AUKUS LOOKS TO BE GLOBAL BRITAIN’S FIRST SUCCESS STORY – THE THREE SEAS INITIATIVE (3SI) COULD BE THE SECOND ONE.

Selina Seesunkur November 10, 2021

By Filip Derewenda

While AUKUS is a key security instrument to maintain regional peace and stability, the Three Seas Initiative ensures European stability through trade and investment cooperation. If Global Britain wants to succeed in maintaining a stable rules-based international order, it ought to consider engaging with the Initiative.

The AUKUS security pact will see the United States and the United Kingdom assist Australia with developing and deploying nuclear-powered submarines. The strong criticism from our French allies notwithstanding, AUKUS is the first major post-Brexit foreign policy victory. Global Britain has created a new avenue for transatlantic cooperation and stronger ties with Australia through a collaborative approach to international stability. However, plenty is yet to be done to build a democratic bulwark against authoritarian expansionism.

While security cooperation is a key component in maintaining stability in the rules-based international order, trade and investment cooperation is an equally important tool. Earlier this month, I contributed to a 10-page report on the Three Seas Initiative (3SI) and the Opportunities for Global Britain, which outlined the mechanisms of the 3SI and highlighted the exceptional political and economic transformation of Central and Eastern Europe. Most importantly, the report also discussed the geopolitical competition currently taking place in the region and demonstrated the 3SI’s ability to act as a strategic counterforce to the growing challenges.

The Three Seas Initiative is an economic platform that aims to intensify regional cooperation through infrastructure, energy, and digital interconnectivity projects. The twelve founding members of the initiative are Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Germany, the United States, and the European Commission are the Initiative’s official partners. Since its inception in 2016, the 3SI has hosted over 5 intergovernmental summits and has established a rapidly growing 3SI Investment Fund to attract international private and public sector capital, which includes Washington as one of its contributors.

As unpacked in the aforementioned report, the 3SI’s success is inextricably linked with the region’s ability to counter Moscow’s growing energy dominance and offers Central and Eastern Europe, the fastest growing European economic region, an alternative to Beijing’s ‘17+1’ investment platform. However, despite its quick development since 2016, the 3SI needs significant political and economic support in order to fulfil its full potential. Consequently, in cooperation with the Initiative’s official partners, many other international players such as Japan have expressed their interest in engaging with the Three Seas Initiative and its institutions.

Global Britain, alongside its recent success in security cooperation, should consider following its closest allies in establishing a new avenue for trade and investment cooperation via the 3SI. A UK-backed 3SI would not only open the British public and private sector to over 157 infrastructure, energy, and digital interconnectivity projects, but would most importantly ensure that stability and prosperity are maintained on the Old Continent.

I believe that discussions around British foreign policy in the context of Central and Eastern Europe are quite scarce in mainstream media, thus I believe this article provides the readers with a new perspective of post-Brexit Britain and educated them about the region more generally.

The full report on the Three Seas Initiative and the Opportunities for Global Britain can be found here - https://emerging-europe.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Report-on-the-Three-Seas-Initiative.pdf

Related Articles

BRITAIN ON THE BRINK?

IS THE WORLD WAKING UP TO CHINA?

THE WAR ON CARS AND THE IMPACT ON THE VULNERABLE

Selina Seesunkur November 3, 2021

By James Hockney

The Mayor’s Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) expansion and his support for the implementation of the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTN) initiative, indicate that he is targeting car users. While Labour like to portray themselves as defenders of the most vulnerable, time and again the opposite could be said.

We can already see the impact that the ULEZ policy, the expansion of which comes into force on October 25th, will have on residents in our community.

For those in a non-compliant, older vehicle, they will need to pay £12.50 each day they need to cross over the A406 to go to our local hospital, North Middlesex. This is also before you take other costs into consideration, because for many, Enfield’s LTNs have increased their journey time to the hospital. It is the most vulnerable that are likely to be making regular trips there too, so £12.50 each day will soon start to mount up.

There is a grace period available for those with a vehicle registered with a disabled tax class or a disabled passenger vehicles tax class, but these exemptions will only apply until 2025, and no further support is being offered to help those owners find alternative transport.

Concerns have also been raised that the limited exemptions mean that many disabled people, and their associated carers and others, will be forced to pay the £12.50-per-day charge. For many people with a disability, getting on a bus is not an option, and this is where Mayor Khan has fundamentally misunderstood the consequences of his policy to expand the ULEZ.

To make matters worse though, both policies will impact the most vulnerable in society, and will actually do very little to tackle climate change. In fact, the LTNs in Enfield will- in all likelihood- make the situation worse.

Transport for All’s Pave The Way report from the start of this year, which examined the impact of all Low Traffic Neighbourhood Schemes on disabled people, is very significant for example. It highlighted that 72% of participants reported issues with how changes have been communicated, with 77% of participants reporting an increase in journey times. The group also identified a common theme of disabled people feeling a great sense of injustice and unfairness at LTN measures, because there is such a distinct lack of alternative options for transport. One respondent even asked why it should take them 20 minutes longer than everyone else because they could not use a bike.

Overall, Enfield Council’s implementation of the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods schemes is being felt by all corners of our community. In our recent, successful, by-election campaign in my ward of Bush Hill Park, it was one of the three issues we focused on, because it was constantly being mentioned on the doorstep.

We can also look at the impact on the local economy. While it may take time for any widespread challenges to filter through, we are already seeing instances of businesses losing clients because of the impact on local traffic, and other businesses who have decided not to locate in the vicinity of the LTNs because of their potential impact.

In Enfield, another significant impact will be on those businesses whose employees cross the A406, because they will be charged each day they make that journey.

When you think of small businesses carrying out deliveries, self-employed contractors and others for example, they are being faced with a decision between the daily charge, or an additional (likely expensive) cost to ensure they have a compliant vehicle.

It seems that Mayor Khan has buried his head in the sand over the impact of his ULEZ expansion. Transport for London had to suspend their scrappage schemes last summer due to high demand, but earlier this year the GLA Conservatives identified a plan to provide an additional £50 million of funding to reopen the schemes. It was estimated that the plan could have helped scrap more than 7,000 vehicles, and could have gone some way to supporting those who will be affected greatly by the expansion- the most vulnerable. This was, however, ignored by the Mayor.

Mayor Khan and Enfield Council should be taking an active interest in encouraging a switch towards more environmentally-friendly transport. In my own ward of Bush Hill Park, we currently have no electric charging points. Expanding the provision of electric charging points, both in my ward, across Enfield, and across London, would represent more of a ‘carrot’ approach. In contrast, Enfield Council is currently using unpopular and divisive measures - and the people who are impacted are often those who have less of a voice

Cllr James Hockney represents Bush Hill Park Ward on Enfield Council, and is an Executive Member of the Conservative Disability Group

Related Articles

A WAR OF WHEELS

IT’S TIME TO FALL BACK IN LOVE WITH OUR RAILWAYS

SUSTAINABLE LOGISTICS IS NO LONGER A LUXURY

FROM SURVIVING TO THRIVING: SOCIAL-MOBILITY MODELS IN UK’S BAME COMMUNITIES

Selina Seesunkur October 27, 2021

By Davida Ademuyiwa

The Covid pandemic has played a big role in exposing British social-economic inequalities. Black and ethnic minority communities were the worst affected, which clearly tells us that more needs to be done to address this problem.

According to Deloitte: “The UK has one of the poorest rates of social mobility in the developed world. This means that people born into low-income families, regardless of their talent, or their hard work, do not have the same access to opportunities as those born into more privileged circumstances.”

Awareness that the problem exists is a starting point. Education on how the inequity can be addressed would help orientate those impacted towards adopting the right mindset and choices that can help improve their life chances, moving them towards upward social mobility rather that experiencing downward mobility.

At the same time, government policy can remove obstacles preventing these people from accessing and engaging in the education system, becoming gainfully employed, starting and growing their own businesses, and getting on the housing ladder.

The Two-Pronged Effect of Emigration

Contrary to popular belief, not every immigrant to the UK comes for an economically better life. In many cases they can end up being worse off. Emigration can have a two-way effect on social mobility. In some cases, it means downward mobility for people well placed in their home society but had to leave due to conflict or other socio-political situations. Coming to the UK is known to be a leveller. Thus, you will find many black and ethnic minority (BAME) people of different socioeconomic statuses having to start at the lowest rungs of the social ladder.

Before anybody can go from striving to thriving economically, they would need a shift in their thinking. The same mindset that helps a community in survival mode is not the same one that would help them go to the next level and ascend the economic ladder. However, for various reasons many get stuck. Then again, wealth in BAME communities is not an individual achievement, it is often a family matter. Family members are known to have made great sacrifices to the individual’s achievement, therefore as they go up the socioeconomic ladder, they constantly have to reach back to help family members who are still steeped in the poor conditions they left behind, thus making the climb slower and more onerous.

The Education Social Mobility Model

Many see education as the key to becoming socially mobile. In the ‘60s we saw illiterate but industrious parents educating their children in order to help them climb the ladder. The UK saw an influx of BAME people from countries that had colonial ties with Britain, coming into the UK to be professionally educated and trained to become nurses, doctors, engineers, pharmacists, lecturers, architects etc. Many returned to their native countries after their education to join the emerging affluent class.

Following that model of social mobility worked for them, and so numerous immigrant parents place high value on education to ensure that their children achieve academically in pursuit of intergenerational social mobility.

One factor not often highlighted is the limited types of intelligences recognised and rewarded by the education and employment systems. The intelligence recognised by the education system often dictates how well a child can achieve. Traditional education and employment systems are geared towards measuring and rewarding only certain types of intelligences such as logical mathematical intelligence and scientific intelligence, to the detriment of others. However, life often rewards other forms of intelligence. Actors and actresses; musicians; entertainers and athletes; writers; TV broadcasters, and other talented people do well in life, becoming highly socially mobile in their lifetime.

The Business Social Mobility Model

Accessing to education does not necessarily mean success for some who are unable to complete their schooling. Many drop out and find themselves at the bottom rung of the ladder. Some find themselves hustling and living hand-to-mouth throughout their lives. Conversely, others develop entrepreneurial skills, finding opportunity, social networks, and funding that enables them to pull themselves out of a downward social mobility spiral. However, the majority are left to flounder. Thus, there is a need for an alternative system to help these people move beyond survival to thriving, that rewards those with talents outside the narrow scope of the education system.

Whilst there are pockets of more privileged BAME children and young people who do well in the educational system, more help is needed for those who do not so that they can build well-developed entrepreneurial acumen to build a business that will positively support and contribute to the British economy.

The Government occasionally implements schemes that provide this alternative, however, this alternative provision is often poorly planned, supported, and funded. These programs are often short-term with sporadic funding. The government needs to pay more attention to this, as a great number of people from BAME communities have used these schemes, for instance in the corner shop or kebab van economy, to access and achieve social mobility.

The sad thing for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds is that most of them do develop entrepreneurial skills, but for some it is on the wrong side of the law. For many of these young people, having their own disposable income is important due to poverty at home, so they become easy targets for criminal gangs and are easily drawn into crime, perpetuating the trend of downward social-mobility.

The Investment Social Mobility Model

Homeownership has always been an important marker for upward social mobility. It is seen as one of the quickest ways to build wealth.

The most socially upwardly mobile from BAME communities are those who have pursued investing in their own homes and have speedily gone on to grow their own property portfolios. Unfortunately, the drive to get on the social housing waiting list is a big deception that becomes an obstacle which prevents many BAME people from becoming socially mobile.

Margaret Thatcher's Right to Buy policies in the ‘80s enabled many in social housing to buy their own home, helping many who would not have otherwise been able to get on the housing ladder become upwardly mobile. According to The Guardian, “Home ownership grew from 55% of the population in 1980 to 64% in 1987. By the time Margaret Thatcher left office in 1990 it was 67%. 1.5 million council houses were sold by 1990, by 1995 it was 2.1 million.” Boris Johnson also has plans to help thousands of young people onto the property ladder and has vowed to pave the way for renters to become homeowners.

Whilst social housing has a place in sheltering the vulnerable, preventing homelessness, and helping people start out, homeownership is the key that often helps them gain social mobility traction.

In Conclusion

According to the Resolution Foundation, wealth gaps between different ethnic groups in Britain are large and likely to persist: “People of Black African ethnicity typically hold the lowest wealth (a median figure of £24,000 family wealth per adult), a total which amounts to less than one eighth of the typical wealth held by a person of White British ethnicity (£197,000 family wealth per adult). Those of Bangladeshi ethnicity typically hold just £31,000 family wealth per adult (median figure), while those with Mixed White and Black Caribbean ethnicity typically hold £41,800.”

These statistics look bleak.

Although many BAME people already employ the three social mobility models mentioned above, we need to see more from these communities adopting them if we want to see a cessation of intergenerational disadvantage.

We must educate the community to be intentional about becoming upwardly mobile. BAME people need shift how they think about economic issues that feed into the choices they make and inevitably help to perpetuate the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage rather than advantage.

With many BAME people living at the lowest rungs of the UK's socioeconomic ladder, intergenerational downward mobility is certainly not an option that the UK can entertain, as it comes with other vices that suck individuals, families, communities, and the nation into a further downward spiral; it perpetuates crime, such as the drug, gang, and the gun and knife culture which all have their own repercussions.

Some people in these communities are proactively taking responsibility for their own upward progress and continue to pull themselves up by the bootstraps as they climb the socioeconomic ladder. For the rest, early interventions, such as investment in the provision of financial and entrepreneurial education and efforts to assist and encourage the upward social mobility of this subsection of UK’s society is a must.