This is a spectacular misjudgement – or possibly worse. The quality of many finished products today largely depends on the quality of the compound semiconductors they use. In an electric vehicle, for example, the acceleration is thanks to an inverter, and the inverter needs a high performance compound semiconductor. Inferior chips mean a more expensive and more sluggish car.
The same logic applies to a solar panel, or the latest networking equipment crunching optical or 5G signals: using poorer components means a less competitive product. You even have them in your pocket. A striking example of how they give a manufacturer competitive advantage is Apple’s FaceID, which uses British compound semiconductors for its 3D sensing system.
Even after five years, no one comes close. Apple has subsequently used them to build lidar (a sensing system) into many devices, for as-yet-unreleased augmented reality apps. Today, an advanced jet fighter can’t even take off without compound semiconductors.
I suspect the Cabinet minister quoted was misled by a piece of irrelevant information. The Newport Fab runs to a 200 nanometer process, a measure of density of the circuitry, while today’s silicon microprocessors from AMD and Intel run on narrower, more modern processes.
But this is not relevant here: that’s a chalk and cheese comparison. The compound parts uniquely move the electrons around much faster than silicon. What’s curious is that the very same piece of misinformation appears online, favoured by shadowy online commenters, who insist there is nothing to worry about China acquiring the Newport plant.
Equally puzzling is the view taken by our chief National Security adviser, Sir Stephen Lovegrove, a career civil servant. Belatedly ordered by the Prime Minister to examine the sale of Newport Wafer Fab, Lovegrove concluded there was no cause for concern on security grounds, despite the critical role played by compound semiconductors in areas already identified by the Government as strategic: electric cars and electricity transmission, satellite communications, 5G and solar panels.
Like much of the Cabinet, Lovegrove boasts an impeccable Oxford humanities degree, in English. That’s fine, but Lovegrove either didn’t consult British boffins, or did, and failed to listen. Did he not consider the application of this technology in advanced military equipment? Or does he not consider China a strategic threat? A lot of dogs have failed to bark, and his complacency raises questions about the competence of our national security apparatus.
Unfortunately, it fits a pattern. In 2017, China snapped up British chip maker Imagination, and last year Arm’s China joint venture unilaterally declared independence, declaring it could do as it pleased with Arm’s intellectual property, which is an unexpected boon for Chinese industry.
You may recall the story of the hapless Tory grandee Oliver Letwin, who welcomed two strangers into his home at 3am to use his lavatory; they then proceeded to relieve Letwin of his wallet and some jewellery. The transfer of the leading maker of these new wonder chips to China is a Bond tale that goes one better than Letwin. Only here, the UK is hanging up a sign saying: take what you please, we won’t stand in your way.
