Clean Capitalism: a Post-COVID Pathway to Economic and Ecological Recovery

Clean Capitalism: A Post-COVID Pathway to Economic and Ecological Recovery

The following report assesses the suitability of the Clean Capitalist Coalition’s CoVictory and Clean Asset Bonds & Loans proposals for the post-COVID UK economy. It finds that, in theory, tax-exempt bonds and loans supplied by the private sector have greater potential for stimulating sustainable economic recovery, and instigating a long-term transition to a ‘clean capitalist’ market to meet our nation’s net neutral emissions target of 2050, than existing recovery budget plans. It is also optimistic about the UK’s free-trade prospects following Brexit; but this perspective is contingent on Britain not belonging to trade groups like the TPP, and instead pursuing independent trade agreements with its international allies.

Contents

Preface Page 3

CoVictory Bonds & Loans Page 5

Clean Asset Bonds & Loans Page 6

Industry Case Study: New Nuclear Power Page 7

Britain’s Clean Free-Trade Future Page 9

Policy Recommendations Page 13

References Page 14

Authors

Connor Tomlinson Sam Payne Sam Curran Michal Bazan Policy Director Policy Researcher Policy Researcher Policy Researcher

© 2020 British Conservation Alliance. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system. Images included sourced from Unsplash, © 2020.

Preface

One of many catastrophic impacts of COVID-19 lockdowns is their tangible and lasting damage inflicted on the UK’s economy. Britain experienced a record fall of GDP, by 19.5%, in April 2020.

Although national output has been increasing since the initial slump, the pace of recovery is decreasing, with production 9.2% below the rate seen in February 20201. Monthly redundancies doubled2; around 150,000 people lost jobs since May, despite the government furlough scheme3.

Almost 80% of households reported a reduced income due to lockdowns4. Prior to the second

November lockdown, only 85% of businesses were able to resume trading; many of which had lost confidence in the Prime Minister’s ability to remedy the situation5, with the Business

Confidence Index at a record low6. The government has already spent almost £180bn on their

COVID-19 response schemes, with the Office for Budget Responsibility projecting spending to exceed £300bn by April 20217. As of September 2020, the UK’s net debt (as a percentage of GDP) reached 101.2%8.

To aid post-COVID financial recovery, the UK government has instituted a three-tier system of

‘bounce-back loans’ for British businesses. The UK government’s small business bounce-back loans provide between £2000 and £50,000 (up to 25% of annual turnover), are 100% guaranteed, and have no interest for the first twelve months (with 2.5% for a subsequent six years)9. The second tier guarantees only 80% of a £5m maximum loan, with twelve months interest free (again, with a subsequent six years total duration)10. The highest tier of COVID-19 Business Interruption loan guarantees 80% of a £200m maximum loan (with a £45m annual turnover eligibility threshold)11. £33 billion in bounce-back loans has already been issued12. £13.68 billion had been spent by August 16th on 60,409 approved facilities (of 122,885 applicants). With over half of small business loan applications unsuccessful, it’s necessary for the private sector to be enabled to provide financial aid for struggling entrepreneurs.

The UK’s recovery period from COVID-1913 is a prime opportunity to implement the foundations for long-term ‘clean capitalist’ policies. A ‘green market’ is already a primary stated interest of

Chancellor Rishi Sunak, who included £40m in financial support to create three thousand—and preserve an existing two thousand—‘green jobs’ in his recovery budget proposal14. As proposed by Rod Richardson, in Green Market Revolution, supply-side tax cuts could achieve greater green economic sector stimulation than existing government subsidies. Clean Tax Cuts are marginal tax rate cuts, offering a simpler, more participatory tax benefit’ for any taxpayer, which alleviate unfair tax burdens from non-polluters15. Said cuts would eliminate the primary opponents—‘more so than price’—to the implementation of emerging green technological innovations: ‘bureaucratic and incumbent-monopoly arrangements’, ‘technological constraints on dispatchability’, and the detrimental assertion that clean energy technologies rely on price-adjustment mechanisms16.

We do not only need the efficiency in producing ‘If the Holy Grail of climate policy is a new method to mobilise trillions of wealth, but efficiency in creating new ways of dollars for capital investment for a producing it. Entrepreneurs must be global transition to clean empowered to invest and innovate if Britain is to infrastructure, then obviously harnessing the laissez-faire principle recover from the government’s pandemic that created the phenomenal growth response rapidly, sustainably, and engine of capitalism should be considered perhaps the essential competitively. It is crucial that equal opportunity solution.’ for prosperity is maximised, to undo the Rod Richardson centralisation of wealth, and dependency on Green Market Revolution corporate monopolies, engineered by the obstruction of local and start-up businesses.

Supply-side tax cuts, and qualified industry

investment incentives, will minimise

bureaucratic red-tape and dependence on

taxpayer funds going forward17. Maximal

freedom and accountability is localised to the

private sector18, with dependence on taxpayer

funds alleviated during economic recovery19.

CoVictory Bonds & Loans

Predicated on research conducted by Richardson, and Wayne

Winegarden, PhD2021, CoVictory Bonds & Loans—a component of proposed Clean Tax Cuts—provide a more cost-effective and inclusive pathway for invigorating ‘clean capitalist’ economic growth than existing government ‘bounce-back loan’ plans.

CoVictory Bonds & Loans exempt loan interest from income taxation: enabling banks to account for and price-in risk, incentivising lending to both large pre-existing customers, and new small firms and start-ups. High-risk borrowers would face initial higher rates, but benefit most from interest reduction compared to the taxable rate22.

Enabling the private sector to provide financial aid at competitive interest rates equivalent to those offered by government, could provide more recovery assistance, job creation, and investment in emerging industries, independent of taxpayer funded subsidies or schemes23.

Clean Asset Bonds & Loans

Furthermore, extending the tax-exempt bonds and loans beyond the COVID-19 recovery period specifically for emerging green market industries—could invigorate the clean capitalist transition both Britain’s national, and our global, market requires. Unlike CoVictory Bonds & Loans, Clean

Asset Bonds—tax-exempt corporate and mortgage-backed bonds for clean assets—require qualification for recipiency. Said qualifications aim not to further complicate on make costly bond issuance; in fact, they are the only bonds optimised to work across the £35 billion global bond market24. Eligible industries include renewables research and development, carbon capture and storage, waste recycling, combined heat and power technology, AI research and development, nuclear power, electric vehicles, green infrastructure construction, and reforestation efforts.

Clean Asset Bonds could make these industries—instrumental to our ecological recovery—more economically appealing by making capital cheaper, and increasing return on equity25. The appetite for adjacent green environmental schemes is reflected by the expansion of the Green Bonds market26.

Private investment in growing environmental sectors will secure more sustainable job creation:

GraniteShares survey of 1,500 investors with £50,000 on average to invest found renewable energy to be the highest priority investment for young to middle-aged investors in 202027. The

American solar and wind industry are outpacing government subsidies, falling in cost at a rate of

85% and 50% respectively since 2010. Taxpayer money evidently isn’t required to incentivise renewables innovation and development; whereas oil and gas continues to be in managed decline. Clean Asset Bonds could further incentivise private investment to accelerate renewables innovation28; moreover—with the trajectory of development trending so positive for green market sectors—there is a decreased likelihood of Clean Asset Bonds defaulting.

Industry Case Study: New Nuclear Power

Nuclear power for a long time has been driven by state actors. Why? Massive capital costs to build the power stations. Sizewell B (SZB) nuclear power station in the UK, on the coast of Suffolk, began construction in 1988, and was finally commissioned in 199529. The station took less time to build than its sister stations of Wolf Creek and Callaway in the U.S. and cost £2Bn (£5Bn today)30. The latest estimates for EDF’s Hinckley Point C (HPC) power station—housing two EPR reactors, each more powerful than the single Westinghouse Pressurised Water Reactor of SZB—come in at

£22Bn31. Borrowing such massive capital required for upfront development investment is currently difficult in the private sector. EDF has had to borrow at an interest rate of 9% rather than the 2% that the government would have been able to borrow at. This disparity alone is estimated to have doubled the price of HPC, for instance32.

Safety and regulatory requirements construct further construction impediments. Nuclear power stations in the UK are, for example, designed to remain safe for a one-in-ten-thousand-year earthquake33. Along with arduous requirements like this, the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR)— who regulate and provide operational licenses for the UK’s nuclear power stations—can impose additional measures. Indulge the following analogy:

A blacksmith is working with metal that would get increasingly hotter unless cooled. A

hose may be a consistent method to cool it; but having a bucket of water to hand should

the hose fail would be beneficial as a contingency measure. The ONR could stipulate

further measures, such as: a water storage tank in case you lose your mains water supply;

automation of the water hose; a second water hose running at all times in addition to the

first. It could also demand a diversification of cooling systems, such as requiring fans

running nearby.

This approach ensures nuclear power in the UK is extremely safe. The ONR state “a risk of 1 in

10,000 per annum to any member of the public is the maximum that should be tolerated”34. As these existing precautionary measures are a sufficient standard to ensure public safety when

constructing new nuclear plants, barriers to entry regarding funding, rather than repealing necessary regulations, warrant address to encourage the construction of new net-zero plants.

Small Modular Reactors (SMR) may allow the private sector to develop and fund new nuclear without the need for state aid, reducing the likelihood of excessive waste in projects. However, these new power stations will still need to meet the same safety requirements, costing time (for engineering pre-construction) and additional capital. The plant must be engineered to stipulated standards, and then undergo a two or more year Generic Design

Assessment (GDA) by the ONR. Only then, if criteria are satisfied, can the plant be built35. This scrutiny includes evaluating everything: from its physical design, to how it will be operated, to how companies plan to maintain the station over its lifetime.

During construction, specifics may vary slightly from its proposed design. This must be accounted for, so the engineering work continues throughout construction, with operational standards and requirements changing constantly.

These monetary and time requirements for companies create a formidable obstruction to investment. This means that—whatever the design of nuclear power stations—they will always face large capital costs compared to other types of power generation. To enlist dependable, carbon neutral nuclear power in meeting the government’s net-zero emissions target of 2050, we need better methods of financing and encouraging the design and construction of these power stations. Access to private sector funding, with tailored, renegotiable terms for borrowing based upon accounting for additional costs during planning and construction stages, could aid in addressing the upfront cost barriers to constructing new nuclear power-plants. Therefore, a system of qualified industry funding, as with Clean Asset Bonds & Loans, could encourage international private sector investment in the construction of Britain’s nuclear future.

Britain’s Clean Free-Trade Future

Following the UK’s liberation from the Common Market policies of the European Union, our nation’s trade prospects have quickly become bountiful. Clean Asset Bonds & Loans could assist in further enhancing Britain’s appeal as a global trade partner by instantiating international tax reciprocity. The inexpensive tax-exempt debt provided by Clean Asset Bonds & Loans will decrease the cost of capital, whilst simultaneously leveraging up GDP and return on equity. This cost effective leveraged incentive—when adopted by Britain, and easily replicated in other nations—could be on par with the post-World War II Marshall Plan as a kickstart for a free-trade recovery network.

Also named ‘the European Recovery Program’, the Marshall Plan injected $12 billion (£100 billion at today’s rate) into the economies of sixteen Western European countries; the UK being the second largest proportional recipient36. This created a trans-pacific free-trade network, opposing the tyranny and uniform poverty of the nations behind the USSR’s Iron Curtain. By the end of the

Marshall Plan, the sixteen nations all demonstrated higher levels of economic growth than in the pre-war period. Almost a century on, it retains a reputation as the highest standard model for

‘organizing the transition from state socialism to open market economies.’ Policies incentivising unobstructed cross-continental trade today could replicate the post-War recovery for our post-

COVID economy. This could also replicate the positive psychological benefits, and exacerbate by example the superior successes of the capitalist—as opposed to the socialist—system, that came as consequence of the Marshall Plan’s economic stimulation37, for our contemporary financial crisis.

Furthermore, whilst Europe’s contingency on Marshall Plan aid may not have saved the continent from a collapse worse than in 194738, had it have happened, encouraging investment through international tax reciprocity diversifies the sources of income to each recovering national economy. This diversification decreases the likelihood of a Wall Street Crash-esque “Domino

Effect”, should one hypothetically prominent nation upon which others rely on for financial recovery aid make catastrophic errors in their own recovery.

Unlike the ‘Coronabonds’ which caused controversy over debt sharing in the Eurozone39, the

CoVictory proposal isolates business recovery schemes and investment in upcoming industries to the private sector. The EU’s recovery scheme is predicated on €750bn public spending, financed through borrowing40, exacerbating concerns about the indebtedness of some member states41.

Beyond that, Clean Asset Bonds would eradicate green innovators’ reliance on ineffective subsidies; as is common practice in the European Union, whose centralised funding schemes are insufficient to meet their target of thirty-three percent of all energy sourced from renewables by

203042. A UK focused on private investment in green recovery would create a replicable free- market approach for a clean capitalist future.

The cross-border tax reciprocity of Clean Asset Bonds &

Loans enables private investors to fund innovation and

infrastructural ventures overseas, circumventing the

obstructive bureaucracy and centralised wealth

concentration of third-world dictatorships.

However, a potential barrier to enacting a clean

capitalist future is the UK’s potential membership in the

Trans-Pacific Partnership trade organisation: an eleven

member-state organisation, comprising the third largest free-trade area globally, and worth in excess of £10 trillion. Former twelfth member-state, the

United States, withdrew in January 2017 via President Trump’s Executive Order, making ratification of their agreement infeasible43. Following Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s resignation over health complications44, Britain has lost a staunch advocate for its entrance into the TPP45. However, this may be a blessing in disguise, as the TPP’s Investor–State Dispute

Settlement (ISDS) provisions could cause disasters for national decarbonisation efforts46. If the UK violates its contractual arrangement to purchase oil from corporations registered in TPP member- states, it becomes liable to lawsuits47. These same companies are safeguarded from prosecution by said member-states in return: instead, governments must pursue legal recourse through domestic frameworks48.

Energy company TransCanada brought forward a suit against the Obama administration— demanding $15 billion in compensation under NAFTA’s investment provisions—over the obstruction of Keystone XL pipeline construction. The same suits could be brought against

Britain—or any TPP member state—should they desire to relinquish dependency on Pacific Rim oil companies as fossil fuels are phased out.

TransCanada suspended the suit following

President Trump’s withdrawal from the TPP and approval of the Keystone XL project in the first month of his administration49. The uptake in domestic oil production has weaned the U.S. off dependence on oil- producing nations with a history of human rights violations, and made it the world’s leading exporter of oil and gas: ending net oil imports forty-six years on from President Nixon’s

Project Independence announcement50, whilst simultaneously leading nations in reducing annual carbon emissions in 201951. A similar scenario may be about to play out in Germany, who—after pledging to decommission all their viable nuclear plants by 202252—are facing pressure to backtrack on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project after alleged espionage by the Russian government53. Such a reversal could cost German taxpayers billions in lawsuits brought against the country by their paradoxical NATO opponent and energy supplier54.

With withdrawal from the TPP instrumental to the U.S. gaining fossil fuel independence—as the industry enters a managed decline as the nation prepares to transition to renewables—Britain should avoid entering into an unelected conglomerate of pseudo-petrostatism like the Trans-

Pacific Partnership, lest it aim to make its energy sustainability strategies additionally and unnecessarily costly for taxpayers. Following freedom from the European Union, we should not be so eager to become enamoured with entanglement in another bureaucratic, oligarchic international organisation, which stifles innovation in favour of preferential treatment of terminal industries. Britain has already negotiated a lucrative £89 billion deal with South Korea55, and is set to negotiate to continue coverage under similar tenets of the EU’s agreement with Singapore56.

Pending a second Trump term, the UK is in prime position to author a deal with the U.S.; a far cry from his predecessor, President Obama’s insistence that Brexit would place Britain at “the back of the queue” for trade-deal priorities57. Our capabilities to sufficiently negotiate as an independent nation on the global stage have been demonstrated. Unless the TPP repeals its unilaterally-applied ISDS provisions, the UK should regard belonging to the Trans-Pacific

Partnership as a feat of environmental suicide.

Though the TPP’s effort to build, as

David Pilling of the Financial Times

characterises58, an ‘anyone but China’

club is admirable in light of China’s

efforts to conceal COVID-1959, and

ongoing genocidal persecution of

Uighur Muslims60, existing malpractices

present in the TPP render the UK’s

membership inadvisable. Britain should, instead, pursue independent agreements between nations in the region, with efforts to strengthen Hong Kong61 and Taiwan’s national sovereignty from incursions against Chinese imperialism, and to instantiate our Commonwealth partners, and friends in Japan and South

Korea, as Asia’s new ethical trade supergiants as they repatriate manufacturing from China. The recent UK-Japan trade deal, eradicating tariffs for the majority of products, is a step in the right direction62. Again, the international tax reciprocity instantiated by adopting Clean Asset Bonds could help deconstruct the global reliance on China’s manufacturing monopoly, by kickstarting sustainable innovation projects worldwide.

Policy Recommendations

▪ Empower private lenders to extends CoVictory Bonds & Loans to businesses in need of

financial assistance, by allowing banks to bundle CoVictory Loans for public sale as CoVictory

Bonds63.

▪ Implement Clean Asset Bonds using a metrics-based pilot programme: extending tax-exempt

bonds and loans beyond the COVID-19 recovery period to emerging green industries, with

robust qualification criteria for industries and infrastructure covered.

▪ Make eligible for Clean Asset Bonds and Loans the following quantifiably environmentally

beneficial industries: renewables research and development, carbon capture and storage,

combined heat and power technology, nuclear power, electric vehicles, green infrastructure

construction, and sustainable woodland reforestation and regeneration efforts64.

▪ Ensure CoVictory and Clean Asset Bonds & Loans are solely accessible to private companies,

and that rate-based public utilities or power monopolies are ineligible.

▪ Reduce tariffs on medical technology imports during the COVID recovery period.

▪ Halt the UK’s membership in the Trans-Pacific Partnership until Investor–State Dispute

Settlement Provisions (ISDS)—preventing decarbonisation of the UK energy sector—are

repealed65.

Clean Tax Cuts empower entrepreneurs to enact the UK Institute of Directors’ ‘Manifesto on

Corporate Governance’ business purpose clauses66, which envision—as Colin Mayer characterises—a market profiting from the provision of solutions to—not creation of—problems for our planet and its people67. If we are to ‘accelerate the transition to a net zero-emission economy’ by 2050, the UK government should pass a Clean Tax Cut programme to institute the economic recovery required to fast-track post-Brexit U.S. and Commonwealth trade deals, incentivise reciprocal investment in green infrastructure from across the pond, and ensure

COVID-19 recovery acts as a ‘pain-free means of turning capitalism into clean capitalism’68.

References

1 ‘GDP monthly estimate, UK: August 2020’, Office for National Statistics (9 October 2020) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/bulletins/gdpmonthlyestimateuk/august2020 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 2 ‘Coronavirus: impact on the UK economy’, Statista (2020) https://www.statista.com/study/71627/coronavirus-impact-on- the-uk-economy/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 3 ‘Labour market overview, UK: October 2020’, Office for National Statistics (10 November 2020) https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabour market/october2020 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 4 ‘OECD Economic Surveys: United Kingdom 2020’, OECD (14 October 2020) https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd- economic-surveys-united-kingdom-2020_2f684241-en#page22 [accessed 30 November 2020], p. 22. 5 ‘Business worried about ‘bunker’ mentality in 10 Downing Street’, Financial Times https://www.ft.com/content/ae8d8986- 7265-4f2b-b121-5f93124f824c [accessed 30 November 2020]. 6 ‘United Kingdom Business Confidence’, Trading Economics https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/business- confidence [accessed 30 November 2020]. 7 ‘Coronavirus Analysis’, Office for Budget Responsibility https://obr.uk/coronavirus-analysis/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 8 ‘PS: Net Debt (excluding public sector banks) as a % of GDP: NSA’, Office for National Statistics (20 November 2020) https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/hf6x/pusf [accessed 30 November 2020]. 9 ‘Apply for a coronavirus Bounce Back Loan’, GOV.UK (27 April 2020) https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-a- coronavirus-bounce-back-loan [accessed 30 November 2020]. 10 ‘Apply for the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme’, GOV.UK (23 March 2020) https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-the-coronavirus-business-interruption-loan-scheme [accessed 30 November 2020]. 11 ‘Apply for the Coronavirus Large Business Interruption Loan Scheme’, GOV.UK (3 April 2020) https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-the-coronavirus-large-business-interruption-loan-scheme [accessed 30 November 2020]. 12 ‘FTSE falls 1.5pc as economy fears mount’, The Telegraph (7 July 2020) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/07/07/markets-live-latest-coronavirus-news-pound-euro-ftse-100/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 13 We define the UK’s post-COVID economic recovery period as reducing its net debt as percentage of GDP to 70% (within the range of Maastricht Treaty guidelines). 14 ‘Government announces £40 million green jobs challenge fund’, GOV.UK (30 June 2020) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-announces-40-million-green-jobs-challenge-fund [accessed 30 November 2020]. 15 Rod Richardson, Green Market Revolution: How Market Environmentalism Can Protect Nature And Save The World, ed. by Christopher Barnard, Kai Weiss (Austrian Economics Center, the British Conservation Alliance, 2020), p. 86. 16 Richardson, 82. 17 Deroy Murdock, ‘Supply-Side Environmentalism’, National Review (6 July 2009) https://www.nationalreview.com/2009/07/supply-side-environmentalism-deroy-murdock/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 18Lily L. Batchelder, et al. “Efficiency and Tax Incentives: The Case for Refundable Tax Credits.” Stanford Law Review, vol. 59, no. 1, 2006, pp. 23–76. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40040294 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 19 Jean-Francois Bonnefon, Augustin Landier, Parinitha Sastry, David Thesmar, ‘Do Investors Care About Corporate Externalities? Experimental Evidence’, HEC Paris Research Paper, No. FIN-2019-1350, SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3458447# [accessed 30 November 2020]. 20 ‘Policy Briefs[:] COVID-19 Policy Response’, Clean Capitalist Leadership Council (2 July 2020) https://cleancapitalistleadershipcouncil.org/proposals/#covid [accessed 30 November 2020]. 21 Wayne Winegarden, ‘Congress Should Stimulate Economic Recovery By Empowering Businesses To Issue Tax-Free Debt’, Forbes (6 August 2020) https://www.forbes.com/sites/waynewinegarden/2020/08/06/congress-should-stimulate- economic-recovery-by-empowering-businesses-to-issue-tax-free-debt/?sh=541f0a14337c [accessed 30 November 2020].

22 Rod Richardson, Wayne Winegarden, ‘A Better Alternative to More Coronavirus Stimulus Spending and Loan Programs’, Reason (13 July 2020) https://reason.org/commentary/a-better-alternative-to-more-coronavirus-stimulus-spending-and- loan-programs/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 23 HM Treasury, ‘HM Treasury coronavirus (COVID-19) business loan scheme statistics’, GOV.UK (27 May 2020) https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/hm-treasury-coronavirus-covid-19-business-loan-scheme-statistics [accessed 30 November 2020]. 24 ‘The Clean Free Market Act’, Clean Capitalist Leadership Council https://cleancapitalistleadershipcouncil.org/wp- content/uploads/ctc-cfma-conceptsummary-180828.pdf [accessed 30 November 2020]. 25 American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, the Clean Capitalist Leadership Council, Clean Free Market Streamlining for Rapid, Resilient COVID Recovery (straw proposal) https://cleancapitalistleadershipcouncil.org/proposals/#covid [accessed 30 November 2020]. 26 Naeem Badiuzzaman, ‘Green bonds market continues to break records despite Covid-19 turmoil’, (12 October 2020) https://www.linklaters.com/en/about-us/news-and-deals/news/2020/october/green-bonds-market-continues-to-break- records-despite-covid-19-turmoil [accessed 30 November 2020]. 27 ‘Beneficial loan arrangements - HMRC official rates’, GOV.UK (6 April 2020) https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rates-and-allowances-beneficial-loan-arrangements-hmrc-official- rates/beneficial-loan-arrangements-hmrc-official-rates [accessed 30 November 2020]. 28 Mark Chediak, Brian Eckhouse, ‘Solar and Wind Power So Cheap They’re Outgrowing Subsidies’, Bloomberg (19 September 2019) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-09-19/solar-and-wind-power-so-cheap-they-re-outgrowing-subsidies [accessed 30 November 2020]. 29 ‘Sizewell B Power Station’, EDF https://www.edfenergy.com/energy/power-stations/sizewell-b [accessed 30 November 2020]. 30 ‘Sizewell B’, ice https://www.ice.org.uk/what-is-civil-engineering/what-do-civil-engineers-do/sizewell- b#:~:text=Construction%20of%20the%20station%2C%20with,%C2%A32bn%20at%201987%20prices. [accessed 30 November 2020]. 31 Jillian Ambrose, ‘Hinkley Point nuclear plant building costs rise by up to £2.9bn’, The Guardian (25 September 2019) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/25/hinkley-point-nuclear-plant-to-run-29m-over- budget [accessed 30 November 2020]. 32 Simon Jack, ‘Government U-turn on nuclear deal’, BBC News (4 June 2018) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business- 44363366 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 33 Dr. Geoff Ballard, et. al., ‘The Tolerability of Risk from Nuclear Power Stations’, Health & Safety Executive [accessed 30 November 2020], para. 141. 34 Ballard, para.173. 35 ‘New Nuclear Power Plants: Generic Design Assessment Guidance to Requesting Parties’, Office for Nuclear Regulation (October 2019) 36 John Agnew, J. Nicholas Entrikin, The Marshall Plan Today: Model and Metaphor (New York: Routledge, 2004), p. 116. 37 Agnew, Entrikin, p. 1-4. 38 Agnew, Entrikin, p. 111-112. 39 Tom Rees, ‘Coronabonds' row throws eurozone into fresh crisis’, The Telegraph (2 April 2020) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/04/02/coronabonds-row-throws-eurozone-fresh-crisis/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 40 ‘Coronavirus: EU leaders reach recovery deal after marathon summit’, BBC News (21 July 2020) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53481542 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 41 ‘EU capitals hesitate over recovery fund loans’, Financial Times https://www.ft.com/content/1621a33b-b05e-4b2d-b6d1- 862a0455c1b9 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 42 Kate Abnett, ‘EU set to slightly surpass 2030 renewable energy goal, but funding boost needed’, Reuters (15 June 2020) https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-eu-energy-renewables/eu-set-to-slightly-surpass-2030-renewable-energy-goal-but- funding-boost-needed-idUKKBN23M2FJ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 43 ‘TPP: What is it and why does it matter?’, BBC News (23 January 2017) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32498715 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 44 ‘Shinzo Abe: Japan's PM resigns for health reasons’, BBC News (23 January 2017) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world- asia-53943758 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 45 ‘UK would be welcomed to TPP ‘with open arms’, says Shinzo Abe’, Financial Times https://www.ft.com/content/57c4e3ce-ca22-11e8-b276-b9069bde0956 [accessed 30 November 2020].

46 ‘Beware of TPP's Investor-State Dispute Settlement Provisions’, Roosevelt Institute https://rooseveltinstitute.org/beware- tpps-investor-state-dispute-settlement-provision/ 47 ‘Petroleum ISDS cases pose major threat to climate action’, ISDS Platform (23 April 2018) https://isds.bilaterals.org/?petroleum-isds-cases-pose-major [accessed 30 November 2020]. 48 James Roberts, Theodore Bromund, Riddi Dasgupta, ‘Straight Talk on the ISDS Provisions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership’, The Heritage Foundation (17 May 2016) https://www.heritage.org/international-economies/report/straight- talk-the-isds-provisions-the-trans-pacific-partnership/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 49 Ethan Lou, ‘TransCanada's $15 billion U.S. Keystone XL NAFTA suit suspended’, Reuters (28 February 2017) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-pipeline-lawsuit-idUSKBN1671W1 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 50 ‘Economic and Budget Analyses’, White House https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp- content/uploads/2020/02/ap_2_assumptions_fy21.pdf [accessed 30 November 2020]. 51 ‘Global CO2 emissions in 2019’, iea (11 February 2020) https://www.iea.org/articles/global-co2-emissions-in-2019 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 52 ‘Germany: Nuclear power plants to close by 2022’, BBC News (30 May 2011) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe- 13592208 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 53 Madeline Chambers, ‘Germany pressed to rethink Nord Stream 2 pipeline after Navalny poisoning’, Reuters (3 September 2020) https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-russia-politics-navalny-germany/germany-pressed-to-rethink-nord- stream-2-pipeline-after-navalny-poisoning-idUKKBN25U0U1 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 54 Philipp Vetter, ‘Nord Stream 2 could become a billionaire grave for Germany’, Welt (9 July 2020) https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/plus215231056/Nord-Stream-2-Das-Pipeline-Aus-kaeme-Deutschland-teuer-zu- stehen.html?cid=socialmedia.twitter.shared.web [accessed 30 November 2020]. 55 Reuters Staff, ‘UK and South Korea to sign post-Brexit continuity trade deal’, Reuters (21 August 2019) https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-trade-korea/uk-and-south-korea-to-sign-post-brexit-continuity-trade-deal- idUKKCN1VB2I9 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 56 Grace Leong, Ann Williams, ‘Singapore's free trade deal with EU will apply to Britain during Brexit transition period: MTI’, The Straits Times (31 January 2020) https://www.straitstimes.com/business/economy/singapore-free-trade-deal-with-eu- will-apply-to-britain-during-brexit-transition [accessed 30 November 2020]. 57 Nile Gardiner, ‘Why there will be a trade deal between Britain and America’, CapX () https://capx.co/why-there-will-be-a- trade-deal-between-britain-and-america/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 58 ‘It won’t be easy to build an ‘anyone but China’ club’, Financial Times https://www.ft.com/content/08cf74f6-c216-11e2- 8992-00144feab7de#axzz2U9X6IlJK [accessed 30 November 2020]. 59 Shengjie Lai, Nick W Ruktanonchai, Liangcai Zhou, Olivia Prosper, Wei Luo, Jessica R Floyd, Amy Wesolowski, Mauricio Santillana, Chi Zhang, Xiangjun Du, Hongjie Yu, Andrew J Tatem, ‘Effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions for containing the COVID-19 outbreak in China’, medRxiv (March 13, 2020) https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.03.20029843v3 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 60 ‘UK accuses China of 'gross' human rights abuses against Uighurs’, BBC News (19 July 2020) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53463403 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 61 Connor Tomlinson, ‘What Britain can learn from Hong Kong’s environmental innovations’, 1828 https://www.1828.org.uk/2020/06/26/what-britain-can-learn-from-hong-kongs-environmental-innovations/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 62 ‘UK signs first major post-Brexit trade deal with Japan’, BBC News (11 September 2020) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54116606 [accessed 30 November 2020]. 63 ‘Private CoVictory Bonds & Loans A COVID S9mulus Proposal For Rapid Recovery & Default Risk Reduction’, Clean Capitalist Leadership Council https://cleancapitalistleadershipcouncil.org/proposals/#covid [accessed 30 November 2020]. 64 We define sustainable efforts for reforestation and woodland regeneration as those incorporating practices in correspondence with our policies outlined in our National Tree Strategy policy paper: https://www.bca.eco/publications/response-to-uk-governments-national-tree-strategy-proposal 65 Connor Tomlinson, ‘Why UK Membership of the Trans-Pacific Partnership is Environmental Suicide’, British Conservation Alliance (4 August 2020) https://www.bca.eco/blog/why-uk-membership-of-the-trans-pacific-partnership-is-environmental- suicide [accessed 30 November 2020]. 66 The Institute of Directors, ‘IoD Manifesto Corporate Governance’ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 67 Colin Mayer, ‘It's time to redefine the purpose of business. Here's a roadmap’, World Economic Forum (7 January 2020) https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/its-time-for-a-radical-rethink-of-corporate-purpose/ [accessed 30 November 2020]. 68 Richardson, 87.