Making sure the green shoots don’t wither away

The UK may be in recovery, writes Scott Barnes, but how can we keep it that way?

Recent third quarter GDP figures for the UK showed a growth of 1.0 per cent, however when these figures were announced, many commentators were keen to point out that discounting this summer’s Olympic Games and Diamond Jubilee spending, the economy has remained stagnant year on year. Although this is a continuation of the current pessimism around the UK economy, the question is whether when you take a closer look at the situation, this is justified. 

Some recent research undertaken by us in conjunction with the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR) found that mid-sized businesses have actually, for the most part, been growing well during the past few years of economic stagnation. After taking a closer look at this growth, it found that mid-sized businesses have been able to boost their productivity, with turnover per employee 18 per cent higher than the UK average, and as a result increase their turnover by £25.7bn over the past year. 

In addition, the third quarter of 2012 company liquidations were down 2.8 per cent from the previous quarter, and 6.6 per cent less than the same quarter in 2011. One of the major factors behind this is that the current low interest rates mean that struggling businesses are better able to service their loans and pay off the interest. As a result, banks are less concerned about calling the loan in. Those businesses that can’t afford to tackle the debt itself are given a bit more breathing space, allowing them to concentrate on growing revenue, rather than struggling to meet loan payments. 

The latest quarterly Business Confidence Monitor from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales and Grant Thornton shows that business confidence is actually higher in regions outside of London and the South East. There have been some encouraging initiatives recently from the Government and it will be interesting to see how this glimmer of regional confidence is affected by the recent review by Lord Heseltine and the Coalition Government’s "City Deals" plan. Together, these schemes have called for more government funds to be diverted to regional governments and greater powers for mayors to support this entrepreneurialism and dynamism across the UK.

The pervading economic climate continues to be a proving ground for companies, with those that are still in business emerging lean, organised and efficient. Businesses are taking a fundamental look at how their business is run in order to weather the worst of the economic storm. Clear effective governance, robust planning and attention to financial levers mean they are now equipped to deal with this kind of environment. 

Before businesses start to invest again, economic confidence needs to come from somewhere, and the government must shout about how well we’re doing, and keep providing support for British businesses. If just a fraction of the estimated £720bn of cash reserves in British businesses was invested back into the economy, business investment would return to pre-crisis levels. While the "new normal" means we have to adjust our growth expectations, confidence is needed to ensure the recent economic growth doesn't just prove to be an anomaly and continues.

Green shoots. Photograph: Getty Images

Scott Barnes is the CEO of Grant Thornton UK.

Getty
Show Hide image

One Day Without Us reveals the spectre of Britain without immigration

Imagine a country without its NHS workers, its artists and even its consumers. That's why immigrants are striking today. 

What’s the best way of making yourself heard in politics? Protesting in the street, or contacting the media? Writing to politicians? A badge?

One option, of course, is to walk out - and give people a chance to recognise what they’d be missing if you weren’t there. In the labour movement, that’s long been an option – a last-case option, but an option nevertheless – when your contribution isn't being recognised.

A strike is a tit-for-tat negotiation and a warning shot. “I’ll work properly when you employ me properly”, it says, but simultaneously: “Here’s what you’d lose if I stopped”. Done right, the worker’s absence can shift the power balance in their favour.

Normally, people strike according to their role, in pursuit of certain conditions – the tube strikes, or last year’s teacher's strike.

Yet there is also a long and rich history of walk-outs whose terms are broader and boundaries hazier. One of the most famous is surely the 1975 Women's Strike, in Iceland, during which 90 per cent of the country's women refused to participate in either paid or unpaid work.

In 2016, the formula was repeated in Poland, where women went on strike to protest against a draconian change being proposed to the country's already-strict abortion laws. (It worked.)

Immigrant strikes, too, have a history. In 2006, for instance, a coalition of Los Angeles Catholic groups, unions and immigration reform groups proposed a boycott in opposition to a bill which, among other things, called for new border security fences to be built between America and Mexico. (Ahem.)

The action grew to become a national event, and on May 1, the “Great American Boycott” took place, with immigrants from Latin America and elsewhere leaving work, skipping school and refusing to buy or sell goods.

Now, with Donald Trump in the White House and Brexit looming, some have decided it’s time for another strike. Enter “One Day Without Us”.

Today, immigrants here in Britain will strike not for pay conditions or holiday allowances, but for basic recognition and respect. Across the country, businesses will close and immigrants will leave work, many of them to take place in alternative actions like rallies or letter-writing campaigns.

The name of the protest pulls no punches. This, it says, is what it would be like if we all went away. (Subtext: “like some of you want”.)

Because – and let’s be honest here – it’d be bad. In hospital this summer, I was treated by migrants. After 24 hours in NHS, I took a count, and found that only about one in five of the staff who had treated me were identifiably English. Around 4.6 per cent of NHS staff nationally are from the EU, including 9 per cent of doctors. Immigrants clean buildings, make our food, and provide a whole host of other vital services.

One Day Without Us, then, could do Britain a huge favour - it provides us with a quick preview function before anyone ups and leaves for good, taking the heart of our health service, or our food supplies, with them.

In recognition of this, some businesses are actively giving their workers the day off. One 36-year-old owner of a support services company, for instance, is giving her staff a paid holiday.

“Not all my colleagues are taking up the offer not to come in”, she explained. “Some, both British and foreign-born, would prefer to work. That’s fine, I wanted to give colleagues the freedom to choose.

 “It will cause some inconvenience and I’ve had to explain to clients why we aren’t offering all our services for one day, but I feel doing this is the only way to show how much this country relies on migrants. I may be a businesswoman, but I’m a human being first, and it hurts my heart to see how foreign-born colleagues are being treated by some people in the current political climate."

The woman, whose staff is 65 per cent foreign born, has asked her company not to be identified. She’s heard her staff being abused for speaking Polish.

Of course, not everyone is able to walk out of work. I write this from Chicago, Illinois, where last week activists participated in an American predecessor to One Day Without Us called “Day Without Immigrants”. Type “Day Without Immigrants" into Google followed by the word "Chicago" and you will find reports of restaurants closing down and citizens marching together through the city.

But search for just "Day Without Immigrants", and the top stories are all about participants being fired.

One Day Without Us, then, encourages any form of engagement. From human chains to sessions during which participants can write to their MP, these events allow immigrants, and supporters, to make themselves known across the country.

Businesses and museums, too, are involved. The Tate, for instance, is offering free tours showing visitors artworks created or influenced by migrants, showing Londoners which of the paintings that they’ve seen a dozen times only exist because of immigration.

Because paintings, like people, come from everywhere, whether or not you remember. Britain is a mongrel country, and so its art and culture are as mongrel as its workforce: a persistent thread through the country’s history.

We risk a lot forgetting this. At its best, assimilation provides a way of integrating without forgetting one’s own unique identity. In a world where immigrants risk threats or violence, however, invisibility can be the best option. For some, it is better not to be recognized as an immigrant than be abused as one.

Those of us who don’t risk threats have a duty to recognise this. I dislike the glibness of “we are all migrants” – maybe, technically, but we’re not all getting slurs shouted at us in the high street, are we? Still, I also don’t like anyone forgetting the fact that their existence, in all probably, is contingent on someone once being given clemency in a place that was their own. The movement of people is woven into the fabric of society.

Of course, it is impossible to say how successful One Day Without Us will be, or how many people’s lives will be directly affected. But I hope that, even as a gesture, it works: that people think of what would be missing from their lives without immigration.

We ignore it at our peril.

You can view all the One Day Without Us events on the organisers’ website, or contribute to a fund to support businesses which are closing for the day here.

Stephanie Boland is digital assistant at the New Statesman. She tweets at @stephanieboland