Brexit: Lost in Space
Even in outer space the effects of Brexit are being felt! It’s worth a closer look at the impact Brexit would have on the UK space sector — a political afterthought today.
The fallout has already begun. In December, the UK announced its intention to pull out of Europe’s global positioning satellite project, Galileo, as a result of Brexit. Despite the UK wanting to stay in (and alone having already invested over 1.5 billion Euro into the project), the EU wouldn’t allow it access to the secure elements once it left EU, so the UK opted out. This has significant economic and security implications for the UK: it leaves it dependent on other nations systems to which it has no formal say (either US’s GPS or EU’s Galileo). Downing Street quickly retorted it would build its own. But this is pie in the sky: the costs would dwarf the entire UK space budget, all for a system redundant, and likely years behinds and second tier, to that of it’s close allies!
Unfortunately, this is just the beginning. The UK space industry represents €12B in business and about 40,000 UK jobs, all of which are at risk with Brexit. The risks arise because space projects are complex and the UK space sector is intrinsically woven with the rest of Europe. The mainstay of UK space endeavours are through its membership of the European Space Agency (ESA). This could be the next casualty. Although ESA is formally separate from the EU, and continued membership will remain an option, in practice ESA’s agenda is increasingly being set by the EU . To be a member of ESA and not the EU will be like Norway in single market but not in the EU: accepting all the plans and rules (and payments!) but without a voice at the table.
Furthermore, in conversations with senior officials at the UK Government during my recent trip there, it became terrifyingly clear that space is an afterthought to the larger political issues of Brexit: there is no plan to mitigate these impacts.
With the space industry shifting to ‘new space’ — a renaissance of new companies tackling everything from rocket launches, to satellites, to space services — perhaps this is respite for the UK space sector post Brexit? A more independent Britain could indeed lead to more agile adoption of this trend. This is good. But this area will suffer a broader downside too: imagine you’re the CEO of a space start up in Europe trying to decide on where to be based, or of a non-EU space company looking to establish your first office in Europe (as I was in 2015). At the time, London was a viable option (though we ended in Berlin). Post Brexit, no CEO will consider the UK a location to put a space company. Why put your European base outside the single market of the largest trading block in the world?! Or likely without access to the main government programmes? Company after company will avoid it. (Of course this logic isn’t limited to the space sector, but applicable to all industries, which is one of the broader challenges of Brexit!)
What is true of the space sector is true in most of science and technology. The UK’s broad scientific base and technology industries will be hurt. From CERN, to the European Science Foundation, to ESA, and beyond, the UK’s science and technology community have historically secured disproportionate returns. These projects are often so large and complex that the EU as a whole can have a meaningful programme, whereas it’s member nations alone cannot.
In space, as in all sectors of the British economy, leaving the EU makes the UK less secure, less financially stable, and adrift. Despite all the space talk I wish politicians would come back down to Earth: Brexit is a folly of great proportions that can and should be reversed. With Brexit, the UK will be a country lost in space.
— — -
UPDATE (5.3.19): The BBC reported on this article and it’s caused some reaction from the UK Space Agency. I have a response to their comments (below), but the main point is this: I’m not taking aim at the UK Space Agency or space sector. I think it has done remarkably well (despite far less funding than in France, Germany, etc- UK space has a strong world-wide reputation).
Instead, my aim is towards the politicians: this industry seems to be an afterthought on Brexit, and that’s a mistake. This industry, like many, will suffer in any Brexit scenario, and I want those politicians to understand the consequences before voting. Note, many of the issues can be partially mitigated by a soft Brexit (staying in single market & customs union), although the best option for UK space is to remain in the EU. It’s all in the hands of @UKparliament.
I urge MPs to seek to remain.
— —
Response to UK Space Agency reaction (from BBC article):
Point 1: “This [survey of British space companies] found that 73% of organisations expected income to grow over the next three years and 48% of those expected that growth to be more than 10% higher than in the previous three years.”
Response: The key is not just the fraction of organisations but also their size. Airbus, representing over 1/3 of the UK space jobs, has made it clear that Brexit will be catastrophic for UK jobs. And I would hazard that many of the rest have not integrated what leaving the EU would mean for their business: it seems implausible that most will see higher growth given that 3/4 of the UK space industry is based on European projects, most of that being via ESA which, as I point out, is increasingly an arm of the EU.
Point 2: “We have an excellent track record of working closely with the sector to drive growth, create jobs and collaborate with partners in Europe and the rest of the world.
Response: I agree — and am just advocating for that to continue, not to be curtailed through an unnecessary Brexit.
Point 3: “This will continue once we leave the EU. We are committed to close international partnerships on space and science programmes, and will remain a leading member of the European Space Agency, which is independent of the EU.”
Response: Again, although ESA is formerly independent, it is not in practice. It is increasingly being driven from the European Commission.
