Labour’s Brave New Energy World: Sir Kier Starmer’s Ambitous Policy Proposals, by Dinesh Dhamija
With the UK election barely a month away, voters are scanning the parties’ manifestos for clues to the future – particularly that of the likely winner – Sir Kier Starmer’s Labour Party.
As a solar energy entrepreneur, I’m alert to the parties’ renewable promises and ambitions. The most recent Conservative government talked a brave game, but gradually ditched its green commitments, because a vocal minority of its supporters hated the plans. This resulted in a fragmented approach to renewable energy, with many initiatives either scaled back or abandoned altogether.
The Labour Party has promised a new energy deal in its pitch to the nation, including a state-owned business – Great British Energy – to invest in renewables: onshore and offshore wind, solar power, gigafactories, energy storage, and green hydrogen. This comprehensive approach aims to cover a wide array of renewable energy sources and technologies, ensuring a diversified energy portfolio for the UK.
Listening to Sir Kier address a meeting in Leith in Scotland, you might think that he was the world’s green energy Messiah. Launching his party’s ‘national mission on clean energy’, he promised: “It will power us forward towards net-zero, generate growth right across the country, end the suffocating cost of living crisis and get Putin’s boot off our throat with real energy security.” These ambitious goals reflect a deep understanding of the interconnected challenges of energy security, economic growth, and environmental sustainability.
It is, he proclaimed, “a plan to use clean power to build a new Britain, a plan to get our future back.” Stirring words, and a welcome commitment. But as recently as February this year, Labour ditched a promise to invest £28 billion a year in green spending, shrinking it to just £4.8 billion a year. What kind of a new deal is that? This significant reduction raises questions about the feasibility and impact of Labour’s green energy initiatives.
Sir Kier bemoans the lost opportunities of the Tory government and the squabbles of the Scottish National Party, for whom a British success would contradict their drive for independence. He plans to headquarter GB Energy in Scotland and harvest the blowy conditions through a massive new wind energy programme, extending right down the eastern coast of the country to Grimsby in Lincolnshire. This strategic location aims to maximize the potential of wind energy, leveraging the geographical advantages of the UK’s coastline.
He plans tidal energy in the Firth of Forth and in South Wales, with clean hydrogen programmes in Yorkshire, Merseyside, and Grangemouth. These projects highlight Labour’s commitment to exploring diverse renewable energy sources, recognizing the unique potential of different regions across the UK.
Quite how far £4.8 billion will go, spread across these many fields, is an open question. The substantial reduction in proposed spending necessitates a careful reassessment of priorities and expected outcomes. Achieving significant progress with limited funds will require innovative approaches and efficient allocation of resources.
Sir Kier points to the transformations of US President Joe Biden’s 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. But that included $783 billion for renewable energy and climate measures. He also wants to model GB Energy on Denmark’s Ørested or Sweden’s Vattenfall, but both of those countries have long traditions of renewable energy champions, paid for through high taxation. The comparison underscores the scale of investment and cultural commitment required for such a transition. Labour’s brave new energy world is an incredibly positive but also very expensive undertaking.
Is Britain ready for the Scandinavian model? This question remains at the heart of the debate, as the UK’s political and economic landscape differs significantly from that of Scandinavian countries. Adopting a similar approach would necessitate substantial shifts in policy and public perception.
Labour’s energy policy is targeted at the Red Wall seats lost during the Brexit saga. It aims to claw back support in the industrial Midlands and north (including Scotland) by promising a brave new world of clean, secure energy, with hundreds of thousands of jobs. This focus on job creation and regional development seeks to address economic disparities and garner broader support for Labour’s vision.
All very inspiring, but without cash to back up its promises, I fear it is little more than hot air. The ambitious plans for Labour’s brave new energy world need substantial financial backing to move from rhetoric to reality, ensuring tangible benefits for the UK’s economy and environment.
Dinesh Dhamija founded, built, and sold online travel agency ebookers.com, before serving as a Member of the European Parliament. Since then, he has created the largest solar PV and hydrogen businesses in Romania. Dinesh’s latest book is The Indian Century – buy it from Amazon.
Diana Taylor graduated with an M.F.A Painting from the Slade School of Fine Art in 2010. She studied B.A (Hons) Fine Art at Bath Spa University College and graduated in 1999. In 2011 she was awarded the Abbey Scholarship in Painting at the British School at Rome. Residencies in 2011 and 2012 include Centre of Contemporary Arts, Andratx, Mallorca and East London Printmakers. A sense of journey, both physically and through memory, and the relation this has with mass-produced images, which travel our own consciousness, are central to her practice. We caught up with her at her new exhibition ‘Borrowed Time’. at Bobinska Brownlee New River
I really love the new stuff. How did these paintings come about?
The new paintings began with Gustav Dore’s illustrations of Dante’s Divine Comedy. The illustrations were made in the 19th century as woodblock prints and the Divine Comedy was written in the 14th century. The book I chose the images from was published in the 1970s and my manipulations from analogue to digital were made this year so there’s oscillation between temporalities within my work. I selected small areas of several illustrations and manipulated them within Photoshop by cropping, enlarging and lowering the resolution.
I also turned the document into bit map format to screen-print them. I always enlarge the images in screen-printing too so the image is reduced in quality even further. So, what was a woodblock print has gone through a digital process into a mechanical method of screen-printing and that’s how the paintings usually begin. There are varying levels of detail and zooming in for those images.
So there’s a digital element and then you set to work as a painter?
I then began painting imagery from my various illustrated books of plants and botanical illustrations some of which were important to Morris’s archive- a 16th-century Gerard’s Herbal. From my PhD research on William Morris I’ve become increasingly interested in the botanical illustrations that he was using, but I also have a real love for early print and that’s why I refer to it often within my work. My love of gardening and my interest in plants as therapeutic and medicinal has steered these new works.
However, there’s also a more serious concern with climate change, and the idea of plants growing and becoming threatened, or in decline, started mirroring my painting process which is one of building up and breaking down the image. These new paintings in my solo show at Bobinska Brownlee gallery, ‘Borrowed Time’, therefore, are about the things that I am thinking about, looking at and doing in my everyday life- which is what my paintings are generally about anyway. The title refers to concerns in a climate crisis and also to my method of appropriation- borrowing images which already exist, to create new works.
Has your method of composition been relatively fixed and stable over your career, or is that evolving?
My method of composition tends to change however over the past 10 years I’d say I’ve been very much focused on using a portrait format and working on a similar size and often it’s because I want to have some kind of composition which involves cascading, a kind of cascade down the painting and alludes to the idea something falling and things falling apart. The composition is not fixed. However, I always use fragments within my work and I’m interested in the composition as appearing unfinished.
There’s something about the tension between something that’s finished and unfinished, that interests me, so the work oscillates between many dichotomies such as fast and slow painting, graphic and gesture, old and new references, art and craft et cetera yet these binaries are always symbiotic which is why I’ve converged them because they need to be together.
Was it always art for you? Did you ever consider some other path in life?
Yes, it was always painting for me. My granny was a painter and I always loved drawing and painting there was never any question that I wanted to do something else, although at one stage I wanted to be an air hostess just because I love travelling so much. But I realised I could travel and do my painting and I could be an artist, and make money from selling my work and teaching, which is something I also enjoy.
Did you have any mentor in art?
I had several brilliant art teachers throughout my education who have inspired me and taught me so much. I think that’s why I love teaching so much because I want to be able to give back what I also experienced in my educational journey.
Who are your heroes in art history who have helped you on your journey?
I think my heroes in art history include Bernini whose work blew me away in Rome. But, in modern history, I love Sigma Polke, Robert Rauschenberg, Lee Krasner, Eduardo Paolozzi, and many others. Contemporary painters I love are Amy Sillman, (I love her writing too), as well as Michael Williams, Charlene Von Heyl, Christopher Wool amongst a load of others.
What are your tips for young artists about the business side?
I’d say for young artists it’s just important to stay focused on being true to yourself and not getting caught up in any trends. You kind of have to be thick-skinned and resilient as an artist and to stay resolute. I find a strong daily meditation practice has helped me to stay resilient and grounded as it can be so difficult to persevere when it seems at times like not much is happening in your career.
Galleries seem to take large percentages from artists – is that something you think will change over time?
I don’t think the 50% commission is likely to change although I’ve no idea really on this aspect of the art world- as long as the Gallery can continue to put on ambitious exhibitions and bring their collectors to the shows then it’s a really good way for an artist to get exposure.
What’s your experience of art fairs?
As a visitor to art fairs, I find them quite overwhelming as there’s so much work to see but I do visit some of the bigger fairs such as Frieze so they’re understandably overwhelming but it’s a good way to get an idea of what’s going on globally in the art world. That said it’s an odd way of looking at art because you’re hardly even giving the work any time at all. It’s just a glance and then moving on to the next thing.
Has the conversation around NFTs affected you at all, or do you think that was just a fad?
I’m not that interested in NFTs. Although I think they could be good for some artists I have zero interest in turning my work into an NFT. I think something is lost in the reproduction of a painting or work that has a haptic quality like my textiles- it’s the aura that Walter Benjamin spoke of, so an NFT for me is kind of dead and it kills the work of the hand. However, I’m sure there’s some really interesting work out there that I haven’t seen so we’ll see how far it goes.
Borrowed Time ran from 18th April-5th June at Bobinska Brownlee New River. For more information go to:www.dianataylor.co.uk
I was fortunate to be able to attend a hastily arranged breakfast in support of Helen Grant OBE, MP for Maidstone and Malling with Michael Gove, who agreed to be guest of honour, despite announcing a few days earlier and making news headlines that he would not be standing at the next General Election.
Although many of our readers will want to say a more formal farewell and thank-you to him at a later date, this was an historic last Ministerial breakfast on the day Parliament dissolved.
The event was held in the Beaumont Hotel in Mayfair and attended by some 25 supporters and well-wishers. Also seated around the table were four student foot soldiers in Helen’s campaign team who have already been hard at work pounding the streets of her constituency; welcomed and treated as equals, together with other business leaders, such is the example of Finito’s commitment to supporting and inspiring young people.
Michael, of course, needs no introduction here. At 56, the MP for Surrey Heath since 2005 he has held several key offices of state: Secretary of State for Education; Chief Whip; Secretary of State for Justice; Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and latterly, since 2022, Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.
There can be few who have been so continually in such high-profile roles and so continually in the limelight. But Michael brings so much more to the table than just being an experienced, consummate politician: he co-founded the conservative think tank Policy Exchange and has had a successful career in journalism and as a writer – his controversial Celsius 7/7 analysed the roots of radical Islamism and the West’s response to it.
To list Michael’s achievements, however, completely fails to really paint the true picture: he is a man of razor-sharp intellect but with the ability to explain and simplify complex issues; his knowledge and deep understanding of contemporary politics is phenomenally extensive; his wit is ready and genuine and his manner always engaging and polite.
Over breakfast he was pressed on everything from national service to education; from the economy to defence; from taxation to foreign affairs, but not once did he faulter or miss a beat: every question received an immediate, logical, coherent and convincing response. Where appropriate his responses were light-hearted, such as when he said he had carried out market research into national service – he had asked his son and daughter!
But despite the ability to be disarmingly charming and funny, his political steeliness and assertiveness are never far from the surface, for example when exposing Starmer’s former support for Corbyn (“Corbyn without a beard”) and Starmer’s comment when a barrister that, “Karl Marx was, of course, right”. Equally, however, his warmth and compassion were also evident in his support for Diane Abbott, someone with whom he profoundly disagrees on practically every issue, because for the way she has been treated by the Labour Party.
Finito breakfast networking event at The Beaumont Hotel, London with Michael Gove. 30.5.2024 Photographer Sam Pearce/www.square-image.co.uk
Michael’s departure from front line politics will be a massive loss to Parliament, to the Party and to the country as a whole. Whether or not you support his passionately held views on education, Brexit or whatever, no one can deny his remarkable ability to think radically and to argue his case in an engaging and convincing manner. Helen Grant, in her vote of thanks, admitted to not usually shedding a tear over breakfast, but saying farewell to Michael was just one such occasion.
As was to be expected, he kept his cards close to his chest as to what happens next – more books, a return to journalism or, as many at the breakfast publicly hoped, a high profile role in the Lords – but there’s one thing of which we can be sure: in our host’s closing remarks he likened Michael Gove to the end titles in a Bond film and, like James Bond, Michael Gove will return.
Since his election as Indian Prime Minister in 2013, Narendra Modi set out a vision for his country to become a fully developed economy by 2047, the centenary of its foundation.
Could India finally cast off its colonial burdens and achieve its undoubted potential?
We are now a third of the way through the journey from Modi’s arrival until 2047 and the Indian population is about to cast its votes in a General Election.
Here’s how the main economic indicators have shifted during the first decade of his tenure:
From 2014 to 2022, India’s GDP grew by an average of 5.6 per cent in compound annual growth (CAGR) terms, compared with a CAGR of 3.8 per cent on average for 14 other large developing economies such as Brazil and Mexico.
The percentage of Indians living in extreme poverty (earning less than $2.15 per day) has fallen from 18.7 per cent in 2015 to 12 per cent in 2021, across both urban and rural populations. Economic analysts attribute this to welfare schemes and the Aadhaar digital ID system, which has helped to target payments to the needy and cut out middlemen.
Indians now make digital transactions worth Rs3,355 trillion per year, a 70 per cent increase on the Rs1,962 trillion in 2017-2018, much of it conducted via locally made smartphones, which 60 per cent of the population own. India’s digital transformation has helped it become the ‘back office to the world’, particularly centred on the cities of Bengaluru and Hyderabad.
India’s middle class – defined as households with an annual income between $6,700 and $40,000 – has risen from 300 million in 2014 to 520 million today, while those classed as wealthy, earning above $40,000 pa, now number 90 million, up from 30 million in 2014. These changes have opened up markets for a huge diversity of consumer goods, for national and international travel, for investment and business development. They are an extremely positive sign for the future of the country.
Infrastructure development is another big success story: more than 10,000km of roads have been constructed each year since 2018 and 1.7 per cent of GDP is devoted to transport investment, compared with 0.4 per cent of GDP in 2014. Of course, not everything is perfect. India’s unemployment figures are concerning: they exceeded 10 per cent in October 2023 and are worryingly high among young people and women. Despite government encouragement, the female labour force participation rate fell between 2014 and 2022 from 25 per cent to 24 per cent, lower than Bangladesh, Sri Lanka or Pakistan.
Nevertheless, if the next 20 years see as much progress and economic growth as the past 10, there is every chance that Modi’s vision for the country will be realised.
Dinesh Dhamija founded, built and sold online travel agency ebookers, before serving as a Member of the European Parliament. His latest book, The Indian Century, will be out soon.
Faith has been a vital part of my work, and that has been a gradual growth over the years. My understanding of these matters has not been dramatic in the sense of having had a sudden conversion: instead, I think that one’s understanding changes as life goes on and experience teaches you to reflect – if you can make time to reflect, of course.
When I was younger I thought I knew myself and thought I understood myself. But as I get older I recognise that one has a capacity to deceive oneself – and perhaps that is true of all human beings. We can go on thinking that we are in the right way, and we might do that for a whole variety of reasons. Part of the process of life is to try and gain a greater in-depth understanding of yourself and your motives.
All of this is aided or supported by our Christian belief and by our belief in our spiritual life – but it’s a long process and it doesn’t come quickly. Hopefully when one gets into one’s latter years then perhaps one has gained a little more understanding. We ought to grow in our lives, and to some extent become different from our young selves. And yet I also find that none of this is in contradiction to the essential principles I was taught when I was young.
I sometimes asked if I have refreshed my faith over time; I think it’s a gradual process. It will involve a constant self-examination. For instance, I am still an Anglican which I was brought up as. But I am also a Quaker, and a member of the Religious Society of Friends: I call myself a quanglican – a mixture of both. As I grow older in life and experience, I recognise the necessity of silence and how silence is important and how communal silence is of the utmost importance. That time alone, spent in meditation, is where we can sometimes make great spiritual leaps forward, and that is an important part of the Quakers approach.
Perhaps this will not always appeal to young people who may sometimes prefer much more exuberance – much more clapping and jumping around. As one progresses, one finds that perhaps there is nothing wrong in expressing yourself in those ways but that it is important too to balance that kind of worship out with reflection. It turns out to be a sound scriptural principle: Christ himself went out into the wilderness for 40 days and 40 nights, and also spent time alone on the final night of his life. That means that there is precedent throughout history, but it is something we must grow into.
All of which means that we need good teachers and educators in our faith groups – those who not push people prematurely in any particular direction, but who will be gentle with people in their development rather than letting people stay at one particular point. That said, it is worth thinking very carefully before you enter a career in faith: it can be a very hard life. I had to think very hard myself about myself.
It was often said that I ought to be ordained as a clergyman and I never felt that as a vocation and I chose to remain as a layperson within the church and have worked from the church base most of my life as a layperson. That wasn’t an easy choice in many ways because there was no chance of promotion and becoming an Archdeacon or Bishop or a Dean: you remain a simple layman. Looking back, it was a big risk because with a young family a mortgage that wasn’t an easy way and I remember acute anxiety all the time. Even so, I am glad I did it. I don’t have regrets: it was absolutely the right decision not to be ordained but to remain as a layperson. I never had a vocation to be ordained – it’s just not me.
So somehow this is where self-knowledge comes in. We need to know ourselves, and to what we believe to be right. Of course, we also need good counsel, and it would be a mistake too solitary in our decisions. But if you follow your vocation, it will work out for you. Of course, perhaps it won’t work out in precisely the way you expected – but it will work out.
Jen Psaki has become a Democratic sage by virtue of having served in both the Obama and the Biden administrations, the latter for 16 months. In today’s polarised America, it was never expected to be a pro-Trump memoir, and it isn’t – but it also has a certain nuance which can be missing from the typical score-settling memoir. We get some vignettes of life at the top of politics. Barack Obama proves relaxed about her taking on the role of Director of Communications and then needing to go on maternity leave. Joe Biden is surprised to hear that he doesn’t help the grieving family members as much as he hopes to when he tries to relate their loss back to the loss of his own son Beau. ‘I thought I was helping them’. At one point, John Kerry makes a gaffe and Psaki learns the importance of quick feedback: it’s often better to speak your mind on the spot, than to pause and let a matter linger. At another point she observes, “Advising someone is not the same as appeasing them.” I suppose this is true, though, like a lot of the wisdom in this book, bordering on the obvious. Nevertheless, it’s worth a look.
Dir: Ali Abassi | Script: Gabriel Sherman | Cast: Sebastian Stan, Jeremy Strong, Maria Bakalova, Martin Donovan, Catherine McNally, Charlie Carrick, Ben Sullivan, Mark Rendall, Joe Pingue, Jim Monaco, Bruce | Biopic Drama, 120′
“You’re either a killer or a loser” is the advice a young Donald Trump (Sebastian Stan) gets from his acerbic mentor Roy Cohn (Jeremy Strong) in this polarising political biopic written by journalist Gabriel Sherman and directed by Iranian-Danish filmmaker Ali Abassi (Border) and Holy Spider (who is now perhaps best known for his involvement in The Last Of Us).
Cohn, the lawyer responsible for putting the Rosenbergs on the electric chair and a key figure in the McCarthy witch hunts, offers up three key bits of business advice during The Apprentice – an entertaining romp that zips briskly through its two hours running time sketching out Trump’s early career as an eager apprentice trained under the high-flying lawyer, and eventually trumping him in a tale of machiavellian morals, ethics and business acumen.
There are elements of poetic licence at play here: in other words Sherman plays slightly fast and loose with the facts in fleshing out Trump’s backstory. The result is a fairly even-handed feature that on the one hand sees the US former president as cold-eyed and devious, but on the other opines that these are the very tools of the trade for those wanting to get on in big business – or politics, for that matter. Crucially it also highlights the recent concept of the truth being a construct open to individual perception.
The focus narrows in on Trump from a broad brush opening outlining the corruption of the Nixon years and the inherent dishonesty that is now rife in all circles of power, not least in America. It contrasts the ‘losers’ (those on welfare) with the killers, the ‘unscrupulous’ hard-working income generators during the Reagan presidency that led to the phenomenon of ‘corporate greed’.
The Apprentice sees Trump starting out during the 1970s working for his property magnate father, Fred Trump (Martin Donovan). Dressed in a suit Donald is tasked with doing the rounds to collect rents. One disgruntled tenant throws a pan of boiling water in his face, another swears at him. The family business comes then under fire from a civil rights action alleging discrimination against Black tenants. Cohn wins the case, as his lawyer, with Trump senior claiming: “How can I be racist when I have a Black driver?”
But Donald is determined to make it alone and sets his sights on transforming the downtrodden area around Grand Central Station where he vows to make a success in a project of urban regeneration involving the dilapidated Commodore Hotel, bringing jobs, European tourists and a facelift for Manhattan.
Family wise we also meet Donald’s kindly mother Mary Anne (Catherine McNally), and his brother Freddy (Charlie Carrick) a failed pilot with emotional problems: Fred admits to having been tough on his boys. But Donald is hellbent on success and soon bonds with Cohn after a chance meeting at a fancy Manhattan nightclub frequented by the top flight business community. Working together they soon go from strength to strength in a business alliance with Trump styling himself in the same vein as Cohn with his fast-talking intransigence. His transformation into fully fledged killer who lives by his own standards happens almost overnight and feels a little too fast even given the film’s ample running time. But Stan grasps Trump’s essence charting his character’s transformation from reasonable business man to self-seeking hardliner.
Trump soon becomes a man who takes his own advice often rubbing Cohn up the wrong way, while at the same time chosing to turn a blind eye to his ‘strange way of life’ and hedonistic habits. Trump’s puritan background sees him gradually distancing himself from the lawyer who berates him for his lack of financial probity. Their relationship eventually sours during the AIDS crisis, although Trump offers an olive branch in the finale.
The marriage to Ivana Zelnickova, against Cohn’s advice, is handled deftly and with some humour. Trump follows Ivana to Aspen to clinch their romance then falls flat on the ice after claiming to be a good skier. The Czech model is a little too sweet and sympathetic despite her purported savvy business sense, but Trump soon tires of her, claiming to find their home life ‘more like coming home to a business partner than a wife’. A shocking episode sees him beating Ivana, but whether this has a factual basis, despite his widely reported misogyny, is uncertain. Stan’s Trump may polarise public opinion in coming across as too likeable but this is surely the essence of a maverick who can charm as well as chastise and here he gives a compelling performance.
With a killer score of hits that just reeks of the ’70s and ’80 and a scuzzy retro texture this is an compulsive portrait of toxic narcissism even more relevant now than it was back in the day.
Christopher Jackson interviews one of the most interesting and talented figures in modern politics about Russia-Ukraine, defence spending, and his own career
Grant Shapps is only 20 minutes late for my interview with him, but is nevertheless apologetic when he comes online. I tell him that, given the range of threats in the world today, I don’t mind at all being kept waiting by the Defence Secretary. He laughs: “At least you know we’re on it.”
Throughout our interview, the 55-year-old seems boyish and cheerful. Although one hears a lot about how tired this government is meant to be, my experience tends to be somewhat the opposite: in general, we are presided over now by highly experienced Cabinet ministers who enjoy the jobs they’re in, and who have learned to wear power lightly. They are also determined to use this moment to solve the problems the country is facing.
In the case of Shapps, who has held numerous roles at the top of government, in addition to serving as the MP for Welwyn Hatfield since 2005, the impression is of someone with seasoned nous who knows how to run things.
Shapps begins by telling me about his day: “It’s been busy. It started with the Yemeni Prime Minister which is always going to be an interesting conversation. ‘So about your country which we’re bombing?’ And later today I have my New Zealand counterpart coming – so it’s another day at the MoD.”
The Secretary of State is talking to me on the back of a major victory, having last month secured a 2.5 per cent increase for his department from the Treasury – a decision arrived somewhat against the Treasury’s inclinations. The story, as told by departed minister James Heappey, is that Jeremy Hunt initially offered Shapps’ department the same 2.5 per cent increase but that the money would be spread over the course of two parliaments. For Shapps, who understood the urgency of the need, this was unacceptable and he made it clear that he would rather have nothing than accept such an offer. It was a calculated high stakes gamble, and it paid off.
As a result of this win, Shapps is now in a position to deliver a boost to the economy. The day before I talk with him, he has announced the building of six new amphibious warships in a widely covered speech at the Annual Sea Power conference.
But this, it will turn out, is just the tip of the iceberg. I ask him if the budget increases represent a chance for small businesses to step up? “Massively so,” he replies. “There are 400,000 people involved in the defence sector, in a range of areas from manufacturing to science. Obviously, you’ve got the so-called primes – the BAEs of this world – but actually there’s an enormous supply chain under that and there’s now more opportunities than ever for SMEs to get involved. That’s partly because a lot of what we need now are not the big things like ships – although we do need those, as you saw yesterday. But we also need clever tech – drones, and all the best kit. The two biggest drone companies were start-ups, although I think a couple have been snapped up by the big boys now.”
Meanwhile, as the UK makes these internal deliberations, conflict seems to be a more or less constant aspect of life on this planet. The Russia-Ukraine situation continues to drag on with all the appearance of a miserable stalemate. At the same time, the situation in Gaza continues to feel intractable as it has done throughout most of our lifetimes. If that weren’t enough, many predict that the next theatre of conflict will be in the South China Sea and involve China making a claim on Taiwan.
Shapps has naturally visited all these zones of actual and potential conflict. I ask him what might surprise us if we were to, say, visit Ukraine and see for ourselves. He gives a thoughtful answer. “Last night, I saw the reporting of Jonathan Beale who is the BBC’s Defence Editor. He was wearing a bright jacket next to burned out buildings. He was touring a part of northern Kharkiv. As you look at the ruins on his report, it would be very easy to get the impression that that’s what Ukraine is like.” So it’s different? “In truth, I’ll go to Kiev and it’s a coffee society. You could be in Prague or Paris for the most part, although the scene is regularly dispersed by air raids – but even then, people usually go to the air-raid shelters in not too much of a panic.”
Image of the Secretary of State for Defence Grant Shapps, seen here visiting a Kibbutz with members of the Israeli Defence Force, which was attacked on October 7th by Hamas.
Shapps is anxious not to minimise the overall situation, especially in the East of the country. “Obviously, if you go to Odessa near the Crimea, that’s a different story,” he continues. “When I was last there, I had to call off a visit to Odessa. I discovered that President Zelensky had been 300 metres or so from a Russian missile attack, though I think that was by chance. At the same time, I received notice from Defence Intelligence that the Russians knew I was travelling to Odessa and it seemed an unnecessary risk to take. So clearly there are parts of the country you wouldn’t go to. But there are vast parts of this huge country where you wouldn’t see anything unusual at all, and which have had no physical effects arising out of the invasion.”
This feels an important perspective, and makes one hope that one day the reconstruction of Ukraine won’t be such a daunting project as we sometimes imagine it might be. I also rather like this image of people having coffee in Kiev. Does this make us understand what we might be fighting for? Shapps goes further: “In a sense coffee culture is what we’re fighting for – it’s a way of life. Free peoples in democracies must decide their own futures and not be driven over by terrorists in the case of Palestine – or autocrats in the case of Ukraine.”
Nevertheless, the battlefield in Ukraine continues to feel frustrating. Brooks Newmark, a former MP and minister, who has been heavily involved in helping refugees in war-torn eastern Ukraine, tells me about the crucial tactical nature of the Kerch Bridge. This has been damaged at intervals during the war but so far always rebuilt by the Russians. But if we were to destroy it, Newmark tells me, we would strike a severe blow since it is Russia’s link to its supply lines. Under circumstances where it was damaged beyond repair, then Putin would be brought to the negotiating table.
So why haven’t we done that, one wonders? Newmark tells me that there are two missiles which can destroy the bridge: the German Taurus and the MGM-140 ATACMS-38. Our own Storm Shadows are unfortunately not quite so powerful and able to damage the bridge. When I put this to Shapps, he says: “In actual fact, the Taurus is exactly the same as the Storm Shadows, which have been devastating in the Crimea, and we allowed them to be used. The Germans sometimes talk up the Taurus but it has the same potential to cause damage as the Storm Shadows.” So how can we destroy the bridge? “I can’t really go into too much detail for obvious security reasons but the Kerch is a well-protected bridge – in fact, I can confidently say it’s the best protected bridge in the whole world. It’s not quite as simple as it sounds. Obviously Ukraine will be looking at the supply lines into their occupied country all the time, and how they can disrupt them.”
Newmark is not alone in wondering whether it is time to lay the ghost of Iraq aside and put boots on the ground. Is that something the government would ever consider? Shapps is firm. “Putin absolutely must not win. But we must be crystal clear: we’re not considering putting boots on the ground as that would put NATO at war with Russia which would seem to me to be not a smart move.” He adds, clearly moved by the courage of our ally: “That’s the amazing thing about our brave Ukrainian friends and allies: they’re prepared to do the hard part which is to do the fighting. We need, consistently and reliably, to do whatever Ukraine needs to win this war.”
Image of the Defence Secretary Grant Shapps, seen here at the Yokosuka Naval Base in Japan today (14/12/2023). The UK has signed an international Treaty with Japan and Italy for a future combat air programme that aims to develop an innovative stealth fighter with supersonic capability and equipped with cutting-edge technology.
Despite this, I can sense that the vacillations by the American Congress who caused significant delays in weapons delivery this year, have been a major frustration, with the war having gone more Putin’s way this year than many would have liked. “Last time I was in Kiev, I was warning that the world has been caught napping: this was two or three months ago during the hiatus over sending weapons,” Shapps recalls. “I saw it as being a real problem. I warned them that we’re sleepwalking into something much worse.” And sadly, much of what Shapps feared has come to pass. “Unfortunately that delay has enabled attacks on Kharkiv which wouldn’t have happened if the package had come sooner. The situation is stretching the Ukrainians but ultimately I’m confident Russia won’t get into Kharkiv in the short run. But it’s an unnecessary distraction and we can’t allow anything like that to happen again. It’s unthinkable for me to have Moscow decide the boundaries and borders of modern European democratic nations.”
Shapps is also firm on the role which Ukraine’s near neighbours have to play. He continues: “But we don’t want Washington to dictate those borders and boundaries either. We want European countries to step up to the plate, and I think the UK has done this. In terms of our own financing package, we’ve gone from £2.3 billion to £2.5 billion to £3 billion. So we’ve been consistent in our approach while also providing increasing funds.”
I ask Shapps a question from the philanthropist and businessman Mohamed Amersi, who wonders how prepared the country is for a potential new theatre of conflict over the China-Taiwan issue. Shapps is keen to link the outcome of the Russia-Ukraine conflict with whatever might be simmering in the Far East: “The best way to prevent an autocrat thinking it’s okay to take over some land that’s not theirs is to make sure Putin doesn’t do exactly that in Europe.” But he also has another point to make: “We have hugely invested in the Indo-Pacific region to make sure we can maintain the world order. For example, until recently we didn’t have AUKUS, which sees the UK, the US and Australia working together to provide nuclear-powered submarines. We also have the Global Combat Air Programme, a joint initiative between Britain, Italy and Japan to develop jointly a sixth generation stealth jet fighter. Thirdly, we have a permanent presence in the Indo-Pacific, both in terms of ships constantly in the area, and the Carrier Strike Group is going back next year. Our purpose in being active in the region is to make it clear that freedom of navigation is non-negotiable and that countries shouldn’t be invading non-democratic countries.”
Carl Hunter, the Chairman of Coltraco Ultrasonics, has observed that the UK’s strategic nuclear deterrent in CASD and its strategic conventional deterrent in UK Carrier & Littoral Strike both depend on SSN submarines, the fleet size of which has been largely configured for the Euro Atlantic. I ask Shapps when the submarine force will be expanded to cater for its equal Euro Atlantic and Indo Pacific commitments and the probability of a maritime war in the South China Sea? Shapps responds: “We don’t comment on our operations there – but I can say that we do operate our subs all around the world. The good news regarding this is that as a result of the announcement of new ships yesterday, we’re increasing that number. But when it comes to our SSN submarines or our Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs), we don’t advertise their locations.”
Turning to the state of the armed forces, I mention to Shapps that recent reports have highlighted that 54 per cent of potential recruits abandoned the Army recruitment process last year. Given the shrinking size of the armed forces by over 7,000 personnel in the last year, what immediate steps is the Ministry taking to improve recruitment and retention during this period of global uncertainty? Shapps is sympathetic to the question: “Recruitment certainly has been a big problem, and applicants have been far too slow to get through the system. However, for that reason, we’re currently working through the 67 recommendations put forward by the Haythornthwaite Review of Armed Forces Incentivisation. Yesterday, when I was talking about the Navy, I was able to announce that we have the fullest training facilities for eight years. More and more people are coming into the programme. We’ll get that turned around.”
Part of the poor retention figures may be to do with poor accommodation. In particular, a concerning report from King’s College London recently exposed the substandard conditions of UK armed forces’ accommodation. With many families living in substandard conditions, I ask Shapps what specific initiatives are planned to upgrade urgently these facilities, and how will these improvements be prioritised in the defence budget? “On the accommodation, I completely agree. This 2.5 per cent that I’ve won is enabling us to do lots of things including the £4 billion into our accommodation to make it lot better.”
These worries also come against a backdrop of worries around pay in the forces, where some argue that pay rises fail to address satisfactorily the scale of current inflation. Again, Shapps is sympathetic but also keen to highlight how much progress has been made: “Inflation has obviously been high, but last year we had the biggest pay rise of anyone in the public service. The lowest paid are getting another 9.7 per cent which is an increase very much designed to recognise that problem. I also think that this is helping to attract more people so we’ve got 10 year highs in terms of our applications for military services.”
Image of the Secretary of State for Defence, The Rt Hon Grant Shapps MP, seen here meeting recruits at Catterick Garrison, North Yorkshire.
Stephen Morgan, an ex-serviceman himself, asks about a recent article in The Guardian referring to the UK’s ‘very limited air defence systems’. He asks whether, in an era of complex and emerging global threats, the Ministry is addressing these critical gaps in our national defence capabilities to ensure readiness against potential aerial threats? Shapps replies: “We have more in that respect than people often realise. For instance, we have Rapid Response Defence Systems. We have some missiles from land, and some missiles from our Type-45 destroyers at sea. We also have other measures in place which I can’t go into because they’re secret. But we’re also in NATO so that we have 31 other countries coming to our defence in the event of an attack which is something that countries like Israel don’t enjoy and that makes a huge difference. That said, I’m working with our European partners on a sky shield approach as well so there’s a lot happening across the board on this.”
That makes me feel safe enough to make the last section of the interview not about the nation’s defence but about him. How is it that he’s managed to hold so many different high-level roles across government? “In my case, I came to Defence via Transport, the Home Office, Business, and Energy so it wasn’t that straightforward,” he laughs, referring to the turbulent transition of power from Boris Johnson via Liz Truss to Rishi Sunak. “But the process of running big things tends to be the same: government departments are all similar. You have a civil service, a permanent secretary and a private office – and then you have mechanisms to get the work through.”
On a day-to-day level, a Secretary of State is confronted with a huge flow of data and Shapps explains that a successful minister will need to learn how to sift that. “The big question when you come into a department is: ‘How do you get your head around everything and understand the subject in the first place?’ Well, I’m not entirely new to any area of public policy, as I’ve been thinking about politics for a long time, so there is that. But I will confess that it is a hell of a lot of reading. I’ve got better over the years, and I learned to speed-read early in my career.”
Everything comes down to time management, Shapps explains: “It’s twice as fast to write and read something as to have people tell you it: people speak slower than you can read, and if they write it down they have to think through what they put in.” He attributes his approach to government to his background. “I think some of this – completely counterintuitively – is because I don’t have a degree or even an A-Level to my name, so I slightly self-educated myself in terms of doing things. I hope that makes me less given to groupthink than some other politicians. If you want to stand out in politics or in any other area of life, you have to have a unique approach, and be able to come to conclusions on your own.”
The Defence Secretary Grant Shapps attends the NATO Ministers of Defence meeting at NATO Headquarters in Brussels.
Given the murders of Jo Cox and Sir David Amess, I mention that many would-be politicians might worry about the safety of becoming an MP. I ask Shapps if it’s a career path he’d recommend to young people? “Well, it’s very sad that we’re talking on the day when the Slovakian prime minister Robert Fico has been shot. We have had killings of MPs, which have been rare but which are nonetheless concerning. In the role of Defence Secretary you have a different level of protection all the time, but I wouldn’t let it put people off. For the most part, we live in a country where guns aren’t as big a thing as they would be in the US, and so the risks are more moderated. Threats seem to come online by social media and I deal with it largely by not reading it. Do have someone reading it, as these things do need to be reported, but it doesn’t need to be you.”
With that he has to go and vote, and I have a moment to reflect that Shapps is an extremely impressive minister, whose story ought to inspire many young people to follow him into politics.
It’s not often you have three heavyweight politicians in one room but that’s what happened at the East India Club where the great and the good turned out in support of Guy Opperman and Siobhan Baillie, both of whom will face competitive re-election campaigns, most likely later this year. Hosting the event alongside Finito was Rob Halfon, the outgoing Apprenticeships and Skills Minister. The event was kindly sponsored by Lorenzo Zaccheo, the owner and founder of the international haulage company Alcaline.
Baillie began by telling the room the story of her ascent to Parliament. “I grew up on a council estate and flunked all my exams,” she recalled, before attributing her success to love of hard work. “What I do like is to work – I will work and work until I achieve something.” Looking ahead to the General Election, Baillie said: “It is a genuine pleasure to work for Rishi Sunak. He is always incredibly thoughtful. What we are doing is solving quite a few long term problems but not necessarily getting the air time on the news.”
When Baillie handed over to Opperman, he was realistic: “Let’s be honest. There are very few of you in this room who think the Conservatives are going to win the next general election. Most of you would like that, but at the moment you think it’s not going to happen. But the race is not over until it has been run. I admit that it is year 14 of the marriage and we are not quite as attractive as we were. Furthermore, it is a factual reality that we have dealt with 12 per cent inflation. There are three wars of real significance that are affecting this country but who is best placed to take us back to growth and prosperity?”
At which, Opperman and Baillie took questions beginning with Zaccheo, who outlined a major problem in the haulage industry. He explained that there is currently a 90/180 day rule for travellers to the EU Shengen area which is hugely impacting drivers’ ability to carry out their jobs. As things stand, Zaccheo pointed out, the Border Force penalties are not fit for purpose and provide zero incentive to drivers or hauliers to report clandestine entrants. It is only the innocent and not organised crime that are being penalised.
Opperman replied, plainly taking the problem seriously. “I am acutely aware that there is an issue here and we are very conscious of it. It relates to regulation in the Treasury. So bear with us: we are working on it to try and find a way forward.”
Zaccheo also raised the question of cabotage which isn’t being enforced effectively by the Drivers and Vehicles Standards Agency (DVSA,) and therefore taking work away from UK haulers. In addition, Zaccheo argued that very low pay in parts of the EU for HGV drivers is driving the movement of clandestine entrants into northern France. There low-paid eastern European drivers are easily convinced to transport immigrants from the east and the south and drop them in supposedly “secure” parking areas in northern France where they then gain access to UK vehicles.
This led to a discussion on immigration with all three MPs having recently voted for the Rwanda Bill. Baillie explained: “We can’t be squeamish when it comes to dealing with the problem, but let’s not forget that this is a very kind and compassionate country. We’re not going to be able to express our values if we’re not tackling illegal immigration hard. The Conservatives are being battered on the BBC, but it’s not compassionate to do nothing.”
Baillie spoke also about her successful campaign to extend the childcare provision. “The reality for families at the moment is that childcare is a second mortgage,” she explained, before adding: “Housing is the big ticket issue which needs to be dealt with.”
Opperman took a question on the apprenticeship levy. “The apprenticeship levy is very easy to announce but really tough to deliver and it takes years and years. Most of the product of Rob Halfon’s great work won’t be seen until ten years from now. Childcare’s the same: we’re subsidising childcare to get more people back to work to get more taxes in the long term. It’s about policy – we have to deliver the reality on the ground.”
Once the questions and answers had finished, Halfon had the floor. “After 25 years both as candidate and as an MP I’ve decided to step down,” he told the room. “In 2008, I went into a constituency in Harlow. I walk into a grim concrete building on a rainy day, and sit down with people from the Prince’s Trust and Catch-22. They start talking to me about skills and apprenticeships and how they’d love to do them, but the opportunities weren’t on offer. I came out of that building and said to myself: ‘If I get elected, I’ll make it my mission to champion apprenticeships and skills’.”
Fast forward 25 years and Halfon has been as good as his word and can look back on an impressive array of achievement. “What we’ve done on apprenticeships and schools is sadly the best-kept secret in government. Now we have apprenticeships for everything from aeronautics to zoology. FE used to be called the Cinderella sector; I hated that name with every fibre of my being. I went to visit FE colleges all over the country. I always used to say that Cinderella became a member of the Royal Family and we need to banish the Ugly Sisters of snobbery and under-resourcing which we have done.”
What the future holds for these three MPs only time will tell. But there’s no doubt that these are parliamentarians of rare passion, who show that politics can be a fulfilling and exciting career where there’s a real chance to make a difference.
Iworked on a programme with NASA for 27 years doing the James Webb Space Telescope. It was around the early 2000s, and I was based in California. I’d just finished launching one of the-earth observing satellites which NASA was doing, when my buddy came into the office and said: “We’re going to build a telescope. Want to join?”” How long will it be?” “It’ll only be a few years.” Twenty years later, I was still working on it.
When I started at JWST, there were three of us. I ended up being in the highest role, the Mission Operations Manager, but I began as an operations engineer. We grew to 700 people – it changed over the years. If you keep your eyes open, people come and people go, and there are always opportunities on a large project like that.
The telescope is rewriting astronomers’ and cosmologists’ understanding of how the universe works and how it was created. There are disruptions into the Big Bang Theory. Some of its measurements and observations are baffling scientists: we’re looking at galaxies which shouldn’t be where they are, and making us think the universe may be older than we thought. It really is an engineering marvel. Whatever it takes a picture of it’s incredibly accurate. Our basic understanding is that the universe is 13.8 billion years old, and that galaxies didn’t start forming until about 500,000 years into that process. But the telescope is taking pictures of galaxies which are older still – and that means we got something wrong somewhere. Scientists are baffled by that, and it can be funny to see them try to explain it: they can’t.
I don’t think people really appreciate what it took to get it there. You see on TV programmes about how we invented ten different technologies to make the telescope work: that engineering side is awesome. But to truly operate it was something else: it doesn’t operate itself. That’s been lost: we’re talking about regular people who worked it day to day, and planned its operations. When it first went into orbit it was 24/7. Who are these people who make this happen every day? It’s not the astronomers.
Up until now, nobody has had something this powerful with which to look at anything. They’re just surprised by everything they see. Think of the early phones – they took quite good pictures. Then they came up with the digital camera and the pictures were amazing. Television is the same: now everybody has such good resolution on their TV that people on the screen looks almost 3D. The telescope is like that: the resolution of the image and the crispness of its data is just really cool. We won’t know for a good while the data is telling us but the astronomical community is already very excited by the data we’re getting.
The more the telescope gets used and looks for other signs of world, it makes me feel more special that there’s life on this planet to this degree. There may be life out there, but I always re-centre myself and think: ‘We’re pretty special – look at what we’ve done as a species.’ Maybe there is life in this area of the universe: but we constantly look at thousands of planets, and there’s isn’t life there so far. In the end, every observation solidifies that we are special – that doesn’t have to make us big-headed. In fact, it’s humbling.
If we did discover life on another planet, that would be a game-changer. But then we’d have to think about how to get there, and we don’t have very advanced jet propulsion systems. It’ll be interesting to see when we find something what the next thought process is. We have four billion years before our sun starts making life here a problem, so our species will have to evolve. We haven’t been on the planet a million years – in a star timeframe, that’s nothing. Give it another hundred thousand years, and another and another. What will we look like? Can we go across the galaxy quickly?
We need to go to the moon before we go to Mars. It’s easier and closer – if something bad happens, you can get home rightaway. Mars is a six month trip. In order to go to the next set of levels, you’ll need to colonise the moon, take what you learn then go to Mars, or one of the moons of Jupiter. People who colonise will need to not come back to earth ever. Their bone structure, and their chemical composition will change – our future self is going to look very different indeed.
