Keir Starmer’s Labour government has repackaged the UK’s toxic Freeports and Special Economic Zones (SEZs), all 86 of them, as “Industrial Strategy Zones (ISZs)”, touting them as a ‘progressive engine for green jobs, fair work, and regional revival’. Unveiled in Labour’s Industrial Strategy Zones Action Plan and The UK’s Modern Industrial Strategy on June 23rd 2025, ISZs promise to streamline 25 zones into a unified framework, targeting clean energy and advanced manufacturing.

Don’t fall for the spin over Freeports

Far from a break with the Tories’ 14-year chaos, Labour’s ISZ rebrand is a shameless continuation of a neoliberal, imperialist legacy, one Labour publicly denounced when in opposition, while quietly and duplicitously enabling behind the scenes.

The UK Govt’s latest policy paper, ‘Industrial Strategy Zones Action Plan exposes Labour’s betrayal, showing how ISZs entrench corporate power, erode sovereignty, and betray workers and communities.

Labour wants you to believe ISZs are a fresh start, fixing the Tories’ bungled Freeports and SEZs. The Industrial Strategy 2025 pitches ISZs as a “mission-led” policy, consolidating 25 zones (likely the 12 Freeports and key SEZs) with:

• Economic Growth: Tax breaks, customs perks, and public cash to lure private investment in eight high-growth sectors.
• Governance Tweaks: Trade union board representation, public meetings, and mayoral oversight to boost transparency.
• Fair Work: “Good business charters” to ensure decent wages and conditions.
• Sustainability: Net-zero goals to counter environmental critiques.

It sounds promising, right?

It’s not

Don’t be fooled, because Labour’s track record tells a different story. While in opposition, Labour slammed Freeports as no “silver bullet for the economy,” with Keir Starmer calling them “blind faith” and John McDonnell branding them a “failed Thatcherite plan” designed to gut regulations and taxes. Yet, behind the rhetoric, Labour was complicit.

Freeport and SEZ boards across the UK, from Teesside to Scotland’s Firth of Forth included Labour MPs, stakeholders, councillors, mayors, Lords, and Baronesses who signed off on these zones alongside Tories like Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss. An often overlooked key shadow operator of free zone governance is Shanker Singham (known as ‘the brains behind Brexit’) developed his World Operating System at US Babson Global, which comprises deregulatory frameworks tailored for corporations who demand ‘laws as services’.

Metro Mayors Steve Rotheram (Liverpool Freeport) and Andy Burnham (Greater Manchester Investment Zone) rubber-stamped corporate zones while Labour publicly postured as critics.

When Labour won in 2024, the mask slipped.

Starmer’s government not only kept the 12 Freeports and 74 SEZs but announced more SEZs to come in their October 2024 budget, claiming they’d “have this government’s stamp.”

Far from inheriting a Tory mess, Labour has championed a neoliberal model it helped build, perpetuating a corporate carve-up rooted in deregulation and public subsidy.

The devastating cost of this bipartisan betrayal must be fully exposed before Zone Fever achieves its goals of replacing big Govt with a Sovereign Corporation with zero democratic accountability or public scrutiny.

The easiest way to understand what’s happening with the duopoly’s nationwide rollout of deregulated free zones in the UK is this.

Think of the most common approach to handling a problem, which is to break it down into smaller pieces so that the problem becomes more manageable, apply this metric to big govt, and the solution is to carve up the UK into corporate governed jurisdictions where Adam Smith’s ‘Invisible Hand’ allows ‘self-regulation’ and trust that the markets know best, don’t fall for it.

It gets worse. AI growth zones (AIGZs): a corporate digital land grab

Launched in February 2025 under Starmer’s “AI Opportunities Action Plan,” AI Growth Zones are sold as hubs to make Britain an “AI superpower,” promising jobs through data centres, AI research, and digital infrastructure.

But the Expression of Interest guidance reveals their true intent: “regulatory flexibility,” “streamlined planning,” and “strong digital connectivity,” with industry invited to “test innovative ideas” without oversight. This is a land grab, with local authorities tasked with providing “land availability” for tech giants like Palantir and Amazon.

Labour’s endorsement of Houchen, despite his Teesside Freeport scandal, where £560 million fueled land grabbing and tax fleecing, is yet another betrayal. AI Growth Zones are the digital arm of SEZs and Freeports, trialling AI-driven logistics and surveillance like facial recognition in Liverpool (UK Free Zones).

BlackRock, with an 80% stake in Felixstowe, Harwich, and Thamesport Freeports, aligns with Amazon’s cloud dominance, creating a seamless network of deregulated enclaves.

Teesside troubles

It’s worth highlighting that Angela Rayner has postponed a security review of NE Security Ltd, a firm central to the Teesside freeport controversy. This company, responsible for overseeing goods entering the deregulated zone, requires stringent oversight due to the well-known risks of freeports globally being used for illegal activities such as money laundering, drug trafficking, and smuggling.

However, NE Security Ltd raises serious concerns. Its majority shareholder, David Garside Sr., is evading a £1.5 million tax debt, having previously dissolved a company to avoid creditors—a classic tax avoidance maneuver.

More troubling, as reported in Private Eye 1633, Garside’s son, David Garside Jr., has been acting as the “managing director” of NE Security Ltd while serving a long prison term for his involvement in a cocaine trafficking scheme. This isn’t merely a family-run business; it resembles a criminal enterprise posing as a legitimate security provider.

Despite these red flags, Angela Rayner, in her capacity at the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, has delayed an essential audit of Teesside’s security protocols.

Her department’s rationale? “No new threats have been identified.”

This excuse is hard to take seriously given the global reputation of freeports. These lightly regulated zones, often overseen by private firms like NE Security Ltd, are infamous for being magnets for criminal activity.

The Freeport fiasco: billions squandered, promises broken

A previous article I wrote for the Canary, Freeports have already cost the public nearly £20bn – yet Labour want more of them?, lays bare the catastrophic failure of Freeports and SEZs, now rebranded as ISZs:

• Job Shortfalls: The 12 Freeports (8 in England, 2 in Scotland, 2 in Wales) promised 80,000 jobs but delivered 5,600 by 2024, with 66% (3,733) displaced from elsewhere, per a 2011 Work Foundation report. SEZs created 100,000 jobs since 2012, but 80% (79,800) were displaced, leaving 22,067 new jobs. Scotland’s Freeports missed targets by 77% (1,857 vs. 8,000), England by 92% (4,124 vs. 53,333).
• Crippling Costs: By 2024, Freeports and SEZs cost £19.78 billion—£2.5 billion for Freeports (£1 billion seed funding, £1.5 billion tax breaks), £17.28 billion for SEZs. That’s £896,246 per new job. Scotland spent £4.68 billion for 3,911 jobs (£1.2 million each), Wales £2.08 billion for 1,711 (£1.22 million). Projections to 2046–2048 estimate £64 billion for 68,334 jobs (£936,693 each), over 26 times the UK median salary (£34,963).
• Displacement Disaster: Over 25 years, 919,519 jobs are promised, but 711,163 are displaced (77–96% for Freeports, 80–92% for SEZs). Scotland’s 70,692 jobs include 55,974 displaced (79%); England’s 564,688 include 519,513 (92%).
• Corporate Bonanza: BlackRock, owning 80% of shares in three Freeports (Harwich, Thamesport, Felixstowe), profits while workers face rising council tax, energy bills, and food costs.

ISZs: neoliberalism with a green veneer

The Industrial Strategy 2025 frames ISZs as a progressive reboot, but they’re Freeports/SEZs in disguise:

• Same Economic Model: ISZs rely on tax breaks, customs benefits, and public subsidies—the formula that cost £19.78 billion for 22,067 jobs. The Action Plan confirms “generous tax incentives” for 25 zones, echoing the £64 billion projected spend by 2048.
• Same Locations: The 25 ISZs likely include the 12 Freeports and key SEZs (e.g., Greater Manchester, Liverpool). Scotland’s 2 Freeports and 18 SEZs continue, with 25-year leases and £10.8 billion private investment.
• Corporate Power Unchecked: The Bullet Point List’s sovereignty concerns—LCIA arbitration, self-regulation, land alienation—remain unaddressed. BlackRock’s profits and corporate policy influence persist.

Labour’s governance reforms are thin gruel:

• Trade Unions: Board representation could counter labour concerns, but without real power, it’s tokenism. The Freeports’ Job Promises notes RMT/TUC opposition to low-wage jobs.
• Public Oversight: Public meetings and mayoral accountability address the Bullet Point List’s scrutiny critique, but secondary legislation and arbitration shield corporations.
• Fair Work: “Good business charters” aim to improve job quality, but deregulation attracts low-value jobs, as seen in Scotland’s 77% shortfall.
• Sustainability: Net-zero goals clash with the Bullet Point List’s “greenwashing” warnings, as deregulation and arbitration undermine environmental enforcement.

Labour’s October 2024 announcement of five new Freeports, plus an East Midlands Investment Zone, cements its commitment to this model. Starmer’s claim that they’ll “maximise potential” for “working people” rings hollow against the £896,246-per-job reality.

Labour’s Freeports duplicity: from critics to cheerleaders

Labour’s hypocrisy is galling. While in opposition, Starmer and McDonnell trashed Freeports as Thatcherite flops, yet Labour figures sat on Freeport/SEZ boards, enabling their rollout. Rotheram’s Liverpool Freeport, promising “thousands” of jobs, and Burnham’s £160 million Greater Manchester Investment Zone, claiming 32,000 jobs, ignored displacement rates (66–80%). Scotland’s Forth Freeport board, chaired by Labour’s Dame Susan Rice, saw Labour councillors like Alan Nimmo cozying up to business leaders.

Post-2024 election, Labour dropped the critique. Starmer’s partnership with BlackRock, announced on X in November 2024, and Angela Rayner’s deregulation rhetoric— “removing the regulatory burden, cutting red tape”—ape the neoliberal playbook. Morgan McSweeney’s purge of Labour’s left ensured no pushback, aligning the party with corporate interests. Labour’s manifesto avoided Freeports, focusing on “Local Growth Plans,” but its actions—new Freeports, ISZ rebrand—reveal unwavering support for a model it once decried.

This isn’t inheritance; it’s endorsement. Labour’s complicity in Freeport/SEZ boards, followed by its ISZ championing, exposes a party wedded to neoliberalism’s imperialist legacy—deregulation, corporate welfare, and public disempowerment—while gaslighting voters with progressive promises.

The cost of corporate greed

The UK Govt’s freeports’ job promises quantify the betrayal.

The £19.78 billion spent by 2024 could have:

• Paid 565,723 workers the UK median salary (£34,963) for a year.
• Funded 113,145 teachers or nurses annually for five years.
• Scrapped the two-child benefit cap, protected disability benefits, saved school sports fields, or settled Birmingham’s refusing workers’ strike over £8,000 pay cuts.

The £64 billion projected by 2048 could support 1,830,210 workers for a year or 366,042 for five years—5 to 26 times more than the 68,334 jobs hoped for. Instead, BlackRock and other firms’ profit, while families face council tax hikes, energy bill surges, and service cuts.

In Scotland, the Bullet Point List highlights the cost of sovereignty. Corporations control land and profits for 25 years, with £52 million in public funds and £10.8 billion in private investment enriching firms. LCIA arbitration threatens Scotland’s post-independence ambitions, locking in corporate dominance.

A neoliberal legacy, recycled – but there is an alternative

Freeports/SEZs are a failed experiment. Thatcher’s 1980s Freeports and Cameron’s 2010s schemes were scrapped by 2012 for high displacement and low returns. Labour’s ISZs ignore this history, doubling down on a model that empowers corporations while impoverishing communities. The technopopulist rhetoric—Ben Houchen’s “levelling up,” Rotheram’s “green jobs,” Burnham’s “Northern Arc” all mask corporate enrichment.

Teesside’s Freeport, a Tory flagship, epitomises the rot. Public land worth millions was sold to Mayor Ben Houchen’s cronies for £1 per acre, yielding £50 million in private profits while taxpayers footed the bill. Labour’s silence on such scandals, coupled with its ISZ push, signals complicity in this neoliberal stitch-up.

For ISZs to serve people, Labour must:

• Empower Governance: Give unions and mayors real authority, not token roles, to counter corporate self-regulation.
• End Displacement: Target new jobs, addressing 66–80% displacement rates.
• Reclaim Sovereignty: Scrap LCIA/UNCITRAL arbitration and shorten leases to reverse sovereignty transfers.
• Redirect Funds: Invest in public services—schools, hospitals, fair wages—rather than corporate handouts.
• Ensure Transparency: Publish ISZ contracts to verify terms, as urged in the Bullet Point List.

Without these, ISZs will deepen inequality, costing £64 billion for minimal gains, while corporations run the show.

UK free zones: corporate overreach and sovereignty transfers

The UK’s 86 Freeports and Special Economic Zones (SEZs) across England, Scotland, and Wales transfer significant sovereign powers to corporations, undermining parliamentary and popular sovereignty through arbitration mechanisms (LCIA, ICC, UNCITRAL) embedded in governance, lease, and concession agreements.

These agreements risk human rights and environmental abuses, particularly if the UK exits the ECHR, enabling unscrutinised deregulation. Below is a concise breakdown of the transfers and tailored opposition strategies for each nation.

England: Freeports and SEZs

Sovereign Powers Transferred:

Political Power: Freeport/SEZ agreements with LCIA, ICC, and UNCITRAL rules allow corporations to challenge Westminster policies via arbitration, bypassing parliamentary sovereignty. Westminster’s unilateral rollout, with £25M per Freeport and £160M per SEZ, sidelines public consent.

Judicial Power: Arbitration clauses enable corporations to bypass UK courts, mirroring ISDS mechanisms, undermining judicial sovereignty.

Oversight Power: Corporate self-regulation and secondary legislation limit parliamentary scrutiny, transferring oversight to corporations.

Human Rights Enforcement: Deregulation risks weakening labor protections, with arbitration limiting public recourse.

Environmental Enforcement: “Green” branding masks deregulation, with LCIA clauses allowing corporations to evade environmental rules.

Territorial Alienation: 25-year corporate control over Freeport/SEZ land and maritime profits violates sovereign resource rights.

Opposition Strategy:

Raise Awareness: Use grassroots campaigns on social media (X, YouTube, TikTok) to highlight arbitration risks and sovereignty losses, citing new LCIA/ICC research.

Leverage Sovereignty: Petition Westminster for primary legislation to review Freeport/SEZ terms, restoring democratic oversight.

Legal Action: Pursue judicial review of arbitration clauses and submit FOI requests for agreement details to confirm LCIA use.

Public Consent: Argue that public unawareness invalidates agreements, emphasising that sovereignty resides with the people.

Scotland: Freeports and SEZs

Sovereign Powers Transferred:

Political Power: LCIA, ICC, and UNCITRAL rules in Scotland’s 2 Green Freeports (Inverness & Cromarty Firth, Forth) and 18 SEZs allow corporate policy challenges, undermining the Scottish Parliament and the Claim of Right 1689.

Judicial Power: Arbitration bypasses courts, transferring judicial authority to corporate-favored bodies.

Oversight Power: Corporate self-regulation and secondary legislation reduce parliamentary scrutiny.

Human Rights Enforcement: Deregulation risks labor rights, with arbitration limiting recourse.

Environmental Enforcement: Arbitration enables corporations to evade environmental standards.

Territorial Alienation: 25-year corporate control over land and profits, backed by £52M Freeport funding, breaches sovereignty.

Opposition Strategy:

Raise Awareness: Mobilise grassroots campaigns in affected regions, using social media to expose LCIA risks and £2.88B SEZ funding’s corporate ties.

Leverage Claim of Right: Petition the Scottish Parliament to review agreements under primary legislation, citing sovereignty violations.

Legal Action: Challenge arbitration clauses via judicial review and submit FOI requests for agreement details:

Public Consent: Argue public unawareness invalidates 2023 agreements, aligning with the Claim of Right’s sovereignty principle.

Wales: Freeports and SEZs

Sovereign Powers Transferred:

Political Power: LCIA, ICC, and UNCITRAL rules in 2 Freeports (Celtic, Anglesey) and 8 SEZs allow corporations to challenge Senedd policies, violating Welsh popular sovereignty (Laws in Wales Acts 1535–1542, Government of Wales Act 2006).

Judicial Power: Arbitration bypasses courts, undermining judicial sovereignty.

Oversight Power: Corporate self-regulation and secondary legislation limit Senedd scrutiny.

Human Rights Enforcement: Deregulation risks labor rights, with arbitration restricting recourse.

Environmental Enforcement: LCIA clauses enable evasion of environmental standards.

Territorial Alienation: 25-year corporate control over land (e.g., Milford Haven, Ynys Môn) breaches sovereignty.

Opposition Strategy:

Raise Awareness: Mobilise grassroots campaigns in Milford Haven, Port Talbot, and Ynys Môn, using social media to highlight Shanker Singham’s role and LCIA risks.

Leverage Popular Sovereignty: Petition the Senedd for primary legislation to review agreements, asserting public sovereignty.

Legal Action: Pursue judicial review of arbitration clauses and submit FOI requests for agreement details.

Public Consent: Argue public unawareness and Drakeford’s 2023 sign-off, despite risks, invalidate agreements, emphasising Welsh sovereignty.

Key Concern: The push to exit the ECHR will only serve to exacerbate human rights abuses in Freeports/SEZs by removing scrutiny, amplifying corporate power through arbitration. Opposition must prioritise transparency, public engagement, and legal challenges to restore democratic control.

Freeports: an ongoing disaster

Labour’s Industrial Strategy Zones are a neoliberal con, rebranding a £19.78 billion Freeport/SEZ disaster as progressive policy.

I have previously exposed what job displacement in free zones constitutes: 22,067 jobs at £896,246 each, while collective sovereignty (people power) is sold to corporations, and communities are not only betrayed, but completely left out of the decision-making process, while being fleeced to support multinationals.

Labour’s opposition-era critiques were a sham, belied by its boardroom complicity and post-2024 embrace of new Freeports and ISZs. In Scotland, 25-year leases, arbitration clauses, and “greenwashing” lock in corporate control.

Starmer’s party isn’t cleaning up Tory chaos, it’s perpetuating a neoliberal, imperialist legacy that enriches the elite while workers pay the price. It’s time to ditch this corporate carve-up and invest in people, not profiteers.

Featured image via the Canary

By David Powell

This post was originally published on Canary.