The ‘Bournville of weapons' powering Britain's rearmament
The town hall at the centre of Barrow-on-Furness is an extravagant piece of Gothic architecture, crowned by a 164ft clock tower that rings out on the hour, every hour.
It was built in 1886 as a symbol of prosperity, when shipbuilding and steel making thrived in the Cumbrian port town.
Today, however, the building is less a monument of success and serves more as a painful reminder of Barrow's prosperous past.
The surrounding streets are plagued by boarded-up shops and broken windows, while a neighbouring multi-storey car park was closed last year because so few people were driving to the town centre.
'There are lots of places that have been derelict for years,' sighs Trevor Vincent, who works in a nearby charity shop.
'Everything is closing down – all we've got left are barbers, takeaways and vape shops.'
Yet this isn't merely a familiar tale about a northern town once a champion of industry. In fact, Barrow is still home to the country's most important defence manufacturing site.
Run by BAE Systems, the Devonshire Dock complex still employs one in three people in the town.
This is where thousands of highly skilled workers operate, in the most secret of conditions, to build the huge submarines that provide the UK's ultimate security guarantee – the at-sea nuclear deterrent.
Since the end of the Cold War, business has been painfully slow. But now, as Britain rearms, Barrow's skills are in demand again – and the yard is poised to be busier than ever.
The pipeline of work should reinvigorate the town, in no small part because it will trigger a population surge.
Over the next decade, as BAE's workforce grows, Barrow is expected to balloon in size from 60,000 people to 90,000, as workers and their families move to the area.
That means new infrastructure will be needed, including bigger hospital facilities, more schools and thousands of new homes.
But if BAE is to get the talent it needs, it will also require a transformation of the town's decaying urban centre so that people want to live there.
Within Whitehall, the issue is so urgent that the Government has partnered with the local council and BAE to push the project forward.
Known as 'Team Barrow', the scheme has been handed £200m in Treasury funding and is being led by Simon Case, the former Cabinet secretary.
In scope, the proposed regeneration has drawn comparisons to Bournville, the model village built by the Cadbury family to house the workers at their chocolate factories.
Case says Barrow is 'the living, breathing example' of what happened to some industrial towns after the government cut defence spending following the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Barrow grew rapidly in the late 1800s after industrialist Henry Schneider found iron ore nearby and began shipping it out of the port. The town quickly transformed into the world's largest steelworks.
Business remained strong through the industrial revolution, both World Wars and then the Cold War, as the Devonshire dockyard built dozens of Royal Navy vessels, including aircraft carriers, frigates, submarines and destroyers in the 1950s, '60s and '70s.
But since the early 2000s, that workload has shrunk to just 11 submarines, including two Astute-class boats yet to be delivered.
'The town's fortune has gone up and down with the yard,' Case says. 'And so when the work for the yard dropped off, that is when worklessness and other problems started to grow.'
Today, it is one of the most deprived areas in the country, scoring poorly on unemployment, education, child poverty and life expectancy when compared to the national average.
The rate of economic inactivity in Barrow is 41.4pc, including 26.2pc of people who are retired. This is higher than average for both the UK and the North West.
The most visible sign of this decline can be seen in the town's main shopping streets – once-bustling places now pockmarked with boarded-up store fronts.
Like other 'Barrovians' that The Telegraph spoke to on Thursday, charity shop worker Vincent, who was accompanied by his 15-year-old daughter, said the most depressing aspect of the town's decline has been the feeling that there is nothing to do locally.
In recent years, major retail brands, including WH Smith, have abandoned the town, while large units have been left vacant by the collapse of retail chains such as Wilko and Debenhams.
'I grew up here and I've never seen it this bad,' says Vincent, 46.
Many people have stopped coming into Barrow to shop and instead go to nearby market towns such as Ulverston or Kendal, he says, with some even going as far afield as Lancaster.
'Who's going to come into a town where there's nothing to do?' asks former shipyard worker John Pringle, 71, walking with his friend Brian Beard, 75, to a nearby pub.
But with the shipyard ramping up again, Case says regenerating Barrow has become a national and moral imperative.
With tensions rising around the world, the Royal Navy has placed a £31bn order for four Dreadnought-class submarines, which will replace the nuclear-armed Vanguard boats, as well as a fleet of new Aukus-class attack submarines that will enter service from the late 2030s.
To keep Britain secure, these need to be delivered on time and to cutting-edge specifications.
'Getting our boats out of Barrow is of profound importance to our nation's security,' Case says.
'With the pressure that we've got on getting the Astute boats finished, then Dreadnought and then Aukus, we started to focus on this two years ago for almost Bournville-like reasons.
'The town is a strategic national asset, although it hasn't always been viewed that way.
'Pretty quickly, we realised we needed Team Barrow to create an environment that would deliver that happy, skilled workforce we need to support the defence nuclear enterprise.
'Thanks to Mr Putin and Mr Xi, the business case makes itself.'
This will involve a variety of measures, says Case, with Team Barrow aiming to use its money to 'catalyse' private investment or directly intervene where necessary.
For example, the council is using government funding to clean up a large brownfield site near the dockyard. This will allow for a new 800-home waterfront development known as 'Marina Village'.
It is part of efforts to kickstart building in the area, which has only delivered around 80 homes a year previously, but will soon need to start building up to 1000 annually.
Another boost to the town has come from the University of Cumbria, which has built a new campus next to the BAE yard that will offer courses in engineering, project management, computer science and nursing.
'Barrow is about to become a university town,' says Case. 'That's never been said about Barrow before – and it is a sign of the ambition we have here.'
Back in the town centre, BAE is also literally setting up shop.
In a bid to draw attention to the regeneration plans, it has bought units formerly used by WH Smith and Debenhams and converted the former into a modern exhibition centre called 'the Bridge'. Here, people can learn about opportunities in the area, and not only those at the yard.
There are even grander plans for the former Debenhams department store next door, which the company wants to transform into a high-tech training centre.
It will provide a space for workers to learn complex welding techniques or other technical aspects of submarines, using large-scale models.
Crucially, however, the building's designs do not include a canteen – meaning the 600 or so people who go there every day will have to venture outside for lunch.
'We're hoping that the captive audience of people will really drive economic activity into the town centre once again,' explains Catherine Reay, a project manager at BAE who will eventually run the new training centre.
A broader masterplan for the town centre is also being drawn up, with policymakers considering creating a local development company that will have the power to oversee major changes.
The plans are also likely to include rejuvenating some of the most battered buildings to make them fit for new tenants.
Though it is still early days, Case points to 'green shoots', including the opening of a new coffee shop, Coffee D'Ash, in the Portland Walk arcade, as well as a new branch of the Furness Building Society.
Ash Holroyd, 33, says he bet on the town's future by opening his cafe in September last year, having previously run a coffee van in the town's market.
'We need businesses to support the town,' he says. 'I hope this will spur people to come and socialise again.'
While chatting, customers of all ages come and go and Holroyd greets most by name.
Case argues that this is the sort of family-friendly venue that Barrow needs more of to help attract high-skilled workers, some of whom currently choose to live in nearby towns and commute in.
'For families transferring in from somewhere else in the country, of course, they'll have the option of living in some absolutely beautiful towns and villages nearby,' Case says.
'But we want Barrow to be an attractive, viable option for them as well.'
In the long term, Case hopes the town can diversify its economy, potentially by securing green energy jobs from the construction of new wind farms in the Irish Sea.
Barrow does have several things going for it already, including an active local art scene, close proximity to the Lake District, beaches and major bird-watching spots such as Walney Island.
There are also hopes that a revamp of the local theatre, the Forum, and other initiatives will help bring in more visitors.
BAE apprentice Abbie Cocker, 21, who is training to be a project manager, says having access to the national park has changed her life.
'A lot of people who come from further away haven't experienced the Lake District, but it started my love of walking,' she says. 'I'd never move back home now.'
For Case, the regeneration of Barrow is a chance to make sure that future activity at BAE's yards can benefit the whole town.
'If you go back to the Bournville example, that tells you of a time when prosperous towns had these partnerships between government and industry, and they produced magnificent structures like the town hall.
'We are now getting investors who are starting to say, 'Hey, this looks like a town with a future. How can we get involved?''
With enough willpower, it's a future that could restore Barrow to its former glory.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Labour urged to publish rent reforms impact report as eviction delays soar
Ministers are being urged to publish a report into the impact of rental reforms on the courts as landlords face eight-month delays to repossess their property. Government departments are required to complete a justice impact assessment for any new bills that are likely to impact the UK courts system. Labour's Renters' Reform Bill is set to become law this summer and will include the removal of Section 21 'no-fault evictions'. There are fears the change will force landlords to rely on the courts to regain possession of their properties, adding to existing backlogs. Private landlords faced an eight-month wait from making a claim to the courts to their properties being repossessed in the first four months of 2025, according to the latest government data. Chris Norris, chief policy officer for the National Residential Landlords Association, said: 'The justice system is simply not ready for the impact of the Bill. 'In the interests of transparency, the Government should publish the Justice Impact test. The Government also needs to come clean about how it defines the courts being ready for the reforms. Warm words are no substitute for clear objectives for the justice system.' Justice impact assessments are an internal process and not usually published by government departments, but previous ministers have committed to publishing court reviews ahead of implementing rental reforms. The former Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Committee in a 2023 report said: 'It is not clear whether the Government fully appreciates the extent to which an unreformed courts system could undermine its tenancy reforms.' Furthermore, in a consultation in 2022, the then-government acknowledged that Section 21 was preferred by landlords to other means of eviction – such as Section 8 – as it was perceived as 'quicker and more certain'. Richard Atkinson, president of the Law Society, said of the Renters' Rights Bill: 'The bill will not be effective without further investment in the justice system.' Mr Atkinson also urged the Government to 'provide greater funding and more clarity to the enforcement provisions so that justice is accessible to renters and landlords alike'. In addition to concerns about the justice system, a report has warned impacts of the bill will add almost £900 a year to the average tenancy. The legislation will limit landlords to just one rent increase per year capped at the 'market rate' – the price that would be achieved if the property was newly advertised to let. Landbay said property owners were planning to increase rent by an average of 6pc, which would add £74 to the average monthly rent, or £888 a year. Dr Neil Cobbold, director at property software company Reapit UKI, said: 'The Government's decision not to share the Renters' Rights Bill justice impact test raises serious questions about transparency and accountability. The estimate of changes in the number of court and tribunal cases is a vital tool for understanding how the legislation will affect the property sector – including case volumes – and whether the justice infrastructure is in place to support the change.' The Bill is currently going through the House of Lords before being sent back to the Commons and is expected to receive Royal Assent by summer 2025 and be implemented before the end of the year. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government was approached for comment. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
NATO agrees ambitious defense spending expansion
NATO leaders agreed their most ambitious military expansion since the Cold War. The US and NATO leadership are pushing to increase the alliance's spending target from 2% of each member country's GDP to 5%, including 1.5% on related defense expenditures such as logistics and cybersecurity. While major countries such as the UK are holding out on the higher target, arguing that the priority should be pushing all allies to meet their existing commitment, the deal is expected to be finalized in a summit this month. The alliance also pledged a five-fold increase in surface-to-air defense systems, and set out a detailed list of each country's specific contributions to NATO's military capabilities.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Odious New Demand of the Civil Service: Loyalty Oaths
The 1939 Hatch Act prohibits government employees from using their position to engage in partisan activity, and prohibits their membership in any organization that advocates the overthrow of the United States. At the dawn of the Cold War, President Harry Truman used the latter provision to authorize investigations of government employees concerning their loyalty to their country, and also the administration of oaths declaring such loyalty. The Truman loyalty program, which spread to the states and to private organizations, led to the firing of many people who were either innocent of disloyalty or who had previously belonged to communist or communist-affiliated organizations (as had many intellectuals during the Great Depression) but refused to endanger others by naming them to the authorities. The program was a catastrophe for civil liberties. Still, the stated goal, however ghastly its application, was defensible: Federal employees were expected to be loyal to the United States and not to its Cold War adversary, the Soviet Union. Now loyalty oaths are back; the Trump White House is imposing them on already-beleaguered civil servants. Only this time Trump is violating the Hatch Act by demanding that they be partisan, and by requiring that employees be loyal not to the United States but to Donald Trump. The 47th president has achieved the impossible. He's making Truman's loyalty program look good. To apply for a civil service job, you click onto this website. The Office of Management and Budget, for example, is looking for an economist. (It could use one!) The job pays in the range of $120,579 to $156,755, and an undergraduate degree in economics or its rough equivalent appears to be a minimal requirement. Your education must be at an accrediting institution recognized by the Education Department, which as of Wednesday looks like a problem for a Columbia PhD, and may soon be a problem for a Harvard PhD. Our prospective OMB economist has to fill out this questionnaire. The questions are fairly anodyne and have to do with reasonable-sounding job requirements. Are you able to analyze 'economic resource allocations, structure, and the behavior of specific sectors'? Do you have experience presenting research and analysis to senior officials? Are you competent to review congressional testimony to be given by your boss? According to a May 29 memo by the White House Office of Personnel Management, this questionnaire will soon be expanded to include a loyalty test. Our prospective OMB economist will have to answer some variation on the following question: 'How would you help advance the President's Executive Orders and policy priorities in this role? Identify one or two relevant Executive Orders or policy initiatives that are significant to you, and explain how you would help implement them if hired.' It is conceivable that this might be an appropriate question to pose to a political appointee. Trump already makes applicants to political positions grovel in all sorts of humiliating ways. 'What part of President Trump's campaign message is most appealing to you and why?' When was your 'MAGA revelation'? The purpose is to privilege cultish loyalty over basic competence, and on the evidence the screeners have done a splendid job. But civil servants are not supposed to be screened based on political loyalty. Even under normal presidents, an executive order is a set of directions to an agency chief, not to rank-and-file civil servants. The agency chief directs civil servants to convert these directions into a proposed rule. The proposal is then put out for public comment to find out whether the rule (and perhaps the executive order requiring it) is faulty. The rule is then finalized, acquiring the force of law. Only then is a civil servant required to follow it. As I say, that's how it works under a normal president. Under the aberration that is Donald Trump, executive orders often have no role other than to express Trump's crotchets, partisan or otherwise. When they call for action, they often violate existing law and/or the Constitution (to which federal hires must also pledge loyalty). One executive order instructed the attorney general not to enforce, for 75 days, a congressionally-enacted ban on TikTok. The delay was later renewed twice, and will likely be renewed again this month, even though the Supreme Court upheld the TikTok ban. Civil servants aren't supposed to choose between upholding executive-branch policies and upholding Supreme Court decisions. OPM wants to make this choice explicit. Another executive order commanded government agencies not to issue documents recognizing the citizenship of children born in the United States to noncitizens, even though the Constitution states that such children are 'natural born citizens.' Rather surprisingly, the Supreme Court agreed to hear arguments about this. If, as expected, it rules against Trump, civil servants will once again be compelled to choose between Trump and the Supreme Court, which amounts to choosing between Trump and the Constitution. That's just executive orders. How would our prospective OMB economist support Trump's plans to annex Greenland, or make Canada the 51st state, or rename the Gulf of Mexico? How would this person help Trump reorder cryptocurrency regulations to maximize the Trump family's participation in this exciting if dubious new financial industry? How would our OMB applicant support his president's conclusion that Taylor Swift is no longer 'HOT'? I'm going to have a real problem getting this OMB job. I went to Harvard, I didn't major in Economics, I've never reviewed anybody's congressional testimony except to criticize it in print, I oppose the Trump executive orders described above and plenty more, and I hadn't noticed Taylor Swift ever stopped being HOT. It's probably better that I don't work for OMB, not only for me (Russell Vought would be my boss!) but also for America. Also, I like the job I have now. So I can't say it's any kind of tragedy that the new requirements screen me out. But it's easy to imagine plenty of people who would be ideal for this job but who can't stomach pledging loyalty to the most corrupt president in United States history. It is correspondingly hard to imagine anybody willing to take the required oath who would be even minimally competent. The Hatch Act was passed to prevent such abuses; so were the Pendleton Civil Service Act and the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (both ignored by the Trump's 'Schedule F' initiative). Harry Truman subjected the civil service to considerable stress when he imposed his loyalty program. Lives were ruined. But the fallout from Trump's loyalty program will probably be worse.