UK
‘We’re by no means out of the woods yet’: workers face uncertainty over Alstom train plant


Heather Stewart
Fri, 19 April 2024

Mick Waldram works on a train at Alstom’s plant in Derby.Photograph: Fabio De Paola/The Guardian

“It’s strange at the moment: everywhere’s so quiet. It’s not good.” Mick Waldram has worked at Alstom’s sprawling train manufacturing plant on Litchurch Lane in Derby for 20 years, like his parents before him, and has watched in recent months as its six production lines have been gradually mothballed.

“I’ve been here 20 years and my brother’s been here 20 years as well,” Waldram says. “My mum was the managing director’s secretary, she was here 38 years, and my dad was a projects engineer who was here 36 years. We want to stay here. Me and my brother are not looking at leaving, we want to stay here if possible, do another 20 years.”

Talks with the transport secretary, Mark Harper, on Tuesday raised hopes that a new order for 10 trains on London’s crowded Elizabeth line would safeguard the future of manufacturing at this historic site, which started work in the 1840s.


But after months of gnawing uncertainty for the 1,300 manufacturing staff whose jobs are at risk, and with kit standing idle and suppliers shuttered, no one is taking anything for granted.

“I don’t think we’re there yet: if you read the wording from the government, there’s caveats in there, there’s get out of jail cards,” says Darren Spencer, a production manager at the site and a rep for the Unite union. “We’re by no means out of the woods yet.”

Harper said he had reached an “agreement in principle” with Alstom on the 10 trains, subject to value for money for the taxpayer, adding that he was confident “a solution is now in sight”.

He and the trains minister, Huw Merriman, have stressed the complexity of the issue. But the Labour MP and shadow transport secretary, Louise Haigh, says it could have been resolved long ago.

“Mark Harper has spent months claiming a deal to save jobs at Alstom was out of his hands. It is shameful that he has had to be dragged kicking and screaming under pressure from Labour, the industry and Unite, just to come back to the table,” Haigh said.

She added: “Ministers need to end this cycle of chaos on our railways and develop a consistent rail procurement strategy to give certainty to manufacturers.”

Unite has worked in an unusually close double act with senior management at Alstom, in an attempt to convince the government that while future projections for the rail industry are upbeat, Litchurch Lane faces a potentially unbridgeable gap in its order schedule.

Staff and managers feared that could lead to hundreds of jobs and decades of expertise being lost – and new contracts being fulfilled overseas.

The cost of the downturn in orders is already evident onsite, where hundreds of workers gathered to mark the last train rolling off the production line late last month. Some have already taken voluntary redundancy, with more due to leave in the coming weeks.

One contractor based at Litchurch Lane, Paintbox, went into administration last year when its work painting new carriages dried up – although some of its staff have been taken on by Alstom. Motherson, which did the wiring on the trains, pulled out of the site. Another Alstom supplier, Solo Rail Solutions, in Birmingham, which made the doors, appointed administrators earlier this month.

With rail woven deeply into Derby’s local economy as well as its heritage, the campaign to close the gap in Alstom’s order book has attracted the support of scores of local businesses – with the slogan displayed on a giant banner at Derby County’s Pride Park ground during last weekend’s match.

Football fan Luke Brame, who completed his apprenticeship at the site and has worked there for nine years, says he feels proud of his handiwork as he travels around to watch matches.

“I quite like working here because I go on trains a lot for football. It’s quite cool when you go on one and you think: ‘I built this one,’” he says. “I’m waiting to see what the future is really. I haven’t gone for voluntary redundancy because I don’t know what else I want to do, and I want to carry on the legacy that the older people have left me.” While his day job is usually welding, for the moment there is nothing for him to weld.

If the order for the 10 Elizabeth line trains is confirmed – extending an existing contract – Alstom plans to restart production in Derby on a slimmed-down basis, with three or four production lines brought back into action, until work is due to start on 54 trains for HS2, in a year or so.

That contract is a joint venture with Hitachi, which is also warning about potential job losses at its Newton Aycliffe factory in County Durham, without help from the government to bring forward orders. Harper met representatives from the factory this week, and the Department for Transport insists that – as with Alstom – they are seeking a solution.

The French multinational Alstom inherited the vast Derby site – the biggest in the world outside China – when it bought the Canadian company Bombardier’s train business in 2021, as the industry emerged from the financial earthquake of the Covid pandemic.

Work servicing and refurbishing much of the UK’s passenger rail fleet continues here, as does engineering and design, which were never at risk; but manufacturing has been halted for now.

Campaigners who have fought for the future of the site welcomed Harper’s announcement this week – but lamented the months of brinkmanship and bureaucracy it took to get here.

“This is an unnecessary journey that we’ve just been on,” says John Forkin, the managing director of Marketing Derby, the city’s inward investment agency, which corralled hundreds of local businesses to throw their weight behind Litchurch Lane. They wrote to Harper earlier this week, calling on him to “save our trains: do the deal”.

“We will still be seeking meetings with ministers about the future of trains,” Forkin says, citing the fate of up to 15,000 jobs in the local supply chain, many at small companies. “We’ve got to stop this boom and bust. We should be able to plan it a lot better. We have to stop doing this.”

Back at Litchurch Lane, the cloud of uncertainty lingers.

Chloe Turnbull works in “methods engineering”, shuttling between the desk-based engineers and the hands-on production workers she trained with. “If there’s any issues that come up during the production of the trains, I’m here to get your engineering drawings and stuff like that.”

“This is my fourth year now. I did my apprenticeship for the first three years. I went down the whole production line from start to finish,” she says. “The more I can be learning now the better, and obviously the thought of not having anything any more, and going to find something else is so stressful. So I’m very stressed and upset, because I enjoy it.”

Body Shop collapse triggered by buyer’s failure to refinance loan


Luke Barr
Fri, 19 April 2024 

The Body Shop is closing its stores after falling into administration in February - Gareth Fuller/PA

The Body Shop collapsed after HSBC withdrew a line of credit and the chain’s private equity buyer failed to secure new funding, The Telegraph can reveal.

A shortfall worth at least £100m arose after Aurelius acquired the retailer in November, much of which stemmed from HSBC’s decision to withdraw credit facilities.

This “unplanned” funding gap led to the retailer’s rapid downfall in February, just three months after Aurelius bought The Body Shop from Brazilian cosmetics company Natura for £207m.

The revelations shed fresh light on the events that led to The Body Shop’s controversial administration and are likely to raise more questions about the collapse of the business.


HSBC is understood to have been a lender to The Body Shop through its parent company Natura.

The decision to sell the retailer triggered HSBC to revisit the relationship and the bank subsequently gave The Body Shop at least 18 months’ notice of its decision to stop lending.

It meant any potential buyer needed to refinance existing loans or seek alternative sources of credit to help keep The Body Shop afloat.

However, Aurelius failed to act on HSBC’s withdrawal, prompting the retailer’s UK arm to file for insolvency.

A source close to Aurelius claimed it was never made aware of HSBC’s decision to cut ties with The Body Shop.

After completing the acquisition in January, Aurelius discovered The Body Shop’s finances were allegedly in a worse state than expected, which sparked internal discussions over the firm’s due diligence.

Meanwhile, it is understood HSBC opted against taking on the private equity firm as a client as it was unable to carry out basic compliance checks.

Documents released by the administrators at FRP reveal details of The Body Shop’s demise. They state: “Following completion of the sale, the company was informed by its bankers that they intended to cease providing banking facilities.”

The decision led to the company being cut off from tens of millions of pounds in credit, which “ultimately resulted in a substantial unplanned cash outflow from the business”.

The administrators added: “These events combined gave rise to a forecast peak funding requirement for the company in excess of £100m, significantly greater than the requirement identified as part of the acquisition process.

“The substantial difference between the anticipated funding requirements and the reality of the company’s position, combined with the business’ poor trading performance, meant the shareholders could not commit to the required level of funding.”

HSBC’s withdrawal from The Body Shop and Aurelius’s failure to refinance loans represent the latest twist regarding the retailer’s collapse.

Hundreds of jobs have already been lost as part of the administration, with swathes of stores being forced to shut. Landlords are also braced for rent cuts as part of a planned Company Voluntary Agreement.

The Telegraph previously revealed that the taxpayer is bearing the brunt of The Body Shop’s redundancy costs, which has led to senior MPs calling for a deeper review into what went wrong.

Scrutiny was heightened last month after it emerged administrators are investigating claims that millions of pounds were taken out of the business before its sale to Aurelius.

Tensions rose further after former owner Natura criticised Aurelius for breaking a promise to pay around 30 Body Shop employees roughly £3m in awards.

The Brazilian cosmetics giant subsequently stepped in to pay staff members to defuse tensions.

A long list of creditors are owed millions of pounds as a result of the retailer’s insolvency, many of which will attend a meeting with administrators in the coming weeks.

Those owed money include a string of local councils across the UK, as well as companies such as Royal Mail, TikTok and The Boston Consulting Group.

Ironically, Natura is one of the largest creditors in the group as its subsidiary Avon is owed £12.8m by The Body Shop.

It is understood that Aurelius is in pole position to reclaim The Body Shop’s assets, shorn of debt, if no other bidder materialises during the administration process.

Labour’s Liam Byrne MP, chairman of the business and trade committee, told The Telegraph last month that The Body Shop’s failure is part of a “live research programme” into private equity’s role in the retail sector.

He said: “The Body Shop was a trailblazer for ethical enterprise and it now looks like it’s being crashed while the taxpayer picks up a big bill for redundancy payments.”

Aurelius, HSBC and FRP all declined to comment.

UK airline emissions on track to reach record high in 2024


Gwyn Topham

 Transport correspondent

THE GUARDIAN

Fri, 19 April 2024

Ryanair emitted 13.5% more CO2 in 2023 and easyJet was up by 4.8%.

Photograph: Neil Hall/EPA

Emissions from UK flights are rapidly returning to pre-pandemic levels, with CO2 pollution from aviation on track to reach a record high this year.

The increase means the sector may breach a key plank of the government’s Jet Zero strategy, which pledged to not surpass 2019 figures on the way to reaching net zero emissions from aviation by 2050.

Several airlines are already emitting more than ever before, according to analysis from the campaign group Transport & Environment (T&E) based on UK and EU carbon reporting and other flight data.

Related: Campaigners warn over failure to curb Europe’s ‘runaway’ transport emissions


It estimates that Ryanair emitted 13.5% more CO2 in 2023 than it did in 2019, with easyJet up by 4.8% and Jet2.com up by 26.3%. British Airways was still by far the UK’s most polluting airline, although its emissions remain 18% below 2019 levels.

Last year, 940,000 flights departed from UK airports, emitting a total of 32 mn tonnes of CO2, 89% of 2019 levels, according to T&E. It said there had been remarkable levels of growth in comparison to 2022 alone, with long-haul flight emissions 28% higher, and that the data suggested aviation emissions could reach a record high in 2024.

BA, Ryanair and easyJet have announced continued planned expansion of between 7% and 9% for 2024.

Although the newer planes with lower fuel consumption ordered by airlines such as Ryanair mean they have boasted of lower emissions for each passenger, the rapid growth in traffic means their overall pollution figures are growing inexorably.

As well as warning that the UK government’s Jet Zero roadmap towards more sustainable aviation risks going off course well before 2050, T&E urged policymakers to reconsider how airlines are taxed given the limitations of the emissions trading scheme (ETS).

The UK’s ETS only covers flights wholly within the UK, the European Economic Area and Switzerland. That means that long-haul flights in and out of the UK – accounting for the majority of emissions – escape without charge while domestic or European flights pay for each tonne of CO2.

British Airways, whose emissions grew an estimated 25% in 2023, pays less under the ETS than easyJet or Ryanair, despite producing almost three times as much CO2 because of its long-haul network. Virgin Atlantic, which only flies to destinations outside Europe, paid nothing at all in ETS. Wizz Air paid £34.23 for each tonne of CO2 emitted, according to T&E.

BA would have paid another £350m annually under an ETS system that included long-haul flights, T&E added.

Ryanair itself has called for an overhaul of the system, demanding the extension of the UK and EU ETS to all flights. However, reform of the scheme to include long-haul flights has proved difficult in the past, with the US and China threatening to derail previous EU attempts to find a fairer global solution.

Future additional emissions from all flights will be liable for offsets under the Corsia system agreed by the UN body, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), before the pandemic – but it is not mandatory worldwide until 2027 and campaigners fear the impact will be negligible due to the likely cost to airlines.

T&E has called for a kerosene tax. Matt Finch, the UK policy manager at T&E, said: “Some airlines had their most polluting year ever in 2023, and there is a good chance that many more will get that badge of dishonour in 2024.

“The UK government is apparently committed to charging polluters to help pay the clean-up costs they cause, but it is wilfully ignoring charging airlines, despite their growing climate impact. That’s the directly opposite approach they’re taking to the nation’s drivers at the petrol pump.”

The Department for Transport was approached for comment.

A BA spokesperson said: “As this report recognises, [our] emission levels are below where they were in 2019. We are proud of the 10% reduction in our carbon intensity we’ve delivered since 2019 and are working hard towards our target of net zero by 2050.”

Opinion

Welcome to the jungle – the new Cold War era of investing is upon us

Barry Norris
Sat, 20 April 2024 

Profit Cold War


The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 marked the symbolic end of the Cold War. But it was an economic not a military victory – a realisation in the Soviet Union that communism could never bring the same economic advancement as capitalism.

The following three decades witnessed the fastest pace of globalisation since the “hundred years’ peace” of 1815-1914 and the proclamation of a unipolar “new world order” led by the United States. It also began a 30-year bear market in European defence stocks.

But geopolitical events have now changed course which has significant yet underappreciated implications for investors.

Too much ‘butter’


Without its historic adversary – the Warsaw Pact was officially dissolved in 1991 – Nato suffered a crisis of identity, leading to the axing of defence budgets and an economic “peace dividend”.

From 1950 to 1989, the UK, France and Germany spent 5.5pc, 3.6pc and 3.2pc of GDP respectively on defence, compared to just 2.4pc, 2pc and 1.3pc since. In absolute terms, in 2022, British and French annual military spending was only slightly more (in 2021 dollar terms) as in 1989. Germany spent slightly less.

At the time of the Suez Crisis in 1956, the UK was spending 7.6pc of GDP on defence, accounting for 43pc of government spending (a similar ratio to Russia today).

Since then, spending on day-to-day public services (excluding armed forces) has increased from 18pc of GDP to over 35pc during Covid: 15 times the annual defence budget. Never had the UK spent so little on “guns” relative to “butter”.

Germany’s Kiel Institute has pointed out within its own country and across the whole of the G7 that there has been a “growing disconnect” between low military spending and high and rising geopolitical risk, concluding: “We live in dangerous times, but military budgets in the West have not responded to these developments.”

Russia and, more importantly, China never accepted American hegemony, seeing themselves as great powers, signing in 1997 a joint declaration to promote a “multi polar” world.

Encouraged by Europe’s reluctance to rearm and President Biden’s weak leadership, the “anti-hegemonic” alliance led by China, continues to grow, now including not only Russia, Iran, and North Korea, but also Brazil and South Africa.

Retired US army general and Hoover Institute Fellow HR McMaster recently noted: “The perception of weakness is provocative to this axis of aggressors.”

More ‘guns’ needed

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has, along with American pressure for Europe to pay its fair share, been a watershed moment for the defence industry.

All European Nato countries now accept – though are not necessarily enthusiastically implementing – a 2pc of GDP floor on annual defence budgets. But Europe would need to spend 3.5pc of GDP on its military to match the US.

Equally important to the defence industry is how much of the budget is spent on hardware. The Nato average today is 30pc (up from just 10pc in 2014) but countries in the frontline such as Finland and Poland are currently spending 50pc on equipment, which is likely to be the trend elsewhere going forward.

Brussels is determined for European nations to procure at least half of its hardware within the EU.

The entire annual revenues of the quoted European defence industry last year (including the UK) were just $132bn (£106bn). If the $375bn annual spend of Nato European nations increases from 1.75pc to 3pc of GDP, and 50pc of this is spent on equipment exclusively sourced within Europe, then annual industry revenues will double.

After three decades of retrenchment, the biggest problem European defence companies currently have is ramping up manufacturing capabilities to meet demand. To encourage investment, governments are offering defence contractors longer contracts and better payment terms.

But with the Russian annual military budget now thought unofficially to be as high as $160bn (10pc of GDP), a UK defence industry executive told me recently: “Putin is on a war footing today, but we have problems getting planning permission.”

Over the last 30 years, Western Europe has effectively disarmed, with its number of tanks down 80pc, fighter aircraft down 60pc and a halving of naval ships and submarines.

Many European countries have already donated most of their ammunition and useful weapons to Ukraine. Nato is now recommending 30 days of battle inventory (previously five days), but the more urgent Ukrainian conflict has postponed Europe’s ability to rearm.

The nature of combat in Ukraine has demonstrated that the next war is always different, requiring new kit: tanks with 360-degree armour, given vulnerability to loitering munitions; mobile artillery as a more cost-effective solution than precision missiles, for example in defending against drone attacks.

German weaponsmith Rheinmetall, the global leader in the manufacture of Nato-standard artillery and tank shells, is the best performing stock in Europe so far this year.

More generally, space and submarines, where Britain’s biggest and most successful manufacturer BAE Systems is well-placed, are promising growth areas, since these are now the only truly stealth activities. Norway’s Kongsberg has an effective monopoly in next generation anti-ship missiles, the kind of which Taiwan might find useful.

Kurtosis: the risk of extreme events

It is too simplistic for investors to think about the new Cold War simply in terms of defence spending. War also has more profound economic consequences and wider investment implications, leading to greater risk of extreme events. Statisticians call this “excess kurtosis” or “fat tails” relative to a normalised bell-curve distribution.

In the unipolar post-Cold War world, investors’ prime concern was the economic cycle, which could be managed by central banks providing liquidity at moments of extreme stress, most notably in 2008 and 2020.

But central banks can’t resolve supply side problems, prevent deglobalisation, or fight geopolitical conflicts. This means investors must think about extreme “unpredictable” outcomes, structurally higher inflation, and higher volatility.

We are already witnessing a reshaping of the global economy. The generally low inflation of the post-Cold War era, which has allowed for historically low interest rates, has been facilitated by the deflationary impulse of Russian commodities and Chinese manufactured goods. This is now changing.

Eminent economist Charles Kindleberger wrote that “war both cuts off old connections in trade and finance and is likely to require the fashioning of the new”.

Russian crude oil now gets sold at a discount to India and China, who – since we have destroyed our own indigenous fossil fuel industry – often export it back to Europe as a refined product.

This disruption of optimal economic trade routes – deglobalisation – by geopolitics, as seen with the Houthi attacks on merchant vessels in the Red Sea, ironically requires more rather than fewer ships for longer voyages, particularly crude (see Norway’s Frontline) and product tankers (see Norway’s Hafnia and Denmark’s Torm).

The American and Chinese economies continue to ‘decouple’

Chinese exports to the US are now down 25pc from peak. China’s foreign direct investment has now turned negative, with Western corporations instead looking to “friend-shore” manufacturing to Malaysia, India, Vietnam, or Mexico instead.

The US government has provided $280bn in subsidies via its Chips Act to “re-shore” semiconductor manufacturing from Asia, while also seeking to prevent the export of high-performance semiconductors and manufacturing equipment to China. What is politically logical comes with economic cost.

The projection of geopolitical power is also changing the unipolar global financial system based around the hegemony of the US dollar.

There is currently $300bn of Russian financial assets frozen (mostly in Belgium’s Euroclear), which the US wants to give to Ukraine – but Europe, fearing retaliation, is resisting, instead considering using the accumulating interest as war reparations.

Russia has responded by freezing the assets of investors from “non-friendly” countries. This should be a shot across the bows for any UK investors in the Chinese stock market.

Equally, the “anti-hegemonic” alliance is highly incentivised to diversify their assets “outside” the Western banking system to avoid political default risk.

Chinese holdings of US Treasuries are now down to just $800bn (from $1.2 trillion at the peak in 2016). Gold – with a market value of $15 trillion – is the most liquid alternative as a store of value. The People’s Bank of China has emerged as its current biggest buyer.

The “Axis” powers must also “de-dollarise” their financial systems since transacting in the greenback results in the risk of accumulating assets which could be confiscated. It also incurs the risk of being frozen out of international trade by sanctions via the dollar-based SWIFT payments system.

The new Cold War increases the attractiveness of “outside” money in all its forms: cash, gold, crypto and, for the Axis, their own currencies.

Russia, Iran, and Venezuela have already adopted China’s CIPS payment system to evade sanctions. China continues to explore a jointly issued central bank digital currency (CBDC) and migrate its commodity transactions from US dollars to renminbi. However, the renminbi share of global transactions is currently less than 3pc.

But rather than pay its friends in an arguably over-valued currency that is not fully convertible and could therefore only buy reciprocal Chinese goods and services, China has instead allowed convertibility into gold, which if done at scale, would require it to further ramp up its gold purchases. But it is not clear whether China can really afford to fulfil its reserve currency ambitions.

America has enjoyed the “exorbitant privilege” of the greenback being the world’s reserve currency, whereby Middle Eastern “petrodollars” and subsequently Asian manufacturing trade surpluses were recycled back into its own assets, particularly government debt, which in turn kept its interest rates low and stimulated the global economy through demand for imports.

But as the British experience of the early 20th century demonstrated, this privilege can be forfeited.

America is already running unprecedented fiscal stimulus at a time of full employment. War increases demand for commodities, which is inflationary, particularly when their supply is not indigenous.

The economic history of war suggests that rather than risk losing geopolitical conflicts, central banks of nations at war will backstop government debt, resorting to the printing press. In fact, the green ink on the new paper currency was the Civil War origin of the dollar’s “greenback” nickname.

The inflationary nature of war and the attractiveness of “outside” money means that gold – and its more volatile peer silver – should replace government bonds as a portfolio risk diversifier.

Having significantly underperformed the physical commodity, blue-chip gold miners such as Barrick and Newmont are a more geared play, now looking cheap perhaps for the first time in my investment career.

To all investors in the new Cold War era: welcome to the jungle and think about both guns n’ Kurtosis.


Barry Norris is founder of Argonaut Capital and manager of the Argonaut Absolute Return fund

Unilever to scale back environmental and social pledges


Rob Davies

THE GUARDIAN
Fri, 19 April 2024 

London-based Unilever previously promised to halve its use of virgin plastics by 2025.Photograph: Tim Ireland/PA

Unilever is to scale back its environmental and social aims, provoking critics to say its board should “hang their heads in shame”.

The consumer goods company behind brands ranging from Dove beauty products to Ben & Jerry’s ice-cream was seen as perhaps the foremost proponent of corporate ethics – particularly under the tenure of its Dutch former boss Paul Polman.

On Friday, the London-based firm’s current chief executive appeared to signal a strategic U-turn for the company, which is valued at £94bn on the London Stock Exchange. In an interview with Bloomberg, Hein Schumacher confirmed plans to water down the company’s ethical pledges on a range of issues including plastic usage and pay.


The shift comes amid a wider trend of pressure from shareholders in corporations ranging from banks to oil companies to cut costs and focus more on stock market performance than green projects.

Unilever, one of the largest users of plastic packaging in the world, had previously promised to halve its use of virgin plastics by 2025. Instead, it will now aim for a reduction of a third by 2026, Bloomberg reported. The less ambitious target equates to about 100,000 tonnes more fresh plastic every year.

The company is also abandoning a pledge to pay direct suppliers a living wage by 2030, instead proposing fair pay for suppliers accounting for half its annual spend on goods and services by 2026. It is also dropping a promise to spend €2bn (£1.7bn) a year with diverse businesses by 2025 and a commitment that 5% of its workforce will be made up of people with disabilities by the same year.

Schumacher said people’s focus on environmental and social issues was “cyclical”.

“When you have a huge drought for a number of months but everything else is going fine, the attention is on climate. These days it’s about wars and rightly so, that’s at the forefront.

“I’m not going to shout that we’re saving the world, but I want to make sure that in everything that we do, that it is indeed better,” he added.

He insisted that the company could still “make a difference” in the four key areas of climate, plastics, nature and people’s livelihoods.

Nina Schrank, the head of plastics at Greenpeace UK, said Unilever bosses “should hang their heads in shame”.

“Hein Schumacher and his board are well aware of the ruinous impact of their plastic pollution,” she said. “The tsunami of plastic they produce each year meant their existing targets were already not fit for purpose. We needed much more. And so rather than doubling down, they’re quietly dressing up their backpedalling and low ambition as worthy pragmatism.”

Unilever’s dilution of its ethical stance follows a period of worsening performance in which the company’s shares have fallen by 8% since Schumacher took over in July 2023.

Under Polman – and his successor Alan Jope – Unilever became increasingly involved in ethical initiatives. It promised to invest €1bn over 10 years in green projects and provided funding from its cleaning brand Domestos for a Unicef project to improve access to toilets in India.

The firm last month released plans to cut 7,500 jobs globally and spin off its ice-cream division as part of an overhaul aimed at saving about €800m over the next three years.

Unilever gives up on ‘saving the world’ after ‘virtue-signalling’ backlash


Daniel Woolfson

THE TELEGRAPH
Fri, 19 April 2024 

Chief executive Hein Schumacher says the company will focus on 'fewer things and with greater impact' - Vivian Wan/Bloomberg

Unilever has abandoned efforts to “save the world” after a backlash from investors over “virtue-signalling” that included giving Hellmann’s mayonnaise a social purpose.

The consumer goods giant, which owns Marmite, Dove, Magnum and Ben & Jerry’s, has watered down green targets and scrapped some diversity pledges after investors told it to focus more on profits and less on social and environmental issues.

Chief executive Hein Schumacher, who took charge last July, told Bloomberg: “I’m not going to shout that ‘we’re saving the world’, but I want to make sure that in everything that we do, that it is indeed better.”


Unilever has softened targets to reduce its use of plastic, improve the health of the land in its supply chain and ensure all the people in its supply chain are paid the living wage.

A promise to increase the number of disabled employees to 5pc of its workforce by 2025 has been scrapped altogether, as have plans to spend almost £2bn with “diverse businesses” across the world by 2025, and to halve food waste in its operations by 2025, Bloomberg reported.

Mr Schumacher said Unilever would focus on doing “fewer things and with greater impact”, adding that the company’s new Climate Action Plan was “very stretching, but they are also intentionally and, unashamedly, realistic”.

Under Mr Schumacher’s predecessors, Alan Jope and Paul Polman, Unilever became focused on improving the planet as well as delivering for investors. In 2019, it pledged to develop a “purpose” for every brand, with everything from Domestos bleach to Vaseline “addressing an environmental or social issue,” Mr Jope said at the time.

However, the focus led to accusations that the company was putting activism ahead of business fundamentals.

Terry Smith, a Unilever investor and the managing director of Fundsmith, repeatedly accused the company of “virtue-signalling” and trying to “define the purpose of Hellmann’s mayonnaise” instead of focusing on performance.

Unilever’s share price has fallen by more than 17pc over the last five years.

Mr Schumacher’s weakening of pledges is the latest move to address investors’ concerns. Last year he abandoned the strategy of ensuring every product had a purpose.

Mr Schumacher said in a statement: “We want to set sustainability ambitions which are credible, which we believe we can deliver against, and which have real positive impact.”

Some of the changes include reducing its targeted use of virgin plastics by one third by 2026, rather than a previous target of 50pc. Its goal for sustainable sourcing of key crops by 2026 has been slightly reduced from 100pc to 95pc.

Other targets have been pushed back: a commitment to using 100pc reusable, recyclable or compostable plastic packaging by 2025 has been delayed until 2030 for rigid plastics and 2035 for flexible plastics.

Roseanna Ivory, a fund manager at Abrdn, which is a top 20 investor in Unilever, said the announcement was “disappointing” but added there was not a significant shift in Unilever’s “commitment to sustainability”.

She said: “It is notable that Unilever’s decarbonisation targets have been left unchanged, and that other commitments, such as to make all plastic reusable, recyclable or compostable, have been retained but pushed further back in time.”

Ms Ivory added that “the challenges of a higher inflationary world make it harder for the company to execute on targets released within a different economic and political context.”

Unilever forced to retain a multibillion-pound slice of its ice cream empire

Unilever raised the for sale sign in March, alongside

 7,500 possible job losses.

Ben Marlow
Sat, 20 April 2024 

ben and jerry's

Unilever could be forced to hold onto a multi-billion pound slice of its ice cream empire, according to senior City sources, as the sheer size of the operations make it difficult to find a buyer.

The consumer goods giant is attempting to offload brands including Magnum, Wall’s and Ben & Jerry’s as part of an elaborate corporate clean-up exercise.

Valued at as much as £15bn, bankers say the ice cream operations are so large that a full takeover would be beyond even the deep-pocketed private equity firms and Middle Eastern state-backed funds that are circling the business.

The only way to make a deal affordable is if Unilever brings down the price tag by retaining a significant minority stake, it is believed. Even then, it is expected that buyers will have to team up in bidding consortiums in order to assemble the required firepower.


Retaining a minority stake would reduce the risk of Unilever being accused of selling the division on the cheap – a charge it has faced in the past when the company has sold parts of its sprawling portfolio of household labels.

“Think of it as an anti-embarrassment clause,” one City source said.

Unilever sold its spreads division, which included the Flora and Stork margarine brands, to buyout firm KKR in 2017 in the wake of a hostile takeover approach from Kraft Heinz and Warren Buffett. KKR paid £6bn but some analysts think Unilever could have got more.

Four years later, CVC paid nearly £4bn for its PG Tips tea division.

It is understood some of the world’s biggest private equity funds, including CVC, KKR, and Blackstone, are running the rule over Unilever’s ice cream division. Sovereign wealth funds from the Middle East are also understood to be interested.

Unilever raised the for sale sign in March, alongside 7,500 possible job losses.

The FTSE 100 consumer goods giant is also exploring a spin-off that would see the ice cream business floated as a separate entity on the stock market.

City figures hope that the board would choose a London listing in this scenario. A share sale in the capital of such a large business would be a huge boost as the stock market battles to stem an exodus of public companies – largely to America.

Shell stunned the Square Mile earlier this month when it raised the prospect that it could become the latest UK company to up sticks and move to New York. Chief executive Wael Sawan said that the £180bn oil explorer was looking at “all options” for its listing.

Referencing the London market, he said: “I have a location that clearly seems to be undervalued.”

There are doubts, however, about whether Unilever would choose London over Amsterdam, given the controversy over its attempts to leave the UK and consolidate its dual Anglo-Dutch corporate structure in the Netherlands during the Brexit vote.

Following a fierce backlash from British shareholders, Unilever was forced into an embarrassing about turn that ended with the company unifying in the UK instead.

At the time, the Dutch government asked for reassurance that Unilever would incorporate and list its foods and refreshment division in The Netherlands should it ever choose to list the businesses as an independent company. Unilever said it was “comfortable to make these commitments.”

In 2022, the division was split into two parts, nutrition and ice cream.

Unilever declined to comment.

Thames Water and its lenders enlist lawyers amid nationalisation threat


Luke Barr
Sat, 20 April 2024 

thames water

Thames Water and a group of lenders to its parent company have drafted in lawyers amid a brewing fallout over the troubled supplier’s future.

Both Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Linklaters have been instructed by Kemble lenders and Thames Water respectively, as a potential restructuring battle looms.

The magic circle duo are among a raft of City advisers working on the potential fallout from Thames Water, which is battling to stave off a special administration regime that could spark huge losses for creditors.

Sir Adrian Montague, chairman of Thames Water, began his career at Linklaters and was formerly a partner at the law firm.

Thames Water chairman Sir Adrian Montague was previously a partner at Linklaters - Leon Neal/Getty Images

Lenders to both Thames and Kemble are facing a wave of uncertainty over the supplier’s future, as it emerged last week that some creditors could suffer losses up to 40pc if the company is nationalised.


Concerns over Thames Water’s finances have prompted various groups to enlist advisers ahead of a prospective legal battle, with EY separately advising Kemble lenders on financing negotiations.

The Telegraph reported last month that a syndicate of banks behind a £190m loan to Kemble includes the Bank of China and the Infrastructure and Commercial Bank of China.

Kemble is meant to repay that £190m to its lenders by the end of April but the deadline is set to be missed after shareholders cut off funding. It will then be up to the banks to either grant an extension or tip the company into administration.

Strategic discussions are also being held among other lenders in the Thames structure, which consists of an £18bn debt pile.

One senior bondholder said he had been approached by other Thames creditors about forming a group to bolster their defences.

A debt analyst close to the situation said that by teaming up, creditors would be able to appoint their own legal advisers.

He said: “The one group of people that are going to get paid here are the lawyers. You probably do want to band together to get some legal steer on the art of the possible.”

The uncertainty over Thames Water’s future was heightened last week as details of the Government’s nationalisation plan emerged.

Proposals being overseen by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs signalled that the bulk of Thames Water’s debts will be added to the public purse as part of a taxpayer-backed bailout.

If nationalised, the Government would manage Thames Water indirectly through an arms-length body.

Ministers would subsequently seek to return it to private ownership over time, with the prospect of the supplier being split into two separate companies.

Details of a possible break-up, as first revealed by The Telegraph earlier this month, indicate that one entity could oversee London while the other will serve Thames Valley and the Home Counties.

Bosses at Thames Water are currently racing to secure its future in the private sector but were dealt a blow in March after shareholders cut off funding from the business.

Thames Water shareholders said they will “work constructively” with Thames Water, Ofwat and the Government.

Freshfields, Linklaters and Thames Water declined to comment.

Preparations made for Government takeover of Thames Water, reports say


David Lynch,

 PA Political Staff
Fri, 19 April 2024 


Thames Water could be taken over by the Government, with its £15 billion debt added to the public purse, reports have suggested.

A blueprint codenamed Project Timber is being drawn up in Whitehall, according to the Guardian newspaper, which could see the UK’s largest water company effectively nationalised.

Under the plans, the company – which serves 16 million customers in London and the Thames Valley region – would be placed in a form of special administration in the scenario that its parent company fails.

Once under the stewardship of ministers, it could be broken up into two separate companies serving London and the Thames Valley, the newspaper said, though the Government and water regulator Ofwat remain optimistic this will not happen.

Some of Thames’ lenders could lose more than a third of their investment under the plans, according to the reports.

There is deep concern within Westminster about Thames Water’s finances, with multiple MPs having raised concerns about its struggle for cash to stay afloat in the Commons.

The Government would not be drawn into directly commenting on the contingency planning, with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) only saying it prepares for a “range of scenarios”.

There is deep concern within Westminster about Thames Water’s finances (Andrew Matthews/PA)

“As a responsible Government, we prepare for a range of scenarios across our regulated industries – including water – as the public would expect,” a Defra spokesperson said.

Thames Water has reportedly drawn up an updated business plan, which could be published within days amid its financial woes.

It had originally wanted to raise customer bills by 40% to fund an investment programme worth £18.7 billion under plans published in October, but the company said water regulator Ofwat had imposed regulations on the plan which made it “uninvestable”.

Thames Water originally wanted to raise customer bills by as much as 40% to fund an investment programme, but this was stopped by Ofwat (Dominic Lipinski/PA)

The company has £2.4 billion cash available as of February, enough cash for it to remain solvent until next year, possibly delaying any decision about its future for the next government.

Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesperson and Richmond Park MP, Sarah Olney said: “Millions of households and taxpayers deserve to know Thames Water’s fate. This corporate clown show must end now.

“The secret plans must be published immediately. Thames Water should have been put into special administration long ago, but the Government is too weak to take on this disgraced polluter.”

Neither Ofwat nor Thames Water wished to comment on the reports.

How PwC got burned by China’s big property bust

Adam Mawardi
Sun, 21 April 2024 

An unfinished village of colourful houses forms part of Evergrande's derelict theme park in China's eastern Jiangsu province

In an eerie, unfinished village of pink and blue fairytale houses in Eastern China, billboards can be found advertising Evergrande’s once ambitious plans to build a tourism empire bigger than Disney.

The derelict amusement park is among the 800 development projects and scores of vacant homes across China abandoned after the world’s most indebted property developer collapsed two years ago.

As liquidators take over the debt-ridden property giant, which owes more than $300bn to banks and bondholders, critics now question who should take responsibility for Evergrande’s downfall.

According to an anonymous letter shared on Chinese social media platform WeChat last week, much of the blame lies with Evergrande’s former auditor: PwC.

The open letter, which purports to have been signed by unnamed PwC partners, claimed the professional services firm “turned a blind eye” while auditing Evergrande for more than a decade.

The letter accused Raymund Chao, chairman of PwC Asia Pacific and China, of being ultimately responsible for bringing the firm into the “hot pit” of Evergrande, which filed for bankruptcy last year.

It also raised questions about the other services PwC has provided to Evergrande and the family office of its scandal-hit founder, Hui Ka Yan. The businessman last year was subject to “mandatory measures” on suspicion of crimes, the group announced in a regulatory filing.

The open letter, written in Mandarin, urged PwC to hire independent experts to review the firm’s governance, culture and accountability while also ensuring the “bad apples” behind Evergrande’s audit failures are held responsible.

“If it cannot conduct an independent investigation, it owes the market an explanation. This is also the only way PwC can restore market confidence for itself,” the anonymous authors wrote.

PwC has rejected the “inaccurate statements and false allegations” contained in the letter, which the firm argued could tarnish its reputation and infringe its legal rights. The Big Four accountant said it will investigate the letter and has reported the incident to the relevant authorities.

How exactly PwC approaches this investigation will be closely watched, given that anonymous authors threatened to publish a second letter and audit working papers in the event the firm retaliates against any partner.

The outburst is understood to have shocked insiders given that Chao is typically regarded as a well respected figure whom partners look to for direction.

“This is a huge problem for the reputation of PwC and I believe that puts a lot of pressure on him [Chao] to step down,” says one former PwC Hong Kong accountant.

The anonymous letter accused Raymund Chao of being responsible for bringing PwC into the 'hot pit' of Evergrande

The strongly-worded letter is the latest headache for PwC since it resigned as Evergrande’s auditor after more than a decade of signing off its books.

The advisory firm, which had audited Evergrande when it listed in Hong Kong in 2009, stepped down last year following disagreements over the developer’s accounts.

PwC has been under investigation by the Accounting and Financial Reporting Council, Hong Kong’s audit watchdog, since 2021.

The watchdog questioned why Evergrande, which also held stakes in US electric vehicle startup Faraday Future and a water bottle brand promoted by movie star Jackie Chan, was given a clean bill of health despite its high debt levels and insufficient cash reserves. The inquiry is ongoing. On Friday, the AFRC announced plans to investigate the “whistleblower allegations” made in the anonymous letter.

The professional services firm has since faced further scrutiny as Chinese authorities investigate PwC’s role in Evergrande’s accounting practices weeks after the developer was accused of fraudulently inflating its revenue by 560bn yuan (£62bn) in the years before defaulting in 2021. Chinese officials have contacted former PwC accountants who audited Evergrande, although have yet to decide whether to penalise PwC, Bloomberg reported.

Meanwhile, Evergrande’s liquidators are reportedly preparing for a potential professional negligence lawsuit against PwC to recoup compensation on behalf of creditors, the Financial Times reported.

The collapse of Evergrande, which is regarded as a symbol of China’s real estate crisis, brings into question the role that auditors played in enabling China’s debt-fuelled property bubble.

Some 800 development projects and scores of homes builds have been abandoned across China since Evergrande collapsed two years ago - Bloomberg

Foreign-linked auditing and consulting firms over the past decade entered China to capitalise on the opportunities thrown up by the country’s booming property market.

However, a combination of overbuilding, Covid restrictions and tighter government controls on debt that China’s property giants could carry on their balance sheets resulted in a wave of bankruptcies that has upended the world’s second largest economy.

Big Four firms, including PwC, now stand accused of failing to spot the early signs.

George Magnus, economist and research associate at the University of Oxford China Centre, says: “In the upcycle in a long-standing property market appreciation, everybody becomes very optimistic. All sorts of behaviour is excused and allowed on the basis that if it makes you rich, it must be good.”

Evergrande, which triggered a cash crunch across China’s property sector after defaulting on its debts in 2021, isn’t the only one to lose their Western accountant in recent years.

Big Four auditors have resigned from heavily indebted Chinese property developers and property management companies en masse after uncertainty around hidden debts has made it increasingly difficult to sign off on their accounts.

It has increased tension between international auditors and developers after being forced to delay their annual results being published, which many attributed to linked to disruption from Covid-restrictions.

This includes Country Garden, once China’s largest developer that is currently audited by PwC, whose shares were suspended from trading on Hong Kong’s stock exchange earlier this month after missing the deadline to release its accounts.

Demand for international auditors could change as China’s debt-ridden private developers give way to the increasing dominance of state-owned and state-backed developers, says Magnus.

“In some ways, China’s property market is reverting to what it was before it became a fully privatised market. In other words, where the state basically built and allocated housing,” he adds.

As Chinese state institutions take on more of the role of private property developers, the narrower the role that international auditing companies will play, Magnus argues.

The prospect of a reduced role for foreign-linked firms plays into recent calls by Beijing for Chinese companies to switch to homegrown auditors once their contracts with Big Four firms end.

It forms part of the Government’s efforts to restrict who has access to Chinese companies’ data, after last year ordering state-owned enterprises and domestically listed companies to increase security checks on their auditors.

Although the Big Four’s global brand recognition and sophisticated reporting has made them more attractive than smaller Chinese rivals, the property crisis and tightening regulation could change this.

Yvette To, an assistant professor at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, says: “The reputation of PwC (and the other three) might be undermined depending on how the PwC-Evergrande scandal unfolds.”

Yan was contacted for comment.

Hundreds of red kites turn up at this Welsh farm every day - it's a 'once in a lifetime' sight

MUST HAVE LOTS OF RODENTS

Cerys Gardner
Sun, 21 April 2024 

Red Kites flying over Gigrin Farm 

Tucked away between the Wye and Elan valleys is the best place in Wales to see majestic red kites. Gigrin Farm, just outside Rhayader, Powys, sees 300 to 600 of the birds descend every afternoon for feeding - and you can watch the kites swooping down for their lunch from just metres away.

Red kites are a stunning bird of prey with their distinctive red-brown feathers that unfurl to a wingspan of almost two metres. Their beady eyes give them an extraordinary sense of sight, used to scan the countryside for prey. Gigrin Farm has been feeding the birds for 31 years, since the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds approached them about becoming an official feeding centre.


At that time there were just two breeding pairs in Wales, but there are now 4,400 pairs across the UK. Once the food is put out crows usually arrive first whilst the kites and buzzards circle overhead. Then the kites dive down, either to snatch the meat or flush crows into the air and mug them. The display is a noisy mixture of jackdaw calls and buzzards mewing. Once they have clear airspace the kites will eat their food, still watching out for other birds. Find out about the latest events in Wales by signing up to our What's On newsletter here

Read more: Walk through a deer park to a huge imposing castle in this Welsh town with its own steam railway

Read more: The Welsh village that's so gorgeous they charge an entry fee

If you want to see this striking display, Gigrin Farm opens at 12.30pm and the kites are fed at 2pm or 3pm depending on the time of year. Feeding can be viewed from five hides, camouflaged shelters, or the viewing field which offers a wider perspective. The kites are the focus but there’s lots more to enjoy including a cafe, a picnic area, and donkeys.

As well as being a great family day out Gigrin Farm is the perfect place for keen photographers. They have specialist hides for photographers that get you even closer to the action. This year they are offering photography workshops for the very first time. “People want to ask lots of questions about how to photograph red kites. We are just expanding what we offer,” said Dominique Powell, owner of the farm.

Kites snatch their meal from the ground and eat it in the air whilst flying -Credit:Paul_Cooper/Getty

It's an awe-inspiring sight -Credit:iStock / Getty Images Plus

One visitor on TripAdvisor said: “There were hundreds of red kites swooping in for food, it was amazing to see. Probably a once in a lifetime experience. Even kept the kids quiet!”, while another said: “An amazing experience, that I’ll never forget. Nature at its magnificent best. The staff are so friendly and helpful. I’m an amateur wildlife photographer, and it’s another tick on my list.”

After you leave the farm you’re only half a mile from the market town of Rhayader, the perfect place for dinner before driving home or to stay in a B&B to explore the Elan valley the next day. Read more about the little town dubbed the 'outdoors capital of Wales' where you can stay in a 'Hobbit House' here. Ms Powell said: “There is plenty for people to do.”

The farm is offering photography classes too, so you can catch shots like this -Credit:Paul_Cooper/Getty

Or this one -Credit:iStock / Getty Images Plus

Ms Powell said she recommends booking in advance through their website because they limit numbers each day and have varied opening times throughout the year. Tickets cost £10 for adults, £6 for kids and three and under are free.

Performers warned about Las Vegas Cirque du Soleil act before paralyzing accident: lawsuit

David Charns
Fri, April 19, 2024 

Performers warned about Las Vegas Cirque du Soleil act before paralyzing accident: lawsuit


LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — A former Cirque du Soleil performer left paralyzed in an accident during the company’s “O” show claims the act where he nearly died was rushed into production, according to a lawsuit the 8 News Now Investigators reviewed.

Kyle Mitrione, a former diver in the show, filed the lawsuit Thursday, accusing Cirque du Soleil of placing him in “harm’s way” during a performance at the Bellagio Las Vegas Hotel and Casino. The show, which celebrated its 25th anniversary last fall, features a 1.5-million-gallon pool and 85 performers, some who dive from heights of 60 feet, the lawsuit said.

On June 28, 2023, Mitrione, who was 35 at the time, was part of a new act called “The Island,” which involved a floating stage, the lawsuit said. During the act, performers dive into the pool while lifts move a platform. The staging was different than previous acts, the lawsuit said.

During the act, Mitrione dove backward headfirst from the platform, which was out of position, striking a lift, the lawsuit said. The collision left him with “permanent, debilitating, catastrophic and life-altering injuries.”

Specifically, the Island act “required performers to dive into the pool while the lifts were being utilized… in the vicinity of the diving performers,” the lawsuit said. “To do so, choreographers would coordinate and sequence the movement of the floating stage with the underwater technicians and divers, in order to prevent a diver from inadvertently striking the lifts.”

Stage technicians both above and below the water relied on verbal, lighting or sound cues to move the equipment while performers, like Mitrione, relied “solely upon musical cues,” documents said.

According to the lawsuit, the Island act started about two weeks before the June 2023 incident involving Mitrione. During that time, “there were numerous instances and concerns of divers striking and/or nearly striking the lifts as a result of the show’s choreography being out of sync,” the lawsuit said. Six days before Mitrione’s incident, another diver suffered a “near miss.”

“There were no other audio and/or technical cues to advise the diving performers if it was safe to perform their respective dives,” the lawsuit said. “Thus, if the stage and underwater technicians fail to properly maneuver the ‘Island’ stage, diving performers, such as [Mitrione], are not informed of the possibility for catastrophic failure and inadvertently diving into the lifts.”


A photo from Cirque du Soleil celebrating the show’s then-24th anniversary. (Cirque du Soleil)

After the incident, paramedics rushed Mitrione to the hospital where he underwent emergency surgery, the lawsuit said. Mitrione was left with neck and spinal fractures, leaving him paralyzed from the neck down.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined Cirque more than $30,000 after the incident, records said. The company was contesting the fine as of Friday.

The lawsuit seeks damages in excess of $50,000, including the cost of medical care and punitive damages.

Representatives for Mitrione nor Cirque immediately responded to requests for comment Friday.

UK

Plummeting in the polls, Sunak targets the sick and disabled

Liam Thorp
Sun, 21 April 2024 

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak -Credit:Getty Images

Rishi Sunak is back at it seeking to alienate vulnerable people in an attempt to recover his staggeringly poor polling ratings.

If his last big gambit was cutting off high speed rail from the North, his latest wheeze appears to focus on cutting off vulnerable and unwell people from the support they need to get by. The Prime Minister, staring down the barrel of a humiliating general election defeat, has decided to take the fight to "sicknote Britain" in a bid to make the lives of millions of struggling people even harder than they already are.

The UK absolutely has a problem with people who are too unwell to work and the PM was correct that a particularly big issue is mental health. Naturally he failed to acknowledge the vast and important reasons behind this and instead looked to alienate those already in trouble - and even the doctors who are helping people deal with their problems.

In a speech that read as if it had been through a Daily Telegraph comment piece generator, he claimed benefits have become a "lifestyle choice" for some - proving once again that when this government is in trouble, it chooses to turn on the most vulnerable.

As part of his vague but demonising plans - which included threatening to remove vital benefits - he also said the Tories, if they somehow win the next election, would use "specialist health professionals" to issue sick notes in England, instead of highly qualified and knowledgeable GPs.

The fact he could not give any further details about who these so-called professionals would be, or how they would be recruited, cemented this as a policy designed to toss some red meat to the right-wing voting base rather than looking to genuinely solve a very real issue in this country.

While Sunak was quick to point the finger of blame at those seeking help and support for their mental health, there was no mention of the reasons behind these numbers or the enormous problem with the availability of services in this country.

There was no talk of the explosion in food bank use, insecure work and poverty that has occurred under the last 14 years of Conservative rule. There was no mention of the two million people in England that are currently languishing on NHS mental health waiting lists.

The thing is, it is much easier to tell people in need of support they are the problem rather than deal with the root causes of these problems or the lack of support available.

I'm curious at the logic on display here. Does he really think that pushing people who are dealing with mental health conditions into unsuitable work and threatening to remove their benefits if they don't accept it is going to make their condition better or worse?

Ben Harrison, director of the Work Foundation at Lancaster University, put it well when he said: "The focus should be on de-risking returning to work for those with long-term health conditions and, critically, on stemming the flow of people who are leaving work due to sickness."

As Mr Harrison points out, there are nearly seven million people in severely insecure jobs, which can have a negative impact on people's health and mean they 'cycle in and out' or work and remain dependent on benefits to afford to get by. Dealing with this should absolutely be a priority for the next government but there is no suggestion Mr Sunak plans to address it.

One thing that absolutely isn't going to make people with illnesses feel supported back into the workplace is to publicly target them in this way. The Mind charity described the Prime Minister's language as "stigmatising, harmful and inaccurate".

It was this kind of cruel approach that, in 2019, saw Liverpool man Stephen Smith denied benefits and told to find work despite weighing just six stone because of a number of debilitating illnesses.

Stephen's was a story I told and one I will never forget. Eventually the Department of Work and Pensions was shamed into correcting its error and paying him back the benefits he was wrongly denied for several years. Sadly the money came to late for Stephen and was used to pay for his funeral.

The latest announcement from the Conservative government shows they have learned absolutely nothing from cases like Stephen's. Either that or they just don't care.

The Liverpool Daily Post