To those
of us who believe that the new British
passport should be printed in this
country, there is a common rebuke
delivered by Remainers and Brexiteers
alike.
Don't you
believe in free trade? Isn't preferring
the more expensive bid of a British
company to that of a European one an
example of protectionism and insularity?
Surely —
these critics go on — insisting that the
new blue passports be manufactured even
at a slightly greater cost in the United
Kingdom runs counter to all the spirited
talk about post-Brexit
Global Britain.
I
disagree. And I very much hope the
Government will reconsider its choice of
the Franco-Dutch company Gemalto in the
light of a Mail-inspired petition with
well over 300,000 signatures, being
delivered to No 10 today.
Symbolism
Indeed, I
am certain these doughty people speak
for millions.
A YouGov
poll found that 49 per cent of
respondents believe the blue passports
should be produced by a UK company even
if an overseas firm offered better
prices or services. Some 29 per cent
disagreed.
Will
Theresa May and Home Secretary Amber
Rudd listen? The answer to that question
depends on the degree to which they have
grasped that this, above all, is a
matter of symbolism which towers above
financial considerations.
As it
happens, nearly all these considerations
collapse under examination. I'll come to
these later.
But first
let me explain why I think that where
the passports are printed is of such
totemic importance.
More than
any other document in our lives, the
blue passport represents the revival of
British sovereignty and independence
sparked by the referendum on June 23,
2016.
I very much
hope the Government will reconsider
its choice of the Franco-Dutch
company Gemalto in the light of a
Mail-inspired petition with well
over 300,000 signatures, being
delivered to No 10 today, writes
Stephen Glover
Some
Remainers scoff, of course. They say
sovereignty and independence are
illusions in an interconnected world
except for huge continental powers like
the United States or China.
The blue
passport means nothing to such people.
In fact, many would rather keep their
burgundy one.
But for
most of those who voted Brexit, the blue
passport is the very essence of what was
taken away from us and has now been
restored.
That is
why it must be truly British. The new
passport should be what it purports to
be — a document signifying that the
'bearer' (to use the term included in
the document's preamble) is a citizen of
an independent nation.
And this
will categorically not be the case if a
Franco-Dutch company manufactures it in
its low-cost Polish plant, or even in a
factory in the UK. For one thing,
Gemalto is expected soon be a quarter
owned by the French state.
What
happens if its workers should strike, or
if the firm in some other way should
fail to fulfil all aspects of its
contract with the British Government?
Well, the
Government would be powerless in the
short-term to do anything at all.
The symbol
of regained independence would turn out,
in practice, to be subject to the
vagaries of a foreign conglomerate
beyond its control.
By
contrast, the British-based company De
La Rue — which makes our current EU
passport, and was underbid by Gemalto
for the blue one — has never missed a
delivery in the decade of its current
contract.
Nor has De
La Rue's loyal (and predominantly Brexit-supporting)
workforce in Gateshead in the
North-East, where current passports are
made, lost a single day to industrial
action.
Meanwhile,
it transpires that Gemalto's record of
reliability is far from flawless.
A YouGov
poll found that 49 per cent of
respondents believe the blue
passports should be produced by a UK
company even if an overseas firm
offered better prices or services.
Some 29 per cent disagreed
It is embroiled in
a national security row with the
Estonian government after hundreds of
thousands of state ID cards made by the
firm were judged vulnerable to
cyber-attack.
The
Estonian government (and others) are
reportedly considering legal action
against Gemalto, which has not had its
contract renewed. From 2019, the cards
will be produced elsewhere.
One might
add that Gemalto's commercial viability
is also not beyond question. It has
posted four profit warnings in 18
months.
Can anyone
be 100 per cent certain that the company
will deliver everything it is contracted
to?
The point
is a simple one. A new UK passport,
standing as it does for our recovered
independence, should be printed in
conditions over which a sovereign
British Government has as much control
as is possible.
Of course
we can't — and here we must grapple with
the financial considerations I mentioned
— ignore the matter of money. Gemalto
underbid De La Rue by £120 million over
an 11-year period to win the £490
million contract.
Furore
Set aside
for a moment whether it can deliver at
that price. Ignore possibly well-founded
insinuations that Gemalto's bid was
below cost price, and that the company
is in receipt of covert loans or
subsidies from the French government.
No, let us
proceed as though that £120 million over
ten years — £12 million a year — were
real. Consider, then, the cost to the
state of the mooted 200 job losses at De
La Rue's Gateshead plant.
In an area
of higher-than- average unemployment,
many of these people would be thrown on
the dole.
Will Theresa
May (pictured) and Home Secretary
Amber Rudd listen? The answer to
that question depends on the degree
to which they have grasped that
this, above all, is a matter of
symbolism which towers above
financial considerations
They would
no longer pay income tax or National
Insurance. Significantly poorer, they
would buy less, and so pay less VAT. And
they would be in receipt of all sorts of
welfare benefits.
It's
impossible to predict what the cost
would be to the Inland Revenue in lost
tax, or the extra burden to the
Department for Work and Pensions in new
benefits, but we can be sure there would
be considerable inroads into the annual
'saving' of £12 million.
And then,
of course, there is the human side of
the equation. The North-East is one of
the poorest regions of the UK.
Many of
its inhabitants feel forgotten and
forsaken by successive governments —
which partly explains why such large
numbers there voted Leave.
Betrayal
Are the
Tories really going to betray these
dutiful people when there are already so
many strong arguments concerning
sovereignty and independence, not to
mention reasonable doubts about
Gemalto's ability to deliver? It would
be a wrong-headed and careless thing to
do.
Don't
forget that France, Germany, Italy and
Spain all insist that their passports
are produced on home soil, citing
security concerns.
But the
British Government dumbly plays by EU
rules (even though we are leaving) and
gives the contract to the lowest
European bidder.
When this
furore blew up two weeks ago, the
Government in general, and Amber Rudd in
particular, looked shell-shocked.
The Home
Secretary could not understand why her
decision was deemed by so many as
unpatriotic — as well as pretty
bone-headed.
Seldom has
the gulf between our rulers and the
ruled been so dramatically illuminated.
It's one
thing to hop along reluctantly to the
mood music of Brexit, as Miss Rudd
generally does. It's quite another thing
to understand its heart.
It's not
too late.
Labour wants the blue passports to be
made in this country
to protect jobs.
Tory free-traders
can surely be induced to accept that
giving the contract to De La Rue is not
an affront to the idea of global trade.
The
Government must grasp that this is an
issue about
sovereignty and independence
and looking after our own people. In
truth, it's really
about the future of Britain.
Passports showdown: As
the Mail prepares to
hand over nearly...