The Tribune

By Peter Young

How compelling it was early on Saturday morning to watch the BBC TV coverage of an emergency debate in the House of Commons at Westminster about the steel industry in Britain. Given the time difference, it was a live transmission.

The exceptional action of calling MPs back from their Easter recess to push through emergency legislation to enable the government to intervene in a steel plant was described by the minister responsible as needed because the circumstances and timing were, indeed, exceptional.

This might be of some interest here on account of the recall procedure since, of course, the Westminster system of government is followed locally. It could also be relevant in the general context of President Trump’s trade war with China because the steel plant that the British government is stepping in to save is owned and run by a Chinese company.

Reportedly, such a recall during the course of a recess happens from time to time, but history shows that it is extremely rare. The exact number seems to be unclear but some say it has occurred only half a dozen times since 1948 after Parliament had sat on both a Saturday and Sunday on the outbreak of the Second World War in 1939.

The government initiated last weekend’s recall, which included the House of Lords having to sit in order to ensure that any emergency legislation could be passed. The Speaker agreed to the special session on the grounds that it was in the public interest for legislators to determine without delay whether immediate action was required to keep the steelworks open at a place called Scunthorpe in North Lincolnshire which is in eastern England. Such action was needed because of a threat by the Chinese owners to shut down the plant’s two blast furnaces. If carried out, say the experts, that would have ended primary steel production in the UK. This would not have been acceptable. But parliamentary authority would be required for government to intervene.

According to reports, Scunthorpe was the last plant in Britain capable of producing virgin steel which is the strongest type used in major construction projects including, among others, buildings, railways, the car industry and defence equipment. It is widely contended that steel made in Britain should be the backbone of the nation’s whole building industry. That is why the prime minister has said that such steel making is essential for the country’s future. It was a strategic national requirement. Therefore, controlling domestic production and protecting the jobs of workers in the industry was in the national interest.

The outcome of the debate was that, in a legislative sprint, the necessary draft authority was rushed through Parliament in a single day - including receipt of the required Royal Assent - to enable the UK government to assume control of the Scunthorpe plant together with British Steel as a whole. Taking such emergency powers duly prevented the Chinese owners from shutting down the furnaces. The government also made clear at the same time that its likely next step would be to nationalize this plant which employs some 2,700 people.

Meanwhile, it is noteworthy that British Steel has been losing money mainly because of soaring energy prices and environmental levies.

Saturday’s debate was well attended. It was spirited and of a surprisingly high standard with some excellent and knowledgeable contributions considering it had been held at such short notice, and it was all the more impressive for that. MPs seemed to be remarkably well prepared and informed in showing their mettle and some displayed unexpected debating skills. They had been let off the leash in discussing a draft bill that was more than likely going to receive support from both sides of the House.

The agreed overall conclusion was that public control of steel production is in Britain’s long-term interest. There will now surely be long and detailed discussions about the details of nationalisation, particularly the extent of powers given to ministers in running and controlling this vital industry.

This is not the time or place for a debate about the merits of privatisation and to which areas of industry and commerce it should apply. But many in Britain have argued consistently that public utilities providing services to the whole country should be placed directly under the domestic government’s control – and these latest developments will surely reignite discussion about how an industry like steel could have been owned and operated by people from another country -- in this case, China.

Mayhem in a troubled world

It is self-evident that much of importance internationally is happening at the moment, with news and information readily available to people around the world thanks to sophisticated and comprehensive communications; and one of the reasons is the non-stop activity of the new US president. The various crises around the world and the uncertainty they bring make it hard to decide what to focus on this week. So it might be useful to try to bring together various threads that seem to be interconnected.

The extraordinary saga of Trump’s tariffs that has been constantly changing makes it practically impossible for commentators to try to keep up with fast-moving developments. It is anyway the function of the news channels to provide a blow by blow account as they judge necessary.

But, amidst all the Trump “toing and froing”, it has been interesting that British prime minister Keir Starmer has stressed that his country is still optimistic about a UK-US free trade deal despite facing similar baseline tariffs as the EU and others in the world apart from China. This is because of the close relations the two countries already enjoy on so many other issues like, for example, defence, security and intelligence sharing.

Who can realistically predict Trump’s next moves? But, in the endless commentary in the UK press, one aspect of the issue caught my eye recently; namely, reported remarks by the director of SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of London) to the effect that, unwittingly, Trump may have done more than anyone else to further Xi Jinping’s international objectives, as the Chinese leader seeks to propel his country towards its quest to become a world superpower. Analysts contend that he is consistently attempting to undermine anything positive that the US has achieved through the rules-based international order since the end of the Second World War.

They argue that China’s global strategy has been to work whenever possible against the liberal international order which Trump seems to have abandoned. As such, one wonders whether the White House can really ignore in the longer term the US strategic policy over the years of engaging with the rest of the world. Incidentally, in the context of the whole controversy over tariffs, it is surprising to many observers how quickly the US/China relationship has deteriorated.

Following the Second World War, both Republicans and Democrats worked to embed US power in multilateral institutions to underpin a peaceful, just and prosperous world in order to facilitate international cooperation in dealing with global issues. But Trump is taking the US away from that long-held policy, and people fear that he will preside over the end of the international rules-based order.

Another issue about which there was a good deal of movement last week was Ukraine. As Trump has been calling on the Russians “to get moving” on a ceasefire, US envoy Steve Witkoff met Putin last week in St Petersburg, their third meeting this year, and the Kremlin described the talks as “productive”. But another disgraceful Russian bombing attack on civilians at the weekend - this time in the Ukrainian city of Sumy killing thirty-four people and injuring more than a hundred - has demonstrated once more Putin’s obstructionism about a peace deal. The Russians are evidently “dragging their feet” and the prospects of a ceasefire remain poor.

Commenting on this latest atrocity, President Zelensky is quoted as saying publicly that “only completely damaged scum can do something like this”. Reportedly, he has now invited Trump to visit Ukraine ahead of any deal with Russia to end the war.

Meanwhile, Ukraine’s European allies have pledged $24 billion in a new tranche of military support for the beleaguered nation. Defence ministers met last week in Brussels, with Germany and the UK in the lead, and the British minister said that this new pledge should send a strong signal to Moscow. Interestingly, it seems that these European countries are trying to fill the gap after Trump’s reordering of US priorities in relation to NATO.

At the same time as all this, it is reported that on Saturday the US held what were described as “constructive and positive” talks with Iran about its nuclear programme – and further meetings are anticipated.

Despite all the problems around the world, commentators are now saying that at least the leaders concerned are talking to one another. To many, the most important immediate issues are Ukraine and Gaza, which they hope that the US president in his unorthodox way will be able to resolve.

McIlroy’s moment

There was incredible drama on Sunday evening at the Masters golf championship at Augusta in Georgia. This is the first major championship of the year.

Rory McIlroy, the experienced and already hugely successful leading golf professional from Northern Ireland, finally came out on top. He won a sudden death play-off against his Ryder Cup colleague, Englishman Justin Rose, to win the only major title that had eluded him in his stellar career.

After the ebb and flow of play over four days he finally fulfilled his dream of winning all four of golf’s major championships in the world, thus becoming only the sixth golfer in history to achieve this outstanding feat. But it had been a tough battle that constantly fluctuated. For instance, he started the third day, Saturday, three strokes behind the then leader but was ahead going into the final day.

Watching the TV coverage over all four days, with fine weather throughout, it looked to me that the famous course was at its best and, of course, the maintenance at Augusta is of the highest quality throughout. Everything was so good that one UK sports writer got so carried away by it all that he described the experience of covering the Masters as going to heaven “before his time”.

Not only was McIlroy’s victory a wonderful climax to his own career but it will have been a boost for British sport as a whole as millions up and down the country will have been glued to their TV sets despite - with the time difference - the late hour. They will surely have congratulated him wholeheartedly on such a fine achievement.