The background:

Under Prime Minister Gordon Brown and previously Tony Blair (for whom Brown was finance minister – the Chancellor of the Exchequer), the Labour Government has been in power since 1997. This month, Prime Minister Brown, with his term nearly up, called an election for 6th May. As Election Day approaches, many independent commentators are now noting the achievements, or otherwise, of the Labour Government.

As this is a space blog, here we will be examining what their record is on space and related areas and what proposals other parties have. Sadly, space has not been directly mentioned in any of the manifestos of the main parties. This is not good news. Generally parties only like to put ‘good things’, e.g. spending increases, etc., in their manifestos. However, even if space had been mentioned, it has to be said that that Manifesto commitments are not guarantees (witness Labour’s previous broken manifesto promise to hold a Referendum over further European integration).
 

The Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, (Labour Party), David Cameron (the Conservative Party) and Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrats). One of these men may be Prime Minister after 6th May, but what will their policies mean for space? Courtesy: www.pitchcoach.co.uk

The Labour Party’s record on Space:

While this writer has long criticised the Labour Government on many things, especially on its record on promoting the ‘surveillance state’ and for limiting civil liberties, this writer has had to praise Labour on its belatedly good attitudes towards the space sector. Having ignored it for much of its administration’s rule, a few years ago the Labour Government suddenly appeared to gain an interest. Then last year the government ran a consultation with experts from the industry and from this the administration came to the conclusion that Britain was actually not only good at the high tech activity of building and operating spacecraft but also in financing and insuring them.


As a result of the above, on 1st April, the Labour Government set up a new British Space agency called UKSA – UK Space Agency, which despite its botched name and logo, does have support across the political divide, but the real problem was money. For while the enthusiasm for space within the British government was there, the state of the public finances meant that there could be no more new money for UK space spending. 
 

The government, in the guise of science minister Lord Drayson, also noted that manned spaceflight would also be good to encourage school children and even hinted that he would like a British astronaut to one day walk on the Moon. While that plan was put back by the demise of NASA’s Project Constellation, the European Space Agency even invited one Brit to become an astronaut despite the fact that the UK puts no money into that programme.

Having seen the achievements of China and India in the field, and despite their record of cancelling Britain’s own launcher programme in the early 1970s, there was even enthusiasm about supporting new launch vehicles including Reaction Engines Limited’s Skylon orbital space plane and Virgin Galactic’s suborbital tourism space plane.
 

With respect to international projects, while it remains committed to some European Space Agency unmanned exploration, telecommunications and Earth science projects, it wisely stayed out of the very expensive International Space Station (ISS) programme and has, until very recently, only had a jaundiced view of manned spaceflight. That said, now the ISS is finally built many in Britain are becoming envious of other countries’ ability to send astronauts there.
 

While being initially a detractor of the Galileo project for a navigation system (they did not see the need for a new GPS), the government came on board especially when it tied in with their own long term plans to roll out a nationwide satellite controlled road charging system similar to London’s congestion charge. That said, and knowing it is an electoral liability in a tightly fought election, theLabour Party has ruled out introducing it during the next parliament.
 

On the military space front, while Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts have been criticised as being poor value with respect to hospital and school building construction, one PFI contract that did go well was for Britain’s military Skynet satellite system. In it, the risk was transferred to Paradigm Secure Communications (an offshoot of Astrium) in return for a guarantee of full access to these satellite services by the Ministry of Defence. The Labour Party remains in favour of replacing the nuclear armed Trident submarine launched ballistic missile system with a new version.

Labour’s future space plans:

With respect to Labour’s future space policy, we might expect more of the same. Labour’s manifesto is vague on the subject of space and makes no direct reference to it. In the Labour Party’s manifesto it states:“We are committed to a ring-fenced science budget in the next spending review. To help us do better in turning research outputs into innovation, we will provide focused investment for Technology and Innovation Centres, developing technologies where the UK has world-leading expertise.”  As such it realises that ‘hi tech’ is the one area of manufacturing that Britain can genuinely compete, the party’s manifesto does state that it will encourage science and innovation (and presumably space).
 

The Conservative Party’s Plans for Space
 

It has to be said that the Conservative Party’s plans for space are even vaguer in its manifesto than those of the Labour Party. In fact, while there are references to green technologies, there is no direct reference to space technology. That said, the Conservative Party promises "a multi-year Science and Research Budget to provide a stable investment climate for Research Councils". The manifesto also states that a Conservative government will encourage science and engineering via the school examination system and encourage apprenticeships in schools and at employers. 
 

The Conservative Party, while concentrating on society and community action, has also wisely worked out that it is only by energising the economy that it can increase spending on good works in the future. As such, the Conservative Party is more determined to give industry friendly taxation and regulatory policies to spark a revival in enterprise and business. This should eventually be good for the space industry and would eventually provide more funding for it. But in the short term there will not be any significant public spending increases as cuts are more likely and any surpluses are likely to be used for economy stimulating tax cuts instead. At this point, while they will keep the UK Space Agency (UKSA) – though hopefully they will rename it - one worries that they may be even tempted to make cuts to the science and research (and space) budget.
 

This would be a mistake given that space is already a winner and will provide genuine prosperity for the nation in the long run. In fact, in some technologies, for example in air breathing rocket engines, Britain leads the world. (Note that the writer is a small shareholder in Reaction Engines Limited currently developing air breathing rocket engines). In fact, while real term cuts are likely via a ‘spending freeze’, dramatic cuts are not.
 

With respect to military space systems, while it may dismantle those Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts in other sectors that are deemed to be not working (e.g. in school, hospital and underground train construction projects), the Conservative party is expected to continue with the PFI contract with Paradigm for Skynet military satellite communications. The Conservative Party also remains in favour of replacing the nuclear armed Trident submarine launched ballistic missile system with a new version.

Conservative support for the Galileo navigation satellite system is likely to continue, not least because the British based EADS subsidiary Surrey Satellite Technology Limited was a major beneficiary as a junior partner of a recent construction contract. However, there will be no moves to use it for road taxation as, unlike Labour and the Liberal Democrats, they have never been in favour of it. 
 

We also expect an eventual commitment to getting a British astronaut corps started as part of NASA’s future programme – though the timing of this depends on NASA’s plans and any delay at that end would, given the financial strictures, actually be welcomed. There is a fit here between a manned space programme and the Conservative educational agenda of encouraging the study of science and mathematics by school children.
 

Liberal Democrat Space Plans:

While the Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg, gained praise for his performance in television debates between the leaders and while the party’s manifesto was praised for its clarity, directness financial detail (even if some critics did not believe their assumptions) sadly there has been no direct reference to space during their campaign. Nevertheless, in the manifesto the Liberal Democratic Party promises to raise science and technology spending; although, honestly, they also note that initially this will not be possible due to financial limitations. 
 

The LibDems are pro-Europe and pro-environment and hence will be in favour of continuing UK involvement in Galileo and especially in the ESA’s environmental monitoring programmes.
While wishing to limit government surveillance powers and CCTV use, the Liberal Democrats state that they will prepare for road charging (presumably using Galileo navigation satellite systems) albeit that it would not be introduced until a second parliament. Manned spaceflight is again likely to be encouraged probably as part of ESA’s programme rather than NASA’s, as probably will be British launch technology developments. 
 

With respect to space and nuclear defence, while there are cost/effectiveness doubts about renewing the submarine launched Trident missile system in all the major parties (even though Labour and the Conservative parties officially remain in favour of it) as the parties note this and moves for multinational disarmament, only the Liberal Democrat manifesto rules out an immediate commitment to a ‘like for like’ replacement of the system. In the meantime, they plan to examine whether cheaper cruise missiles could do the job. Likewise, the Liberal Democrats are the most willing of the major parties to distance themselves from the U.S. defence and foreign policy including the fielding of a European-based ballistic missile interceptor system and any of its space-based tracking elements. Although strongly critical of the Private Finance Initiative contracts overall, the UK military Skynet contract with Paradigm is likely to continue under any Liberal Democrat administration. 

While it is unlikely that the Liberal Democrats will hold power directly, there is the very real possibility (say, in the event of a ‘hung’ parliament where no one party has an absolute majority) that it may be involved in a power sharing alliance so their views should not be discounted as they may be enacted in some form.
 

The other political parties’ views of Space: 
 

The UK Independence Party (UKIP), despite wanting to withdraw Britain from the European Union (EU), is unlikely to want to end ties with the European Space Agency (ESA). That said, given that Galileo is a joint ESA/EU project, UKIP will probably want to withdraw from this venture. 

The Scottish Nationalist Party and the Welsh nationalists wish to withdraw Scotland and Wales respectively from the Union (via referendum). If this happens, then as newly independent countries, they will probably want to have their own respective independent space agencies, albeit while maintaining an involvement with the European Space Agency (ESA) for multinational research.
The Green Party, in being very environmentalist, is likely to be very much in favour of multinational environmental monitoring space missions. All three of the above minior parties are in favour of nuclear disarmament.  Finally, while expressing no view over space research, the strongly anti-immigration stance of the British National Party (BNP) means that if they ever reach power, they will demand that all aliens go home. J
 

Analysis and advice on which to choose:
 

All the main parties (and even some of the minor ones) have good points in their policies and talented individuals in their teams. While the main parties have broadly similar plans with respect to space policy, there are some small but significant differences between the three.
 

These differences are mainly over items such as satellite-based road charging (Labour and LibDems are broadly in favour), maintaining a nuclear-armed long range missiles (all three major parties are currently in favour of nuclear deterrence though the LibDems want a cheaper system than Trident), and using state surveillance against the people (all will probably continue to use this but the LibDems and Conservatives have stronger civil liberties safeguards).
 

However whichever party gets into power, the current financial difficulties means that there will be painful public spending cuts to come. Some fear that an incoming government may be tempted to make spending cuts not only in inefficient state run public services, but also in science, innovation and space as well. This, of course, will be short sighted. The space sector is a proven winner for Britain and any cuts now will probably damage the sector’s near term prospects. We note here that previous governments have a poor track record in making ill-thought out cuts to science budgets, even if they have a better record on supporting aerospace. 
 

Our final note:

It was Bill Clinton who once said during his successful U.S. Presidential election campaign in 1992: “It’s the economy stupid!” In other words, a country needs a strong economy and good tax revenues to allow a government to do anything – including maintaining spending on space.
However, while space is currently deemed as a luxury by the public, even if it is actually a source of long term revenue and enterprise, the public usually want the basics ahead of it. That is, they want: a strong economy and prosperity, good public services and low taxes, safety and security, freedom and privacy. Thus, while neither Ascend nor its space team will tell you directly how to vote, we do advise to give your support to the party which you think will be best at giving you all these…and hope that whichever party that wins will keep up the good work on space as well. For that is where the future lies.