Sam Bidwell – Croydon Constitutionalists

How we can really revive British industry

Sam Bidwell on how we can really revive British industry.

“By the late 19th century, Britain was falling behind the United States and Germany. GDP growth slowed to less than 1% between 1899 and 1914”

People across the political spectrum say that the UK needs an industrial strategy. In fact, it was industrial strategy that killed our industry in the first place – Attlee is more to blame than Thatcher.

According to the popular narrative, British industrial decline started in the 1970s and 1980s, as free trade and neoliberalism shifted us towards a more globalised economy. Today, advocates of industrial strategy argue that Government needs to intervene to redress the balance.

In fact, Britain’s relative industrial decline starts much earlier. By the late 19th century, Britain was falling behind the United States and Germany. GDP growth slowed to less than 1% between 1899 and 1914, while productivity growth fell by two-thirds between 1871 and 1914.

Though it had led the way on industrialisation (more on this later), the UK couldn’t compete with the mass production of the US and Germany. Britain had fewer natural resources and a more skilled workforce, while American firms could rely on cheap resources and cheap labour.

Britain’s relative industrial slowdown was accelerated by the Great Depression. Heavy industry declined by a third between 1929 and 1930, with unemployment doubling from 1 million to 2.5 million. In cities like Glasgow, unemployment rose as high as 30 percent.

“In the Midlands and parts of the south, industry boomed in the 1930s – with specialisms in automobiles and household electrical goods. In 1936, Leicester was actually the second-richest city in Europe”

The decline was particularly acute in the industrial areas of Britain’s Victorian heyday, such as Lancashire, Yorkshire, South Wales, and Scotland. Coal production in Lancashire fell by 43%. Ship production in the north-east of England fell by 90% between 1929 and 1932.

But that didn’t mean that industry was declining everywhere. In the Midlands and parts of the south, industry boomed in the 1930s – with specialisms in automobiles and household electrical goods. In 1936, Leicester was actually the second-richest city in Europe.

It was true that Britain couldn’t compete with the mass production of the US and Germany – but it could lead the way again on high-quality, high-skilled industry. The social effects were incredible – between 1923 and 1937, Birmingham’s workforce grew at double the national rate.

“The Attlee government saw the success of the Midlands as damaging to traditional industrial regions. In 1945, it passed the Distribution of Industry Act”

From 1911-1954, the West Midlands grew its economic output faster than any other region of the country – by the 1960s, Birmingham wages were higher than in London. Nearby Coventry fared similarly – in 1953, it had an unemployment rate of 0.8%. British industry was back.

And then came the industrial strategists. The Attlee government saw the success of the Midlands as damaging to traditional industrial regions. In 1945, it passed the Distribution of Industry Act, which aimed to push development away from ‘congested’ areas like the Midlands.

The Government required that any factory set to be opened or expanded in a ‘congested’ area would be reviewed by the Board of Trade – which would aim to push industrial development back to places like Lancashire and South Wales. The results were predictable – and depressing.

“In 1946, the West Midlands Plan set Birmingham a population target lower than its current population. In 1964, Harold Wilson restricted the development of office space in Birmingham for 20 years”

Of the ‘Industrial Development Certificates’ rejected by the Board of Trade, just 18% actually relocated to declining industrial areas. 49% of refused projects downsized their ambition to avoid government oversight. 31% of projects were scrapped entirely.

For every job re-directed to old industrial areas, several more were prevented. In 1946, the West Midlands Plan set Birmingham a population target lower than its current population. In 1964, Harold Wilson restricted the development of office space in Birmingham for 20 years.

“Forcible relocation of growth, and subsidy for declining industries, left British industry inefficient and uncompetitive”

Industrial strategy also meant subsidising inefficient ‘old’ industries, such as coal and steel, at the expense of new industries, such as cars and household electrical products. The nationalisations of the 1940s and 1960s were designed to preserve old industry at all costs.

Forcible relocation of growth, and subsidy for declining industries, left British industry inefficient and uncompetitive. The burgeoning ‘advanced manufacturing’ boom of the 1930s was killed by the nostalgic, backwards-looking industrial strategy of the late 1940s.

These inefficient and expensive controls were eventually lifted by the Thatcher governments. Yes, British industry did shrink in the 1980s. But if it had been allowed to adapt, improve, and emerge organically in the previous decades, it would have remained competitive.

“we shouldn’t try to decide where industry ought to be based on pre-conceived ideas about where growth “should” happen. Industrialisation completely changed Britain’s economic geography”

If we actually want British industry to succeed, we shouldn’t follow in the footsteps of the 20th century industrial strategists. We should learn from the conditions which birthed British industry in the first place – which actually means less government control, not more.

First, we shouldn’t try to decide where industry ought to be based on pre-conceived ideas about where growth “should” happen. Industrialisation completely changed Britain’s economic geography – cities like Liverpool and Manchester barely existed before the 18th century.

People were able to move to where economic opportunity emerged – and the we didn’t try to direct that growth. Today, that means liberalising our housing market – allowing housing supply to emerge where people want to live, not where the Government thinks that they should live.

“Our current regulatory environment punishes companies that trial new products here, with lengthy processes of consultation, review, and assessment. Instead, we should be removing regulatory blockers”

Second, we should embrace and encourage investment in innovation. The Industrial Revolution was driven by investment in new technologies designed to reduce dependence on high-cost labour – such as Watt’s steam engine, which could do the work of 21 manual labourers.

Our current regulatory environment punishes companies that trial new products here, with lengthy processes of consultation, review, and assessment. Instead, we should be removing regulatory blockers – and reducing tax on innovative firms in cutting-edge fields.

Third, we should make it easier to build the infrastructure that powers industrial growth. In 1846 alone, Parliament approved around 9,500 miles of private railway construction, the equivalent of 63 HS2s. We must relax planning rules around major infrastructure projects.

Fourth, we must address energy costs. The Industrial Revolution was powered by cheap coal – low energy costs kept industry competitive. Today, the UK has the highest industrial energy costs in the developed world – killing businesses in energy-intensive sectors such as steel.

“The Industrial Revolution was powered by cheap coal – low energy costs kept industry competitive. Today, the UK has the highest industrial energy costs in the developed world”

This also has enormous implications for our ability to host AI infrastructure, which is similarly energy-intensive. If it wants British industry to compete, the Government should make energy cheap – particularly by bringing down construction costs for nuclear energy.

Finally, we should not try to direct the economy based on what we think industry “should look like”. We should not be picking winners – whether sectors, businesses, or regions of the country. This will be expensive, and it won’t work – as 20th century industrial decline shows.

Reproduced with kind permission of Sam Bidwell, Director of the Next Generation Centre at the Adam Smith Institute, Associate Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, although views are his own. Sam can be found on X/Twitter, on Substack, and can be contacted at [email protected]. This article was originally published as a X/Twitter Thread at https://x.com/sam_bidwell/status/1859560533608874311

How capitalism built Manchester

Sam Bidwell on how capitalism built Manchester.

“In c. 79AD, a Roman fort was constructed on the banks of the River Medlock, the first settlement in modern Manchester. The area remained largely depopulated and impoverished throughout the medieval period”

I\n 1700, Manchester was an obscure village of fewer than 10,000 people – by 1900, it was a metropolis, the world’s first industrial city. Its remarkable growth is testament to the power of trade, industry, and British ingenuity.

For most of its early history, Manchester was entirely unremarkable. In c. 79AD, a Roman fort was constructed on the banks of the River Medlock, the first settlement in modern Manchester. The area remained largely depopulated and impoverished throughout the medieval period. The one exception to this trend came in 1363, when a small community of Flemish weavers, from modern-day Belgium, settled in Manchester. These weavers helped to establish Manchester as a local centre for textile production – which would one day power the city’s growth.

Under Queen Elizabeth I (1553-1603), the Crown began supporting the English wool trade. The Queen’s support for the trade was so fervent that, from the 1570s until the 1590s, Englishmen were required to wear woollen caps to church on Sunday, in order to support the industry. With its existing tradition of textile production, Manchester benefitted from this support – and began exporting cloth to Europe, via London. Nevertheless, it was still an obscure Lancashire village – paling in comparison to its counterparts in neighbouring Yorkshire.

During the English Civil War (1642-1651), Manchester was a hotbed of support for the Parliament. On the Restoration of the Monarchy in 1660, Manchester lost Parliamentary representation, as a reprisal for its support for Cromwell. No MP was to sit for Manchester until 1832. And so, without any local government or representation in Parliament, Manchester looked set to fade into obscurity as a textiles-oriented market town. In the 1720s, Daniel Defoe described Manchester as “the greatest mere village in England”. But change was afoot.

“With its history of textile production, Manchester was well-placed to turn these raw imports into high-quality material exports. It also had ideal geography, with canals connecting the city”

By the early 18th century, Britain was in the midst of a revolution. Developments in agricultural technology meant that more food was being produced than ever before – with fewer people needed to work in farming. As a result, more people moved to the country’s urban centres. At the same time, Britain’s trade with the outside world was expanding rapidly – including in places such as India. This meant that the country had more access to new raw materials than ever before – and more markets for the export of consumer goods. Enter Manchester.

With its history of textile production, Manchester was well-placed to turn these raw imports into high-quality material exports. It also had ideal geography, with canals connecting the city to the port at Liverpool, and to the coalfields of Lancashire.

Raw goods could be imported to Manchester, processed, and then sent elsewhere for sale. The city began to boom, growing from 9,000 people in 1717 to 25,000 people in 1773. In 1781, Richard Arkwright opened the first steam-powered textile mill in the city. Throughout this period, Manchester and the surrounding towns in Lancashire were responsible for processing 32% of cotton produced globally. And the need to sell finished textile goods prompted the creation of new transport infrastructure, which connected the city to the world.

In 1761, the world’s first industrial canal opened, connecting Manchester to the coalfields at Worsley. In 1824, one of the world’s first public bus services opened in Manchester. And in 1830, the world’s first passenger railway connected Liverpool to Manchester. Canals and railways transported Manchester textiles to the port of Liverpool, allowing them to be exported. Meanwhile buses and trams enabled the city’s workforce to reach their workplaces. By 1930, Manchester Corporation Tramways operated the 3rd largest tramway in the UK.

The city also came to be known as a commercial hub, with warehouses and markets springing up across the city. In 1815, Manchester had 1,819 distinct warehouses, housing both raw materials and goods for sale. Many of these warehouses still dominate the city’s skyline today.

The jewel in Manchester’s crown was the Cotton Exchange, first opened in 1727. This vast building was the beating commercial heart of the city, a site for the sale of textiles and the financing of new industrial businesses. In 1851, it was granted the “Royal Exchange” title. In 1867, the Royal Exchange was rebuilt, with funding provided by a consortium of notable Manchester industrialists. The Exchange which still stands today began construction in 1867, and was finished in 1921 – financed, start to finish, by private donors.

“Manchester became the hub of the Anti-Corn Law League in 1839, which argued for the removal of protectionist tariffs on food”

More than almost any other city in Britain, Manchester’s urban landscape was shaped by industry, trade, and private finance. This wasn’t just the product of textile wealth. This building, on Mosley Street, was built in 1880, to house the Manchester and Salford Bank.

The city didn’t just benefit from trade liberalisation – it exported it, too. Manchester was a hub of 19th century economic liberalism. Prominent advocates of free trade, such as Richard Cobden and John Bright, were based in the city. Indeed, Manchester became the hub of the Anti-Corn Law League in 1839, which argued for the removal of protectionist tariffs on food. The Corn Laws were eventually repealed in 1846 by Conservative Prime Minister Robert Peel, partly thanks to the League’s campaigning.

“It’s also testament to the ways in which private sector growth can improve public space and enhance civil society. The city’s University, for example, was founded as a private institute”

As Manchester develops today, it’s worth remembering how the city came to exist in the first place. From obscure market town to global metropolis, Manchester’s growth was powered by building, growth, and private industry. Manchester exists because of business and capitalism. It’s also testament to the ways in which private sector growth can improve public space and enhance civil society. The city’s University, for example, was founded as a private institute in 1824, and expanded in 1846 on the basis of a bequest from textile merchant John Owens.

Rather than rejecting development, we should recognise the opportunities that change can bring. Just as our ancestors pursued growth and change, so should we. Our cities used to some of the greatest in the world – they can be again

The British invented the modern world

“Englishman Jethro Tull developed a horse-drawn seed drill, which allowed seeds to be sowed in neat rows Tull’s drill laid the foundations for modern mechanised agriculture”

Few other countries can boast such a proud legacy of innovation and invention – for centuries, we have led the way on the development of new technologies. Some of the world-changing innovations birthed here in Britain.

In 1668, Englishman Sir Isaac Newton built the world’s first reflecting telescope Newton’s discovery was based on his understanding of prisms and optics. It allowed scientists to develop a sophisticated theory of colour, and paved the way for the modern telescope.

In 1701, Englishman Jethro Tull developed a horse-drawn seed drill, which allowed seeds to be sowed in neat rows Tull’s drill laid the foundations for modern mechanised agriculture, allowing farmers to plant more crops with fewer men – which increased productivity steeply.

In 1761, Englishman John Harrison invented the marine chronometer, a device which allowed sailors to accurately calculate longitude while at sea Harrison’s chronometer revolutionised navigation, and made long-distance sea travel much safer.

In 1764, James Hargreaves invented the ‘spinning jenny’, a textiles-weaving frame The spinning jenny allowed workers to produce cloth on an industrial scale, producing 8 times as much as an individual worker. This laid the foundations for industrial mass-production.

In 1776, Scotsman James Watt launched a new design for a steam engine Watt’s design built on earlier steam engines – but was far more efficient, both in terms of power produced and fuel consumption. Watt’s engine powered the industrial expansion of the 19th century.

In 1798, Englishman Edward Jenner pioneered the concept of the vaccine, producing an effective smallpox vaccination In Jenner’s time, smallpox killed around 10% of the global population. Jenner’s work has probably saved more lives than the work of any other individual.

In 1804, Cornishman Richard Trevithick invented the first working steam locomotive, which he tested in Merthyr Tydfil, Wales Trevithick’s locomotive was later improved upon by Robert Stephenson. Stephenson’s 1829 ‘Rocket’ formed the basis of the modern steam locomotive.

In 1807, Scotsman Alexander Forsyth pioneered the process of ‘percussion ignition’, the basis for modern firearms Forsyth’s work allowed weaponry to progress from the flintlock mechanisms of the 18th century – resulting in faster-firing and more effective guns.

In 1824, Englishman Joseph Aspdin patented the process of modern cement-mixing Aspdin’s patent made it far easier to build at-scale. His initial process was later improved upon by his son, William Aspdin, who created a product more akin to today’s ‘Portland cement’.

In 1841, Scotsman Alexander Bain patented the first ever electric clock Bain’s electrical clock enabled more accurate timekeeping – as, unlike older models, his clock did not require consistent adjustment. Bain also worked on an early fax machine, from 1843 to 1846.

In 1876, Scotsman Alexander Graham Bell received a patent for the first modern telephone On 10th March 1876, the first intelligible telephone call was made. On 10th August 1876, Bell made the first long-distance call, from Brantford, Ontario to Paris, Ontario.

“Welshman Edgar Purnell Hooley patented tarmac Hooley’s design combined tar and macadam, a paving material invented in the 1820s by Scotsman John McAdam. Today, about 70% of the world’s paved roads are made of tarmac”

In 1878, Englishman Joseph Swan produced the first successful lightbulb Swan’s bulbs were the first used to illuminate homes and public buildings – including London’s Savoy Theatre, in 1881. Swan was also responsible for producing early electric safety lamps for miners.

In 1902, Welshman Edgar Purnell Hooley patented tarmac Hooley’s design combined tar and macadam, a paving material invented in the 1820s by Scotsman John McAdam. Today, about 70% of the world’s paved roads are made of tarmac.

In 1928, penicillin was discovered by Scotsman Alexander Fleming Penicillin was the world’s first antibiotic, and was critical in the development of modern anti-bacterial medicine. An estimated 500 million lives have been saved by Fleming’s invention.

In 1926, the first working television was invented by Scotsman John Logie Baird Baird also achieved the first trans-Atlantic TV transmission in 1928, and the first colour TV in 1944. Baird’s work was also instrumental in the development of modern fibre-optics.

In 1930, Englishman Frank Whittle invented the first modern jet engine, patenting his design in 1932 Whittle was an RAF pilot officer, with a knack for engineering. His engine first flew in 1941 – and would go on to revolutionise air travel.

“Englishman Tim Berners-Lee developed the World Wide Web While WWW was not the first ‘internet’, it did allow the internet to go global”

In 1943, a team of British codebreakers designed the ‘Colossus’ computer, the world’s first programmable digital computer Colossus was initially designed a codebreaking tool – but it would serve as the foundation for modern computing in the post-war years.

In 1952, British aviation firm de Havilland flew the world’s first commercial jet liner, the Comet The Comet had first flown in 1949, but debuted commercially three years later. This marked a new era in civil aviation, and birthed modern air travel.

And in 1989, Englishman Tim Berners-Lee developed the World Wide Web While WWW was not the first ‘internet’, it did allow the internet to go global. Today, around 5.3 billion people use the internet, a development which has totally revolutionised how we live and work.

“Our energy policy makes it impossible to develop energy-intensive industries like AI. Our regulatory policy stifles innovation and creativity”

For literally centuries, the British have been at the cutting-edge of innovation and technology. From modern transportation to modern medicine, the British built the world that we live in today. Given the quality of our human capital, we should still be leading the way…

…but thanks to policy, we risk falling behind. Our planning system makes it impossible to build anything, including new lab space. Our energy policy makes it impossible to develop energy-intensive industries like AI. Our regulatory policy stifles innovation and creativity.

Many of the great innovations in this thread would have been impossible to develop today. Most importantly, we shouldn’t shy away from technological progress. Our greatness was largely the result of our willingness to embrace and advance change, innovation, and modernity.

If we want to be great again, we must embrace the future – and allow the natural quality of our people to flourish. That means less regulation, cheaper energy, and more enthusiasm for change. We’ve built the modern world before – and we can do it again

Argentina’s nascent recovery

Sam Bidwell writes on Argentina’s nascent recovery.

“Milei promised to cut tax and spending, fire government employees, and get the economy moving again. 1 year on, it seems to be working”

In 2023, after decades of turmoil, Argentinians elected maverick libertarian Javier Milei as President. Milei promised to cut tax and spending, fire government employees, and get the economy moving again. 1 year on, it seems to be working.

But first, some context. In the early 20th century, Argentina had one of the highest per capita GDPs in the world – ahead of countries like France and Italy. Thanks to decades of mismanagement, the economy is now in turmoil – in relative terms, it has declined steeply.

In January, year-on-year inflation had soared to an incredible 211 percent. The country’s rapid inflation is largely the result of public spending. For years, the country has run large deficits, despite sluggish growth, in order to appease the public.

When the Government has been unable to cover the costs of this spending, it has borrowed or printed more money – resulting in inflation. For ordinary Argentinians, this has driven up the cost of essential goods and created an environment in which businesses struggle to grow.

Because of this borrowing and printing, the country has entered into a vicious cycle of debt defaults. Since 1980, it has defaulted on its debt five times – with the latest default coming in 2020. This is an incredible decline for one of the world’s most promising economies.

“When the Government has been unable to cover the costs of this spending, it has borrowed or printed more money – resulting in inflation”

Enter Javier Milei.

Milei is an economics professor, and a self-described anarcho-capitalist, who was first elected to Congress in 2021. He is known for his combative style, and for his contempt for the state. Incredibly, he also owns four clones of his beloved dog, Conan.

Milei emerged as a surprise candidate in the October 2023 Presidential race. After a close first-round, Milei beat establishment politician Sergio Massa to triumph in the final ballot, on 19th November 2023. So what has the maverick libertarian achieved so far?

First, he has cut state spending – aggressively.
He has reduced the number of government departments in the country from 19 to 10.
His new Ministry of Human Capital merges the previous departments of Social Development, Education, Culture, and Labour.
He’s also fired thousands of government workers.

“He’s ending provision of free healthcare to immigrants in Argentina and introduced new fees for foreign university students”

When he took office, the Argentinian state had about 341,000 employees – today, that figure stands at 317,000, with thousands more cuts to come in the next few years. Retained employees have seen pay freezes or cuts.

He’s ended costly subsidies for energy, rent, and transport, while cutting non-essential local government funding. He’s vetoed Congressional plans to introduce an ‘inflation lock’ on pensions in the country, and to increase funding for public universities. And he’s also taken action on immigration.

He’s ending provision of free healthcare to immigrants in Argentina and introduced new fees for foreign university students. He has also proposed plans to automatically deport foreign criminals from the country.

For Milei, Argentina is a country that needs to learn to live within its means, after decades of inflationary borrowing and spending. With inflation under control, the country should be able to win back international investors, and grow the economy.

“For international investors, falling inflation is a sign that Argentina can once again be trusted as a place to spend money and grow businesses”

But is it working?

Well, the country’s budget deficit has finally turned into a surplus – meaning that Argentina has begun to get its debt repayments under control. Month-to-month, the Argentinian government now spends less than its earns, setting the country back on the road to recovery.

As a result, inflation has started to fall. For ordinary Argentinians, the price of everyday goods has begun to stabilise. For international investors, falling inflation is a sign that Argentina can once again be trusted as a place to spend money and grow businesses.

The country’s most important stock index, the S&P MERVAL, tracks the performance of major Argentinian companies. Since Milei took office, the MERVAL has reached record highs – indicating that investors are beginning to return to Argentina.

Meanwhile, the country’s risk profile has begun to fall, meaning that it could soon enjoy the same premiums as its South American neighbours. The country’s bonds have also hit record highs on international markets, again signalling growing investor confidence in the country.

“Milei ended rent controls across the country early in his tenure – and since that time, the supply of apartments in Buenos Aires has risen by 170%, while rents have fallen by 40%”

According to the IMF, Argentina is projected to grow 5% in 2025 and 4.7% in 2026. That’s compared to 3% in neighbouring Brazil, and 2.1% in Chile – signalling that Argentina could truly be about to fulfil its enormous economic potential.

For many ordinary Argentinians, life is beginning to improve. Milei ended rent controls across the country early in his tenure – and since that time, the supply of apartments in Buenos Aires has risen by 170%, while rents have fallen by 40%. As a result, Milei is popular.

Despite his ‘shock therapy’, his party is leading in the polls for the 2025 legislative elections – and his approval rating stands at around 48%. Economic optimism is also on the rise and stands at the highest level since 2015.

Of course, with three years left as President, Milei still has significant challenges ahead of him. Argentina’s incredible “Milei boom” shows what politicians can achieve with sufficient commitment. It also shows us what can happen when the state gets out of the way.

By cutting burdensome regulations, reducing unnecessary spending, and challenging political orthodoxy, Milei looks set to turn around Argentina’s ailing economy. Politicians across the world could learn from Milei’s example – we should all dare to challenge received wisdom.

British Overseas Territories

Sam Bidwell writes on Britain’s Overseas Territories.

“the UK hasn’t been self-sufficient in terms of food production since the 1750s – and in the 1930s, only about 30% of food consumed in the UK was produced domestically”

On the 4^th October, the UK Government announced that it would hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius The handover puts our strategic interests at risk – but why? An overview of the Overseas Territories, and why they’re so crucial to our security and national interests.

Here is a map of Britain’s Overseas Territories Together, they form a network of staging posts that allows us to defend our interests abroad. But it doesn’t take a genius to notice that most of these territories are not close to the British Isles – so why do they matter?

For centuries now, Britain has been a trading nation, with commercial interests abroad. For example, the UK hasn’t been self-sufficient in terms of food production since the 1750s – and in the 1930s, only about 30% of food consumed in the UK was produced domestically.

Today, we import roughly 40% of our food and 37% of our primary energy sources. This means that we have an interest in the security of key trade routes and shipping lanes. Disruptions to these routes can drive up import costs, meaning higher prices for British consumers.

Even if Britain became more self-sufficient in food and energy production, we would still have overseas interests. Many of our largest businesses rely on their operations abroad to turn a profit. Also, we still need to collect military intelligence, to help us predict threats.

“The Overseas Territories are a crucial part of our efforts to keep trade flowing and exercise influence. For example, Gibraltar sits at the western entrance to the Mediterranean Sea, which accounts for about 15% of all global shipping”

Economic and military influence abroad also gives us a stronger hand when we deal with other countries – which brings us to the Overseas Territories.

The Overseas Territories are a crucial part of our efforts to keep trade flowing and exercise influence. For example, Gibraltar sits at the western entrance to the Mediterranean Sea, which accounts for about 15% of all global shipping. The RAF and Royal Navy both have a presence here, allowing for quick deployment into the Mediterranean or out into the Atlantic.

If the Strait of Gibraltar were disrupted, this would be a disaster for the flow of global trade – and Gibraltar helps Britain to keep it open. The Rock of Gibraltar is also an outpost for intelligence gathering, perfect for transmitting and receiving intel over long distances.

At the other end of the Mediterranean are Britain’s two sovereign base areas on the island of Cyprus, Akrotiri and Dhekelia from the RAF Base at Akrotiri, Britain can maintain influence over the other entrance to the Mediterranean, namely the Suez Canal. Akrotiri also allows Britain to maintain oversight of the volatile Middle East, both in terms of intelligence gathering and in terms of forward military operations. Akrotiri has been crucial in joint US-UK efforts to keep the Red Sea shipping route open despite Houthi attacks.

Ascension Island in the South Atlantic is home to an RAF facility, which was critical to the success of the Falklands War in 1982 It serves as a refuelling point for Royal Navy ships, a signals intelligence hub, and hosts one of the four ground antennas that enables GPS.

Further south are the famous Falkland Islands, now home to RAF Mount Pleasant. While traditionally not of enormous strategic value, a number of companies are now drilling for oil and gas off the coast of the Falklands – which we should be taking advantage of.

“The British base on the islands, Diego Garcia, allows the British military to refuel and restock when travelling between Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also ideally located for intelligence gathering”

Of course, the world’s most important shipping lanes are not in the Mediterranean or the South Atlantic – but in Asia. This is precisely why the British presence in the Chagos Islands is so important – it is a staging post for our operations in East Asia and the Persian Gulf.

The British base on the islands, Diego Garcia, allows the British military to refuel and restock when travelling between Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also ideally located for intelligence gathering, with easy access to some of the world’s most important theatres.

Diego Garcia complements British military instalments in the Persian Gulf, including our naval support facility in Bahrain, our military logistics centre in Duqm, Oman, and the RAF outpost at Al Udeid, Qatar. These instalments help us to ensure the free flow of oil.

Diego Garcia also complements British military instalments in Southeast Asia, such as naval facility in Sembawang, Singapore and our military base in Brunei. These instalments help us to ensure the free flow of goods from Asia to Europe and vice versa.

“What’s more, Mauritius regards China as a key ally – and is susceptible to Chinese economic influence”

Under the handover deal, Britain retains access to Diego Garcia for another 99 years – but this is a vulnerable position. After all, Mauritius promised that it would honour Britain’s ownership of the Chagos Islands in the 1960s, and reneged within a generation.

What’s more, Mauritius regards China as a key ally – and is susceptible to Chinese economic influence. Naturally, China has an interest in expanding its own ability to influence global trade routes from this key strategic position in the Indian Ocean.

The deal also removes Britain’s ability to use access to Diego Garcia as a bargaining chip when dealing with the United States. Allowing partners to use the Overseas Territories strengthened Britain’s negotiating hand – after all, we could always threaten to take it away.

Of course, not all of our Overseas Territories are of military importance. Caribbean territories like the British Virgin Islands, Anguilla, and the Cayman Islands offer favourable tax treatment, and widen access to capital for our financial services sector.

What is certain is that our Overseas Territories are a key part of a self-interested UK foreign policy – giving us military flexibility and influence, leverage over our allies, and the ability to protect key shipping lanes. Handing over the Chagos Islands was a mistake.

Singapore: reasons for the Lion City’s remarkable success

Sam Bidwell writes on the success of Singapore.

“Singapore was born – a poor city state, surrounded by enemies, and with no natural resources of its own. Yet today, Singapore is one of the world’s richest and most successful nations”

Today, Singapore is: – the safest city in the world – the world’s freest economy – #1 in the Ease of Doing Business Index But why has Singapore been so successful, and why is it such a great place for businesses? A on the reasons for the Lion City’s remarkable success.

First, some history. In 1819, Singapore was founded by Sir Stamford Raffles, a British official who believed that the site was perfect for a trading post. The city grew quickly, attracting traders from across the region who were drawn to the city’s ‘free port’ status.

Singapore was governed by the British until 1963, when the city became independent as part of the ‘Federation of Malaya’. However, the union was not a harmonious one. Due to political disputes – including race riots in 1964 -, Singapore was expelled from Malaya in 1965.

And so, Singapore was born – a poor city state, surrounded by enemies, and with no natural resources of its own. Yet today, Singapore is one of the world’s richest and most successful nations, thanks largely to the work of its visionary founding father, Lee Kuan Yew.

A graduate of the University of Cambridge, Lee had initially tried to make a success of Singapore’s position within Malaya. But with independence forced upon him, he worked to build the ideal “start-up” nation in Singapore, using the city’s natural strengths to his advantage.

“Over 99 percent of all imports to Singapore are duty free. Corporation tax is charged at a flat rate of 17%, and the city has no capital gains tax.”

He was ruthlessly pragmatic in pursuit of his vision. His decisions were guided by empiricism rather than ideology. As a result, Singapore grew from an obscure post-colonial backwater into a world-leading city. What exactly did Lee do?

First, he recognised that Singapore’s openness to business and trade could be one of its greatest strengths. Over 99 percent of all imports to Singapore are duty free. Corporation tax is charged at a flat rate of 17%, and the city has no capital gains tax.

Thanks to efficient processes, it takes an average of 1.5 days to set up a business in Singapore, and just 15 minutes to register a company online. That’s alongside strong IP protections and light-touch regulation – many businesses have their Asia-Pacific hub in Singapore.

In order to make Singapore attractive to global businesses, Lee Kuan Yew insisted that English would be the main language of administration in the city. Alongside English, Singaporeans also learn a ‘mother tongue’ – Mandarin, Malay, or Tamil – depending on their heritage.

But low taxes and English proficiency alone would not be enough to guarantee Singapore’s success. The city also has world-leading infrastructure, designed with comfort and ease in mind. Singapore’s port is the second busiest in the world in terms of total shipping tonnage.

Meanwhile the city’s airport, Changi, is consistently rated as one of the best in the world. Changi Airport serves more than 100 airlines flying to more than 400 cities worldwide. It is clean, comfortable, and modern, designed to ensure efficient layovers and speedy boarding.

“One of the tragic illusions that many countries of the Third World entertain is the notion that politicians and civil servants can perform entrepreneurial functions.”

Within the city itself, travellers can get around using the fully automated Mass Rapid Transit network – a clean and comprehensive urban transit system, complete with functional Wi-Fi. Meanwhile the city’s roads are rated as amongst the best in the world.

Much of this infrastructure is funded and maintained by Temasek, an investment firm owned by the Singapore Government. Alongside GIC, Singapore’s other sovereign wealth fund, Temasek operates like a private company, managing many of the Government’s assets.

Temasek uses private sector incentives in the public interest. “One of the tragic illusions that many countries of the Third World entertain is the notion that politicians and civil servants can perform entrepreneurial functions.” – Dr Goh Keng Swee, 1st Finance Minister

Singapore also has a zero-tolerance approach to crime, with impartial and efficient enforcement of strict laws. Chewing gum is banned in the country, and littering can result in an on-the-spot fine. Vandalism and drug use can result in harsh penalties, including caning.

These laws, alongside an efficient system of municipal government, makes Singapore the world’s cleanest and safest city. Singaporeans regularly leave their phones as placeholders in public places – a civic culture of cleanliness and orderliness is extolled at every level.

Singapore also invests in its people and maintains genuinely meritocratic systems for hiring and firing. The Government consistently invests in education. At schools, at universities, and in public life, Singaporeans venerate intellectual ability and promote those who succeed.

Its political system is meritocratic too, prizing stability and talent. Though Singapore holds free multiparty elections, the Government maintains control over the political process. Protest is strictly controlled, and the press is regulated to prevent seditious acts and speech.

“Stability, low taxes, an efficient state, and an uncompromising approach to public order. These are the roots of Singapore’s success”

The result is the most stable political system in Asia, and amongst the most stable countries in the world. The People’s Action Party, founded by Lee Kuan Yew, has led Singapore since 1965, ensuring stability and continuity across the decades.

Public figures – civil servants and politicians – are paid well, to ensure that the best and brightest are attracted into Government. The Prime Minister of Singapore earns about ten times more than the UK’s Prime Minister, and about four times as much as the US President.

But Singapore also has a zero-tolerance approach to corruption. Public officials who take bribes while in office are removed from their post, fined, and often jailed. Just this week, the country’s former Transport Minister has been convicted of receiving gifts while in office.

Stability, low taxes, an efficient state, and an uncompromising approach to public order. These are the roots of Singapore’s success. In building Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew was not guided by ideology, but by what works. He was a pragmatic empiricist through and through.

Lee’s story is a reminder that national success is largely the product of pragmatism, competence, and vision. By studying what works in practice and implementing it, we can change society for the better. No obstacle is too big if we set our minds to the task of national revival.

The great man himself puts it best: The lessons of Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew should inspire us all.

UK stagnation: countries which have overtaken the UK since 2007.

The UK’s economy has stagnated since 2008. In terms of GDP per capita – economic output divided by the number of people in a country – we’ve actually gone backwards. Sam Bidwell gives an overview of the countries that the UK was richer than in 2007, but which have since overtaken us…

“None of this was inevitable. Our economic stagnation was the result of policy choices made by successive governments”

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Singapore GDP per Capita, 2007: $39,432
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Singapore GDP per Capita, 2023: $84,734

In 2007, the UK was richer than Singapore, southeast Asia’s Lion City – today, it is much, much poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
USA GDP per Capita, 2007: $48,050
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
USA GDP per Capita, 2023: $81,695

In 2007, the UK was (slightly) richer than the United States, the world’s economic superpower. Today, it is far poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Australia GDP per Capita, 2007: $41,051
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Australia GDP per Capita, 2023: $64,711

In 2007, the UK was richer than Australia, a world-leading mining economy. Today, it is much poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Austria GDP per Capita, 2007: $46,915
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Austria GDP per Capita, 2023: $56,506

In 2007, the UK was richer than Austria, a highly developed social market economy. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Belgium GDP per Capita, 2007: $44,319
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Belgium GDP per Capita, 2023: $53,475

“When you see crumbling infrastructure, poor public services, or stagnant job opportunities, you’re seeing these two lost decades of growth”

In 2007, the UK was richer than Belgium, a developed services economy and home of the EU. Today, it is poorer. {Editors note: Taking money from hard working citizens of the EU does help}.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Finland GDP per Capita, 2007: $48,467
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Finland GDP per Capita, 2023: $53,755

In 2007, the UK was richer than Finland, a powerhouse in electronics manufacturing. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Canada GDP per Capita, 2007: $44,659
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Canada GDP per Capita, 2023: $53,371

In 2007, the UK was richer than Canada, our oil-producing cousins across the Atlantic. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Germany GDP per Capita, 2007: $41,640
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Germany GDP per Capita, 2023: $52,745

In 2007, the UK was richer than Germany, Europe’s manufacturing powerhouse. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
UAE GDP per Capita, 2007: $43,918
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
UAE GDP per Capita, 2023: $52,976

In 2007, the UK was richer than the UAE, the Gulf state which plays host to futuristic cities like Dubai. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Hong Kong GDP per Capita, 2007: $30,593
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Hong Kong GDP per Capita, 2023: $50,696

“it doesn’t have to be this way. We were richer than these world-leading economies before, and we can do it again”

In 2007, the UK was much richer than Hong Kong, East Asia’s financial services superpower. Today, it is poorer.

UK GDP per Capita, 2007: $50,397
Israel GDP per Capita, 2007: $25,633
UK GDP per Capita, 2023: $48,866
Israel GDP per Capita, 2023: $52,261

In 2007, the UK was much richer than Israel, the Middle East’s high-tech hub. Today, it is poorer.

None of this was inevitable. Our economic stagnation was the result of policy choices made by successive governments since 2008. Our broken planning system, expensive energy, and a risk-averse regulatory culture have all contributed to nearly two lost decades of growth.

When you see crumbling infrastructure, poor public services, or stagnant job opportunities, you’re seeing these two lost decades of growth. The point is that it doesn’t have to be this way. We were richer than these world-leading economies before, and we can do it again.

Principally, this requires two things from our politicians. Honesty – about why we are where we are, and how we got here. And ambition – about what Britain can, and should, be. We deserve to be a high-tech, high-growth, high-powered economy again.

That means getting the basics right – housing, energy, infrastructure, public order, migration. Let’s start building things again and stop relying on low-skilled labour. Dare to dream. We built the modern world before, and we can do it again. Anglofuturism now.

Podcast Episode 94 – Sam Bidwell: Selling Economic Liberty

We are joined by Sam Bidwell, the Director of the Next Generation Centre at the Adam Smith Institute, as we discuss the challenges of selling economic liberty and free markets to younger people.

You can find out more on Sam at X/Twitter, and at his Substack. You can find the articles we discussed with Sam here https://croydonconstitutionalists.uk/category/sam-bidwell/.

Spreaker

iTunes

Podchaser

Podcast Addict

Deezer

Spotify

Castbox

Amazon

Contents:

00:00 – Intro
01:40 – Next Generation Centre at the Adam Smith Institute
06:30 – Young people & free markets
15 :00 – Selling economic liberty
19:40 – Policy ideas
24:10 – Thoughts on the new government
28:50 – Plans for the Next Generation Centre
31:16 – Website
33:30 – Events
35:08 – Outro

Dubai’s transformation: shrewd investments and a business-friendly environment

“Dubai’s remarkable growth is the product of shrewd investments, business-friendly tax and regulatory rules”

In just fifty years, Dubai has transformed from an obscure fishing village into a city of global significance.

Despite popular misconceptions, oil revenues contribute less than 1% of Dubai’s GDP today. You read that right – unlike nearby Abu Dhabi, Dubai’s economy is not powered by oil revenues. In fact, Dubai’s remarkable growth is the product of shrewd investments, business-friendly tax and regulatory rules, and an uncompromising approach to political stability.

Modern Dubai was founded as a fishing village on the Persian Gulf at some point in the 18th century. Throughout the early 19th century, Dubai – as well as other neighbouring Gulf states – fell under British influence. In 1820, these small Gulf states fell under a British protectorate.

“In 1901, Sheikh Makhtoum bin Hasher Al Makhtoum established Dubai as a free port, with no tariffs on imports or exports”

As early as 1900, Dubai began to emerge as an important port. Its location at the mouth of the Persian Gulf made it ideal for trading into the Middle East, India, and East Africa. This geographic advantage, and its openness to commerce, has been the secret to Dubai’s success.

In 1901, Sheikh Makhtoum bin Hasher Al Makhtoum established Dubai as a free port, with no tariffs on imports or exports. Merchants, particularly those working in the pearl industry, were given parcels of land, guarantees of protection, and religious toleration.

In the first half of the 20th century, Dubai grew in importance as a hub for trade with Persia and India. However, the city’s position was supercharged with the emergence of a new leader. In 1957, Rashid bin Saeed Al Makhtoum succeeded his father to become ruler of Dubai.

Sheikh Rashid understood the young city’s potential. He set about transforming Dubai from a small coastal settlement into a modern port city. He also understood the keys to Dubai’s success – openness to trade, infrastructure investments, stability and order.

“In 1966, more gold was shipped from London to Dubai than almost anywhere in the world”

He set about creating private companies to build and operate infrastructure. In 1959, he established Dubai’s first telephone company; by 1961, it had rolled out an operational network. The city’s private water company established a regular supply of piped water by 1968.

By 1960, the city’s airport had opened, with flights operating across the Middle East. In 1963, the Sheikh opened the first bridge across Dubai Creek, paid for by tolls. The airport was expanded in 1965 to enable long-haul flights and was expanded again in 1970.

By the late 1960s, Dubai was also a hub for the global gold trade – much of which was based on the illegal sale of gold to India. In 1966, more gold was shipped from London to Dubai than almost anywhere in the world (only France and Switzerland took more).

And again, this is all before the discovery of oil. By the time that Dubai struck it rich in 1966, it was already a growing port, with a solid base of infrastructure and a low-tax, pro-business environment. Of course, the discovery of oil supercharged Sheikh Rashid’s vision.

“Roads, bridges, hospitals, and schools were constructed in a construction glut which propelled Dubai’s economy through the 1980s. As the old saying goes, build it and they will come”

But Sheikh Rashid had the foresight to know that one day, the oil would run out. He understood that one day, the city would need to survive without oil – and so set about making Dubai a world-leading hub for regional and international commerce.

In 1972, Port Rashid was constructed and in 1979, it was followed by the Port of Jebel Ali, today the busiest in the Middle East. In 1978, Sheikh Rashid opened the Dubai World Trade Centre. Dubai Creek was dredged and widened in the early 1970s. In 1983, Dubai Drydocks opened.

Meanwhile the city’s airport was expanded, and hotels were opened for business travellers. Roads, bridges, hospitals, and schools were constructed in a construction glut which propelled Dubai’s economy through the 1980s. As the old saying goes, build it and they will come.

This infrastructure-first approach was the foundational principle of Dubai’s pro-business policy environment. By leveraging the city’s geography and encouraging businesses to invest, Dubai made itself into one of the Middle East’s leading trade entrepôts.

The city sits at the mouth of the oil-rich Persian Gulf, with convenient maritime connections to Asia, Europe, and Africa. By air, more than 50% of the world’s population is 7 hours or less from Dubai – again, ideal geography for an international business hub.

“26 free trade zones, companies enjoy a 50-year corporation tax exemption, and no international tariffs. Many of these free trade zones use English common law”

However, it’s not just geography and infrastructure. Dubai has no income tax. Corporation tax is low at 9% – and in 26 free trade zones, companies enjoy a 50-year corporation tax exemption, and no international tariffs. Many of these free trade zones use English common law.

These zones create an extremely business-friendly environment – many international businesses have their regional or global HQs in Dubai. At the same time, the state invests in the infrastructure – roads, schools, hospitals – needed to keep business travellers coming.

And speaking of business travellers, Dubai – and the rest of the United Arab Emirates – is home to a large number of foreigners. In fact, 88% of the UAE’s population are expats. The territory’s tax-free status and world-leading infrastructure attracts high net-worth individuals.

However, unlike in Europe, immigrants in Dubai live under strict conditions. They do not benefit from state welfare and can be deported at any time. It is almost impossible to become a naturalised citizen. In return, migrants get to make far more money than they would at home.

This is particularly true for low-skilled migrants, often from South Asia, who come to the country under the so-called ‘kafala system’. Under the kafala system, all migrant workers need to have an Emirati sponsor – if their employment ends, so does their residence.

Which brings me onto the final aspect of Dubai’s success – law and order. The city has a zero-tolerance approach to crime and public disorder. The Dubai Police employs drones and has an average emergency response time of 2 minutes and 24 seconds, as of Q3 2023.

“Despite popular misconceptions, its rapid rise owes just as much to sensible policymaking as to oil. Not everybody can turn a patch of desert into a global megacity!”

Sheikh Rashid passed away in 1990. He was succeeded by his son, Maktoum, who ruled until 2006. In turn, Maktoum was succeeded by his brother Mohammed, who rules Dubai to this day. Though Dubai has grown considerably since Sheikh Rashid’s time, the basic principles are the same.

In many ways, the principles that built modern Dubai are the same as those that built Hong Kong, Singapore – or even, historically, London.

Openness to business
Ideal strategic positioning
Shrewd investments in infrastructure
Pragmatic governance
Law and order

Whatever you think of Dubai, the city’s growth is one of the most incredible stories of the 20th century. Despite popular misconceptions, its rapid rise owes just as much to sensible policymaking as to oil. Not everybody can turn a patch of desert into a global megacity!

Yes, it really is true – as of today, less than 1% of Dubai’s GDP is generated by oil revenues. In fact, it’s commerce, financial services, real estate, and transportation that are the biggest drivers. The ultimate service economy!

Private security and the law enforcement gap

Sam Bidwell writes on the UK’s law enforcement crisis – and the signs that private security is emerging to fill the gap.

“In 2022, 89.2% of bike theft cases across England went unsolved, rising to 93% of thefts in London”

Alongside defence and border security, maintaining law and order is one of the first duties of any state – but in the UK today, many laws are just not being enforced. When we talk about law and order in the UK, we often talk about a few distinct but related issues: – softening of the law around some crimes

soft sentences
inaccurate data reporting
generalised disorder
non-enforcement of the law

I want to focus on the latter.

In May 2024, London’s Met Police announced that it would no longer be policing fare evasion on London buses. “Since this incident happened, we have stopped our involvement in supporting Transport for London fare evasion operations.” December 2023 research revealed that the Met Police attended just 44% of shoplifting reports between April 2022 and April 2023 – the rate has not been above 50% since 2018.

“police failed to solve a single burglary over the past three years in half of neighbourhoods in England and Wales”

In 2022-23, Home Office statistics show that the Met Police failed to solve 82 percent of burglaries in London. Just 8 percent of London burglaries during this period resulted in a suspect being charged or summoned – we can assume that the conviction rate is even lower. In 2022, 89.2% of bike theft cases across England went unsolved, rising to 93% of thefts in London. In Surrey, just 0.81% of bike theft cases resulted in a suspect being charged.

According to March 2024 research, police failed to solve a single burglary over the past three years in half of neighbourhoods in England and Wales. This comes despite an October 2022 promise from all 43 police chiefs across England and Wales to “attend every break-in”.

In 2023, police failed to attend 72 percent of car thefts – an increase of 32 percent since 2021. In Cambridgeshire, a full 90 percent of car thefts reports were not attended by an officer – in Bedfordshire that figure was 88 percent.

“the Co-op has reported that assaults on staff have increased by almost 30 percent, with 20 percent more anti-social behaviour and verbal abuse”

The police’s own data shows that, as of 2023, around 90 percent of all crime goes unsolved, rising from around 75 percent in 2015. This figure includes more than 30,000 sex offences, 330,000 violent crimes, 320,000 cases of criminal damage, and 1.5 million thefts.

According to February 2024 research, police failed to attend 40 percent of violent shoplifting incidents in 2023. This comes as the Co-op has reported that assaults on staff have increased by almost 30 percent, with 20 percent more anti-social behaviour and verbal abuse.

“The police are no longer consistently enforcing the law – particularly in cases of property crime, but increasingly in terms of low-level violent crime too”

Finally, across London, 250 phones a day are stolen – one every six minutes. In theory, the Met Police’s ‘Operation Venice’ is designed to crack down on phone snatching – but there’s no public information about the current state of that operation. Pulling together these individual data points, what do we see? The police are no longer consistently enforcing the law – particularly in cases of property crime, but increasingly in terms of low-level violent crime too. This isn’t just a London problem, either.

This is especially audacious given the efforts made by police in recent weeks to crack down on ‘hate speech’ and improper political activism. They don’t have the resources to protect businesses from theft, but they do have the resources to put people in jail for sharing memes.

This leaves ordinary people subject to the tyranny of criminality – criminal disorder is just as tyrannical as any overbearing state. One of the results of this is a rise in private security use, particularly from businesses who know that they can no longer rely on the police.

“According to the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), the UK will need 62,000 new security officers over the next 12 months to keep up with growing demand”

My Local Bobby, a security firm established by two former Met Police officers, served 12 residential areas and four “public realm beats” as of May 2023, with a focus on property crime. Households pay around £100 to £200 a month for this additional protection.

According to the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), the UK will need 62,000 new security officers over the next 12 months to keep up with growing demand. BSIA estimates that a total of 450,000 licensed security professionals could be in operation by the end of 2024.

In a January 2024 poll, 6 in 10 UK adults trust private security professionals, while 7 in 10 say that private security professionals are necessary to maintain public order. An April 2024 poll, on the other hand, showed that just 4 in 10 Britons trust the police. In the absence of a capable state police force, many businesses – and some individuals – are turning to private provision. Let me be clear – this is not a good thing! The expanding role of private security is a sign of withering state capacity.

“The early warning signs are there – including the growth in private security and the rise of gated and quasi-gated communities”

In countries where disorder is common – like South Africa, Nigeria, or Brazil -, private security is a fact of life. Nevertheless, these private security firms often operate under strict regulatory conditions, even while the state’s policing capacity continues to decline.

While Britain’s situation is not nearly as severe as Brazil or South Africa, we are experiencing a decline in law and order. The early warning signs are there – including the growth in private security and the rise of gated and quasi-gated communities.

We must resource our police force properly, enabling them to enforce the law consistently. Even John Cowperthwaite, Hong Kong’s famously laissez-faire Financial Secretary, understood the importance of a police force able to enforce order and protect property.

“The hard realities of keeping the peace between man and man and between authority and the individual can be more accurately described if the phrase were inverted to “order and law”, for without order the operation of law is impossible.” – Lee Kuan Yew, 1963

Main image: Southbanksteve, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons