Entering the third week of the British steel saga, the Conservative government’s indecisiveness over Brexit has begun to show. Tory Business Secretary Sajid Javid, alongside a wealth of government colleagues, has pledged to support a strong British steel sector. But shouldn’t the government have grasped the European Union’s hand in order to nurse the steelworks’ wounds?
The answer is most definitely ‘yes.’ Needless to say, evident Tory laxity over British steel has proven that many see no merit whatsoever in saving Tata Steel. With strong international imports from the East, along with a heavy government focus on business and services instead, steel girders are no longer used as the supports upon which the UK stands.
The British government’s handling of the ailing Tata Steel has been arguably problematic. Hearing the piercing blare of alarm bells set off by a slowing of European exports, the international community has been moved to protect substantial parts of their economies.
Britain seems to have taken a different route, however. Several days ago, Conservative Party-affiliated MEPs were amongst a select few within the European Parliament to block the imposition of import tariffs on set products entering Europe – especially those products delivered at a cheaper price than those of EU nations’ workforces. The Tories did have their chance to rival the emerging Chinese heavy industries monopoly, but interestingly enough chose not to.
Whilst I don’t doubt that those in government truly want to better the national economy, political tactics and ideology have prevailed just too much. Actions have certainly spoken louder than the words of the Conservatives over the past fortnight have. It is clear that a tactical statement of British EU resentment has markedly backfired. A vote which showed a standing up for hardworking people which the Conservatives insist on assisting, and a pledge to continue with the Tories’ British economic rejuvenation could well have scored the party points in the British steel sector. It seems that the responses of Sajid Javid to events currently battling with him are a cry out for a reformed European Union, or perhaps even a reiteration of the hefty Conservative Eurosceptic presence.
In addition, it is evident that the Conservatives have toed their traditionally laissez-faire line once again. Minimal state ownership has proven to be a key part of Cameron’s administration, as reflected by increasingly privatised housing, amenities and health services. This time, the Tories’ opinions on British manufacturing have similarly been presented loud and clear. But small-scale investment seems to have produced a measly gain this time. After the Business Secretary has adamantly refused to directly fund British steel, it seems that the government will now have to at least ‘co-invest’ in the industry.
Political advantage and European Union protest have sharply backstabbed the Tories. The current steel saga continues. The Conservatives should re-emerge relatively unscathed, somewhat covered over by Cameron’s tax revelations shifting the media’s focus. This time, however, the playing of party tactics has caused Javid problems, and the adoption of strict Conservative ideology has become an evident setback.
Today, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund Christine Lagarde preached that the UK’s possible exit from the European Union could prove detrimental to the global economy. In relation to British steel, this must provoke a Conservative rethink. Economic solidarity and political compromise are the way forward. Sajid Javid’s team has fatally rejected a perfectly viable EU solution for progressing the repair of Britain’s manufacturing sector. The most unforgiveable part of his oversight is that it may well have been willful. Haunted by the possibilities of Brexit and the party’s strict ideological traditions, David Cameron’s government could have scored easily here with even the most hardcore of Conservatives.