WHY DON'T WE MAKE THINGS ANYMORE??

I have the rare pleasure of teaching the Industrial Revolution next term. I have taken advantage of the virtual curricular autonomy I seem to have at the Castle to ditch the Civil War project, hurry through the Stuarts with Year 8 and leave lots of time open to look at inventions, cholera, slavery, protest and factory conditions (not necessarily in that order) next term. I’m looking forward to planning the lessons for the first time, but I’m already asking the question – where did it all go? What do we make and export to the world now? Yes there are things that maintain our world presence – finance, culture or entertainment for example – but not Sheffield steel, Stoke pottery or ships banged together in Govan. No more is the ready association made between Wales and coal, Hull and fish or Liverpool and its docks. And what’s replaced these hundreds of thousands of jobs? We are now a ‘service economy’ – dominated by its tertiary sector as opposed to primary (extracting a product from the ground/sea) or secondary (turning that product into something via industrial process). We are indeed a ‘nation of shopkeepers’, and indeed of call centre operatives, bankers, IT consultants, estate agents and public sector drones. It’s not all bad – but it results in a great many jobs offering limited satisfaction, it does little to bind or define a community and it means there is little scope for providing new jobs en masse when people are wary at splashing out on non-essentials.

Why is this the case? We still drive, dwell in and use numerous solid structures… but the truth is they’re manufactured elsewhere. It’s cheaper and more efficient for corporations to set up plants in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia than it is to maintain a presence on Teesside. Are they wrong? Certainly not from their perspective. Our minimum wage, pension/National Insurance contributions, workplace regulations and limited working hours make a large scale UK presence massively expensive. Overseas it can all be bypassed and a product produced for far less – why wouldn’t they do so? I’m not necessarily talking ‘sweat shop’ conditions here – a company can in good conscience set up in Eastern Europe paying lower wages quite appropriate to the housing/service costs of that locality and thus mistreating no-one. In an age of increasingly global companies, there is no special obligation to subsidise the UK workforce or economy. We Brits figure as consumers and vendors rather than producers in the eyes of most I’m sure. We’re caught between two stalls in a frustrating incarnation of the mixed economy – we’ve got just enough socialism from Europe to ensure bountiful regulation, but allied to enough free marketeering to ensure no-one has to stick around and abide by it!

So how do we compete? Well, as ever, I’m no expert, but I see the key possibilities, to be considered in turn, as 1) Go the libertarian route, freeing up UK working conditions to beat developing economies at their own game 2) the opposite – embrace enhanced state control 3) Play the global game – be prepared to emigrate 4) Focus on niche markets or 5) Provide here the skills and quality that others can’t…

1. This is surely the most controversial of the suggestions. You never hear anyone suggesting we scrap the minimum wage and free employers to treat their workers worse in order that they might base production here rather than in China. Rather you hear of the need for better paid paternity leave. Had it always been thus, the Industrial Revolution would never have taken off! Plus this does rather rely upon an assumption that the material benefits of enhanced wages/conditions are more conducive to happiness than is the sureness that comes from identity within a working class community – one low paid perhaps, but with job security and communal bonds to compensate. Wages might be lower and life tough, but the fact everyone is in the same boat may lead to low-cost services and houses provided in order to tap the market – perhaps by the employer companies themselves investing in the area. It appeals because so much seems to have been lost in areas deprived of their industrial life-blood, no longer able to relate to the Labour Party and without identity as the phrase ‘working class’ becomes anachronistic. However, I’m well aware it’s untenable (and ultimately undesirable) for the following key reasons:
• The unions would never hear of it! Rightly so if they’re doing their jobs – just look at the way Unite are taking on (unfairly crippling?) British Airways for relatively minor crimes.
• Every city will attract its high earners, if only for exploitation purposes, and they will help drive prices up and beyond those paid ‘free market wages’ in the vicinity.
• It’s probably all nonsense anyway – this noble working class myth. Many living it out were probably hungry and miserable half the time, even if they could play football in the cobbled streets! Maybe on reflection many miners are happier and safer above ground, despite the negative community impact? The standard of living has demonstrably improved almost everywhere since the 70s, let alone the 19th Century!
2. There is also REAL socialism to consider – the idea that, rather than just insist upon fair pay and Health & Safety, the government actually go the whole hog and run the factories and mines themselves, thus ensuring they stay open. British Steel was always going to be based in Britain! To a lesser degree they could subsidise industry in order to incentivise companies sticking around – much as they have the banks. This prospect has reared its head in the accusation that they should have kept the Corus plant in Redcar running until a buyer was found. Again however it is dangerous – the USSR was eventually scuppered over a lack of modernisation and productivity – why bother changing and progressing if you can keep doing things exactly as you are without threat of being closed down or rendered obsolete?
3. Speeding up now –emigration should perhaps be thought about far more. A basic British closed-mindedness and lack of languages means we only ever see the new EU-sanctioned freedom to work overseas as an immigration issue. In fact, why not do as the Poles do? Why not take our skills to the markets where they’re required and remunerated appropriately within the local economy? That is surely an option for the workers of Redcar and, indeed, why stick to Europe? What demands must there be within the burgeoning economies of Brazil, India or China? I’m not saying I’m personally tempted but I think I’d rather that than the dole?
4. I well remember the time when anyone with basic computer programming skills could name their wage and walk into a job – after all, every single company suddenly had to have an IT network and online presence. Hence the fact my university housemate could drink his way to a Third and quickly make himself better paid than the rest of us! Is there an ongoing opportunity for clever people to identify in advance niche or boom markets and for Britain to be taking particular advantage in some area of its own? A random example springs to mind – when in corporate sales I would always call Israel for the bioscience companies! What’s our niche, and could it involve manufacturing something new or different?
5. Finally – let’s look at the positives. Maybe, whilst Corus couldn’t keep up in the modern world, we should realise that Britain DOES still make things – eg Rolls Royce in Derby, Mercedes in Northampton. Nissan in Sunderland is apparently Europe’s most efficient car plant! In these cases there is something keeping them here and it’s not sentimentality – perhaps a brand, a reputation, an expert workforce or just a really well-run enterprise. The problem is that none of the above employ huge numbers of people – I guess we have to accept that modern technology has cut down on the sheer numbers of workers required. Nonetheless it is a reminder that quality and skills will out. Maybe we could drop the obsession with our nation’s children reaching university, even if ill-suited, because we value graduation (whatever the debts) more than we value skills and practical expertise. That’s why we needed all the Polish plumbers in the first place! Apprenticeships should surely be designed and offered in order to reflect the needs and opportunities of industry? And a profitable business is always appealing...

A lot there and a violation of my ‘3-digit word count’ rule, meaning probably no-one will read. But I’ve enjoyed thinking it through, and I hope we do remain a country that makes things… even if I myself remain a DIY-phobic who merely writes about it. It’s not just nostalgia – more a belief that a nation’s history imprints upon it and that we Brits are happiest when producing THINGS of our own.