LONDON — Countries focused on reopening the Strait of Hormuz will meet for a security summit in the near future, which the U.K. has offered to host. More than 30 nations including United Arab Emirates, the U.K., France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands have now signed a joint statement agreeing to work on “appropriate efforts” to safeguard the major trade route. A British official, granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak on the record, said Tuesday the U.K. wanted to help “build this coalition and develop momentum” in order to “open a route safe through the Strait of Hormuz, and provide that reassurance to merchant shipping.” They added that cooperation between like-minded partners would include a security conference on the topic, which could be hosted in London or Portsmouth, the home of the Royal Navy on the south coast of England. NATO chief Mark Rutte and British PM Keir Starmer now appear to be leading the push to restart traffic through the Strait, despite skepticism from other allies. The same British official discussed options for securing the channel, such as deploying autonomous minehunting systems from a mothership in the Gulf, while conceding this would not be possible while the current level of hostilities continue. They expressed confidence that “we will see different nations coming forwards with different offers to support us”and “we will be able to find in the right conditions a coalition that will be able to provide that assurance to the merchant shipping industry.”

LONDON — Keir Starmer’s keeping Britain out of the war in Iran — but he can’t duck the conflict’s grave economic consequences. In a sign of growing fears about the impact of the war on Britain, the prime minister chaired a rare meeting of the government’s emergency COBRA committee Monday night, joined by senior ministers and Governor of the Bank of England Andrew Bailey. Starmer’s top finance minister, Rachel Reeves, will update the House of Commons on the economic picture Tuesday, as an already-unpopular administration worries that chaos in the Middle East is shredding plans to lower the cost of living and get the British economy growing. For Starmer’s government — headed for potentially brutal local elections in May — the crisis in the Gulf risks a nightmare combination of a rise in energy prices, interest rates, inflation and the cost of government borrowing that threatens to undermine everything he’s done since winning office. Economists are now warning that even if Donald Trump’s promise of a “complete and total resolution of hostilities” with Iran were to bear fruit, the effects on the British economy could still last for months. Already there are signs of a split within Starmer’s party over how to respond. Labour MPs want the government to think seriously about action to protect households — but Starmer and Reeves have long talked up the need for fiscal responsibility, and economics are warning that there’s little room for maneuver. Fuel prices displayed at a Shell garage in Southam, Warwickshire on March 23, 2026. | Jacob King/PA Images via Getty Images Jim O’Neill, a former Treasury minister who served as an adviser to Reeves, told POLITICO the government should “not get sucked into reacting to every external shock” and “concentrate on boosting our underlying growth trend.” WHY THE UK IS SO HARD HIT Just before the outbreak of war, there was reason for Starmer and Reeves to feel quietly optimistic about the long-stagnant British economy. The Bank of England had expected inflation to fall back sustainably toward its two percent target for the first time in five years, giving the central bank the space to carry on cutting interest rates.  With the Iran war in full flow, it was forced to rewrite those forecasts at the Monetary Policy Committee’s meeting last week — and now sees inflation at around 3.5 percent by the summer. The U.K. is a big net importer of energy and also needs constant imports of foreign capital to fund its budget and current account deficits. That’s made it one of first targets in the financial markets’ crosshairs. The government’s cost of borrowing has risen by more than half a percentage point over the last month. That threatens both the real economy and Reeves’ painstakingly-negotiated budget arithmetic. Higher inflation means higher interest rates and a higher bill for servicing the government’s debt: fiscal watchdog the Office for Budget Responsibility estimates a one-point increase in inflation would add £7.3 billion to debt servicing costs in 2026-2027 alone. The effect on businesses and home owners is also likely to be chilling. Britain’s banks are already repricing their most popular mortgages, which are tied to the two-year gilt rate. Hundreds of mortgage products were pulled in a hurry after the MPC meeting last week, something that will hit the housing market and depress Reeves’ intake from both stamp duty and capital gains. Duncan Weldon, an economist and author, said: “Even if this were to stop tomorrow, the inflation numbers and growth numbers are going to look materially worse throughout 2026. “If this continues for longer… it’s an awful lot more challenging and you end up with a much tougher budget this autumn than the government would have been hoping to unveil.” DECISION TIME The U.K.’s economic plight presents an acute political headache for Starmer, as he faces a mismatch between his own party’s expectations about the government’s ability to help people and his own scarce resources. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has promised to keep looking at different options for some form of assistance to bill-payers hit by an energy price shock. A pain point is looming in July, when a regulated cap on energy costs is due to expire and bills could jump significantly. One left-leaning Labour MP, granted anonymity to speak frankly, said: “They [ministers] need to be treating this like a financial crisis. They need plans for multiple scenarios with clear triggers for government support.” A second MP from the 2024 intake said “it’s right that a Labour government steps in, particularly to help the most vulnerable.” Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper and Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves at the first cabinet meeting of the new year at No. 10 Downing St. on Jan. 6, 2026 in London, England. | Pool photo by Richard Pohle via Getty Images This demand for action is being felt in the upper echelons of the party too, as Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy recently argued Reeves’ fiscal rules — seen as crucial in the Treasury to reassure the markets — may need to be reconsidered if prices continue to rise and a major support package is needed.  One Labour official said there are clear disagreements with Labour over how to go about drawing up help and warned “the fiscal approach is going to be a massive dividing line at any leadership election.” The same official pointed to recent comments by former Starmer deputy — and likely leadership contender — Angela Rayner about the OBR, with Rayner accusing the watchdog of ignoring the “social benefit” of government spending. Despite the pressure, ministers have so far restricted themselves to criticizing petrol retailers for alleged profiteering, and have been flirting with new powers for markets watchdog the Competition and Markets Authority. The government said Reeves would on Tuesday set out steps to “help protect working people from unfair price rises,” including a new “anti-profiteering framework” to “root out price gouging.” But Starmer signaled strongly in an appearance before a Commons committee Monday evening that he was not about to unveil any wide-ranging bailout package, telling MPs he was “acutely aware” of what it had cost when then-Prime Minister Liz Truss launched her own universal energy price guarantee in 2022.  O’Neill backed this approach, saying: “I don’t think they should do much… They can’t afford it anyhow. The nation can’t keep shielding people from external shocks.” Weldon predicted, however, that as the May elections approach and the energy cap deadline draws nearer, the pressure will prove too much and ministers could be forced to step in. The furlough scheme rolled out during the pandemic to project jobs and Truss’s 2022 intervention helped create “the expectation that the government should be helping households,” he said. “But it’s incredibly difficult. Britain’s growth has been blown off-course an awful lot in the last 15 years by these sorts of shocks.” Geoffrey Smith, Dan Bloom, Andrew McDonald and Sam Francis contributed to this report.

LONDON — The House of Lords has struck down the government’s controversial proposal to direct where pension schemes invest, handing Rachel Reeves’ Treasury a significant defeat. The government had sought to give itself a controversial “reserve power” in the Pension Schemes Bill, which would allow it to direct where pension schemes invest, in a bid to boost U.K. and private assets. That provision was met with fury by the pensions industry, and Thursday’s amendment shows enough peers feel the same way. An amendment to the Pension Schemes Bill — tabled by Liberal Democrat peer Sharon Bowles, Conservative peers Deborah Stedman-Scott and Thérèse Coffey, and independent peer Ros Altmann — won a vote in the upper chamber Thursday by 217 to 113. It removes the provision on the asset allocation condition in the legislation. The defeat is a blow to Pensions Minister Torsten Bell, who only last week tried to reassure industry and peers by telling POLITICO that he would table “clarifications” to the bill outlining that the power would only align to Mansion House Accord signatories and targets. It means ministers will now be required to reconsider the proposed law. “This power must be removed,” said Stedman-Scott. “It is a massive overstep from the government, and despite the assurances of the minister, no one is yet convinced that this can remai.” The amendment removing the threat of a mandate will now go back to the House of Commons, where Bell will need to decide whether to include new changes to reinstate the power.  Altmann got another victory in the report stage debate on Thursday by winning a vote on her amendment to extend the time limit defining an unused pension pot as “dormant” from 12 months to two years.  Under government plans, all “dormant” small pots worth under £1,000 will be consolidated into larger schemes.

The Bank of England warned it may have to take a tougher line on interest rates as the spike in energy prices caused by the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran pushes inflation higher. “Monetary policy cannot reverse this shock” to world energy supply, Governor Andrew Bailey said in a statement on Thursday, after the Monetary Policy Committee voted unanimously to leave the Bank rate unchanged at 3.75 percent. “Monetary policy must, however, respond to the risk of a more persistent effect on U.K. consumer price inflation,” Bailey added. The Bank had only last month declared victory over inflation, which has been above its 2 percent target for over four years. However, its latest analysis suggests headline inflation will rebound back above 3 percent in the next three months and could add as much as 0.75 percentage points to the consumer price index over the summer, as higher fuel bills percolate through the economy. “The MPC is alert to the increased risk of domestic inflationary pressures through second-round effects in wage and price-setting, the risk of which will be greater the longer higher energy prices persist,” the Bank stressed. However, it also acknowledged that the energy price spike is likely to hurt economic growth, and that it is “assessing the implications for inflation of the weakening in economic activity that is likely to result from higher energy costs.” Until the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, most analysts had predicted that a slowing economy and growing prospects of easing inflation would allow the MPC to cut rates at Thursday’s meeting. However, the invasion and the ensuing turmoil in world commodity markets have turned the situation on its head, by closing a vital chokepoint at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, through which irreplaceable volumes of oil, gas and fertilizer pass every day. As a result, the Bank warned that there is now a real threat of higher energy prices causing a broader rise in prices across the economy. Food prices face a similar risk. ALREADY OUT OF DATE? The situation is changing so fast that the Bank’s latest forecasts could already be out of date. The Bank said they were based on the situation as of March 16, when Brent oil futures were only at $100 a barrel. But a succession of strikes on key energy installations around the Persian Gulf since then has already pushed prices up by another 12 percent. “The news flow around the war in Iran looks more worrying for global markets with each passing day,” Deutsche Bank strategist Jim Reid said in a note on Thursday. Analysts argued ahead of the meeting that the Bank would prefer to err on the side of keeping policy tight in the face of the new risks, given lingering concerns about its credibility due to its slow response to the inflation shock in 2022. Inflation peaked at 11.1 percent back then, the highest rate posted by any major economy. The Bank’s change in outlook will make life doubly uncomfortable for the Labour government, which had hoped that its efforts to close the U.K. budget deficit would be rewarded with lower inflation and lower interest rates. Instead, the government’s key 10-year borrowing costs have risen by nearly half a percentage point since the war started, and they leaped again on Thursday, first in response to Iranian attacks on a Qatari gas field, then to the BoE’s statement. At 4.89 percent, the 10-year gilt yield is now at its highest in 15 months. The pound, by contrast, was steady against the dollar and euro after the decision. The Office for Budget Responsibility earlier this month already cut its forecasts for U.K. growth this year. That implies lower tax receipts which, combined with higher borrowing costs, threaten a new two-way squeeze on Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ fiscal arithmetic, less than six months after she had to raise taxes sharply at her latest budget.

President Donald Trump is demanding that the Federal Reserve immediately lower borrowing costs. But the war in the Middle East has now made any interest rate cuts much less likely in 2026 — not just in the U.S. but around the world. With oil prices surging past $100 a barrel and Gulf shipping routes disrupted by Iran, governments and investors are bracing for a repeat of the 2022 energy shock from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. And from Washington to Frankfurt, and London to Tokyo, the world’s central banks are likely to strike a more wary tone on inflation while assessing the fallout during a flurry of policy meetings taking place this week. The effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a channel through which roughly a fifth of global oil passes, is pushing up costs not only for energy and transportation, but also for other key goods that are shipped through the waterway. The result could be a toxic mix for central banks: higher prices and lower employment, two problems they’re not equipped to address simultaneously. “My best guess, but spoken with no conviction at all, is that this gets sorted out somehow in the next few weeks, and by the middle of the year, oil prices have come back down a fair amount,” said William English, a former top staffer at the Fed who is now a professor at Yale University. “But there’s a real risk, of course, that things go on for longer and are more damaging. And in that case, all bets are off.” The specter of a prolonged global energy crunch could dash the hopes of consumers, businesses and investors worldwide for rate cuts this year — and in some cases, throw those plans in reverse. No immediate moves are likely except in Australia, which raised its target rate by a quarter-point on Tuesday. But markets have already repriced their bets on what comes next from monetary policymakers. Indeed, if the Fed does cut rates later this year, it might be one of the few major central banks that does so, given that other economies like Europe are more exposed to higher energy costs than the U.S. Before the war, investors saw a chance of cuts from the Fed, the European Central Bank and the Bank of England. Now they’re pricing in an altogether tighter policy stance: at least one ECB rate hike this year, a 60 percent chance of a BoE increase, fewer and later cuts from the Fed and more urgency in raising rates from the Bank of Japan. Central bankers will prefer to wait until they get a better gauge of the economic repercussions from the conflict because “the shock could turn out to be negligible or very large,” said EFG chief economist Stefan Gerlach. But few doubt the need for strong messaging as central banks are wary of repeating 2022, when energy price shocks combined with the after-effects from Covid and fiscal stimulus to morph into the worst inflation spike in half a century. “There will be a significant contingent worrying about upside inflation risks in light of the 2022 experience,” J.P. Morgan economist Greg Fuzesi said ahead of the ECB’s policy-making council’s meeting on Thursday. The Iran conflict is further complicating efforts by Trump to demonstrate to voters that the GOP is addressing cost-of-living concerns before this year’s midterm elections. Already, the war has caused a surge in politically salient gas prices and erased some of the progress toward more affordable mortgage rates. And it’s further muddied the picture for a central bank that the president has been pressing hard to take decisive action toward rate cuts. Now, when Chair Jerome Powell and other Fed officials meet on Wednesday, they’re expected to be more open to the idea of rate increases later this year, though that’s still not the likeliest outcome. As Yale’s English pointed out, higher costs might ultimately increase the case for rate cuts if they slow the economy significantly. “With the higher oil prices and the shock to the global economy, the likelihood of overheating seems reduced now, so that’s one of the reasons you might be comfortable waiting through some period of higher inflation,” rather than hiking rates in response, English said. “This might be enough to push the economy into real weakness, and in that case, they might well have to cut.” But if households and businesses start to worry about a new acceleration in inflation and start expecting higher prices, that dynamic can be self-fulfilling and might call for rate hikes. Hawkish policymakers are already signaling the ECB won’t hesitate this time. “A reaction by the ECB is potentially closer than many people think,” Peter Kažimír, Slovakia’s central bank governor, told Bloomberg last week. “We will be ready to act if needed.” President Christine Lagarde pledged to ensure that consumers “don’t suffer the same inflation increases like those we saw in 2022 and 2023.” Back then, the ECB was slow to react, helping inflation surge past 10 percent. Economists say today’s backdrop looks very different: In 2022, rates were near or below zero, balance sheets were bloated and fiscal policy was highly expansionary. “When inflation rose, it did so in an environment of strong demand supported by both fiscal and monetary stimulus,” said Gerlach. Now, tighter monetary and fiscal policy should limit the risk of energy shocks spilling through the economy into second-round effects. Still, Barclays analyst Silvia Ardagna says that if medium-term inflation expectations “deteriorate significantly,” she expects “the ECB to act more swiftly than in 2022, but to tighten policy gradually.” Nick Kounis, of Dutch bank ABN AMRO, also sees a more hawkish tone. “Uncertainty on the conflict is high, but if the current situation persists through to the April meeting, a hike becomes a distinct possibility,” he said. Many analysts say the first obvious central bank casualty of the war is likely to be the Bank of England, which was widely expected to cut this week but is now seen firmly on hold. That’s because the U.K. still hasn’t quite gotten on top of the inflation that was unleashed four years ago. Andrew Benito, an economist with hedge fund Point72 in London, reckons that the inevitable increase in fuel prices and household energy bills alone will add a full percentage point to headline inflation by summer, with “second-round” impacts on other prices pushing it even further away from the BoE’s target. That, says Deutsche Bank’s Sanjay Raja, will force the bank into some “uncomfortable trade-offs”: The U.K. economy has already slowed over the last year due to global trade uncertainty and various government tax hikes to close the budget deficit. Hiking rates when the economy is already struggling could risk needlessly making things worse. But any sign of complacency could be disproportionately punished by the markets, given that the BoE performed worse than any other major central bank during the last inflation shock (the headline rate peaked at over 11 percent). Raja expects BoE Governor Andrew Bailey to highlight the differences with 2022 — when inflation was accelerating rather than slowing — as one reason not to overreact to today’s price spike. However, he expects that Bailey, like the ECB and others, will talk tough about not letting business and households develop an inflationary mindset again. More important will be the Bank of Japan’s decisions and press conference on Thursday, due to the outsized influence of Japanese interest rates on global financial markets. For decades, Japan kept interest rates low and printed money furiously to escape deflation. As long as it did so, Japanese and foreign investors borrowed yen cheaply to throw at higher-yielding markets such as the U.S. Now, however, the BoJ’s concerns have finally switched from deflation to inflation, and BoJ Governor Kazuo Ueda is now in a hurry to “normalize” policy. Its key interest rate, at 0.75 percent, is the lowest in the developed world outside Switzerland. But Japan, too, faces a big headwind from higher energy prices because of its dependence on imports, and Gregor Hirt, chief investment officer for Multi Asset at Allianz Global Investors, argues that the BoJ will hesitate before raising rates again. The trouble with waiting and seeing is that the yen has already lurched lower, prompting alarm in Washington and sparking rumors of possible intervention to support it. “In order to stop further weakness, the BoJ may have to move up a rate hike to stabilize the currency,” Hirt said. Meanwhile, the war has presented the Swiss National Bank, which has kept interest rates at zero since June 2025, with a different kind of conundrum. One risk is that a global “flight to safety” drives the Swiss franc to even greater heights against the euro and others. That could make so many imports cheaper that the overall inflation rate could turn negative. Alternatively, the boost in energy prices could have the same malign impact on inflation as it will elsewhere. “The SNB will probably prefer to wait and see which of the two effects will have the greater impact on inflation prospects before acting in one direction or the other,” said ING economist Charlotte de Montpellier, who expects the Swiss central bank to stay on hold. That response, shot through with varying degrees of nervousness, looks likely to be the dominant one this week. But things will look very different if the war situation hasn’t improved by the next round of meetings.

LONDON — War in the Middle East has put Keir Starmer in a tight spot.  The U.K. government can’t afford to spend big on protecting voters from looming energy bill hikes. But politically, the British prime minister has little choice.  Starmer said Monday that his “first instinct” in responding to the Iran conflict — and the global energy price shock it has triggered — is protecting the household finances of ordinary voters.  “It’s moments like this that tell you what a government is about,” Starmer said, addressing yet another hastily-arranged Downing Street press conference.   “My answer is clear. Whatever the challenges that lie ahead, this government will always support working people.”  He was announcing £53 million in state support for low-income families already hit by a sharp rise in the cost of heating oil, a fuel that warms around one in 20 U.K. homes.    But much bigger, much pricier policy choices are coming down the track.    STRAITENED FINANCES A regulated cap on energy costs is keeping a lid on most people’s household bills. But the current cap expires in July — at which point, without intervention, bills could jump significantly. Wholesale gas prices, which significantly influence household bills, have nearly doubled since the crisis began. Starmer’s Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told The Mirror newspaper he would “keep looking at how we can do more” to protect consumers. The government must decide how big they go with any support package.  But the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank has already sounded the alarm over the government’s fiscal wiggle room. “The public finances are in a more strained position than they were [in 2022] at the start of the Russia-Ukraine war, and a sustained increase in energy prices is likely to worsen them further,” the think tank said last week. Starmer sought to contrast the situation now with that faced by Liz Truss’s Conservative government in 2022, and her multi-billion pound energy bailout.  The policy reduced the energy bills of every family in the country. It also, coupled with sweeping tax cuts, led sterling to crash, borrowing costs to soar, and forced Truss out of her job days later.  His Labour government, Starmer said, had “brought stability back to our public finances, stability that I will never put at risk.”  Now he faces the challenge of meeting that pledge on stability, while standing by his cost-of-living guarantee to the British people.   TO TARGET To help people most exposed to rising bills, while avoiding Truss’s fate, the obvious option for Starmer is to make a targeted intervention on energy bills come July.  The heating oil policy follows this approach, aimed squarely at “people who need it most,” Chancellor Rachel Reeves said Monday. The Treasury is similarly looking at “targeted options” for any future energy support package, she told The Times at the weekend.  Starmer himself said on Monday “we’re not ruling anything out.” But the signals are that a universal offer like Truss’s — which ended up costing an eye-watering £23 billion — is unlikely.   Among Labour MPs, the penny is already dropping that not all households will benefit from government largesse.   “It’s right that the government steps in at a time of national crisis and supports those that are struggling,” Suffolk Coastal MP Jenny Riddell-Carpenter told the BBC on Monday. “But it’s complex,” she added. “There isn’t a limitless pot of money.”   And targeting the right people for help will not be straightforward. In 2022, government lacked the data required to know which households should be targeted, Reeves told MPs on the Treasury committee last week.    Work on this inside government is now “more advanced,” she insisted. But officials still lack the targeting data needed, said Ben Westerman, director of policy at the energy campaign group Electrify Britain.    Officials simply “haven’t moved on” with targeting data since the last energy crisis, Westerman said, adding: “That is a failure of governments plural to learn the lessons from last time.”   Energy companies, pushing ministers over the issue, have grown frustrated.   “Industry has called for government to provide the data so that we can target support [to] those who need it. And there’s just been little to no progress on this,” Caitlin Berridge-Dunn, head of external affairs at energy supplier Utilita, said.  NEW AND OLD IDEAS  One option, separate from bills, would be to maintain a longstanding, five pence per liter tax relief on gasoline and diesel, a fuel duty cut which expires in September. The oil price shock has driven up costs at the pump by more than eight pence per liter for gasoline and more than 18 pence for diesel. Another approach officials could opt for, according to Westerman, and reported in The Times Monday, is to expand the existing Warm Homes Discount, a one-off payment to reduce bills for the poorest households, as a vehicle for getting more support to people who need it most.  But that approach, he cautioned, would not catch the “squeezed middle” of households.   Another option is to repeat a trick Starmer and Reeves pulled off at last year’s budget — shifting green and other levies currently added to energy bills into general taxation.   Miliband hailed that move at the time — which saved around £150 on the average energy bills — as a way of “asking some of the wealthiest in our society” to subsidize everyone’s bills.  There is enthusiasm for the principle in Whitehall, even if no decisions have yet been made. A government official, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record, said the £150 cut could be “the beginning of a big principled move” of the burden of energy costs from consumers onto tax.     A study by the industry group the MCS Foundation found that moving all such levies onto taxation could cut bills by up to £410 a year. But that, of course, would put taxpayers on the hook. MCS Foundation estimated it would cost £5.7 billion per year. The most important difference from the Truss era, argued Sam Alvis, a former Labour adviser and now a director of energy security and environment at the influential IPPR think tank, is that Starmer cannot hang around.  The government should be planning any intervention now and not allow prices to rise in July, he argued, avoiding a repeat of the last Conservative government’s mis-step, when it waited until the fall to act.  “I think the public tolerance for [energy bill] increases will be a lot lower than it was in 2022, when Liz Truss waited from February to September to react,” Alvis said. “I just don’t think we’ll have that same time.” 

Banknotes issued by the Bank of England will soon feature images of wildlife rather than historical figures, following a public consultation on the design of the next set of currency. On the current crop of notes are former Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill (£5), author Jane Austen (£10), painter J.M.W. Turner (£20), and mathematician and computer scientist Alan Turing (£50). The Bank of England held a public consultation on banknote imagery last year. In a press release, it said that of the 44,000 responses received, about 60 percent wanted nature to feature, ahead of architecture and landmarks, historical figures, arts, culture and sport, innovation and noteworthy milestones. The bank said it will hold a second public consultation in the summer to gather views on the kind of nature that people would like to see featured on the notes, with a shortlist to be drawn up by a panel of wildlife experts. England is home to a range of wildlife, including foxes, badgers, beavers, squirrels, otters, deer and seals. The new notes won’t enter circulation for several years. Victoria Cleland, chief cashier at the Bank of England, said: “The key driver for introducing a new banknote series is always to increase counterfeit resilience, but it also provides an opportunity to celebrate different aspects of the U.K.” “Nature is a great choice from a banknote authentication perspective, and means we can showcase the U.K.’s rich and varied wildlife on the next series of banknotes.” King Charles III will remain on the front of the notes. The highest note issued by the Bank of England is £50. Due to massive hyperinflation in 2008, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe issued a one-hundred-trillion-dollar banknote.

PARIS — Finance ministers of G7 countries will discuss Monday whether to use emergency oil reserves amid a spike in energy prices triggered by the U.S. and Israel’s war on Iran. “The use of strategic reserves is an option being considered,” one French official, granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly on the matter, said Monday. French Finance Minister Roland Lescure, who holds the rotating presidency of the G7 finance group, will chair the virtual meeting scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Talks on using oil reserves — in the range of 300 million to 400 million barrels — were first reported by the Financial Times, which added that the ⁠International Energy Agency would join the discussions. Oil prices surged above $100 a barrel overnight, reaching the highest level since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. In a social media post, U.S. President Donald Trump said that prices would “drop rapidly when the destruction of the Iran nuclear threat is over” and added that more expensive oil was “a very small price to pay for U.S.A., and World, Safety and Peace.”

LONDON — Days into the U.S. war with Iran, the U.K. government is retooling to cope with a crisis that is already squeezing British defense capabilities and driving up energy prices. Teams of officials are being redeployed around Whitehall, including at the Ministry of Defence, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and departments covering energy, transport and trade, in order to cope with fresh demands. Two people working in the civil service, granted anonymity because they like others in this piece were not authorized to speak publicly, said reassignments had been made on a three-to-four-month basis. A third person said internal government assessments are not necessarily that specific — but that they expect to be dealing with the war on Iran and its fallout “for the long haul.”  The government’s central assumption is that the direct, kinetic phase of the conflict will last weeks but its tail could be much longer. While the U.K. is straining to keep out of the conflict — granting only limited use of its military bases to the U.S. — ministers accept there will be a huge knock-on effect from the Middle East crisis. That includes on hot-button cost-of-living issues that are central to embattled Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s chances of political survival. MILITARY RESPONSE The Ministry of Defence is focused on the immediate task of trying to protect U.K. military assets and personnel, while the government’s other top concerns were highlighted Wednesday by Chancellor Rachel Reeves’ audience with oil and gas sector representatives and Treasury Minister Lucy Rigby’s meeting with insurers. “I don’t think anyone’s expecting this thing to be over quickly,” said one British diplomat.  The U.K. has been preparing for potential U.S. strikes on Iran since the beginning of the year, according to four officials, including by surging fighter planes to the region. The MoD moved to a higher level of force protection — measures designed to safeguard military personnel and facilities — in response to mass unrest in Iran and the U.S. bolstering its presence in the Gulf.  Treasury Minister James Murray alluded publicly to these operations, telling Times Radio: “I’m not going to get into exactly the details of what happened. But what I’m clear about is the defensive capability that we’ve been building up in recent weeks.” Nevertheless, two government officials said the eventual action by the U.S. and Israel was beyond what they had expected, as was Iran’s response — which they described as “haphazard.” The U.K. had some foresight of the U.S. intention to move, said one of these officials, but they had far less indication of where Iranian retaliation would fall, which partly explained the apparent slowness of British warship HMS Dragon and helicopters going to the aid of the U.K.’s Royal Air Force base on Cyprus. Jacob Parakilas, research leader at the RAND Europe think tank, said: “RAF Akrotiri was certainly a conceivable target in the event of hostilities but it’s neither the easiest nor the most significant target for Iran.” A Western official said the decision to send the warship to the Mediterranean only landed on U.K. Chief of Defence Staff Rich Knighton’s desk at 9.30 a.m. on Tuesday, and was approved soon afterwards. The MoD is one of the ministries which has redeployed staff internally to work on Iran, with high priority attached to ensuring that the U.K.’s changing posture does not damage existing NATO commitments or sap energy from efforts to support Ukraine. Starmer has already sought to link the Middle East conflict to the war in Ukraine, saying Ukrainian experts will help shoot down Iranian drones, and his government is expected to call on industry to help meet the need for stronger air and missile defenses. Parakilas predicted the conflict would not require a massive outlay of further British defense capabilities, since the U.K.’s naval base in Bahrain is heavily defended and can meet the threat of occasional attacks by Shahed-style drones.  But, he warned: “That should not be cause for complacency.” In this instance, Parakilas said, the U.K. and most of its facilities are at the edge of Iran’s reach — “but that will not necessarily be the case in future conflicts.” TERROR RISK Elsewhere, the Home Office and security services are monitoring for a heightened risk of domestic threats. On Monday the National Cyber Security Centre — part of the GCHQ digital intelligence agency — issued a fresh alert in response to the situation in the Middle East, calling on organizations to review their cybersecurity. It noted that although it views there to be “no current significant change” in the direct cyber threat from Iran to the U.K. this may change due to the “fast-evolving nature of the conflict.” The FCDO is meanwhile leading repatriation efforts described as “unprecedented,” by Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper with hundreds of thousands of Britons currently stranded in the Gulf. Above all, civil servants are scrambling to deal with potential implications for the energy sector and international trade — two areas that risk upending the unpopular Starmer government’s bid to slash the cost of living. Households could see more than £500 added to their energy bills this summer if hostilities continue, the Resolution Foundation think tank calculated earlier this week. Keir Starmer Starmer told MPs that “the question of energy supply right now is a serious one.” | Wiktor Szymanowicz/Future Publishing via Getty Images Starmer told MPs at prime minister’s questions Wednesday that “the question of energy supply right now is a serious one” and “we are doing all we can, with allies, to make sure that it is preserved. It is vital that we keep trade flowing through the Strait of Hormuz.” The U.K. is currently considering options for protecting commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, including sending naval escorts, according to Western officials.  Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has held talks with representatives from Qatar and Saudi Arabia, as well as energy giants BP and Shell about global energy markets in recent days. A third government official said the hope is that consumers are protected for a while because Britain’s energy price cap — a limit on the amount suppliers can charge for each unit of gas and electricity — is locked in for the next three months. But they acknowledged there would be pressure to replicate several support schemes drawn up after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, even as they cautioned that the need for such a move is a long way off. Treasury Minister Lucy Rigby met insurance firm Lloyds of London Wednesday to discuss how the sector is being affected. A fourth Whitehall official said that while commercial insurance remains available, additional premiums may be needed for vessels transiting these areas. A jump in energy prices could, in turn, hold back the Bank of England from continuing on its path to reducing interest rates, economists have warned – something that would represent a significant blow to Reeves and the government’s wider battle with inflation. The National Institute of Economic and Social Research think tank has carried out analysis which finds that if the shock to energy prices is more than just temporary, the U.K.’s central bank may have to go in the other direction — raising the all-important Bank Rate from its current 3.75 percent rate to back above 4 percent. “The Bank of England will have to contend with a shock to global energy prices, with the question of persistence hanging over their heads. This will cause problems for Rachel Reeves as financing costs increase, putting further pressure on an already precarious fiscal outlook,”  said the NIESR’s Ed Cornforth. Mason Boycott-Owen and Charlie Cooper contributed reporting.

LONDON — The British government should stop being “unnecessarily secretive” about its plans for closer relations with the European Union and be much clearer about what it wants, the chair of the U.K. parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee said. In a report released on Wednesday, the cross-party committee of lawmakers urged ministers to publish a white paper outlining what they want the eventual relationship with the EU — billed as a Brexit “reset” — to look like. The Labour government should, they argued, “clarify” whether it is reconsidering its election manifesto red lines on trying to rejoin the bloc’s single market and customs union — and whether “it can envisage any circumstances in which it would be prudent to do so.” “We do feel that the government is being unnecessarily secretive about it all and isn’t sufficiently clear about what it is that it’s doing and why — which we think is unfortunate,” Emily Thornberry told POLITICO in an interview timed with the report’s launch. Thornberry, the veteran Labour MP for Islington South, whose constituency neighbors that of Prime Minister Keir Starmer, said she understood why the government had been “nervous” when starting talks with Brussels, but said it should now be more ambitious and open. “The truth is that the public have just sort of shrugged their shoulders and said, well, yeah, get on with it,” the committee chair said. “And so I think that it has been incumbent on the government to be more ambitious, to go further, and to be clearer about what it is that we want. Because it’s quite clear what the Europeans want, and that there are times when it is not necessarily as clear about what it is that we want to achieve.” Starmer last year struck a deal in principle with the EU that opened talks on a spread of agreements covering trade in agri-food, electricity interconnections, carbon markets, and visas for young people. Negotiations on the topics are currently ongoing, with most of the files expected to be completed by the summer. But the prime minister and his finance chief Rachel Reeves have since hinted that they want to go further and align the U.K. with the EU single market in other areas — while ruling out joining the EU customs union. The government is yet to say exactly which sectors it would prioritize, however — and Starmer has said he wants the U.K.-EU relationship to be “iterative” with new cooperation added on an annual basis at regular summits. SCRUTINY The new report also calls for the re-establishment of a dedicated European Scrutiny Committee in the House of Commons, to oversee the Brexit reset and Britain’s wider relationship with the continent. A version of the specialized EU affairs committee had existed since 1972, but it was disestablished by Starmer’s new government in 2024 — with responsibility for the topic passing to Thornberry’s Foreign Affairs Committee, as well as a group of unelected lawmakers in the House of Lords. Thornberry told POLITICO: “The truth is that there are only 11 of us … we had, at one stage, ten reports open, which sounds ridiculous, but then you think about the state of the world, and you think, well, yeah, of course. “We haven’t properly done a study into China yet. And how can we not have done an inquiry into China? The reason is because you just can’t do everything, although we are trying. So I think in order to give our developing relationship with the European Union the scrutiny that it definitely deserves, we do think that there needs to be another team working on it.” A U.K. government spokesperson said: “Our priorities are clear: working in the national interest to deliver a strategic shift in our relationship with the EU through improved diplomatic, economic, and security cooperation. “This includes securing a landmark food and drink trade deal and the carbon linking agreement by the next UK-EU Summit that will add £9 billion a year to the UK economy. “We are stripping away the costly bureaucracy and red tape that acts as a drag on growth, backing British jobs and putting more money in people’s pockets across the country.”