Uncorrected oral evidence: The relationship between the Government and the defence industry
Oral evidence, 1 September 2026.
Baroness Carberry of Muswell Hill
For example, how is BAE Systems managing its relationships with local colleges and schools? Is Team Barrow as an entity content to allow the company to get on with that, or is there local encouragement and local intervention? Is there any central government involvement in trying to ensure a steady flow of young people coming out of those institutions into apprenticeships at all levels?
Peter Anstiss
As I say, I cannot speak on behalf of BAE Systems, but obviously I have worked very closely with them and I can observe the progress that has been made and the active engagement that they make in just those areas. What I would like to do, if I may, is to give you a very tangible example of Team Barrow working with our partners to deliver fundamental change to achieve these aims. Literally within the shadow of the yard, there is a secondary school—it has seen over the years, as a result of the sort of troughs that I have referred to, an exodus of talent and so on—that has now been rejuvenated. New leadership has come in. Most recently, within the last couple of months—through Team Barrow, using funding from the Barrow Transformation Fund, working with the Baker Dearing Educational Trust—we have invested £1.7 million in the creation of a university technical college sleeve for that school, which will have an impact of attracting talent, both teaching and pupils. It will transform the syllabus. It will enable more of the kids who progress from the school to be eligible for apprenticeships and other roles within not just the shipyard but other sectors. We are expecting that, within one to two years, those changes will manifest themselves in a much greater local participation in applications for apprenticeships. I mentioned previously the Furness Education Trust, which has further education, schools and so on within its remit, and there is very close co-operation between industry and the trust. We are looking, for example, currently not just at direct support for the education components, but at things like a Barrow education and arts theatre, which could be both a small venue for the community but also primarily an education facility—to encourage people who aspire to go into the arts and culture sector and performing. Yes, there are a lot of interventions which we do on a daily basis, financially; and finally, we also channel the social value funding and the ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) support—the social responsibility agendas of many of the defence supply chain companies and others in the area, again in close association with BAE Systems. We encourage those companies to support investments in the community which have the same effect, using a percentage of some of the funds that they receive as a result of being involved in either the defence supply chain, the submarine yard infrastructure or perhaps offshore energy. It is an important part of what we do.
Lord Fuller
I was really interested in this. I used to lead a local authority myself, so this is familiar—and I was born and raised in Great Yarmouth.
Peter Anstiss
A coastal community.
Lord Fuller
For coastal communities, the aspirational points are very familiar to me. BAE Systems are driving this and they have their own commercial imperative, but you have got to support them. To what extent are you wholly reliant on funding from Government in all its guises to deliver your programme, or is there an idea that you might be able to put some sort of financing together? Funding is just writing the cheque; financing is putting the deal together. To what extent are you—your legal entity—and the council putting together a financing package that might be appropriate for wider investors? There is even the new mayoralty, which presumably is coming your way. Are you going to issue a Barrow bond, for example?
Peter Anstiss
First, the Barrow Transformation Fund, as it is known, is in effect central government funding through the MoD, and one or two other inputs from other parts of the innovation sector and education and healthcare and so on. But it sits at around £220 million over 10 years. Our aspiration is to use that as effectively seed funding, a sort of catalyst for giving confidence to other investors that this is a very real national endeavour. We have got firm footing for this. So my role has changed: in the last few months, I have moved from being the CEO with the leadership of the formation of Team Barrow, in its early stages at least, to now concentrating on the development of strategic partnerships and inward investment. What that means is that we are determined to get, just as you describe, funding from private sources. They could be major capital projects and programmes looking at infrastructure, whether that is improved rail connections, whether it is national health estates, whether it is a sports stadium, and so on. To address that, we have been dealing with the pension funds, the insurance companies, some associations like the Association of British Insurers, the National Wealth Fund, the British Business Bank and so on. There is a big pot that we are striving to achieve there. However, it is also important to recognise that many of the things we want to do are just not big enough to get the attention of such big organisations. We want small interventions which can be game-changing for the local community. So we are also working with the local mutual building societies, such as the Furness and the Cumberland, very closely and they are very supportive of what we are doing. I have already mentioned the use of social value funding from the defence supply chain and others to invest in the community. We are also looking at philanthropy, which is another area where Barrow has a great history. At the core of this partnership that I refer to are the three members I mentioned, but we have an enormous number of supporters. A major one locally is the Holker Estate Group—Lord Cavendish and his family. They are investing in social housing—further houses on a commercial basis for new homes for employees—but also have a history of making major contributions to the social infrastructure of Barrow and the surrounding area. My job is to do just that. It is to pitch Barrow and the opportunities, from huge infrastructure through to local social interventions that might benefit community groups, to complement the £200 million from central government. Lord Fuller: Is there any marriage value with Sellafield? Peter Anstiss: We work very closely with Britain’s energy coast. We work very closely with Sellafield in terms of our experiences. When we look at things such as the defence and energy coast rail upgrade, we connect very closely the nuclear waste requirements of the Sellafield organisations with those of Barrow. There is also how we look at the development of the royal port in Barrow, as it now is. How do we fully utilise that in support of the energy sector? A major infrastructure project under consideration is the geological disposal facility, a huge project off the coast of Cumbria, if that comes to fruition. “Yes” is the short answer to your question. We work very closely with all the other infrastructure demands of Cumbria. People who visit quickly realise that there is more to Cumbria than the Lake District National Park, important though that is. The industry around the coast is quite extraordinary and the community spirit that we experience in Barrow is quite exceptional. People pick that up when they live and work in the area. Q97 Lord Barber of Ainsdale: On getting investment into the town more widely, are there any changes that the Government could make that would support your efforts? You have talked about the fund, which is essentially central government funding, of £200 million or thereabouts over 10 years. Are there other things that Government could do to support your efforts to boost investment into Barrow? Does the relationship with defence and the centrality of defence to Barrow’s economy help or hinder getting wider investment? Peter Anstiss: The two points are intrinsically linked. What defence does and what Government can do best is give a level of assurance and a level of confidence—some predictability of demand such that private investors and other investors have the confidence to progress with projects in housing, town centre regeneration and so on. Defence is a real asset. The economy is so dependent on it that even with the early progress that we are making in diversification activities for the foreseeable future, the fortunes of Barrow and the surrounding area will be totally dependent on the fortunes of defence. It is very firmly an asset. It does condition how people live and work because of the security environment, the physical appearance, the dominant nature of the yard, the razor wire, the security environment, the high-vis jackets, the surveillance cameras and so on. It conditions daily life. We cannot play that down. That does affect some people, particularly those who do not aspire to careers in science and technology. However, overall that defence connection is a very important one. Our job is not to exploit it but to take full advantage of its potential. What else could Government do? The key thing, which I have already mentioned, is to provide the assurance of the demand side of the equation. It is very important when I am talking to potential investors, for example, in housing and infrastructure, that they understand that there will be, for the foreseeable future, a growth in the population, that we will have this mix of students needing campus environment for the university, apprentices, people relocating for long-term careers in the yard, offshore energy specialists, construction workers and so on. It is also important that they see that this demand is real and not vulnerable to a procurement decision which changes direction or withdraws support in a particular grant scheme for bringing empty buildings back to life and reuse, for example. We need consistency of commitment to get the private investment. That is the key role of Government. We are also very aware that the spotlight is on us a bit. We enjoy many visits and have a few coming up in the next week or two. Our job is to make sure that we put the message across that this is not just a one-way street—that for Government we are transforming the lives of citizens. We are addressing some of the inequalities that have arisen through decades of underinvestment. We are doing things which support the Government’s agenda. We are not just taking defence procurement money and using it for short-term benefits. We are putting in place long-term foundations for a very different economy and a very different Barrow-in-Furness. That is our objective. The Chair: Thank you very much. That is probably the statement that you would most have liked to finish this session with, a nice upbeat one. I thank you on behalf of the committee. This has been invaluable for our work and our thinking. I thank you for your time and for your early start this morning to get down from the beautiful area in which you live to the grime of London. Peter Anstiss: Thank you very much for the opportunity to contribute, and we would love to play host to you at some point to show you the fruits of our labours for us. The Chair: Thank you. That concludes this hearing.