MPs say there is no political, strategic or funding analysis behind the phrase

The Foreign Office’s post-Brexit policy of “Global Britain” is a meaningless slogan, currently underpinned by no clear political, strategic or funding analysis, MPs have said.

A report from the foreign affairs select committee said that unless the FCO assembles a new policy that “goes beyond a superficial rebranding exercise, the UK risks damaging its reputation overseas and eroding support for a global outlook in the UK itself”.

The MPs on the committee repeatedly asked for an FCO analysis setting out the thinking behind the phrase and were exasperated with the memorandum eventually provided by the department, which they described as “little more than a continuation of the FCO’s current activities, with modest adjustments.”

The report said no minister was able to provide a definitive explanation of what the phrase meant or how to measure whether its objectives were being met.

Expert witnesses to the committee’s inquiry, including a former permanent secretary at the FCO, Sir Simon Fraser, were unclear “what Global Britain means, what it stands for or how its success should be measured,” the report said. Fraser told the committee he feared the FCO had so far produced only “mushy thinking” and “simplistic words”.

The chair of the committee, Tom Tugenhadt, rapidly becoming a thorn in the side of the foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, said the government needed to set out what the policy meant.

“The UK is a global player, but a slogan is not a policy,” he said. “Ministers need to show that the idea of ‘Global Britain’ means more than a continuation of the FCO’s current activities and is instead a targeted, resourced plan.”



Pro-Europeans are increasingly concerned that the FCO, which is not directly involved in the Brexit talks, has been unable to articulate a new relationship with the EU and may instead sideline UK values to seek out new allies in the Gulf or the far east.

They argue the delicate transition to new overseas alliances comes just as the UK-US relationship, the bedrock of postwar UK foreign policy, enters one of its least stable periods due to Donald Trump’s protectionist trade stance.

Recent voting defeats at the UN over key positions such as the appointment of a British judge on the international criminal court are cited by the committee as a sign that the UK’s influence may be waning.

The FCO “needs to work harder and do more to deliver on its promise to strengthen the rules-based international order”, the committee said.

It urged Theresa May to make a speech in the Commons setting out how she views UK foreign policy in the wake of Brexit. It raised concerns that the FCO was simply cutting resources outside Europe in an effort to bolster bilateral relations with individual European capitals.

Recent official data from the FCO shows it intends to spend £4.2m funding 50 new posts in Europe, partly funded by savings made in Asia, the Americas and Africa.

A paper by the Centre for European Reform shows both the EU and UK have declined to be specific about the kind of future foreign policy relationship they have in mind.

The CER paper suggested a treaty-based alliance similar to that between the EU and Canada to guarantee consultation on sanctions policy, secondment of British officials to the European foreign policy service and regular meetings with UK officials before meetings of the EU foreign affairs council.