We’ve
heard plenty of talk about a Northern Powerhouse over recent days – but only
after weeks of the Government acting like spectators while steelworkers in Redcar and Scunthorpe face losing their jobs.
We’ll only achieve the ambitions
behind the Northern Powerhouse if giving more power to communities goes
hand-in-hand with a proper industrial strategy.
But it has become clear during
this steel crisis that Britain no longer has an industrial strategy.
Civil servants have been told not
to use the words ‘industrial policy’ because apparently it is not a
sufficiently Conservative phrase.
I’m afraid that’s not good
enough.
Instead they are offering the
same short-sighted excuses that were used to withdraw support from Sheffield
Forgemasters five years ago.
That loan would have positioned
Forgemasters as a premier producer of components for nuclear power stations.
Now Britain’s nuclear energy future is being paid for with Chinese investment and built by French constructors.
It’s not only steelworkers whose
prospects will be damaged if Ministers let our steel industry go to the wall.
The question of whether we save
some of the best coke ovens and the largest blast furnace in our country has
implications for our national security too.
It undermines our freedom and our
influence if we become beholden to other countries for essential resources that
we will need in the future.
If the UK becomes over-reliant on
foreign imports then we risk the possibility of being effectively held to ransom
by other regimes when steel prices change in the future.
These are decisions of profound national importance.
That’s why I believe the steel crisis should be reviewed by the National Security Council and factored into the ongoing Strategic Defence & Security Review.
There is no evidence however that this has been considered.
Ministers seem content to let these steelworks close for good. It feels foolish when the economic conditions could easily change in a few years’ time.
The first duty of any government is to safeguard our national security. Cameron and Osborne should think again and save our steel.
That’s why I believe the steel crisis should be reviewed by the National Security Council and factored into the ongoing Strategic Defence & Security Review.
There is no evidence however that this has been considered.
Ministers seem content to let these steelworks close for good. It feels foolish when the economic conditions could easily change in a few years’ time.
The first duty of any government is to safeguard our national security. Cameron and Osborne should think again and save our steel.
"If the UK becomes over-reliant on foreign imports then we risk the possibility of being effectively held to ransom by other regimes when steel prices change in the future.
ReplyDeleteThese are decisions of profound national importance. We shouldn’t wander into them without considering the long-term security consequences for our country."
This is nonsense. If steel is a matter of national security as Jarvis claims then surely it would be a good idea to import as much cheap steel as possible and stockpile it. The reason he does not advocate that is because national security isn't the real issue- he's just seizing on any excuse to shut out imports.
Even if we concede that steel is a strategic industry and needs protecting (which I don't) protectionism would surely be a very bad way to do this as it is completely untargeted. If foreign imports of steel are blocked and british steel makers make bigger profits how do we know management will protect jobs? What if they just give themselves big raises instead?
A direct subsidy would surely be preferable as then Government could ask for something in return and distribute the costs across the economy rather than arbitrarily penalising industry which consume steel.
If steel is as utterly central to our economy as Turley etc. would have us believe then it must be a tremendous boost to our economy to have access to a cheap source of it from imports. Their argument is utterly self contradictory.