Burnham Urged to Award £2.4bn Military Satellite Contract to Airbus Over US Rival

The battle for the £2.4bn military satellite contract is a critical test of Andy Burnham’s commitment to backing British industry, and it goes beyond mere jobs – it’s about national sovereignty.

Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, has thrown her weight behind Airbus, which designs and builds satellites in Stevenage and Portsmouth. She claims that awarding the contract to Lockheed Martin would be a “massive mistake” and undermine Britain’s space industry. Labour MP Kevin Bonavia has also urged Burnham to opt for the European manufacturer.

The Skynet 6 wideband satellite system will carry the UK Ministry of Defence’s most sensitive data, but the debate surrounding its procurement extends beyond national security concerns. It raises questions about whether Britain should cede control over its own military technology and jobs to an American company. Lockheed Martin has promised to create 500 direct jobs in north-east England, plus another 1,500 in the broader supply chain, but critics argue that this would come at the cost of British intellectual property and expertise.

This is not just a matter of union politics or a Labour Party loyalty test; it’s about Britain’s role in the world. The UK has long been a proud producer of military satellites, with Airbus and its predecessors having built these systems for decades. The first Skynet satellite was launched in 1969, predating even the most ardent patriot’s nostalgia for British industry.

The decision to award the contract is also a test of Burnham’s commitment to Labour’s defence investment plan, which emphasizes the need to back British manufacturing and sovereign capabilities. The design, manufacture, and testing of military satellites are indeed a “crown jewel” of Britain’s defence capability – one that has been honed over decades by skilled workers in Stevenage and Portsmouth.

Critics of Lockheed Martin’s bid argue that the company would rely on American intellectual property rather than using technology developed in Britain. While Lockheed has pledged to keep any IP it develops in the UK, this promise is only as good as the government’s ability to enforce it. Senior defence industry insiders warn that awarding the contract to Lockheed could have far-reaching consequences for British space industry exports and even lead to Airbus relocating its satellite construction elsewhere.

The pressure on Burnham to make a decision is mounting, with Defence Eye reporting that the MoD wants a verdict as soon as 1 August. As Britain navigates its complex relationship with the US administration under Donald Trump, this contract represents an early test of how it will balance national interests with international cooperation.

In the end, it’s not just about the £2.4bn price tag or even the jobs at stake – it’s about whether Britain can resist the allure of cheap American hardware and instead choose to develop its own defence capabilities. As Sharon Graham put it, “handing the British space industry over to the Americans in the first days of the new government would be a massive mistake, industrially and politically.”