Category Archives: Investment

Conservative Party Conference: Can Kemi Badenoch’s ‘Right Way’ Win Back Britain?

This year’s conference season saw one of the clearest ideological divides in British politics for some time. The prime minister delivered a speech that many on the left had long wanted to hear, making the case for a more active and interventionist state. In Birmingham, Kemi Badenoch offered an equally unapologetic defence of Thatcherism.

The Conservative leader’s speech gave a sense that the party is finally off life support and up for the fight, with a renewed appeal to the shires through promises of tax cuts that will undoubtedly energise the Tory core vote. At the same time, Badenoch sought to challenge Reform UK on questions of values and integrity. Clearly adored by her party members, she remains behind in the polls and continues to fight for attention from the country.

More significant than any individual announcement was the moral case set out in The Right Way, Badenoch’s conference policy document, and echoed throughout her speech. Almost every policy proposal was rooted in a belief in personal responsibility and the value of individual endeavour. Badenoch argued that individual effort is not only the source of economic prosperity but also of human fulfilment and opportunity. In that sense, her speech was about more than policy. It was a battle of ideas, with Badenoch presenting conservatism as a competing vision ‘for the soul of the country’.

The headline-grabbing policy announcement was Badenoch’s pledge to abolish inheritance tax on family homes and raise the amount an individual can pass on tax-free to £500,000. Under the proposals, a couple would be able to leave their main residence to direct descendants free from inheritance tax, alongside a further £1 million of assets to other beneficiaries. Long criticised by many on the right as Britain’s least fair tax, inheritance tax is often portrayed as a form of double taxation, applying to assets accumulated from income that has already been taxed.

Badenoch also identified the eventual abolition of inheritance tax as a long-term ambition. Critics argue, however, that the benefits would be concentrated among the wealthiest and not ‘ordinary’ families. The Institute for Fiscal studies estimated that the wealthiest 1% of estates, worth £2.1 million or more, would receive around half of the gains from full abolition. Some also worry that the proposal could encourage older homeowners to remain in larger properties, limiting the availability of family-sized homes.

The Leader of the Opposition also argued that too many people are being written off by a welfare system that discourages work. Her reforms would remove access to out-of-work benefits immediately after school or university, introduce ‘back to work’ cards for long-term claimants, and require those able to work to engage with employment programmes. Badenoch aims to couple these welfare reforms with plans to halve the jobs tax for under-25s and repeal Labour’s Employment Rights Act.

Badenoch said that cutting the welfare bill would help fund higher defence spending, something that was notably absent from Burnham’s conference speech. Central to this was a £10 billion commitment to build ‘Britannia Shield’, an integrated UK air and missile defence network. The proposal would initially focus on protecting critical national infrastructure and military bases before being expanded to cover the UK mainland and British territories overseas. However, with the programme expected to be delivered over ten years, it represents a long-term ambition rather than a rapid build-out.

The proposal is more ambitious than the government’s current plans, having previously identified missile defence as a priority while allocating less than £800 million to the capability over four years. This comes despite a recent commons Defence Committee report warning that the UK has ‘next to nothing’ in place when it comes to missile defence, particularly against the growing threat posed by drones.

Despite the non-nonsense tone of Badenoch’s speech and the long list of policy commitments unveiled at conference, all of it ultimately depends on the Conservatives returning to power. With Badenoch ruling out an electoral pact with Reform UK and the party still polling below its performance at the 2024 general election, the central question remains whether voters are willing to give the Conservatives another hearing after fourteen years in government.

Steve Brine, GK’s Strategic Adviser and former health minister said: ‘What struck me was the attempt to give the Conservatives a clearer organising argument: that Britain’s problems stem from weak growth and an overextended state, and that the answer is greater economic freedom, lower taxes and firmer choices about public spending. The speech also sought to present Kemi as someone prepared to make the case for a distinct Conservative identity and one that her party feels wholly comfortable with. In that, the two main parties are in lock-step. The test will be whether that argument can be turned into a credible and coherent programme for government.’

Robert Halfon, GK’s Strategic Adviser and former education minister said: ‘Kemi Badenoch leaves conference with her leadership secure and her party more united than it has been for years. The direction is clear: firmly Conservative, and clearly distinct from Reform. Skills are part of that offer. Badenoch put apprenticeships in her leader’s speech, and the plan to move money from poor-value degrees into apprenticeships gives the Education team a concrete policy to drive forward. Employers will now want to see it costed and funded.’

What Great British Grid means for Britain’s electricity network

In his first address to Labour Party Conference as prime minister, Andy Burnham set out plans for a new government-backed body, Great British Grid (GBG), as part of a wider effort to address high energy costs, accelerate infrastructure delivery and support economic growth.

For investors and businesses, the government’s plans for GBG are unlikely to represent a fundamental change to the ownership or operation of Britain’s electricity network. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero has said that GBG will ‘complement, rather than replace’ the companies already responsible for operating the electricity system, with the role of existing network operators remaining unchanged. Instead, the focus is on changing how future transmission infrastructure projects are developed and delivered.

GBG will operate as a branch of Great British Energy (GBE) and will participate in bids for future transmission projects. Rather than incumbent network operators automatically developing new infrastructure, projects could be awarded through a competitive process involving bids from GBG, existing network companies and private investors. The government argues that increasing competition in this way will help speed up grid expansion, support economic growth and reduce the costs of network investment that are ultimately passed on to consumers through energy bills.

The scale of GBG’s involvement will depend on the funding available to it. GBE was allocated £8.3 billion of capital funding for this parliament, although a proportion of that funding has already been committed to other priorities, including support for small modular nuclear reactors. While the final allocation to GBG has yet to be confirmed, it is likely to be small compared with the scale of investment required across the electricity network. Planned transmission investment during the 2026-31 regulatory period alone is expected to total around £70 billion, with substantial further investment required throughout the 2030s.

The use of competition to deliver transmission infrastructure is not entirely new. The Competitively Appointed Transmission Owner (CATO) regime, introduced under the Conservative government in 2023, was designed to open parts of the transmission network to competitive procurement. GBG therefore builds on an existing framework for competition, while giving the state a more direct role in bidding for future transmission projects.

The government has also announced reforms that would allow businesses to construct their own grid connections rather than waiting for network operators to undertake the work. Ministers hope this approach will accelerate the delivery of energy projects, industrial developments and AI data centres in the UK.

While these reforms may help reduce some delays, many industry groups continue to argue that the planning and consenting system remains one of the biggest barriers to faster infrastructure delivery. The success of the government’s approach is therefore likely to depend not only on changes to grid connections, but also on whether wider planning reforms can shorten approval times for major energy projects.

Please contact Brett Morton via brett.morton@gkstrategy.com if you would like to discuss the government’s energy reforms in more detail.

A new UK Prime Minister, potentially a new Energy Secretary – another hydrogen delay?

The ongoing conflict between the US and Iran and the disruption to oil and liquefied natural gas flows through the Strait of Hormuz have reinforced the importance of energy security and independence. Against this backdrop of heightened geopolitical uncertainty, reports suggest that Prime Minister-in-waiting Andy Burnham may be more open to new North Sea oil and gas developments. This could include a potential expansion of the Rosebank oil field (the UK’s largest undeveloped oil field) and the Jackdaw gas field (one of the largest undeveloped gas fields in the North Sea), while also accelerating the deployment of advanced clean energy technologies.

Increasingly recognised as a key part of the UK’s future energy mix, hydrogen (the most abundant element in the universe, accounting for around 75% of matter) is highly versatile, enabling its use in electricity generation, fuel cells, industrial heat and as feedstock for the production of low-carbon fuels such as sustainable aviation fuel.  As policymakers seek both energy security and decarbonisation, hydrogen offers a credible alternative to diminishing fossil fuel resources.

Expanding the hydrogen industry is about more than achieving climate goals; it represents a significant economic opportunity. It can create high-value jobs across engineering, manufacturing and energy, while providing a pathway for workers in the oil and gas, chemicals and heavy engineering sectors to transition into low-carbon industries. Hydrogen projects can also drive regional growth by attracting investment into ’industrial heartlands’ and helping to regenerate communities historically reliant on carbon-intensive industries. Looking ahead, the opportunity is substantial, with the global hydrogen market projected to exceed $1 trillion by 2050 according to analysis carried out by Deloitte.

The UK is well positioned to capitalise on this opportunity. It benefits from a strong industrial base, established energy infrastructure and expertise developed through decades of oil and gas activity. Major industrial clusters in the North West, South Wales, the Solent, Grangemouth and the North East provide an immediate and scalable market for hydrogen, particularly for high-temperature industrial processes where electrification is not yet commercially viable. Recognising this potential, the government has sought to attract investment across the hydrogen value chain through measures including the Hydrogen Production Business Model and Hydrogen Allocation Rounds (HARs). It has also committed more than £500 million towards hydrogen infrastructure, including plans for the UK’s first regional hydrogen network by 2031 to support the production, storage and transportation of low-carbon hydrogen.

However, impending policy decisions are creating uncertainty for project developers and investors. HAR1 supported 11 projects (such as Bradford Low Carbon Hydrogen in Yorkshire) and HAR2 shortlisted a further 27 further projects (such as Green Hydrogen 5 in Wales). However, progress has been slower than anticipated, with only a limited number of HAR1 projects advancing towards Final Investment Decisions. Progress on HAR2 has also been limited, as shortlisted projects remain in the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero’s due diligence and cost assurance process, with developers still lacking clarity on when that process will conclude. At the same time, the revised Hydrogen Strategy, originally expected in autumn 2025, remains delayed.

The combination of these delays and a lack of policy clarity have created uncertainty for developers and investors. Many project developers continue to commit substantial resources towards land, planning, engineering, grid connections and supply chain engagement while awaiting clearer signals from government. If this uncertainty persists, it risks slowing project deployment, discouraging participation in future allocation rounds and weakening the UK’s attractiveness as a destination for hydrogen investment.

With a new Prime Minister and potentially a new energy secretary, important questions remain: Will the long-awaited Hydrogen Strategy face further delays while ministers review priorities? Will it provide a clear vision for where hydrogen can deliver the greatest economic, technical, environmental and societal value? The UK has a significant opportunity to become a leader in the global hydrogen economy, but realising that potential will require clear, timely and credible policy signals from government.

If you would like to discuss GK’s public affairs offering and how policy developments may impact investment in emerging energy technologies, please contact Brett Morton at brett.morton@gkstrategy.com .

Sajid Javid- Five priorities of the new Health Secretary

Capital isn’t glamorous, but it’s where health reform succeeds or fails

Drawing on his experience as a Health Minister and Chair of the Health and Social Care Select Committee, GK’s strategic advisor Steve Brine argues the real challenge is delivering, not announcing, NHS infrastructure investment.

There is an old saying in politics that ministers like cutting ribbons more than fixing roofs. Reading the Government’s new 10-Year Capital Plan for Health and Social Care, I was reminded just how true that is.

Having served as a Health Minister and later as chair of the cross-party Health and Social Care Select Committee, I’ve learned that while politicians understandably focus on services, patients and waiting lists, none of those can be credibly improved without investing in the infrastructure that underpins them.

Estates, equipment and digital capability are not simply operational issues; capital isn’t glamorous – but it’s where health reform succeeds or fails

That is why I think this document matters, even if it contains fewer headline announcements than some may have wanted. It’s more of a capital investment framework than a capital spending announcement and while it is important because it starts to join together a series of previously announced commitments into one strategy, if you’re looking for lots of new money or major projects, you’ll likely be disappointed.

For investors, suppliers and those looking to support the transformation of health and care, this is best understood therefore as a statement of strategic direction. The Government is attempting to provide something the NHS has too often lacked: a long-term framework that links capital investment directly to service reform.

The themes will be familiar and re-enforce the view many of us held that the capital plan would essentially be the infrastructure companion to the 10-Year Health Plan which is now just over one year old.

Investment in neighbourhood health centres, modern diagnostic equipment (see my last piece), digital infrastructure, community facilities and the maintenance of the existing estate have all featured in previous announcements.

What is new is the attempt to bring those priorities together and explicitly align them with the Government’s ambition to shift care from hospitals into communities, from analogue to digital, and from sickness towards prevention.

As a minister, I learned very quickly that capital policy is health policy. You can’t expect clinicians to embrace new models of care if they are working in buildings designed before England last won the World Cup, nor can you promise a digital NHS without investing in the infrastructure that powers it. Too often, capital has been treated as something separate from healthcare delivery whereas in reality, it is one of its principal enablers.

That lesson stayed with me when I chaired the Health and Social Care Select Committee. Alongside colleagues on the Public Accounts Committee, we scrutinised the New Hospital Programme, asking not simply whether Boris Johnson’s ambitions were right, but whether they were deliverable.

That experience reinforced a rather obvious point: announcing infrastructure programmes is relatively straightforward; delivering them consistently over a decade, through changing political and economic circumstances, is considerably more challenging!

That is why I think investors should read this document with cautious optimism. The opportunities are clear. If the Government is serious about expanding community-based care, modernising diagnostics, digitising the NHS and addressing the maintenance backlog, there will inevitably be demand for expertise, technology, construction, data, equipment and innovative delivery models.

The direction of travel is now clearer than it has been for some time. The question not answered is pace. The plan sets out the destination far more clearly than the route to get there. There is relatively little detail about sequencing, procurement, prioritisation or delivery milestones.

History also provides a note of caution. During my time in government, I saw how easily capital budgets could come under pressure when day-to-day NHS spending became squeezed. Every government says it will protect long-term investment; not every government manages to do so.

And I note how one of the strongest themes is ‘repair first’ as large sums are earmarked for tackling the maintenance backlog, replacing obsolete equipment and of course removing RAAC. £6.75bn for hospital repairs over nine years and £2bn to remove reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete.

Overall, I see this as a welcome piece of strategic thinking. It provides a clearer signal than we have had for many years that infrastructure is no longer being viewed as an afterthought but as a prerequisite for NHS reform. For those looking to invest, that matters.

The real test, however, will not be whether the strategy is well written, but whether successive governments (including the new one about to start work) have the discipline to stick to it.

What could skills policy look like under a Burnham-led government?

The prospect of Andy Burnham succeeding Keir Starmer as Prime Minister is significant for the skills sector. Burnham is a strong advocate for technical education and has criticised previous governments for their ‘obsession’ with higher education, including former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair’s target of having more than 50% of young people go to university.

In his first major speech since launching his bid to replace Starmer on Monday 29 June, Burnham acknowledged that while university is ‘great for those who want it’, there also needs to be a focus on the life chances of those who don’t wish to opt for the higher education route. Given he has long called for ‘true parity’ between academic and technical education, as highlighted in his manifesto for his 2015 Labour leadership bid, Burnham is likely to place much greater emphasis on study programmes linked to in-demand technical and vocational occupations as part of a broader effort to create clearer pathways into employment for young people.

Burham’s Manchester Baccalaureate (MBacc), which provides a pathway into the region’s high growth sectors through technical and vocational qualifications, is a clear example of what this shift could look like on a national scale. Launched by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) in September 2024, the MBacc guarantees every young person in the region a clear pathway to employment opportunities through a combination of careers advice services, work experience placements and technical qualifications, including by expanding access to T Levels and apprenticeships.

Since its launch in 2024-25, the MBacc has benefitted from growing support amongst local employers. In January 2026, GMCA confirmed that several leading employers, including Autotrader, IBM and the NHS, had pledged over 1,000 additional work placements to T Level students. This demonstrates how engaged and invested businesses can be in skills and the future workforce, provided the right policy framework is in place. The MBacc not only provides technical education routes into growing regional industries, but it also encourages young people to make subject choices at the ages of 14, 16 and 18 that support progression into these pathways.

Another aspect of Burnham’s approach is the emphasis he places on greater collaboration between skills, health and employment, specifically the need to adopt a place-based model while pivoting away from a nationally directed skills system. One of the advantages of a place-based model is the recognition of significant regional differences in the causes of unemployment and the nature of local labour markets. This includes inconsistent access to training provision and the variety of opportunities for growth across the country. A Burnham-led government is likely therefore to see more devolution by default, whereby employment support is further integrated with local health, skills and community services. This would mean that providers in the FE and HE sectors play a much larger role in supporting people into work.

A Burnham premiership is likely to see a more devolved and technically-focused skills and training system. On a practical level, this is likely to involve granting established combined mayoral authorities (like London, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands) greater autonomy in shaping skills provision around local labour market demands. For employers and training providers, this direction of travel will place greater emphasis on more joined-up local working and support across education, health and employment services. While this has the potential to significantly transform the skills sector, the test for Burnham is whether he can demonstrate that a localised, devolved approach will deliver economic growth, boost living standards, and give every young person growing up a ‘clear path into a re-industrialised Britain’.

If you would like to talk more the potential of a Burnham-led government and what this could mean for the skills sector, please email Noureen@gkstrategy.com.