Category: Brexit

MIL-OSI Global: Can Kemi Badenoch claim to have ‘become working class’ while working in McDonald’s – and why would she want to?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michael Rees, Senior Lecturer in Sociology, Nottingham Trent University

Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch recently caused controversy by claiming that while she was born to a middle-class family, she “became working class” when working in McDonald’s to earn money while she was in college. In fairness to Badenoch, having a diversity of experience is an admirable attribute for an MP – something you wouldn’t associate with someone like recently deposed Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg for example.

Badenoch, who was born in the UK but spent the first part of her life in Nigeria before returning as a teenager, said her time at the fast food chain helped her understand the life of “single mothers” struggling to make ends meet – insight that might have made her object to the policies enacted by her government that made life harder for the working classes. She said of the job:

There’s a humility there as well. You had to wash toilets, there were no special cleaners coming in. You had to wash toilets, you had to flip burgers, you had to handle money.

Badenoch’s assertion – during her bid to become leader of the Conservative party – raises several interesting questions, not least whether you can “become working class”. Part of the issue is that class is increasingly hard to define in 2024.

Is class subjective and something that we feel (as Badenoch’s claim suggests) or is it something objective that we can measure? This is a question that has been troubling sociologists – and others – for years.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

In social sciences, the most widely used measure of social class is the Office for National Statistics’ (ONS) national statistics socioeconomic classification (NS-SEC). It is also the measure used by the UK government, most notably to measure social mobility – the movement of people between classes.

The NS-SEC defines class by placing individuals in one of eight different classes according to their occupation. The scales runs from one (for higher managerial and professional positions) to eight (long-term unemployed).

The classes are further simplified into three categories of professional/managerial (1 and 2), intermediate (3 and 4) and working class (5 to 7). It’s a hierarchy but it also shows that there is no easily identifiable dividing line between classes. Examples of those in professional/managerial would include directors of major companies, those teaching in higher education and journalists. Those in intermediate professions include travel agents, police officers (sergeant and below) and hotel managers. Those in the working class would include farm workers, building site labourers and workers in the service industry, such as in McDonald’s.

Using the NS-SEC occupational coding tool, we can place both Badenoch’s parents (a GP and a professor) in social class 1. While she acknowledges that she is from a middle-class background, it is clear that both her parents occupy positions at the top of the social class hierarchy. As an MP, Badenoch herself is now also clearly social class 1. Her previous roles before entering politics, as a digital director for The Spectator and associate director at private bank Coutts return class 2 and 1 respectively. It is evident that Badenoch has lived, and continues to live, a very privileged, and middle-class, life. Given this, why would she claim to be working class?

Does working in McDonald’s make you working class?
Shutterstock/Jessica Girvan

The first thing to note is that Badenoch is not unique in citing a working-class identity of some kind. The prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, is by now notorious for his frequent references to his father’s job as a toolmaker. Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, is also regularly photographed in pubs while drinking a pint and smoking a cigarette – something that sociologist Pierre Bourdieu would define as him attempting to evidence a working-class habitus, those tastes and behaviours that we typically associated with members of a particular social class.

The rationale for this is that Britain is quite unique in its perspective on class. People will often claim they are working class, or have working-class roots. This would be unheard of in other parts of the world, where claiming to be middle class is aspirational.

People in Britain will continue to claim they are working class even when evidence indicates that they are, and have been, middle class for several generations. This largely seems to be an inheritance of Britain’s history as an industrial country and the national obsession with “getting on” as well as a the country having a reputation for being particularly divided by social class. British people want to prove that they have been successful on merit rather than because of unearned privilege.

Large fries and a majority in 2029?

Britain’s changing political landscape is also an important part of the picture, as we look back at Badenoch’s McDonald’s career.

Throughout the 20th century the dividing line between political parties was evident. The working classes typically voted for the Labour party and the middle classes typically voted for the Conservative party. The dividing lines between political parties have become more complicated in the 21st century, particularly in the post-Brexit years; notably evidenced by Boris Johnson’s 2019 election win and the crumbling of the red wall.

This helps us understand why Badenoch would want to find a way to show that she is in touch with working-class people – and how she was able to do it, at least according to her own reasoning.

Votes are always on a politician’s mind – and the increasing willingness of voters to switch allegiances means more votes than ever are up for grabs. The nebulous nature of class and the difficulty we have in defining it, becomes the vehicle for appealing for those votes.

Badenoch’s claim that she became working class appears to be a longer-term strategy. She is looking ahead to the next election. Nevertheless, it seems difficult to argue that a short period working in McDonald’s made Badenoch working class. An adulthood of privilege also makes her claim rather insulting to those who, in her own words, struggle to make ends meet.

Michael Rees does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Can Kemi Badenoch claim to have ‘become working class’ while working in McDonald’s – and why would she want to? – https://theconversation.com/can-kemi-badenoch-claim-to-have-become-working-class-while-working-in-mcdonalds-and-why-would-she-want-to-240638

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 23, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: The boomer generation hit the economic jackpot. Young people will inherit their massive debts

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Renaud Foucart, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster University

GoodIdeas/Shutterstock

Young people in Britain could be forgiven for despairing at the financial pressures they face – and feeling that previous generations enjoyed a much fairer economic environment. Then just to add to their worries about home ownership and a precarious jobs market, along comes the gloomy announcement that the UK’s public debt is now 100% of GDP.

That debt burden will have to be carried by tax-payers for decades to come. Paying the interest – just the interest – of the country’s debt currently accounts for around 7.3% of public spending. That’s more than what is spent on defence (4.8%) or transport (3.8%).

And while some of what’s left will go to towards essential future public services, it will also go towards fixing problems caused by a historic lack of public investment (less money being spent by previous generations) in water, railways and other crucial infrastructure.

In fact, in the 1980s much of that infrastructure was used by the UK government to help finance itself, with assets including British Gas sold off at a bargain price. Those baby boomers and older generations who could afford to buy shares often made a decent profit.

There are other kinds of costs that today’s younger generations have had to bear too. During COVID lockdowns, universities and schools were closed as the young were forced to stay at home, predominantly to protect the elderly. They have lost the freedom to live and work in the EU after 60% of retired people voted for Brexit, while most young people voted against. Leaving Europe has also made the UK less well-off.

But not everyone is poorer. In the last 20 years, the average income of pensioners has increased on average by more than 50%, while that of working-age adults has risen by less than 10%. The median income of pensioner households is now higher after housing costs than that of households with children.

Most of the country’s wealth is now in the hands of older people. In 2018, one in four people aged over 65 was living in a household with a total wealth of over a £1 million pounds. Poverty rates of pensioners are now lower than for the rest of the population.

Yet pensioners receive all sorts of unconditional discounts and benefits, such as free or discounted public transport. Their income is exempt from national insurance contributions, and there is a triple-lock on state pensions, which is guaranteed to grow faster than work income.

Until recently, the winter fuel allowance meant that anyone born in 1944 or before received £300 (reduced to £200 for younger pensioners).

Boomer and bust?

While there is mild popular support for limiting the fuel allowance to poorer pensioners, the question of recouping money from older people remains highly sensitive. (Back in 2017, the then prime minister Theresa May had to quickly U-turn when she suggested using pensioners’ wealth to finance the rising cost of care.)

One reason for this reluctance to prise money from older people may be that while most pensioners are doing better (compared to the working population) this is not true of the poorest ones. Also, some pensioners do not claim the benefits they are entitled to, and the last thing a civilised society wants is to let its older people freeze.

‘Loser has to pay off the national debt.’
fizkes/Shutterstock

But the apparent economic divide raises a broader question about inter-generational justice. What does one generation owe the generations that follow?

And it’s not just about money. Global warming is another thing older people have not spent most of their lives having to pay for, with the burden for repairing environmental damage again falling mostly on the young.

Perhaps a fair philosophical approach would be that it’s OK to leave certain costs to be paid in the future if the next generation can generally expect to live longer and in better health, with more consumer choice and comfort, and an improved quality of life.

But this does not seem to be the expectation right now. Incomes have stalled, and so has life expectancy, while housing prices have not been so expensive relative to earnings since the 19th century.

In that sense, many people, however old they are, would probably sympathise with young people today. And they may even argue that it’s time for the government to focus on policies that explicitly benefit the young – like house building, different forms of taxation or subjecting pension income to national insurance.

There could also be a change in fiscal rules to allow for more investment in national infrastructure, higher taxes on fossil fuels to pay for the energy transition, or sharing the cost of funding higher education more evenly among all graduates, regardless of when they got their degree.

Such changes would provide a dramatic shift towards an economic system which seeks to redistribute wealth not just among citizens – but between the generations.

Renaud Foucart does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. The boomer generation hit the economic jackpot. Young people will inherit their massive debts – https://theconversation.com/the-boomer-generation-hit-the-economic-jackpot-young-people-will-inherit-their-massive-debts-238908

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 23, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Ludwig: in this comic BBC detective drama, puzzles are key to solving a murder – and understanding other people

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Deborah Klika/Klikova, Academic Portfolio Lead in Film & Television Production, University of Greenwich

“It makes no sense. It’s impossible to solve” – so decries John “Ludwig” Taylor (David Mitchell) when trying to solve a murder using puzzle techniques in the new six-part BBC detective series, Ludwig.

Each week puzzle designer John uses his skill to solve a crime. The show, also starring Anna Maxwell Martin, is guided by the thematic question: “how do we solve life’s puzzles?”

John’s twin brother James (also portrayed by Mitchell) has suddenly gone missing. Enlisted by his sister-in-law Lucy (Maxwell Martin) to help find James, John reluctantly moves in with her and her son, leaving behind his ordered and self-contained (but lonely) world. Lucy wants John to pose as his brother to get some information from James’ office about a case that he was working on, which she suspects is related to his disappearance.

What begins as a benign task very quickly escalates into John taking on James’ role as DCI James Taylor with Cambridge’s Major Crime Squad. John is swept along to crime scenes wherein he proceeds to solve murders using various puzzle techniques: logic puzzles, spot the difference, coincidences (three to be statistically relevant) and even reverse chess (where maths, probability and reason are used to determine prior moves in the middle of a chess game).

The situation creates a bind plot. John wants the love of a family – specifically James’ family – but if he finds James, he will lose the “family” he has found. He is caught between his want (to have a family and Lucy) and his flaw (to learn to engage with people and the world).

In my research, I posit that the bind plot is more prevalent in comedy than in drama. The tension between the want and the flaw is what underpins the comedy.

John is navigating life on two levels: as an imposter detective and as a lonely man with signs of neurodiversity, such as an inability to understand and express feelings, and the need to follow certain rules. This results in misunderstanding and confusion for some of those around John, but not for John himself.

The trailer for Ludwig.

This duality is a common technique in comedy writing. As comic writer Steve Kaplan notes in The Hidden Tools of Comedy (2013), comedy emerges in the gap between the wavy-line character (the confused one) and the straight-line character (with a fixed view on life).

What is interesting in Ludwig is John’s character arc. He begins as a straight-liner, but both his interactions with Lucy and her determination to find her husband force him to question his own life. His increasing confusion about, and interaction with, other people result in him becoming a wavy-line character.

In my book Situation Comedy, Character, and Psychoanalysis (2019) I label the straight-liner as “echo characters”. That’s because they echo the unconscious fear of the main character, while maintaining their own fixed view of the world. It is because the main character is unconscious of this behaviour in themselves that such characters become “trapped” in their dynamic.

These kinds of relationships define the sitcom. Think Phoebe in Friends, who echoes Rachel’s fear of commitment. In the first episode of Friends, Rachel is a runaway bride and Ross is recovering from a failed marriage, setting both these characters up as commitment-phobic. Phoebe, however, embraces life and all its alternatives, no matter how kooky or off-beat.

Moss in The IT Crowd, echoes in a different way. His attention to detail and focus are the antithesis of Roy’s approach to work and Jen’s lack of knowledge of anything to do with IT. Roy fears work and Jen fears being exposed as ignorant, making Moss their perfect echo character.

Maintaining the pretence

The challenge for Ludwig’s head writer and creator, Mark Brotherhood, is to ensure that John can keep up the pretence of being his twin brother, while at the same time ensuring the pretence is believable.

Brotherhood’s previous credits (Father Brown, Death in Paradise, Benidorm and Mount Pleasant) have shown his ability to merge genres such as crime and drama with comic moments.

Set-ups such as characters having recently joined the crimes unit (who did not know James), and fleeting interactions with other characters (who do know James), save John from exposure. But they also distract the audience from the central question – “why don’t other people see that John is a different person?”. Instead we are drawn into the world of puzzles and how they can help solve crimes – and maybe help us solve problems in our own lives.

Dramatic irony enables the audience to be in on the conceit. We know John is not James, but we also know that John is a puzzle master, and we revel in his ability to solve crimes. However, being in on the deception prompts the question: what will happen when John is exposed?

In the vein of Poirot or Miss Marple, John is dedicated to solving murder through reasoned logic as well as increasingly astute observations of human behaviour – something he has avoided until now.

Ludwig is an engaging (and at times puzzling) drama with comic moments, governed by a thematic premise – to understand puzzles is to understand life.

Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

Deborah Klika/Klikova does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Ludwig: in this comic BBC detective drama, puzzles are key to solving a murder – and understanding other people – https://theconversation.com/ludwig-in-this-comic-bbc-detective-drama-puzzles-are-key-to-solving-a-murder-and-understanding-other-people-239626

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

September 29, 2024
MIL-OSI Banking: Joachim Nagel: Why do we need Europe?

Source: Bank for International Settlements

Check against delivery

1 Global challenges need global answers

We are living in a period of significant change. Many distinct forces are contributing to this change. Examples here include global warming and the switch towards carbon-free energy, progress in digitalisation and AI, as well as geo-economic factors and demographic developments.

What do all the changes I’ve mentioned have in common? They affect humanity at the global level. It therefore does not seem useful to limit one’s attention to national solutions. That said, the European elections have shown us that many voters backed parties calling for greater national sovereignty or even nationalism – as well as less Europe. The Brexit referendum, eight years ago, can be seen as an example of this trend. As, too, can the recent German regional elections.

Why is this? Global changes often lead to global challenges, and sometimes to global crises. This means a lot of complexity. Those who are in charge are responsible for properly explaining this complexity. If we don’t assume this responsibility, simple political messages may trump complex ones. And there is no doubt that politics at the European level are complex. Just think of the legislative process behind the new Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – a directive that sets rules for firms to mitigate their negative impact on human rights and the environment. Or the slow progress that has been made regarding the capital markets union – a topic I will return to later.

However, as the current major challenges are global in nature, national responses alone will not resolve them. Action is needed on a global scale. Take the pandemic, for example. Overcoming this required unprecedented vaccine research, large-scale production and global distribution. Or consider the climate crisis. While Germany can lead by example in terms of decarbonising its economy, it cannot solve the climate crisis alone. As for European countries, this means that we have to work on European responses to the current challenges. This holds true for Germany, too – despite it being one of the largest economies in the world. Germany should see itself as part of a wider European team – a team that can provide greater stability given the current geopolitical risks. Take the increasing global trade restrictions, for example. Between the two main global players, the United States and China, only a unified European approach stands a chance of defending European interests. This view is shared by almost three-quarters of Europeans surveyed at the beginning of this year.¹

2 Europe is not a weak spot – it is a source of strength

It is true that open democratic societies tend to have complex and cumbersome decision-making processes. The more fragmented the political landscape, the more difficult it becomes. This already holds for the national level – as can currently be seen in the case of France and Germany. At the European level, complexity is even greater. There, agreeing on a compromise is like an art in itself. However, democratic decision-making processes have one great benefit. They integrate the diverse interests and preferences of the people.

In fact, a significant majority of EU citizens are satisfied with the way democracy works in the EU.² And the share of people who have a positive image of Europe is nearly twice as big as the share of people who have a negative one.³ This might well reflect an observation made by the Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset at the beginning of the last century. He noted that four-fifths of our intellectual property stem from our common European heritage.⁴ People seem to have a good understanding of what “European” means: the common ground of our liberal, democratic societies and the intellectual achievements we have made.

Once we realise these strengths of Europe, we can use them to move forward, to manage the changes I mentioned at the outset of my speech. Europe does not have an analytical deficit, but a deficit in taking action. For example: A deeper single market could help seize the opportunities of digitalisation more fully. And a unified European approach to decarbonisation could serve as an example and help the formation of larger climate clubs. These clubs derive mutual benefits from sharing the costs of producing less CO2-emissions. The members of such a voluntary club have incentives to adhere to its rules as long as the gains from the club are sufficiently large.⁵

3 What it will take to move forward

And what will it take to move forward? As President of the Bundesbank and as a member of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank, I am doing all I can within my remit. First and foremost, I am striving to restore price stability. This is because price stability is a crucial requirement for economic development and for the welfare of our societies. And I am also supporting measures that help Europe to act. It is in this context that I return to the topic of the capital markets union. The capital markets union can be an important means of providing companies with the necessary funding to manage change. This includes funding for new scientific knowledge and for innovations to help us thrive in our future environment. Europe is relatively good at research.⁶ And research is a crucial basis for innovation. However, a lack of available capital often prevents young innovative companies from growing. A key reason is that capital markets in Europe are still highly fragmented and rather underdeveloped compared to those in the United States, for example. Although market structures are not fully comparable, venture capital investment may serve as an example here. Relative to GDP, its size in European countries is less than one-tenth the size in the US.⁷ A European capital markets union would give firms better access to risk capital in Europe – notably young firms in their start-up and scale-up phase, and it would provide better exit options. By mobilising more private capital, the capital markets union could improve opportunities for economic growth. And it could foster much needed investments in Europe’s digital and sustainability transformation.

It is a real challenge to make progress at the European level and in the 27 Member States on the legal initiatives necessary to realise the capital markets union. But if we agree that the changes we see are global in nature, then we should not try to deal with them at the national level. We should strive for multilateral solutions. Here in Europe, the European Union provides a wonderful opportunity to find common approaches that many around the world can subsequently gather behind.

I am optimistic that the new European Commission will build momentum to move forward – not least with respect to the capital markets union, which was recently given fresh impetus by Member States’ political leaders. We have the potential to rejuvenate the European idea. A thriving research and innovation ecosystem will support that goal – with stable prices, sufficient financing opportunities and steady growth. Let us all do what we can to strengthen Europe at the current juncture.

MIL OSI Global Banks –

September 29, 2024
MIL-OSI China: France’s new gov’t revealed despite left-wing winning legislatives

Source: China State Council Information Office

French Prime Minister Michel Barnier announced on Saturday evening the formation of his government with 39 members coming from center and right-wing parties.

Among the 17 ministers, seven come from President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist alliance and three from Barnier’s conservative party The Republicans (Les Republicains).

Jean-Noel Barrot was nominated to replace Stephane Sejourne as Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs.

The 41-year-old Barrot was an economist and served as Minister Delegate for Europe in the former government.

Bruno Retailleau was appointed to be the Minister of Interior, which the French daily Le Figaro considered as a “symbol of firmness” to restore public order in France.

Retailleau, a member of the Barnier’s party, promised, on his social media platform X account, to “restore order to ensure harmony” and reaffirmed his support for the police.

The position of Minister of Economy and Finance was given to Antoine Armand who is only 33 years old.

He now has to help Barnier submit France’s 2025 budget draft bill to the National Assembly while trying to keep France’s debt under control as mandated by the European Union.

However, the list of members of the new government lacks candidates from the left-wing and far-ring wing parties, two relative winners of the snap legislative elections.

Barnier’s government immediately received criticism from left-wing parties. The leader of the Socialist Party Olivier Faure denounced Barnier’s decision to form a center-right government, saying that his decision “gives the finger” to democracy.

Leader of the far-left-wing party, La France Insoumise, the main party of the left-wing parties alliance during the latest legislative elections, Jean-Luc Melanchon, said that the government was formed with “losers of the legislative elections.”

The government “has neither legitimacy nor a future. It will be necessary to get rid of it as soon as possible,” he said on his X account.

The left-wing parties already vowed to launch a vote of no confidence against the government in the National Assembly where they do not hold an absolute majority. They need to count on the far-right wing party, the National Rally’s support.

As for the far-ring wing party, the National Rally (RN), its former leader Marine Le Pen expressed her disappointment over the new government.

On her X account, she said that Barnier’s government was “transitional” and called for a “major change.”

For her, the government announced on Saturday evening was rather a reshuffled former government than a newly formed one.

Macron nominated on Sept. 5 Barnier, former Brexit negotiator, as the new prime minister.

Barnier has announced that he intended to address “the challenges, the anger, the suffering, and the sense of abandonment and injustice” that the country is currently experiencing.

After forming a government, Barnier’s urgent mission now remains to complete a draft budget for 2025 before Oct. 1 and submit it for voting in the National Assembly.

MIL OSI China News –

September 29, 2024
MIL-OSI China: France’s new center-right gov’t revealed

Source: China State Council Information Office 3

French Prime Minister Michel Barnier announced on Saturday evening the formation of his government with 39 members coming from center and right-wing parties.

Among the 17 ministers, seven come from President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist alliance and three from Barnier’s conservative party The Republicans (Les Republicains).

Jean-Noel Barrot was nominated to replace Stephane Sejourne as Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs.

The 41-year-old Barrot was an economist and served as Minister Delegate for Europe in the former government.

Bruno Retailleau was appointed to be the Minister of Interior, which the French daily Le Figaro considered as a “symbol of firmness” to restore public order in France.

Retailleau, a member of the Barnier’s party, promised, on his social media platform X account, to “restore order to ensure harmony” and reaffirmed his support for the police.

The position of Minister of Economy and Finance was given to Antoine Armand who is only 33 years old.

He now has to help Barnier submit France’s 2025 budget draft bill to the National Assembly while trying to keep France’s debt under control as mandated by the European Union.

However, the list of members of the new government lacks candidates from the left-wing and far-ring wing parties, two relative winners of the snap legislative elections.

Barnier’s government immediately received criticism from left-wing parties. The leader of the Socialist Party Olivier Faure denounced Barnier’s decision to form a center-right government, saying that his decision “gives the finger” to democracy.

Leader of the far-left-wing party, La France Insoumise, the main party of the left-wing parties alliance during the latest legislative elections, Jean-Luc Melanchon, said that the government was formed with “losers of the legislative elections.”

The government “has neither legitimacy nor a future. It will be necessary to get rid of it as soon as possible,” he said on his X account.

The left-wing parties already vowed to launch a vote of no confidence against the government in the National Assembly where they do not hold an absolute majority. They need to count on the far-right wing party, the National Rally’s support.

As for the far-ring wing party, the National Rally (RN), its former leader Marine Le Pen expressed her disappointment over the new government.

On her X account, she said that Barnier’s government was “transitional” and called for a “major change.”

For her, the government announced on Saturday evening was rather a reshuffled former government than a newly formed one.

Macron nominated on Sept. 5 Barnier, former Brexit negotiator, as the new prime minister.

Barnier has announced that he intended to address “the challenges, the anger, the suffering, and the sense of abandonment and injustice” that the country is currently experiencing.

After forming a government, Barnier’s urgent mission now remains to complete a draft budget for 2025 before Oct. 1 and submit it for voting in the National Assembly.

MIL OSI China News –

September 29, 2024
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: British beetroot growers to put down roots in US market
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 2

Food and farming businesses to benefit from new export access to US
The government has delivered a significant early victory for British farmers, securing access to the US market for UK beetroot growers.

Following extensive talks between the two Governments and trade representatives, this will open new opportunities for British farmers by increasing export opportunities and raising the profile of British beetroot in international markets – and is a springboard to grow the economy and expand UK trade relationships post-Brexit.

Daniel Zeichner met with his US counterpart, Secretary Vilsack at the G7 Ministers’ Meeting on Agriculture today to celebrate the milestone.

For the US, this will allow their processors to diversify their supply to satisfy demand for high-quality beetroot outside the US growing season, giving American consumers to access beetroot all year round from world-leading producers in the UK.

Industry estimates this new access will be worth approximately £150,000 per year in increased exports, with groups such as the NFU recently voicing their desire for the barrier to be resolved to allow British producers to benefit from the enormous potential of the US market, building on the recent successes of UK lamb in the US.

Minister for Food Security, Daniel Zeichner said:

This Government was elected on a mandate to support our farmers in trade deals – that is exactly what we are delivering.

This milestone marks a significant step forward for our beetroot farmers.

But this is only the start – over the coming weeks and months I will work tirelessly to back our British farmers and get our food exports moving again.

NFU President Tom Bradshaw said:

It is great news that after many years of campaigning, British beetroot growers will have access to the market in the United States for the first time. Being able to access the US market, supplementing local production, will help to meet rising consumer demand for this healthy, nutritional crop, creating genuine growth opportunities for farmers and growers in the UK.

I am especially delighted that this announcement comes days after we returned from the US where we were able to make the case for UK beetroot directly to government officials. Industry collaboration with government and especially with the UK’s agri-food attaché based in Washington has been key to resolving this issue.

It shows the type of wins we’re able to achieve with the UK’s expanded network of agriculture attachés following a number of years of campaigning by the NFU for the creation of these positions. Long may the collaboration continue so British farmers and growers can expand into further markets and increase sales of great British food overseas.

British businesses such as G’s Fresh will directly benefit from the opportunity to showcase their premium produce and grow their business in the US.

Graham Forber, Beetroot Product Director for G’s:

I would like to thank all involved in the assistance given to support our Love Beets beetroot development in the USA, in securing permission to import UK Beetroot. This will assist in our development and growth in processing beetroot in New York State while strengthening our supply across the USA.

I would like to thank all the parties who helped with this and particularly the support of the UK’s Agriculture Attaché at the British Embassy in Washington DC.

Defra’s Agri-food attaché in the US was key to delivering this win for the UK, building on the strong relationship between the UK and US. Defra’s technical experts and global network of 16 agri-food attachés are driving sterling progress to remove non-tariff barriers to exports of high-quality UK food and drink, which are worth £24 billion per year.

Defra will work closely with UK beetroot growers and relevant industry bodies to ensure a smooth transition into the US market.

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 28 September 2024
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
September 29, 2024
MIL-OSI Global: UK election: Reform and Green members campaigned more online – but pounded the pavements less

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tim Bale, Professor of Politics, Queen Mary University of London

It’s party conference season in Britain, a chance for members to meet and talk through their successes and failures from the election campaign – and start talking strategy for the next.

Perhaps inevitably after it suffered such a crushing defeat and the resignation of its leader, the Conservative party conference in Birmingham risks taking on the air of a wake. Quite a contrast, then, with the Lib Dem bash down in Brighton, which, complete with jet skis and beach volleyball, was very much a celebratory affair.

Admittedly, Labour’s get-together in Liverpool, plagued as it was by newspaper stories about supposedly dodgy donations and the row over winter fuel allowances, wasn’t quite as upbeat as one might expect from a party that has just won a sizeable majority.

Whatever the outcome, many (though by no means all) members of all the parties worked hard to help deliver MPs to parliament. True, the evidence that campaigning by party members makes much of a difference to election results is hardly overwhelming.

But it can obviously make a difference in the closest of constituency contests. Examples in 2024 would surely include Hendon, won by Labour by just 15 votes, Basildon and Billericay, won by the Tories by 20, South Basildon and East Thurrock, won by Reform by 98, and even Ely and East Cambridgeshire, won by the Lib Dems by 495.

The party members project, run out of Queen Mary University of London and Sussex University, has been surveying party members about their activities after every election since 2015 and has just completed the 2024 exercise. And it appears that, following a decline in election campaigning in 2017 and 2019, there was a slight uptick overall this time round.

A simple way of looking at this is to note the proportion of respondents who told us they’d spent no time at all campaigning for their party (see Table 1). This rose considerably in 2017 and even more so in 2019 but dropped noticeably this year, suggesting the grassroots are getting a little more active, even if they’re still spending way less time campaigning for their parties than they were a decade ago.

Table 1: Percentage of party members saying they spent no time campaigning during the 2024 general election:

Party members who didn’t campaign. NB: Figures in the Reform column cover Reform in 2024, UKIP in 2015 and 2017 and the Brexit Party in 2019.
Party Members Project, CC BY-ND

However, the uptick was due largely to the time put in by members of the smaller parties rather than by those belonging to the Conservatives or Labour – although it should be said that members almost certainly tend to overestimate the time they put in.

Indeed, worryingly for Keir Starmer, Labour members actually appear to have been no more active (and in some respects perhaps somewhat less active) than they were five years ago. This is possibly owing to the departure of many of those fired up by Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership in 2017 and 2019.

On the other hand, if we dig into the type of activities members got involved in, a slightly different picture emerges. Members of the smaller parties may be putting in the work, but they’re doing it from the comfort of their homes rather than pounding the pavements.

If we exclude the admittedly large number of party members who told us they either did nothing for their party or just hit “don’t know”, a whopping 71% of Reform members and 67% of Green members who were active said they spent time campaigning on social media in 2024. Just 45% of Conservative members who had done at least something for their party during the campaign said the same.

However, Reform and to some extent Green members too, were less likely than members of the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties to do some of what, in the jargon, is known as high-intensity activity – the stuff that involves direct contact with voters (or at least their letterboxes).

Table 2: What active party members got up to in the 2024 election campaign (percentages):

What members got up to.
Party Members Project, CC BY-ND

Interestingly, the members of the “old” parties appear to have done less on social media than they did in 2019. Instead they put their efforts into activities that, research suggests, do sometimes make a difference, such as leafleting. The Lib Dems (as ever) emerged as the champions when it came to this activity, with 59% of members who did something for the party during the election stuffing campaign literature through British households’ letterboxes. Whether it got read on its journey from front door to recycling bin, of course, is another matter.

But what also comes through strongly is that, worryingly for whoever takes over as leader from Rishi Sunak, Conservative members seem to be lagging further and further behind their main rivals – Labour and (especially) the Lib Dems – on campaign activities overall (see Table 3).

Table 3: Average number of activities (out of a total of nine) done by all members of each party during the 2024 general election campaign:

Lib Dems come out on top for average number of activities.
Party Members Project, CC BY-ND

Now, nobody would argue, of course, that this was the main reason the Conservatives lost the election so badly. Nor should anyone imagine that simply recruiting and enthusing more members – something each of the candidates vying to become Tory leader has vowed to do – will rapidly reverse the epic defeat the party suffered this summer. But it certainly wouldn’t do it any harm in the long term.

After all, the Tories almost certainly have a very long and very hard road ahead of them in opposition. Persuading more people to join the party, and encouraging as many of those who do join to get out “on the doorstep” (or even just to go online if that’s all they feel up to), might not make that road much shorter. But it might make it feel just that little bit easier.

The Party Membership Project received Talent and Stabilization funding from Research England, via QMUL, for this survey research.

Paul Webb has previously received funding from the ESRC to conduct research on political parties.

Stavroula Chrona does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. UK election: Reform and Green members campaigned more online – but pounded the pavements less – https://theconversation.com/uk-election-reform-and-green-members-campaigned-more-online-but-pounded-the-pavements-less-239570

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

September 29, 2024