The government still needs a coordinated story on its response to the Middle East war

The government’s approach to managing the fall-out from the Middle East crisis is gradually becoming clearer. First, it was reported ¹⁴ https://www.politico.eu/article/united-kingdom-brexit-style-crisis-team-iran-conflict/  that the government had established a Middle East Response Committee to coordinate its work (though the Cabinet Committee list on the government website was last updated in November 2025).

This is rumoured to be organised along the lines of the committees the Johnson administration used for Brexit and Covid: a strategy committee with a limited membership and a bigger operations committee involving the departments required to deliver programmes or policies. This is not quite in line with our recommendation last week to copy the National Economic Council that Gordon Brown used to manage the response to the financial crisis, but is a very welcome development nonetheless. The critical success factor in Brown’s NEC was the combination of a high-powered cross-departmental secretariat and a committee of senior officials that ensured that the government was addressing critical issues.

Second, there are reports ¹⁵ https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/iran-war-hormuz-uk-supermarkets-food-shortages-chicken-g620j8xrg  that officials are modelling scenarios for the supply chain impact of a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Again, this is exactly what the government needs to do to think through now what it would do in case of that eventuality.

Third, in Washington, the chancellor announced expanded and backdated support to intensive energy using businesses. ¹⁶ https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-cuts-electricity-bill-for-10000-manufacturers-in-boost-for-uk-competitiveness  That builds on the British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme that the government had already announced for 2027 as part of its industrial strategy.  

For all the activity, however, coherence and communication are lacking.

The UK government will come under pressure as others go further, faster

Even so, the UK government is still looking slower off the mark than other countries. In the last week the Irish government unveiled a support package ¹⁹ https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-the-taoiseach/press-releases/government-announces-new-package-of-fuel-supports/  involving fuel excise duty cuts and support to farmers, and in Canada prime minister Mark Carney has announced a temporary suspension of fuel excise duty for the summer. These moves are expensive, no more than stop gaps, and it is to Starmer and Rachel Reeves’s credit that they have so far resisted expensive and ineffective cost alleviations.  

But they create risks for the UK government. At PMQs on Wednesday, Keir Starmer came under pressure from Northern Ireland’s MPs to help farmers there who see their counterparts south of the border benefitting. There have already been fuel protests. ²⁰ https://www.fwi.co.uk/news/northern-irish-farmers-and-hauliers-stage-fuel-protests  Thus far he has held his ground, pointing simply to the fuel duty freeze in March. Because farmers benefit from a big excise duty rebate, the increase in the underlying cost of diesel translates into a much bigger percentage rise than for other motorists.

The government needs to start communicating better

The danger for the government – as we previously noted – is that it is leaving a vacuum to be filled by others who do not have to worry about delivering or paying for the expensive measures they advocate. We do not (yet) need the crisis equivalent of the daily covid press conferences, but the government should be taking control of the news on the UK reaction to the crisis. At the moment it seems in its comfort zone making political capital out of its decision not to back Trump’s war, and falling back on measures announced at last year’s Budget, namely the reduction in the policy levies on electricity and the extension of the fuel duty freeze to September.  

There should be much more active communication on what the government is doing now. It should take credit for setting up coordinating machinery and for doing crisis planning to ensure the UK is ready if (and stress the “if”) anything resembling worse cases does arise. Crisis preparation should not be made public through a leak – but as part of a co-ordinated set of government announcements. Ministers should show how pockets of activity fit together into a coherent response, and should explain how the government’s approach secures the UK’s longer-term energy resilience.  

The government should also make clear when and how it might act to help sectors under the most pressure. That means communicating where it will not be able to afford to help – as well as signalling very clearly how people can help themselves to reduce bills. It should also be clear just how volatile the external environment is – and why jumping the gun could be an expensive folly.  

One of the criticisms of Gordon Brown’s NEC was that the ministerial meetings focused too much on presentation. Keir Starmer and his ministers must focus a little bit more on getting their message across.