The Space Economy (UK Engagement with Space Committee Report) Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Stowell of Beeston
Main Page: Baroness Stowell of Beeston (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Stowell of Beeston's debates with the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology
(3 weeks, 1 day ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, it was a great pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Shamash, and to serve alongside him and all the other very enthusiastic members of the space committee—and, indeed, to serve under the excellent chairmanship of the noble Baroness, Lady Ashton of Upholland. I congratulate her not just on her excellent introduction to this debate but on leading us to produce our report. I join her and other noble Lords in thanking the committee staff for their hard work and all those who gave evidence to us, both oral and written, throughout our inquiry.
If nothing else, the committee has done the House a considerable service in highlighting both the opportunities presented by the UK’s space economy and the risks of failing to seize them. As has already been mentioned by several noble Lords, the title of our report, Act Now or Lose Out, captures this challenge perfectly.
I welcome the growing recognition across government that space is now a strategic capability. Although our committee did not major on defence in the context of the UK space sector—perhaps to some mild frustration expressed by my noble friend Lord Lansley—it is worth nothing that the strategic defence review makes it clear that satellites are critical national infrastructure. We have already heard from others that satellites underpin our communications, navigation, financial services, energy networks and national defence. In the 21st century, sovereign satellite capability is no less important to our resilience than secure energy infrastructure or telecommunications.
My concern is not that the Government lack ambition when it comes to space but that they still lack focus. Strategy is about making choices. We cannot lead in every part of the space economy, so we must decide where Britain should build sovereign capability, where we should work with trusted allies and where we can rely on the commercial market.
For me—I do not think I am alone, although my noble friend Lady Mobarik may differ with me—one capability stands above all others: sovereign capability in satellites. Recent and ongoing conflicts have demonstrated beyond doubt the importance of satellite communications, positioning, intelligence and earth observation. It is no surprise, therefore, that the strategic defence review speaks of sovereign capability. However, sovereignty is not achieved by simply being an aspiration; it requires sustained investment and clear priorities. The previous Government’s intervention in OneWeb demonstrated that they understood the strategic importance of sovereign satellite capability—I note my noble friend Lord Willetts’ comment about the current Government’s reluctance to take advantage of their golden share—but the challenge remains of ensuring we build globally competitive British space companies here in the UK. That brings me to a subject on which I have spoken before: scaling British technology companies—the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, highlighted this.
I hope I have brought several things to the work of the space committee, but I think if there was one thing of value that I did bring it was what I had learned from chairing the Communications and Digital Committee, especially as the chair was so gracious as to acknowledge our work on AI large language models and scaling tech businesses. As she said, Britain is exceptionally good at creating innovative businesses, but we are much less successful at helping them become globally significant companies headquartered here. We celebrate the start-up but too often lose the scale-up. But that is no longer simply an economic weakness; in sectors such as AI, quantum and space, it is becoming a strategic vulnerability. If we cannot build companies of global scale, we will struggle to build sovereign capability.
So I welcome the Government’s greater emphasis on scale-ups in both the industrial strategy and the defence industrial strategy. It is particularly encouraging that defence procurement is increasingly seen as a means of helping innovative British companies grow. But strategies do not build companies; customers do. The Government have one of the most powerful tools available: their procurement power. By becoming an intelligent first customer for British space companies, they can create the demand and confidence that enable promising firms to scale, attract investment and remain British as they grow. If we want genuine sovereign capability in space, we must move beyond funding excellent research to building globally competitive businesses. That means patient capital, smarter procurement and, above all, clear national priorities.
So which space capabilities do the Government believe must be sovereign, which should be delivered through trusted allies, and which can safely be left to the commercial market? Until those choices are made explicit, we have an ambition for sovereignty but not yet a sufficiently prioritised strategy for delivering it. Britain begins this race with world-class science, outstanding engineers and innovative entrepreneurs. Our challenge is no longer to prove that we can innovate; it is to ensure that British innovation becomes British capability and that British capability becomes British industrial strength.