Ahmed Imtiaz is a qualified barrister working as a legal counsel for a global insights platform in London. He was a candidate for Westminster Council in the May local elections.
One of the striking themes to emerge from the local elections was the advance of nationalist and populist parties across the UK.
Labour, for the first time in its history, lost control in Wales.
In Scotland, the SNP’s grip on Holyrood remains firm despite internal turbulence. In England, the rise of Reform and the Greens coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum signals a deeper restlessness in the electorate. These results cannot be dismissed as isolated protest votes. They reflect a broader sense of economic stagnation, frustration with living standards, and a belief that the political class has failed to offer a credible path to long‑term prosperity.
If Britain is to reverse this drift, the government must be willing to think more boldly about the country’s economic future. Incrementalism will not be enough. We need institutions capable of generating wealth over decades, not just managing decline year by year. One such institution should be a British sovereign wealth fund, a national investment vehicle designed to build long‑term assets, strengthen our economic resilience, and give future generations a genuine stake in the country’s prosperity.
It is often said that Britain missed the moment in the 1980s, when North Sea oil revenues could have been channelled into a sovereign wealth fund similar to Norway’s. That is true, but dwelling on the past is unhelpful. The more important question is whether we can build such a fund now. The answer is yes, if we design it properly, insulate it from short‑term political pressures, and give it a clear mandate focused on returns rather than industrial policy.
The Labour Government’s National Wealth Fund, announced in 2024, suffers from a fundamental flaw: it is narrowly targeted at specific sectors such as clean energy and industrial transformation. That may be politically attractive, but it is not how a successful sovereign wealth fund should operate. Norway’s fund does not exist to pick winners or subsidise favoured industries. Its purpose is simple: to maximise long‑term returns for the Norwegian people.
A British sovereign wealth fund must follow the same principle. It should be independent, professionally managed, and overseen by a respected board of trustees. Its mandate should be to invest globally across equities, bonds, property, and private markets, with the sole objective of generating strong, sustainable returns. Government should set the framework, but not the investment strategy. The Bank of England provides a useful model: independent, technocratic, and trusted.
The benefits would go far beyond financial returns. A well‑capitalised sovereign wealth fund would give Britain a new source of soft power. Countries around the world court investment from Norway’s fund, Singapore’s GIC, and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. A British equivalent, a properly governed and globally active fund, would give the UK influence in boardrooms and capitals alike. That matters at a time when Britain’s international development budget has been reduced from 0.5 to 0.3 per cent of GDP. As Mark Carney argued in Davos, middle powers must find new ways to shape the global order. A sovereign wealth fund is one such tool.
The returns generated by the fund could be used in several ways. A portion should be reinvested to grow the fund over time. Another portion could support long‑term infrastructure, from transport to digital networks. Crucially, the fund could also help tackle Britain’s housing challenge by offering low‑interest, long‑term loans to young people struggling to get on the property ladder. Over time, the fund could develop an investment arm that supports British entrepreneurs, acting as a domestic venture capital catalyst for innovation and growth.
But one feature should distinguish a British fund from its international counterparts: the public should be able to invest in it directly. Britain lacks the broad‑based investment culture seen in the United States. The Financial Conduct Authority estimates that around 22 million UK adults have £10,000 or more sitting in cash savings, earning little, and missing out on the long‑term benefits of investing.
Allowing ordinary citizens to buy into the sovereign wealth fund, receiving a fixed, reliable return, would democratise wealth creation and help build a culture of long‑term saving. It would also give the fund a stable domestic capital base, reducing reliance on government contributions alone.
Britain stands at a crossroads. The political turbulence reflected in the May elections is a symptom of deeper economic malaise. If we want to restore confidence, rebuild prosperity, and give people a sense that the future can be better than the past, we need institutions capable of delivering long‑term value. A sovereign wealth fund properly designed, professionally run, and open to public participation could be one of the most important economic reforms of the next decade.
It is not too late for Britain to start thinking generationally again. The question is whether we have the ambition to do so.
Ahmed Imtiaz is a qualified barrister working as a legal counsel for a global insights platform in London. He was a candidate for Westminster Council in the May local elections.
One of the striking themes to emerge from the local elections was the advance of nationalist and populist parties across the UK.
Labour, for the first time in its history, lost control in Wales.
In Scotland, the SNP’s grip on Holyrood remains firm despite internal turbulence. In England, the rise of Reform and the Greens coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum signals a deeper restlessness in the electorate. These results cannot be dismissed as isolated protest votes. They reflect a broader sense of economic stagnation, frustration with living standards, and a belief that the political class has failed to offer a credible path to long‑term prosperity.
If Britain is to reverse this drift, the government must be willing to think more boldly about the country’s economic future. Incrementalism will not be enough. We need institutions capable of generating wealth over decades, not just managing decline year by year. One such institution should be a British sovereign wealth fund, a national investment vehicle designed to build long‑term assets, strengthen our economic resilience, and give future generations a genuine stake in the country’s prosperity.
It is often said that Britain missed the moment in the 1980s, when North Sea oil revenues could have been channelled into a sovereign wealth fund similar to Norway’s. That is true, but dwelling on the past is unhelpful. The more important question is whether we can build such a fund now. The answer is yes, if we design it properly, insulate it from short‑term political pressures, and give it a clear mandate focused on returns rather than industrial policy.
The Labour Government’s National Wealth Fund, announced in 2024, suffers from a fundamental flaw: it is narrowly targeted at specific sectors such as clean energy and industrial transformation. That may be politically attractive, but it is not how a successful sovereign wealth fund should operate. Norway’s fund does not exist to pick winners or subsidise favoured industries. Its purpose is simple: to maximise long‑term returns for the Norwegian people.
A British sovereign wealth fund must follow the same principle. It should be independent, professionally managed, and overseen by a respected board of trustees. Its mandate should be to invest globally across equities, bonds, property, and private markets, with the sole objective of generating strong, sustainable returns. Government should set the framework, but not the investment strategy. The Bank of England provides a useful model: independent, technocratic, and trusted.
The benefits would go far beyond financial returns. A well‑capitalised sovereign wealth fund would give Britain a new source of soft power. Countries around the world court investment from Norway’s fund, Singapore’s GIC, and the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority. A British equivalent, a properly governed and globally active fund, would give the UK influence in boardrooms and capitals alike. That matters at a time when Britain’s international development budget has been reduced from 0.5 to 0.3 per cent of GDP. As Mark Carney argued in Davos, middle powers must find new ways to shape the global order. A sovereign wealth fund is one such tool.
The returns generated by the fund could be used in several ways. A portion should be reinvested to grow the fund over time. Another portion could support long‑term infrastructure, from transport to digital networks. Crucially, the fund could also help tackle Britain’s housing challenge by offering low‑interest, long‑term loans to young people struggling to get on the property ladder. Over time, the fund could develop an investment arm that supports British entrepreneurs, acting as a domestic venture capital catalyst for innovation and growth.
But one feature should distinguish a British fund from its international counterparts: the public should be able to invest in it directly. Britain lacks the broad‑based investment culture seen in the United States. The Financial Conduct Authority estimates that around 22 million UK adults have £10,000 or more sitting in cash savings, earning little, and missing out on the long‑term benefits of investing.
Allowing ordinary citizens to buy into the sovereign wealth fund, receiving a fixed, reliable return, would democratise wealth creation and help build a culture of long‑term saving. It would also give the fund a stable domestic capital base, reducing reliance on government contributions alone.
Britain stands at a crossroads. The political turbulence reflected in the May elections is a symptom of deeper economic malaise. If we want to restore confidence, rebuild prosperity, and give people a sense that the future can be better than the past, we need institutions capable of delivering long‑term value. A sovereign wealth fund properly designed, professionally run, and open to public participation could be one of the most important economic reforms of the next decade.
It is not too late for Britain to start thinking generationally again. The question is whether we have the ambition to do so.