecting their agency and prided sovereignty and ignoring the preference of many states to remain non-aligned on issues pertaining to great power competition.
This is a mistake. 25 per cent of the UN General Assembly is comprised of African member states and, of them, 21 are Commonwealth members with Gabon and Togo recently joining. The Russian invasion of Ukraine and intensifying competition with China is a reminder that in this era of sharper geopolitics, Africa increasingly matters for UK’s foreign policy objectives.
Liz Truss will need to review the 2021 Integrated Review, too, which downplayed much of Africa for UK strategy and advocated a pivot focus to East Africa. The Ukraine war, coupled with democratic reversals in East Africa and worsening stability in West Africa requires a UK priority rethink. With limited resources to support an expanded UK footprint, sharper focus and defined ambition is important.
Continuity is important too. Since 1989, there have been 21 ministers for Africa, an average tenure of just over 18 months. This is not the time to change the UK’s minister responsible for Africa but it is the moment to make once again that post focused just on sub-Saharan Africa rather than also covering the Caribbean and Latin America too.
Alex Vines, Director, Africa Programme, Chatham House.
The UK-US relationship
The US and the UK have proven to be surprisingly strong partners despite the host of factors that threaten to pull them apart. Shared interests in supporting Ukraine, strengthening NATO and cooperating on defence and intelligence are the current bedrocks of this partnership.
As the new prime minister, Liz Truss should double-down on the UK’s existing international commitments, especially in the Euro-Atlantic, and through NATO. She should also build strong mechanisms for security cooperation with Europe and restore Britain’s reputation as a nation committed to international, regional and domestic multilateral and legal frameworks. These measures strengthen Britain’s attractiveness to the US and so lend it greater influence in this essential partnership. Any move to undermine the Northern Ireland protocol should be carefully measured against its wider impacts, not only with Europe, but also with the US.
The new prime minister must also be wary though. The US faces a period of unpredictable and potentially deep political upheaval. Liz Truss should be careful to avoid unwittingly being drawn into divisions inside the US. Continuing Boris Johnson’s policy of restraint, rather than demanding a US-UK trade deal, is wise given the persistence of anti-trade sentiment in the US Congress and the looming US midterm elections.
The prime minister should also do what she can to lend her support and work effectively and pragmatically with this US administration. What comes next could be very disruptive so now is the time to leverage US power and lock the US in to durable commitments.
US President Joe Biden is determined and pragmatic. He will choose the partners that best enable him to deliver his foreign policy priorities. Liz Truss will be both more attractive, and less supplicant, to the US if she has a strong relationship with Europe.
Dr Leslie Vinjamuri, Director, US and Americas Programme, Chatham House.
Global health priorities
Global health has been one of the areas where the UK has historically been seen as punching above its weight due to the magnitude of its financing for global health programmes and its reputation as a leader in global health initiatives.
However, the UK’s standing has taken a significant hit since the start of the pandemic with it demonstrating a lack of solidarity in combatting COVID-19 when it hoarded vaccines and failed to lead the G7 in raising adequate funding for the COVAX facility and blocked attempts to share vaccine technologies with developing countries.
Slashing the international aid budget and deprioritizing global health within its aid strategy has further tarnished the UK’s reputation as a global health leader.
Rebuilding the UK’s hard-earned status as a leading force in global health by at least restoring the level of official development assistance (ODA) for health, if not enhancing it, should be one of the new prime minister’s top priorities. This should include support for major initiatives such as the Financial Intermediary Fund for Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response (FIF), the Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Intelligence in Berlin and the vaccine technology transfer hub in Africa.
There is a risk that the ongoing pandemic treaty negotiations will result in a weak instrument of little value. Liz Truss should prioritize the successful outcome of the negotiations by championing provisions that ensure the treaty makes a meaningful difference in enhancing global health security. There is a need for workable mechanisms to ensure countries cooperate next time in preventing, preparing for and responding to a pandemic and supporting countries that need extra resources while, another related priority, should be to engage in efforts to reform the International Health Regulations in a way that strengthens global health security.
Robert Yates, Director, Global Health Programme and Executive Director, Centre for Universal Health, Chatham House.
Championing international law
Compliance with international law is in the best interests of the UK and Liz Truss and the new UK government need to recognize this.
The UK wants Russia to comply with the UN Charter and stop its aggressive war against Ukraine. It wants China to recognize the rights of its Uighur citizens, for women to be protected from violence in armed conflict, for compliance with nuclear non-proliferation treaties and negotiate lucrative international trade agreements.
These are all excellent aims and they should continue to be pursued. But exhortations to the rest of the world to support the international rules-based order ring hollow if they come from a government which itself does not itself adhere to those rules.
How the UK conducts itself domestically is a mirror of how it conducts itself internationally. What elected UK officials say and do here matters elsewhere. How we treat the rule of law in this country impacts how others treat it – and us.
Liz Truss has an opportunity to lead by example. She should end the slow but dangerous habitualization of the British public becoming numb to government ‘intentions’ to break international law whether or not such threats are ultimately carried out.
She should also enable full public and parliamentary scrutiny of constitutionally significant proposals, like the Northern Ireland Protocol bill and reform of the Human Rights Act, rather than fast-track them past a public distracted by the cost-of-living crisis.
International law is founded upon principles of mutual trust, cooperation, good faith and reciprocity. To be a credible global leader, the UK must put the rule of law, including international law, at the heart of both its foreign and domestic policy. They cannot be disaggregated.
Rashmin Sagoo, Director, International Law Programme, Chatham House.
Strengthening international security
Security and defence will be high on the agenda for the new UK prime minister. Russia’s war in Ukraine and the potential for sudden, wider escalation remains a serious concern. The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant stand-off, threats of nuclear weapons use and veiled references to chemical or biological attacks has demonstrated the willingness of Russia to take enormous risks in regard to threatening Europe as a whole in order to achieve its aims.
If Ukraine’s counter offensive continues to make gains, then NATO countries will likely be threatened again in this manner. These are not just threats to Ukraine but to NATO states. And, most likely, given the significant role it has played in supporting Ukraine militarily, aimed primarily at the UK.
In the longer term, Liz Truss will need to review the 2021 Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy. The review came following the decision to increase defence spending and the Secretary of Defence, Ben Wallace, has been clear that he has no need to increase his budget further although that may change as the impact of inflation becomes clearer across the board and Liz Truss has pledged to raise defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2026 and 3 per cent in 2030. The Integrated Review is all about serious investment in the science and technology needed for security and defence in the future. Without such investment the UK will not be able to contribute to international security even in the limited way it can now and certainly not in an ambitious way in decades hence.
There are many long-term security threats that Liz Truss will need to grapple with in addition to Russia’s aggression in Europe, not least of which are China’s rising military capabilities and global ambitions. In the Arctic and Antarctic, China along with several other major economies, has serious ambitions for exploiting natural resources in terms of minerals, energy, particularly as climate change drives fish stock to the polar seas.
There are also discussions about extending the newly established AUKUS arrangement that plans to produce a nuclear-powered submarine capability for Australia which produces a mechanism for joint investment by Australia, the UK and the US in science and technology to other countries such as Japan and will also need to include the space sector.
The newly established AUKUS arrangement, that plans to produce a nuclear-powered submarine capability for Australia, also provides a mechanism for joint investment by Australia, the UK and the US in science and technologies such as in artificial intelligence and quantum technology. There are discussions about extending this arrangement to other countries such as Japan and could also include the space sector.
Meanwhile, at home, in the short-term, there will be increasing calls to end Russia’s war in Ukraine. Liz Truss will need to be ahead of that game so that Ukraine is supported and European security is enhanced rather than further stressed. This will require a new approach to international security – a need that was further highlighted at the end of August in New York with yet another collapse of agreement in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a result of Russia’s veto.
The UK has long played an important diplomatic role in finding creative solutions for international security and Liz Truss would be well advised to lever that reputation.
Dr Patricia Lewis, Director, International Security Programme, Chatham House.
Supporting science and technology
In science and technology, the UK currently finds itself in a balancing act between the US and the EU: ideologically attached to the light-touch approach of the US while dependent on the EU as an export market and for supply chains.
While Brexit in theory gives Britain more regulatory freedom, UK companies have often ended up abiding by EU regulations they are unable to shape. As the new prime minister, Liz Truss should explore forms of regulatory cooperation with the EU that prioritize market access while offering incentives to attract scientists and boost technical innovation.
Beyond transatlantic and European partnerships, it is essential for the UK to foster coalitions with a broader group of like-minded democracies which will be crucial to addressing global technology concerns and countering China’s digital model expansion.
Entrenching the UK as a science and technology ‘superpower’ will require a collaborative approach and involve identifying critical areas where the UK can drive international efforts. For example, Liz Truss should build on the UK’s recent successes in the sensitive issues of data flows and digital technical standards as well as encourage investment in open-source security and infrastructure.
Finally, Liz Truss must unblock the skills and talent pipeline. It is difficult and expensive for high-skilled workers to move to the UK and a key source of labour supply has been lost since leaving the EU. The UK should consider introducing a Commonwealth visa scheme and radically reduce the cost for science and technology companies to offer those visas.
Strengthening infrastructure and housing, particularly in areas that need levelling up, will allow talent to move to areas with the most productive opportunities.
Marjorie Buchser, Executive Director, Digital Society Initiative, Chatham House; David Lawrence, Research Fellow, UK in the World Initiative Chatham House and Alex Krasodomski, Head of Innovation Partnerships, Chatham House.
Trade, climate, and green supply chains
Liz Truss will soon find the answers to the UK’s supply security challenges and soaring energy and food prices as well as future growth lie not at home but are global problems.
At a time of crisis, solutions can only come from countries working together. The UK is a perfectly sized state with plenty of heft but it is not so large as to be able to afford to ignore the needs of others.
It should lead the convening of a growing ‘coalition of the willing’ on trade, climate, and green supply chains which could include Australia and Canada as well as developing nations with large extractive sectors in Africa and Asia that are pro-trade, pro-climate, pro-development, and pro-growth.
Even though working together on trade and green supply chains can reduce unwanted dependencies, support climate action, and help businesses unlock the $26 trillion in market opportunities, many governments have yet to take bold steps due to a fear of disguised protectionism.
Meanwhile, the European Union (EU) carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM) is fuelling bitter divides on competitiveness and development concerns.
Trade retaliation is likely, and most probably will happen in parallel with legal processes at the WTO. These dynamics mean trade will be underused as an instrument but will create challenging dynamics for COP27.
Although the Agreement on Climate Change, Trade, and Sustainability (ACCTS) was launched in 2019, the UK could fill a leadership gap since no major economies have positioned themselves as leaders at the intersection of trade, climate, and green supply chains.
British International Investment, the UK’s development institution, should support the establishment and scaling of low-carbon, resource-efficient, sustainable, and deforestation-free supply chains which could help fuel next generation of growth in the UK and beyond.
Bernice Lee, Research Director, Futures; Hoffmann Distinguished Fellow for Sustainability; Chair, Sustainability Accelerator Advisory Board.
Improve regulation, give priority to trade relations with the EU, and maintain transparency
The UK’s new prime minister comes into office with the country facing the most serious set of economic challenges since 2008-9.
But in contrast to the global financial crisis, the causes of today’s crisis are more multifaceted and to a degree more UK-specific – the Brexit trade shock, increased public spending pressures linked to the backlog in the NHS and potentially serious long-term effects of ‘long COVID’ and disrupted schooling, and the unprecedented shock to energy prices following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, linked in part to the UK’s lack of gas storage capacity.
In response Liz Truss is determined her government should tackle from the outset both the immediate cost of living crisis and what she sees as the causes of the UK’s poor long-term record on productivity, investment, and growth – unnecessary regulation (ranging from financial regulation through town planning) and excessive taxation.
Moreover, to square the circle between the new spending required to cushion the public against rising energy prices and delivering her commitment to reduce taxes she has signalled a readiness to see further significant rises in public debt.
While the new prime minister is right not to delay addressing the UK’s long-term challenges, there are three critical questions which will help determine the success or failure of her approach:
First, whether her diagnosis of Britain’s underlying problems is correct? Should the priority be less regulation, or in the context of the tech revolution and the need to accelerate the transformation of the economy to net zero, smarter regulation?
Second, whether her government is willing to give adequate attention to the substantial economic costs of Brexit? The government is resolute in its belief that Brexit is an under-exploited opportunity rather than a drag on growth, but the available empirical evidence increasingly highlights the costs.
Meanwhile, growing geopolitical tensions with China and the political consensus in the US on the need to protect its own industries means it is unlikely the UK will find large and rapidly expanding alternatives to compensate for stagnation in its trade with the European Union (EU).
Third, whether the financial markets will give the UK government sufficient leeway on debt and inflation. The Cameron-Osborne administration was arguably too cautious on public debt, but the nature of financial markets is that by the time you have lost their confidence it is too late to do anything about it.
Kwasi Kwarteng has written that a Liz Truss government will remain ‘fully committed’ to the independence of the Bank of England, but he also said coordination across monetary policy and fiscal policy is crucial.
Coordination was a successful feature of the economic response to the pandemic, but the wider context there was very low inflation. There is a fine line between effective coordination and loss of operational autonomy.
Therefore, Liz Truss’s new government should interpret its existing policy commitments to:
- focus primarily on the goal of improving regulation, whether that means elimination or enhancement;
- give high priority, however discretely, to stabilizing – and if possible improving – the UK’s trade relations with the EU, drawing on the common sense of purpose arising from the energy crisis;
- maintain a high degree of transparency in its dealings with the Bank of England, particularly in relation to economic policy coordination, so as to minimize the risk of a misunderstanding by the markets.
Creon Butler, Research Director, Trade, Investment and New Governance Models, and Director, Global Economy and Finance Programme.