Britain Must Unlock Its Hidden Wealth
Britain owns trillions of pounds in public assets. Lessons from Singapore and Abu Dhabi show how a national investment platform could put that wealth to work.
In brief
- Britain cannot solve its economic problems through higher taxes and more borrowing. We must make better use of the assets we already own.
- Sovereign Wealth Funds in Singapore & Abu Dhabi demonstrate how professionally managed public assets can unlock significant national wealth, drive investment and create long term prosperity.
- A British National Investment Platform could unlock public wealth, attract inward investment and help rebuild our economy.
Every Budget, Britain has the same tired argument. Who should pay more tax, where can we cut spending, and how much more can the Treasury borrow? Yet we seldom ask a more obvious question: what do we already own, and are we making the most of it?
Britain has trillions of pounds in public assets, substantial pension savings and some of the world's finest financial institutions. Nevertheless, we struggle to finance infrastructure and attract investment into new industries.
Having lived in Singapore and Abu Dhabi, what always struck me was how seriously they treated national wealth. Their sovereign investment institutions are not simply holding public money. They are investing it, growing it and helping create prosperity for future generations.
Britain could learn a great deal from that approach.
Britain's Overlooked Wealth
Our public finances make uncomfortable reading. In September 2026, national debt passed £3 trillion, equivalent to 94% of GDP. Every Chancellor faces difficult choices, but the national balance sheet tells another story.
The latest Whole of Government Accounts reveal £2.79 trillion in public assets, including £1.66 trillion in property, plant and equipment. Much of this consists of schools, hospitals and roads, which nobody is suggesting we sell. But across government there is valuable land, property and commercial infrastructure that could be working considerably harder for taxpayers.
Economist and former Swedish government adviser Dag Detter has spent years making precisely this argument. In The Public Wealth of Nations, written with Stefan Fölster, he explains how governments overlook enormous opportunities by failing to manage their commercial assets professionally. The answer isn't necessarily privatisation, but better management of what the public already owns.
Britain's assets are scattered across government departments, councils, transport authorities and development agencies, each with different priorities. Valuable land around railway stations, ports and regeneration areas can remain underused for years because nobody has the responsibility, expertise or incentive to unlock its potential.
Consider a neglected government site. Left unused, it costs money. Properly developed, it could provide housing, attract businesses and generate income for decades.
We scrutinise every proposed tax increase yet rarely ask whether taxpayers are getting a decent return on assets they already own. No sensible investor would run a business that way. Why should government?
What Singapore and Abu Dhabi Understand
Singapore offers one of the clearest examples of what can be achieved.
In 1974, its government established Temasek Holdings, transferring 35 state-owned companies valued at S$354 million into a professionally managed investment institution. Today, Temasek's portfolio is worth S$518 billion, with an annualised shareholder return of 7.1% over the past decade.
Abu Dhabi has taken a similar approach through Mubadala Investment Company, which manages approximately $385 billion and reported a ten-year annualised return of 10.3% in its latest results.
These institutions operate differently, but both demonstrate what can happen when governments entrust capital to experienced investment professionals and plan beyond the next election.
There are lessons closer to home too. Copenhagen used publicly owned land and development rights to help finance its Metro and regenerate former industrial areas. Land that might otherwise have remained underused became part of a much larger economic opportunity.
Britain need not copy another country's model wholesale. But public ownership and commercial discipline should not be opposites.
Putting Pension Capital to Better Use
Pensions offer another lesson.
Canada's CPP Investments has delivered annualised net returns of 8.8% over ten years. Australia's Future Fund, New Zealand's Super Fund and Norway's enormous sovereign wealth fund demonstrate different approaches to managing capital across generations.
Britain has comparable financial expertise and substantial pools of savings.
The Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales held £437.9 billion in assets at March 2026, spread across 86 separate funds, each with its own governance and administrative structures, creating overlapping costs and fees. Even modest restructuring, reducing duplication and negotiating lower management fees could save millions, improving returns for pension members and reducing costs for taxpayers.
I previously served as a local government pension fund trustee, and that experience reinforced something important. Pension money belongs to the people who have earned it, not politicians looking for projects to announce.
Any investment must put beneficiaries first.
But that should not prevent professionally managed funds from investing in British infrastructure, housing, technology and industry when the commercial returns justify it. We need to create more opportunities worth investing in, rather than expecting pension funds to accept weaker returns in the name of patriotism.
A British National Investment Platform
I would go further and establish a British National Investment Platform, operating independently of ministers and managed by experienced investment professionals.
It would bring suitable commercial public assets, surplus development land and major investment opportunities into a common framework. Rather than create another expensive bureaucracy, we could build around existing institutions, including the National Wealth Fund, whose financial capacity was increased to £43.2 billion in the October 2026 Budget.
This is not about selling off Britain's public wealth. It is about retaining public ownership where appropriate, managing assets commercially and ensuring taxpayers benefit from the value they create.
Crucially, the platform could become a serious investment partner for international sovereign wealth funds, pension institutions and private investors.
Imagine former industrial land being developed into manufacturing facilities, or ports and electricity networks attracting long-term institutional investment. We could mobilise capital for critical-mineral processing, technology and artificial intelligence while creating skilled employment at home.
Governance would be essential. The institution should follow the internationally recognised Santiago Principles, with independent management, transparent accounts and a clear separation between political oversight and commercial investment decisions. Pension participation must remain voluntary and subject to fiduciary duties.
Ministers should set the broad objectives, not select individual investments. The last thing Britain needs is another politically directed fund supporting fashionable but uncommercial ventures.
An independent institution, judged on long-term returns, would give investors the confidence to commit serious capital.
Thinking Beyond the Next Budget
There is an obvious objection. Britain does not have Norway's oil wealth or Abu Dhabi's accumulated financial surpluses. Our debt is enormous, and no investment platform will make it disappear.
But that makes better management of existing assets more important, not less.
We have the legal institutions, financial expertise and commercial experience to manage national investments professionally.
A successful investment institution would take years to build. It would require patience, political restraint and genuine accountability, alongside a willingness to measure success over decades rather than electoral cycles.
Nor would it replace responsible public finances or the private sector. Its purpose would be to make both work more effectively.
We cannot keep looking to the taxpayer to finance every ambition, nor can borrowing indefinitely compensate for weak economic growth.
Britain must start thinking not simply about what it spends, but what it owns, what it builds and what it leaves behind. The wealth is already there. The challenge is putting it to work.
