Robert Webster

@LewisHamilton on pole - oldest pole sitter since Mario Andretti- fabulous to see!

This hurts to write (let’s call it tough love), but I believe that in full transparency, in advocating for EVs one must also acknowledge the downsides. My company leases a BYD Sealion (and other EV’s on the fleet) - on paper, it’s great value for money. A Chinese car @BYDCompany leased via @santanderuk But then we had an issue with a door harness - took the car to Hartwell Bracknell; they can’t fix the car - it’s been off the road 71 days chasing faults around the car. Santander don’t want to answer the phone (2.5hrs on hold today) and BYD are unhelpful with a car that has a seemly a catastrophic fault. The cars a lemon (and frankly so are the leasing company and the dealer), the question really is, are all their cars lemons or is this a one-off? Clearly BYD aren’t ready for scale in U.K. and don’t have the dealer back up you’d expect of a mass brand - so as much as I advocate for low cost EVs, my advice at least in the short term, is steer clear of the BYD! The same might be said of Santander leases and Hartwell dealers! I will of course update you on any progress!

John, the production figures are correct, but your interpretation omits the role of British management and successive UK governments, including the Thatcher government in which you served. I was at Rover from 1986 to 1991 and witnessed the effects of those government decisions directly. One example was the decision not to support lean-burn technology, but instead to bow to French and German pressure and adopt catalytic converters. That choice had important consequences for British automotive technology and competitiveness, and it illustrates why government policy cannot be left out of this discussion. British Leyland’s problems were already deeply entrenched before Thatcher came to office: chronic underinvestment, poor quality, weak productivity, industrial disputes and fragmented management. EEC membership did not create those problems. The wider manufacturing record also complicates your argument. Between 1973 and 1981, British manufacturing output fell by 18%, while manufacturing output in the rest of the EEC rose by 9%. That comparison does not prove that EEC membership benefited every country equally, but it does show that membership alone cannot explain Britain’s decline. If the EEC was responsible for destroying British manufacturing, why did our European partners perform so much better within the same trading bloc? The timing of Thatcher-era policy matters too. The 1980–82 recession caused severe damage to British manufacturing, while the government pursued a broader programme of restructuring, privatisation and reduced state support. British Leyland was progressively broken up and sold: Jaguar was privatised in 1984, the commercial vehicle operations were sold to Volvo in 1988, and Rover was later transferred to British Aerospace in 1988. These decisions did not cause all of BL’s earlier problems, but they shaped how the company’s decline was managed and what remained of the group. Nor does your argument explain what happened next. Nissan established its Sunderland plant in 1986, followed by Toyota and Honda investments in British manufacturing. Those companies were attracted by several factors, including Britain’s industrial reforms, access to a skilled workforce and, crucially, access to the wider European market through the EEC. The timeline therefore points to several interacting causes: British Leyland’s weaknesses predated Thatcher; the early-1980s recession intensified them; Thatcher-era policies accelerated restructuring and privatisation; and later Japanese investment demonstrated that Britain could still attract competitive manufacturing, partly because it provided a base within the European market. BL’s decline was consequently a failure of industrial competitiveness, management and policy—not simply a consequence of joining Europe. Given your own involvement in the Thatcher government, surely its industrial policies deserve at least as much scrutiny as Britain’s EEC membership?