UK
Iceland boss and former Tory donor throws weight behind Labour 

THEIR SLIDE RIGHT MAKES THEM RED TORIES

Archie Mitchell
Mon, 29 January 2024 

Iceland’s Executive Chairman Richard Walker has backed Labour ahead of the next general election (John Nguyen/PA) (PA Archive)

The boss of Iceland has thrown his weight behind Labour, saying the party was the “right choice” for households and businesses.

Just months after failing to find a seat to stand to be a Tory MP, Richard Walker has switched his support to Sir Keir Starmer’s party.

The executive chairman of the supermarket and former Tory donor said Sir Keir has “transformed” Labour since taking over from Jeremy Corbyn four years ago.


And Mr Walker praised the Labour leader’s “compassion and concern for the less fortunate”, which he said contrasts with the Conservatives under Mr Sunak.

Writing in the Guardian, he said: “Labour is the right choice for the communities across the country where Iceland operates – and the right choice for everyone in business who wants to see this country grow and prosper.”

Mr Walker said that when he quit the Conservative Party in October, he had not committed to supporting Labour. And he acknowledged criticism of the party under Sir Keir that voters “don’t yet know him well enough” to be enthused about the prospect of a Labour government.

But he added: “Having met the man, I am sure that Starmer has exactly what it takes to be a great leader.”

“He absolutely gets it when I talk to him about the way that the cost of living crisis has put unbearable strain on the finances of so many of my customers and their families, and the urgent need for a government that does everything in its power to ease their burden,” Mr Walker said.

He also heaped praise on shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves, who he said “understands the critical importance of wealth creation” and “knows that we must revive our manufacturing and services”.

Mr Walker went on to say the country is “in a mess” and accused the Conservatives of having “failed the nation”.

He told BBC Breakfast: “I think the Conservatives have failed the nation. They’ve drifted badly out of touch with people like my customers, and they’re drifting further and further to the right.

“What’s interesting is that my values and principles haven’t changed, and, whilst the Conservatives have moved away from me, Labour has steadily moved towards the centrist pragmatic views that I’ve long held.”

He said Labour is “on the right track and the right party”.

“The country is in a mess, the country is in a significantly worse place than it was 14 years ago.”

But Mr Walker said he does not agree with “every single thing that Labour proposes”. And he said he is not joining the party so he can speak out “without fear or favour about the issues that matter to me and the people my business employs and serves”.

Mr Walker’s backing for Sir Keir is the latest blow for Mr Sunak and the Conservatives as business leaders flock to Labour ahead of the next general election.

Business chiefs have been flocking to the Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer (PA)

It comes after former Bank of England governor Mark Carney backed the party and Conservative grandee Kenneth Clarke praised Ms Reeves for her work as shadow chancellor.

And it follows the advertising giant that helped to put Margaret Thatcher in power, Saatchi & Saatchi, attacking the “cruelty” of the Conservatives and backing Labour to win the next election, expected this autumn.

Mr Walker’s support for the party is also a major about-turn for the grocery chief, who until quitting the Tories wanted to stand as a candidate for the party in the election.

At the time, he attacked the Tories for “flip-flopping” on net zero and HS2 and said his views on food bank usage and sewage were “unwelcome” in the party.

“I was told to pipe down. I am not willing to wear a gag to bag a seat and I am not willing to change my values and principles to suit a party that itself has lost its way,” he said.

Iceland supermarket boss and ex-Tory donor backs Starmer for PM

Rowena Mason Whitehall editor

The Guardian
Sun, 28 January 2024 


Photograph: Richard Saker/The Guardian

The former Conservative donor who chairs Iceland supermarket has publicly backed Keir Starmer to be the next prime minister, saying the Labour leader understands how the cost of living crisis has put an “unbearable strain” on families.

Richard Walker, who quit the Tories last October after previously seeking to be a candidate, said he had reserved judgment on who to back at the next election but now believed that Labour and Starmer had a “credible programme” to improve the UK economy and people’s lives.

Walker’s change in allegiance comes after Labour put huge effort into wooing business leaders and persuading them that the party would not implement anti-business policies.


The party plans to hold a major business conference in central London, hosting leaders from companies including Google, Shell, AstraZeneca, Airbus and Goldman Sachs. More than 400 are expected to attend and the event sold out in four hours.

Writing for the Guardian, Walker, the executive chair of Iceland, said Starmer had moved closer to the centre while Rishi Sunak’s party had gone in a different direction and caused a “total collapse in public confidence” in the government.

He said he had met Starmer and that the Labour leader had demonstrated a “compassion and concern for the less fortunate” as well as an understanding of the cost of living crisis that had hurt his customers. Walker said he was particularly keen on change to regulation to allow promotions of and discounts on infant formula, which has soared in price during the cost of living crisis – a move that would overturn a ban put in place in order to avoid discouraging breastfeeding.

The businessman highlighted Starmer’s leadership qualities, saying he had “demonstrated this in the way in which he has transformed his own party by ruthlessly excising the Corbynite extremism that made Labour unelectable in 2019”.

Walker said he had not had a “radical change of heart” but that Starmer had “progressively moved towards the ground on which I have always stood, at the same time as the Conservatives have moved away from it”.

“Indeed, the Tories’ abandonment of what I have always regarded as basic Conservative principles has fuelled my personal disenchantment,” he added.

Walker said Labour’s missions were clear, while the Conservatives had presided over infighting, chaos and an “apparently endless churn of prime ministers, chancellors and secretaries of state”.

He said Rachel Reeves was a chancellor in waiting who understood the critical importance of wealth creation and that he believed the party would remove barriers in the planning system, as well as “breathing new life into our wearied high streets”.

Walker, who stressed that Iceland as a business was apolitical, said he did not agree with everything that Labour proposed, and that he would not became a party member. He is not understood to be planning to donate to the party.

However, he said he would support Labour at the next election and hoped that it would “deliver the majority they will need to begin delivering their recovery programme for the UK”.

Other business leaders are likely to follow Walker in switching allegiance to Labour as the election draws closer. Starmer’s party is still leading the polls by a large margin.

Ahead of Monday’s business summit, Jonathan Reynolds, the shadow business secretary, pledged to make it an annual event and promised to end the “VIP lanes” for contracts that gave preference to bidders with links to government figures during the pandemic.

“Labour is the party of business,” he said. “There will be no back doors or special access for donors under a Labour government. The public and honest businesses have had enough of Conservative sleaze and scandal. Labour will bring integrity back to how the government and business works together to solve the big challenges in our country. We will always treat taxpayer money with the same respect a businesses treats customers’ money.”

Earlier on Sunday, Reynolds stressed that the party’s commitment to increasing spending on green projects to £28bn by the middle of a parliament was not “the holy grail”, following speculation that it could be dropped after the budget.

He told Times Radio: “How much you can spend is determined by the health of the economy, and for us, our fiscal rules. We want to see UK government debt falling at the end of a parliament. I don’t want to be talking about a sum of money as being the holy grail in terms of investments.

“It’s about, over time, getting to that level of ambition, whilst making clear that how much you can spend, how much you can invest, is governed by your fiscal rules. It is opposition within the envelope of what the government are doing, because that’s your starting point. That is just the reality of opposition.”

Labour gains business support as half of leaders prefer Starmer-led Government

Will Hazell
Sat, 27 January 2024

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer laughs with shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves during the party annual conference in Liverpool last year - REUTERS/PHIL NOBLE

Half of business leaders have said they would prefer a Labour Government under Sir Keir Starmer to a Conservative one led by Rishi Sunak.

The polling by Opinium found that a quarter of business leaders who voted for the Tories at the 2019 general election were now backing Sir Keir’s party.

The findings come as Labour prepares to hold a major business event this week, with 600 executives, investors, and ambassadors flocking to a conference in London on Thursday, indicating that many bosses expect the party to form the next government.


Labour commissioned Opinium to conduct an online survey with a sample of 500 business leaders and senior decision-makers, with respondents spread across micro, small, medium, and large businesses.

Within the sample, 44 per cent said they had backed the Tories in the 2019 election, compared to 27 per cent who had supported Labour.

However, asked for their preferred outcome at the coming general election, the positions had reversed, with 49 per cent preferring “a Labour government led by Keir Starmer” compared to 34 per cent who wanted “a Conservative government led by Rishi Sunak”.

Of the 220 business leaders who had backed the Tories in 2019, 55 (25 per cent) said they now wanted a Labour victory.
‘Loss of trust’

The polling was similar when the business leaders were asked about the Chancellor Jeremy Hunt and the shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves. Forty-eight per cent said they would trust Ms Reeves more to manage the economy, compared to 34 per cent who opted for Mr Hunt.

The survey found that 69 per cent agreed with the statement that the Tories had “lost the trust of the business community”, compared to 25 per cent who disagreed. Two-thirds (66 per cent) also agreed that the Tories were “out of ideas” compared to 28 per cent who disagreed.

The shadow business secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the findings showed that “business has given up on the Conservative Party” and “lost faith in them”.

“Business wants stability more than anything,” he said. “I think we’re in a really unusual position where I think business is looking to a change of government for greater stability than the continuation of the present one.”

On Thursday, Labour will hold a conference featuring 400 business leaders and a further 200 international investors and ambassadors.

The conference is three times the size of a similar business event Labour held last year, with each ticket costing nearly £1,000 excluding VAT and the whole event selling out in just four hours.

High profile attendees include the president of the British Chambers of Commerce Baroness Lane-Fox, Google’s UK managing director Debbie Weinstein, and the chief executive of Siemens in the UK and Ireland, Carl Ennis.

Earlier this month, Mr Reynolds was in Switzerland with Ms Reeves wooing global business leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

He revealed he had taken the opportunity to ask international companies whether they would “consider listing in the UK”.

He said: “If there’s a room I’ve got to get into, to get more business investment, more inward investment into the UK, to tell people about what a Labour government would mean for them if they’re interested, I’m happy to be in that room.”

UK

Opinion

Thinking small may get Labour into No 10. 

It could also stop it from staying there

John Harris
Sun, 28 January 2024 

Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

In about 10 days’ time, we are told, the deadline will fall on policy submissions for Labour’s draft manifesto. Reports over the weekend have highlighted senior party people insisting that a May election is still a big possibility, and fretting about a contest that could be called as early as 16 March. And besides, Keir Starmer’s accelerated timetable suits his marketing as the kind of leader keen on preparedness, prudence, and technocratic efficiency.

At which point, an inevitable warning: the content of Labour’s plan for government, in all likelihood, is not going to be terribly spectacular. To no one’s surprise, Starmer’s advisers have been briefing journalists that “financial discipline will run through the document”. Proposals that have come out of Labour’s policy forums will seemingly be ruled in or out depending on whether they can stand up to Tory attacks. The only extra taxes in play – on non-doms, private schools and private equity “dealmakers” – will raise less than £10bn a year, which also puts a lid on any big policy ambitions. To cap it all, after months of briefings about its possible demise, the party’s plan to spend £28bn a year on green investment may well be even further diluted and delayed.

The leadership’s deep conviction is that this approach is the only way they can win. As Jeremy Corbyn led his party to 2019’s near-death experience, they point out, far too many people saw Labour as reckless, profligate and in the grip of ideological mania, an impression that lingers. The coalition government of 2010-15 also casts a long shadow: despite the wreckage left by the austerity that is still blitzing local services, a lot of voters need only to hear words such as “borrowing” and “deficit” to think that the sky is about to fall in. Liz Truss’s short time in office completes the picture: voters have a fear of politicians opening the way to national financial ruin, and those anxieties must be respected.


After four consecutive Labour defeats, these issues demand to be treated with a certain nuance, even by Starmer-sceptics: getting the British electorate to return centre-left governments is onerously hard, and all this has a ring of truth. But the result is a politics characterised by chronic smallness. As proof of his supposedly huge sense of purpose, the Labour leader habitually points to his “missions” – among other things, to “get Britain building” and “break down barriers to opportunity” – but what sits under them often looks either equally vague or comparatively tiny. In the past few weeks, shadow ministers have made a lot of noise about such policy minutiae as supervised tooth-brushing for kids, and a new register for children who are absent from school. On a bad day, it looks as if Labour has decided to offer as little as possible in the hope that the Tories find nothing to attack, and even the most timid swing voters then help Starmer to victory.

Such caution has started to lead in a dismaying direction. Once, all the party’s big figures would have self-identified as economic Keynesians, well aware that in difficult times, investment led by the state is the one dependable way of getting things moving. Now, Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, seems to be drifting deep into the most tight-fisted kind of supply-side economics – which means, for example, that the key to solving the housing crisis is a mere relaxation of planning laws. Nothing of any substance can be done, it seems, until the animal spirits of the private economy are revived – and even borrowing to invest has to be subject to specious fiscal rules, which is a strange position for a party of the centre-left to be in. Last week, there were reports that if Jeremy Hunt cuts taxes in the forthcoming budget, the effects on the state’s fabled fiscal headroom will be so dire that the green investment plan will in effect bite the dust. If sinking Tory chancellors end up dictating Labour policy, something will surely have gone very wrong indeed.

Here, then, is the Starmer’s project’s defining tension. As far as he and his people seem to see it, smallness is Labour’s most dependable way not only of winning, but then sustaining the public’s trust: the programme initially followed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, which included sticking to Tory spending projections for the first two years, is often cited as the proof. But that comparison does not really work. Will there soon be an equivalent of New Labour’s great rush of initial change: the minimum wage, Scottish and Welsh devolution, Bank of England independence and Sure Start, all either rolled out or launched in the Blair government’s first two years? It does not look like it.

We are, moreover, a long way from the 1990s’ easy optimism and favourable economic conditions. The defining features of British life in 2024 are bound up with an overwhelming sense of shabbiness and decline: cancelled trains, aborted infrastructure projects, bankrupt councils, potholed roads, rivers full of sewage. And however much it tries to dial down public expectations and insist that change will have to wait until a second or third term, a Starmer administration will be judged – probably fairly quickly – on whether it makes any material difference to all that.

Related: The Trump revival will force Starmer to acknowledge the sheer folly of Brexit | Rafael Behr

From day one, an incoming Labour government will also be faced with a barrage of hostile rightwing noise, from a coalition of forces – the Mail and Telegraph, GB News, whichever political organisation Nigel Farage may have decided to lead – that could well have finalised its takeover of the Conservative party. The arrival of every so-called small boat will be held up as evidence not just of failure, but rampant government wokery; every Labour slip-up and mishap will be hailed as a terminal disaster. The new political right, let us not forget, tends to trade not just on prejudice, but the understandable resentments of people and places that fundamentally feel ignored. If you want to draw their sting, the only way to do so is by starting to convincingly mend what has been broken. Put another way, you cannot build any sort of good society – let alone support for it – when you are still surrounded by rubble.

Not that anyone seems to be listening, but there are credible economic voices making the case for large-scale, debt-financed public investment; they point out that it would actually have the opposite effect to the financial ruin Reeves and Starmer now seem to fear, firing exactly the growth – and tax receipts – they want. There are also serious Labour figures advocating the kind of big fiscal changes – such as a wealth tax – that might loosen the party’s self-imposed straitjacket. These things highlight a fear that ought to be nagging at Labour people, whatever the party’s huge poll leads and rising hopes: that even if political smallness initially gets Starmer and his allies over the line, it could sooner or later be their undoing.

John Harris is a Guardian columnist


Labour’s £28bn green investment pledge remains ‘level of ambition’ – Reynolds

Harry Stedman, PA
Sun, 28 January 2024



Labour remains committed to invest £28 billion a year in green projects as its “level of ambition”, the shadow business secretary has said.

Jonathan Reynolds conceded the investment may not be seen until the latter part of the next parliament and that “circumstances do change”.

Under its green prosperity plan announced in 2021, Labour had promised to invest £28 billion a year until 2030 in green projects if it came to power.


However, party leader Sir Keir Starmer previously hinted he could scale down the investment given the financial picture he would inherit if he becomes prime minister while the party was forced to deny allegations it had axed the pledge last week.

Asked whether Labour would spend £28 billion a year or not if in power, Mr Reynolds told Sky News on Sunday: “How much you can spend is determined by the health of the economy, which is clearly in a challenging position, and our own fiscal rules, which want to see debt fall by the end of a parliament.

“So, we’re still committed to that level of ambition but we’re clear it is the fiscal rules that determine whether you can do that, and that is not because we’re limiting our ambition in that space – it’s a recognition if you don’t have that discipline, you end up with the kind of disaster we saw with Liz Truss where you’re spending more money, but it’s only that interest, rather than the investments, that you want to make.”

Mr Reynolds said news earlier this week of up to 2,500 job losses at the Port Talbot steelworks showed the current Government “still spend a lot of money, but they’ll do it to make thousands of people redundant”, and that the next government will have to cope with “the worst inheritance ever”.

He labelled Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s discussion of further tax cuts in the coming months as “a scorched earth policy”.

Asked on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg whether Sir Keir was prone to showing uncertainty on his party’s policies, Mr Reynolds said: “I think we’ve got some very clear positions. I think circumstances do change, and particularly the health of the public finances, the cost of borrowing, that did change remarkably in the last few years.

“You’ve got no choice in opposition but to reflect on that and therefore put your programme forward, because, again, people don’t want promises that won’t be delivered.”

Aside from policies, he said voters should consider Sir Keir’s transformation of the Labour Party in recent years as a reason to put their confidence on him as a future prime minister.

He said: “Look at where the Labour Party was in 2019 – I mean, literally, in an absolutely terrible state.

“I don’t think most people believed one party leader in one term of parliament could bring Labour back from that to being competitive at the next election.

“Now he has done that and the courage, the resolve, the resilience, he’s had to show to do that tells you about the kind of prime minister he could be and would be if he’s given that choice.”

Opinion

Voices: Keir Starmer is about to make up his mind about Labour’s £28bn albatross – its green manifesto

John Rentoul

INDEPENDENT UK
Sat, 27 January 2024

Everyone has taken sides now, which makes Starmer’s decision more complicated 

(PA Wire)

Rishi Sunak was sharper at the most recent Prime Minister’s Questions than at the previous two. He fought back against Keir Starmer’s ridicule by mocking the leader of the opposition’s inability to decide whether he was committed to £28bn a year of green investment some day.

The prime minister referred to an anonymous briefing from someone close to Starmer who described the figure as “an albatross” around the party’s neck, and said: “That might have been the shadow chancellor.”

That was an accurate sally because although Rachel Reeves might not have briefed The Sun personally, she would like to get rid of the £28bn figure. There are now almost daily news stories either saying Labour is about to ditch it, or that Labour denies that a decision to ditch it has already been taken.


Patrick Maguire of The Times, who is writing a book about Labour’s not-so-long march to (presumed) election victory, reported that at Tuesday’s shadow cabinet meeting, “there were complaints by Emily Thornberry and Louise Haigh that this background hum of speculation is taking its toll on policy making and planning”.

Everyone has taken sides now, which makes Starmer’s decision more complicated. Ed Miliband, the shadow energy secretary, has fought tenaciously to keep the figure, which would provide him with powerful leverage in government. He is said to have “gone bananas” over the “albatross” briefing.

Another Labour person told me that the £28bn was such an albatross that it had “dragged the party down to a 20-point lead”. I am afraid I corrected them, saying that the average of the latest six polls shows a 21-point Labour lead.

Even Sue Gray, Starmer’s suddenly influential chief of staff, is reported by Maguire to be “resisting any decision that leaves Starmer vulnerable to accusations of folding under Tory pressure”.

Too late for that. If the figure is a bad idea (and it is), it needs to go. It is true that it hasn’t done Labour much harm so far but the reason that Isaac Levido, the Tory election chief, has persuaded Sunak to go for it is that it could be a problem for Labour when it comes under the intense scrutiny of an actual election campaign.

That is why I think Starmer has already decided to ditch it. He is serious about “no complacency”, about fighting for every vote as if the party is five points behind, and about reassurance. And that is why the £28bn figure is already a zombie number, left over from the days of zero real interest rates when government borrowing was an easy option. Since Reeves made the £28bn figure subject to her fiscal rules, specifically the one that has debt falling by the end of a parliament, it was already dead.

Yet it survives as a half-life, somewhere between an aspiration and a weapon to be deployed by Miliband in negotiations with the Treasury. But also as a weapon to be deployed by the Tories against Labour.

So Starmer needs to disown it. As Ed Balls, the former shadow chancellor, put it in his podcast on Thursday: “You need something which looks like a U-turn. And I think that that’s what they’re going to end up doing. They’ve tried partial U-turns. It hasn’t worked. They need a big U-turn.”

We can already predict what form the U-turn will take. Reeves will probably give an interview to the Today programme in advance of a speech to economists and green think tanks in which she will say that Labour needs to focus on what it wants to achieve instead of on an arbitrary number. She may talk about the plan to decarbonise UK electricity generation by 2030, and the drive to save energy by improving the insulation of millions of homes. She may even put a (small) price on the first-year costs of these policies, to be paid for out of the closure of specified tax “loopholes”.

And we can guess when she might do it. Although The Sun speculated that the albatross would be lifted from Labour’s neck after the Budget on 6 March, it would make sense to do it before. Starmer, who as leader of the opposition will respond to Jeremy Hunt’s Budget speech, will not want to go into the Commons chamber with a dead bird still weighing him down.

He has already set an internal deadline of 8 February for shadow ministers to finalise their manifesto plans, so that they are ready to enter confidential discussions with civil servants about them. We can therefore expect Reeves (and Miliband) to set out Labour’s shiny new green objectives, without the £28bn number, in the next 10 days or so.

It will look as if Labour has given in to Tory pressure. On the other hand, it will leave the Tories with even less ammunition for the election battle. Richard Holden, the Tory chair, cut the ground from under his own feet yesterday when he said: “For as long as Labour continue to commit to their £28bn of spending without a plan to pay for it, the British people should expect Labour to raise their taxes.”

In other words, the moment Labour ditches the £28bn figure, the British people should be reassured that a Labour government would not raise their taxes.

That will lead neatly to the argument between the parties about tax cuts in the Budget – and the further tax cuts promised by Holden in a pre-election mini-Budget in the autumn. This is firmer ground for Labour. Starmer, in his reply to the Budget, and Reeves in her reply to the mini-Budget later, will not promise to reverse Tory tax cuts.

This will be awkward because everyone knows that they would rather deploy any spare cash on public services (and on the “green transition”). That is what the voters want too. A YouGov poll this month found that 62 per cent of voters want the government to spend more on public services, “even if it means not cutting taxes”, and only 22 per cent want to cut taxes, “even if it means spending less on public services”. But Starmer and Reeves will recite “highest tax burden for 70 years” and move on.

They can then fight the election on the unspoken but true assumption that a Labour government would prioritise public spending over tax cuts, knowing that it is what the majority of the voters want.

UK

Channel 4 to axe almost 250 jobs in biggest ever round of cutbacks


Hannah Boland
Mon, 29 January 2024 

Channel 4

Channel 4 is poised to announce almost 250 job cuts this week after a slump in spending by advertisers.

The broadcaster is understood to be holding a company-wide meeting on Monday in which it is expected to lay out plans for what would be its biggest ever round of cutbacks.

The reduction would be equal to around 15pc of all staff, and a step up from initial plans.


Channel 4 was previously understood to be looking at axing 200 jobs, which would have been equal to the same amount in the wake of the financial crisis.

Details of the deeper-than-expected job cuts were first reported by Sky News.

The planned overhaul comes amid a sharp slump in spending on traditional TV ads, with chief executive Alex Mahon saying that revenues for 2023 will be between 8pc and 9pc below the previous year’s.

The broadcaster, which is publicly owned but commercially funded, is expected to post a deficit and is considering using its emergency £75m overdraft to shore up its finances.

Cuts are expected to centre on the traditional broadcast TV division, which has been hardest hit by advertisers reining in spending in the face of high interest rates and a slowing economy.

Channel 4 has already been forced to cut back its programming budget, which was at an all-time-high of £713m in 2022.

The current ad slump comes less than a year after Channel 4 avoided a government attempt at privatisation.

Ms Mahon recently said the industry is in “market shock” territory, with the downturn the worst since the financial crisis.

A spokesman for Channel 4 said the company was “having to deal with an extremely uncertain economy in the short term” and needed to accelerate the shift to become “a genuinely digital public service broadcaster”.

He added: “As a result, we need to continue to divest from our linear channels business and simplify our operations to become a leaner organisation.”

The spokesman said Channel 4 would share further details with its staff, partners and stakeholders soon.

Superdry restructure could mean store closures and job losses


Laura McGuire
Mon, 29 January 2024 

The Superdry logo on a store in Brussels

Embattled British retailer Superdry is plotting a major restructuring which could see stores closed and jobs cuts after reporting weak sales.

Over the weekend, Sky News reported that the firm was working with PWC to deliver a turnaround plan, which could lead to a company voluntary arrangement (CVA).

Superdry confirmed reports this morning, telling the London market it is “working with advisors to explore the feasibility of various material cost saving options”.


The board said: “Whilst there is no certainty that any of these options are progressed, they aim to build on the success of the cost saving initiatives carried out by the company to date and position the business for long-term success.”

Today’s developments come one week after the retailer posted a 23.5 per cent decline in revenues during the half year, blaming wet weather for the slide.

But the firm, which has 98 stores across the UK, has been struggling to keep its head above water for months, launching a number of schemes to shore up extra costs.

Back in October, it signed a joint venture with Reliance Brands Holding UK Ltd (RBUK) for the sale of its intellectual property in South Asia, in its latest bid to boost funds.

It mirrored an agreement announced by Superdry in March to sell the intellectual property of its Asia Pacific offering to South Korean retail group Cowell Fashion Company for $50m (£40m).

On Friday, chief of the firm Julian Dunkerton, admitted it was a difficult period for Superdry.

He said: “A challenging consumer retail market, set against a backdrop of macroeconomic uncertainty and some remarkably unseasonal weather conditions have all combined to weaken the financial performance of the group.”

Charlie Huggins, head of equities at the Wealth Club, said Superdry has no option but to take a knife to costs.

“Closing less profitable or loss-making stores makes sense to create a smaller, but more profitable enterprise,” he said.

“However, cost cutting can only go so far. At some point they need sales to start moving in the right direction which will need the brand to be revitalised. That will be a much more difficult task.”

Superdry considers store closures as part of cost-cutting plan

Jasper Jolly
Mon, 29 January 2024

Photograph: Britpix/Alamy

Superdry has confirmed it is considering a significant round of cost-cutting as the struggling fashion retailer contends with slumping sales.

The British brand is drawing up plans for potential store closures and job cuts after it reported last week that sales dropped by nearly a quarter in the six months to October. The delayed results were accompanied by the appointment of a new finance boss, the fifth in five years.

The company, which has about 3,350 staff and more than 215 stores, on Monday said it had hired “advisers to explore the feasibility of various material cost saving options.”

Related: John Lewis considering cutting 11,000 jobs after slashing redundancy terms

It added: “While there is no certainty that any of these options are progressed, they aim to build on the success of the cost saving initiatives carried out by the company to date and position the business for long-term success.”

Monday’s announcement came in response to a report on Saturday by Sky News saying Superdry was considering a significant number of store closures and job cuts with the consultancy PwC. Those cuts could come as part of a company voluntary arrangement or a restructuring, either of which would involve Superdry working with creditors to try to make its debts manageable.

Superdry’s market value has slumped in recent years. Its share price reached £19 in 2017, but was just 17p on Monday, giving it a value of £17.5m.

Julian Dunkerton co-founded Superdry in 2003 as a market stall in Cheltenham, growing it into one of the most successful names on the UK high street selling T-shirts, jeans and coats.

However, Superdry has struggled in recent years, and has gone through a turbulent few years after Dunkerton left before forcing his way back in a 2019 boardroom coup.

In recent months, Superdry has blamed its poor sales on the general weakness of the fashion market, with deep discounting by rivals, as well as milder weather that has prevented people from spending on winter items such as coats.

The company on Monday emphasised that it is already looking at steep cost cuts, with £40m already earmarked, compared with a previous aim of £35m. It said it had already made £20m of those cuts.

Superdry looks at ‘cost-saving options’ after potential store closure reports

Henry Saker-Clark, 

PA Deputy Business Editor
Mon, 29 January 2024 

Troubled fashion brand Superdry has said it is looking at various “cost-saving options” after reports it is considering a major restructuring which could include store closures and job cuts.

On Saturday, Sky News reported that Superdry is working with advisers at PwC on a plan which could lead to a CVA (company voluntary arrangement) or another form of restructuring.

Such a move could result in store closures and potentially force through rent reductions with landlords.

On Monday, Superdry told the stock market: “In line with the company’s turnaround strategy, the company confirms it is working with advisers to explore the feasibility of various material cost-saving options.

Superdry co-founder and chief executive Julian Dunkerton (Superdry/PA)

“Whilst there is no certainty that any of these options are progressed, they aim to build on the success of the cost-saving initiatives carried out by the company to date and position the business for long-term success.”

It comes days after the firm revealed a sharp slump in sales over the half-year to October and warned shareholders its fortunes could still take some time to turn around.

On Friday, the clothing firm said that its revenue had fallen by nearly a quarter (23.5%) to £219.8 million in the six months to the end of October, with adjusted loss nearly doubling to £25.3 million.

The retail business, which employs around 3,350 globally, said it also cut around £20 million in costs over the half-year and is on track for over £40 million in savings for the current year.

This saw the business close 12 stores over the first half of the financial year, taking its estate down 216 owned stores. The company also runs shops through franchisees.

UK

Unions and employers attack plans to resurrect agency worker plans

Alan Jones, PA Industrial Correspondent
Mon, 29 January 2024



Unions and recruiters have combined to call on the Government to abandon plans to end a ban on agency workers filling in for workers who go on strike.

The TUC and the Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC) urged ministers to reconsider the ”ill-judged proposal”.

The Government was defeated in the High Court last year over moves to allow agencies to supply employers with workers to fill in for those on strike.


A joint TUC-REC statement said despite strong opposition from employers and unions, the plans are being resurrected.

The statement said: “We both believe that using agency staff to cover strikes only prolongs and inflames the conflict between employers and their permanent staff.

“It also risks placing agency staff and recruitment businesses in the centre of often complicated and contentious disputes over which they have no control.

“Where a dispute occurs, the focus should instead be on negotiation and resolution to return to a normal service.

“The proposal is simply impractical. There are currently significant numbers of vacancies for temporary agency workers. This suggests that many can pick and choose the jobs they take and are unlikely to opt for roles that require them to undermine industrial action.”

REC chief executive Neil Carberry said: “Agencies across the country have been clear that they do not want the law changed again.

“The ban on direct replacement of striking workers reflects global good practice and protects temps and agencies from being drawn into disputes that are nothing to do with them.

“Removal of the ban does nothing to resolve those disputes either. The REC was clear in 2022 that this is a step that only causes problems for businesses and workers in reality – however good politicians think it sounds.”

TUC general secretary Paul Nowak said: “The humiliating High Court defeat should have been the final nail in the coffin for these unworkable, shoddy plans to overturn the long-standing ban on agency workers filling in for striking workers.

“Now they are trying to resurrect the proposal despite strong opposition from unions and employers. It’s spiteful, cynical – and it won’t work.

“Bringing in agency staff to deliver important services in place of strikers risks worsening disputes and poisoning industrial relations.

“Agency recruitment bodies have repeatedly made clear they don’t want their staff to be put in the position where they have to cover strikes.

“It’s time for ministers to listen and drop these plans for good.”

A Government spokesperson said: “We want to ensure that there is an appropriate balance between the right to strike and the rights of the general public to go about their daily lives and access vital public services.

“We believe there is a strong case for this change to help employers to manage any disruption, and people expect the Government to act in circumstances where their rights and freedoms are being disproportionately impacted.”

LGBTQ+ RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS
Germany’s transgender community confronts surge in far-right disinformation

Christopher Wiggins
Sun, January 28, 2024 


Germany COLOGNE Christopher Street Day Pride March Sign Amnesty International Translation Stand up for the protection of LGBTI people worldwide Munich Old Town National theater rainbow flags

The transgender community in Germany faces an escalation in disinformation, primarily fueled by far-right groups amid attempts to pass the country’s Self-Determination Act. This legislative proposal, designed to ease the legal process of gender change on official documents, was initially lauded as a progressive step by Germany’s majority Social Democrat (SPD), Green, and neoliberal Free Democrat (FDP) coalition. However, Deutsche Welle reports that it has now become a flashpoint for intense political debates.

The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has been particularly active in exploiting this issue, using it to stir divisive political rhetoric much like the American Republican Party has been doing.

“There’s no money for pensioners, schools and the railway under the current government, but they now want to introduce nationwide gender identity advice centers for all those who don’t know if they are male or female,” the deputy leader of AfD, Beatrix von Storch, told the German Bundestag last November. She questioned to what end documents could be “falsified” if one “can choose” to be a woman by wearing “painted fingernails and mini skirts.”

— (@)

The German publication Welt highlighted FDP member Justice Minister Marco Buschmann’s leadership in this legislative change. In an interview with Welt, Buschmann conveyed the act’s objective to simplify the process of changing gender registration. Furthermore, in an interview with ZDF television, Buschmann criticized the current legal process for gender change, saying, “Imagine that you simply want to live your life and you don’t wish anyone anything bad, and then you’re questioned about what your sexual fantasies are, what underwear you wear and similar things. Those affected have found this questioning very degrading.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center has documented similar strategies by right-wing groups in the U.S. to undermine transgender rights. According to the SPLC, these groups isolate transgender rights advocates from traditional allies, using tactics that frame transgender rights as contrary to the interests of other marginalized groups.

CENSORSHIP

Crackdown on an already banned Hamas raises free speech fears in Germany

Sophie Tanno and Nadine Schmidt, CNN
Sun, January 28, 2024 

As Israel battles Hamas in Gaza, European authorities have been tightening the net on the militants, with high-profile raids, financial curbs and a crackdown of its online activities. But no country has gone further in targeting an already-banned group and its supporters than Germany.

In Berlin, pro-Palestinian marches have been limited and schools have been granted the power to place bans on Palestinian flags and keffiyeh scarves.

Across the country, using the pro-Palestinian slogan “From the river to the sea” is now a criminal offense. The chant, used frequently at demonstrations, demands equal rights and the independence of Palestinians, although in some cases it is intended to call for the abolishment of Israel.

German politicians have repeatedly stated that Israel’s security is Germany’s “reason of state.” This term is a reference to Germany’s special relationship with Israel due to its Nazi past, which saw the German state systematically murder 6 million Jews in the Holocaust. This genocide profoundly shaped the country’s policymaking.

Friedrich Merz, the leader of the Christian Democratic Union, last year called for a signed statement confirming “Israel’s right to exist” as a prerequisite for German citizenship.

But Germans themselves are divided. In a January poll carried out by German public broadcaster ZDF, 61% of respondents did not consider Israel’s military campaign in Gaza to be justified.

Adding to a complex picture, Germany has the largest Palestinian diaspora in Europe, estimated at 300,000.

People at a pro-Palestine rally in Berlin hold a banner reading "From the river to the sea, we demand equality." - J'rg Carstensen/picture-alliance/dpa/AP

There are thought to be around 450 Hamas members in Germany and, like the rest of the European Union, Germany considers Hamas a terrorist organization.

The figure comes from The Federal Office for Protection of the Constitution (BfV), which in 2022 warned that “Hamas sees Western countries such as Germany as refuge in which the organization can concentrate on collecting donations, recruiting new supporters, and spreading its propaganda.”

Experts told CNN that there are heightened risks of attacks following the October 7 attacks, which left 1,200 Israelis dead, and signs that Hamas is boosting its presence in Germany and beyond.

But at the same time, Germany is facing questions over what its crackdown on a small number of Hamas members means for legitimate expressions of Palestinian solidarity and opposition to the war in Gaza. More than 26,000 people have died in the enclave since October 7, according to the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry.
Arrests and raids

An early warning of the risks the new conflict brought came in October, when Molotov cocktails were thrown at a Berlin synagogue. In line with other European countries, Germany stepped up security amid fears of further attacks. There were also reports of people celebrating the Hamas attacks on the streets of Berlin.

Then in December came the biggest flashpoint yet, as four alleged members of Hamas were arrested and accused of planning attacks against Jewish institutions in Europe. Three of the suspects were detained in Berlin and another in Rotterdam.

According to Germany’s top prosecutor, all four are longstanding members of Hamas with close links to the leadership of its military branch.

German media showed images of authorities retrieving ice packs from a Berlin apartment, which contained ammonium nitrate.

Hans-Jacob Schindler, senior director at the Counter Extremism Project (CEP), said ammonium nitrate – which is also used as a fertilizer - is the “explosive of choice” for making quick and cheap improvised explosive devices.

Overall, Schindler believes there are around 10,000 people in Germany who “broadly agree with what Hamas does and are willing to take part in demonstrations, raise funds and share propaganda.”

Asked if Hamas’ presence would expand in the wake of the October 7 attacks, Schindler said: “Yes, it has grown already.”

Germany and the Netherlands are not the only European countries to see raids on Hamas suspects.

Denmark earlier in January said seven people suspected of planning a terror attack had links to Hamas, while Israel has claimed that Hamas was planning to attack its embassy in Sweden. When approached by CNN for comment, Sweden’s foreign ministry declined to comment on specific missions.

But while such incidents grab headlines, more low-key efforts are also underway.

Police in the German city of Potsdam seized donation boxes from two fast food restaurants in November.

The boxes were labelled “Die Barmherzigen Hände e.V.” or “Merciful Hands” – a charitable association which states on its website that it has now dissolved.

Brandenburg’s Office for the Protection of the Constitution has launched an investigation, but previously named “Merciful Hands” as a “contact point for Hamas supporters”.

Two people are led from a helicopter to a car by police officers at a helipad in Karlsruhe, Germany, Friday Dec. 15, 2023. - Uli Deck/dpa/AP

The office confirmed to CNN that it is investigating unknown persons on suspicion of violating the Association Act, which determines the right to form societies and other associations.

This was denied by a former chairman of the association when approached by German newspaper Der Spiegel for comment, who said that the charity collected money for orphans including Palestinians. CNN has reached out to the charity for comment.

According to The George Washington University, charitable organizations are one of the most common vehicles used by Hamas networks in the West to collect funds.

Matthew Levitt, a director at pro-Israel American think tank the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and a former U.S. official specializing in counterterrorism, told CNN that Hamas is using Europe as a “cash cow.”

“Hamas is pretty good at laundering funds and masking what it is doing,” he said.

“The majority of people who are donating to these charities don’t know [they are supporting Hamas] because they present themselves as charities that are just helping Palestinians.”

Germany’s neighbor Austria has also grappled with the issue of Hamas fundraising, suspending aid to Palestinians in the wake of Hamas’ attack pending a review into what the funds were being used for.

The suspension was lifted on December 7, since the review found no indication funds were being used for terrorism.

This hints at the dilemma facing international donors keen to help ease the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Germany itself stepped up its assistance earlier this year.
Spreading propaganda

On November 2, Germany took the step of banning Hamas and all activities linked to the group. Although Hamas was already a proscribed terror group, the move gave authorities greater power to target supporters, including on social media.

The EU has put pressure on social media giants to combat disinformation related to the Gaza conflict, while US intelligence agencies have warned Hamas is boosting its influence, in part due to viral propaganda videos.

According to the Atlantic Council, a research group focusing on international relations, Telegram channels run by Hamas have experienced significant growth since the start of the conflict. A Hamas-aligned channel called “Gaza Now” has also drastically increased its number of subscribers, nearly doubling in size within the first 24 hours of the conflict.

Schindler believes that Hamas has been increasing its propaganda efforts in Europe because it knows it cannot win a conflict by conventional means.

“Hamas understands that there’s no way militarily that they can prevail against the IDF [Israel Defensce Forces]. So they have to have a couple of building blocks in place in order to make sure that Hamas as an organization has a chance to survive,” he said.

Police stand outside a building that houses a synagogue following a pre-dawn attack on October 18 in Berlin, Germany. - Maja Hitij/Getty Images

As part of this strategy, according to Schindler, Hamas is pumping propaganda into Germany over its social media channels daily to try and build a following.

Professor Yossi Mekelberg, an associate fellow of the Middle East and Africa Programme at Chatham House, believes the largest security threat comes from “general radicalization as a result of what is happening in Gaza and the West Bank.”

“There might be some [Hamas] cells in different places in Europe, but the main concern is how certain already-radicalized groups might react to [the war in Gaza] and decide to act through terrorism.

“The radicalization happens at home, but it’s affected by events abroad. The war in Gaza will have great influence because there are double standards in the killing of Israelis compared to the killing of Palestinians.”
‘Muslims in Germany are not Hamas’

Berlin’s refusal to authorize many pro-Palestinian demonstrations since October 7 has been criticized as infringing on the right to freedom of assembly.

Germany, though, has the legal capacity to crack down on anything that could be considered antisemitic due to what it calls its “special responsibility” to the Jewish people because of the Holocaust.

At the same time, this has triggered warnings that the actions could alienate a significant proportion of Germany’s population. The bulk of the anti-war protests have been peaceful.

One protester at an unauthorized march in Berlin last year told Reuters: “I feel that in Germany we’re not allowed to speak our mind.”

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said authorities “should avoid restrictions on protests unless they are absolutely necessary.” Criminalizing or banning general Palestinian symbols is a discriminatory and disproportionate response, the organization added.

Speaking to CNN, German Green lawmaker Lamya Kaddor agreed that the slogan “from the river to the sea” could be understood as a denial of Israel’s right to exist and as support for Hamas, and it is “therefore correct” for it to be treated with initial suspicion.

However, she added that we must be careful not to equate pro-Palestinian supporters with Hamas sympathizers in Europe.

“Not every expression of solidarity with Palestine is support for Hamas; the desire for the Palestinians to have their own state and for peace is not antisemitic; a Palestinian flag is not a criminal offense.”

She emphasized that Muslim communities in Germany have felt ostracized in light of the events in the Middle East, with many talking of a “cold social atmosphere” which has placed Muslims “under general suspicion.”

“Despite the need to safeguard Jewish life in Germany and to resolutely combat the extremism of Hamas and other groups, we must always make it clear that Muslims in Germany are not Hamas and that their concerns, fears and opinions must be taken seriously and given space.”

Nadine Schmidt reported from Berlin and Sophie Tanno reported from and wrote in London.

UK 

Labour MP suspended after accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza in post about Holocaust Memorial Day

Genevieve Holl-Allen

(TORY) TELEGRAPH
Sun, January 28, 2024 

Kate Osamor served on the Labour frontbench under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn - PA/Danny Lawson

A Labour MP has been suspended after accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza in a post about Holocaust Memorial Day.

Kate Osamor, the MP for Edmonton, had said in a weekly newsletter for local members on Friday that Holocaust Memorial Day was “an international day to remember the six million Jews murdered during the Holocaust, the millions of other people murdered under Nazi persecution of other groups and more recent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and now Gaza.”

She also shared a photograph of herself signing the Holocaust Educational Trust’s commemoration book in Westminster.

Ms Osamor has now been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party by the party’s chief whip pending an investigation, a Labour source confirmed on Sunday evening.

The former frontbencher under Jeremy Corbyn had issued an apology on Friday for “any offence caused” by her comments.

Ms Osamor wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter: “Holocaust Memorial Day is a day to remember the 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust and the genocides that have occurred since.

“I apologise for any offence caused by my reference to the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza as part of that period of remembrance.”

Tensions within the Labour Party

The Jewish Leadership Council had said of Ms Osamor’s comments before she was suspended: “To invoke our history and abuse Holocaust Memorial Day to attack the Jewish state is not only amoral, it is offensive to survivors and the wider Jewish community.”

A weekly update post on Ms Osamor’s website now reads: “Tomorrow is Holocaust Memorial Day, an international day to remember the six million Jews murdered during the Holocaust, the millions of other people murdered under Nazi persecution of other groups and more recent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda and Bosnia.”

The suspension reflects the ongoing tensions within the Labour Party about its response to the Israel-Gaza conflict.

Last Wednesday, Labour MP for Birmingham Hall Green Tahir Ali apologised after being spoken to by party whips for telling the Commons that Rishi Sunak had “the blood of thousands of innocent people on his hands” over the Government’s handling of the conflict.

Earlier this month, shadow foreign secretary David Lammy had a major policy speech in London interrupted by pro-Palestinian protestors.

Labour MP has whip suspended after Gaza comment in Holocaust Memorial Day post

Nina Lloyd, PA Political Correspondent
Sun, 28 January 2024

Kate Osamor  British politician


An MP has had the Labour whip suspended after she appeared to say the war in Gaza should be remembered as a genocide in a post about Holocaust Memorial Day.

Kate Osamor has issued an apology for “any offence caused” by the message on the eve of the day marking the murder of six million Jews during the Second World War.

A Labour source confirmed that the chief whip has suspended her from the parliamentary party while an investigation takes place.



The Edmonton MP had appeared to suggest the conflict in Gaza was a genocide in a message she shared online the day before Holocaust Memorial Day.

She later tweeted: “Holocaust Memorial Day is a day to remember the 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust and the genocides that have occurred since. I apologise for any offence caused by my reference to the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza as part of that period of remembrance.”

The former shadow development secretary, who served in Jeremy Corbyn’s top team, is the second Labour MP to apologise for remarks about the war in Gaza this week.

Tahir Ali accused Prime Minister Rishi Sunak of having “the blood of thousands of innocent people on his hands” over his response to the conflict.

The comments in the House of Commons prompted the Labour leadership to quickly distance itself from his position and Mr Ali later posted an apology on X, formerly Twitter.

“Earlier at PMQs I asked the Prime Minister about the actions of Israel in Gaza. This is obviously a deeply emotive issue,” he said.

“While I do not resile from my strongly held views on the situation in the Middle East, I would like to apologise for the way in which I described the Prime Minister in my question.”

A Labour spokesman said of his remarks: “That language is clearly inappropriate and not language we would support or endorse or believe should be used.”


Labour suspends Kate Osamor over Gaza comments in Holocaust message

Rowena Mason Whitehall editor

THE GUARDIAN
Sun, 28 January 2024 

Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA

The Labour MP Kate Osamor has had the whip suspended while she is investigated for saying Gaza should be remembered as a genocide on Holocaust Memorial Day.

The MP for Edmonton in north London is due to meet party whips on Monday after issuing an apology over the message she sent on the eve of the day marking the murder of 6 million Jews during the second world war.

Osamor had distributed the message to her party members, saying Holocaust Memorial Day should be observed, but other genocides should also be remembered – listing Gaza as one of them.


The former shadow development secretary, who served in Jeremy Corbyn’s top team, shared a photograph of herself signing the Westminster remembrance book of the Holocaust Educational Trust.

Related: Angela Rayner: Tories’ council fund is cynical pre-election sticking plaster

She also wrote that there was an ‘“international duty” to remember the victims of the Holocaust, as well as “more recent genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and now Gaza”.

Osamor later tweeted: “Holocaust Memorial Day is a day to remember the 6 million Jews killed in the Holocaust and the genocides that have occurred since. I apologise for any offence caused by my reference to the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza as part of that period of remembrance.”

Jonathan Reynolds, the shadow business secretary, told Sky News that Osamor had met the chief whip to discuss her comments and was due to meet officials again this week.

“What is happening in Gaza is clearly a humanitarian catastrophe that is recognised,” he said. “But there are specific reasons why the Holocaust is considered as it is. It’s important on Holocaust Remembrance Day to remember that.

“And I understand Kate has apologised. There’s been a conversation with the chief whip. There’ll be further conversations next week, but of course we take anything in this space extremely seriously.”

Asked if Osamor was likely to be disciplined, Reynolds added: “There will be those conversations, and I can tell you that they have already been scheduled for the week ahead. Of course, whenever we have a situation like this, we take it extremely seriously.”

Starmer has supported Israel’s “right to defend itself” in Gaza against Hamas, but more recently called for a sustainable ceasefire and hit out at the “intolerable” casualties.

His position has caused tensions within Labour. Many in the party have pressed him to be more critical of Israel’s military action, which has caused an estimated 24,000 deaths.

Momentum, the pressure group on the left of Labour, said it was an “outrageous decision [that] further damages Labour’s reputation for anti-racism under Keir Starmer, and should be immediately reversed”.