Dominic Raab under the spotlight: What has led to the deputy prime minister being investigated
Soon after Rishi Sunak took office, Dominic Raab was sitting in Number 10 being offered his old jobs back, after a short hiatus from government thanks to Liz Truss.
His return to government as justice secretary and deputy prime minister has been accompanied by questions over his conduct during his previous tenures in the roles, and at other departments too.
Sources close to Mr Raab have hit back at the claims, with a number of his Tory colleagues describing him as “an excellent and considerate boss”.
As accusations continue to emerge, let’s look back at what has been reported so far:
‘Respite or route out’
The first claims against Mr Raab emerged in The Guardian and relate to his stint at the Ministry of Justice between September 2021 and September 2022 under Boris Johnson.
Around 15 senior civil servants in his private office had been offered “respite or a route out” after his return was announced, the newspaper said, due to concerns some were still traumatised from working for him.
Multiple MoJ sources also said he had previously created a “culture of fear” in the department, alleging he was “demeaning rather than demanding” with civil servants, and that he was “very rude and aggressive”, adding: “[He] wasn’t just unprofessional, he was a bully.”
A spokesperson for the department said there was “zero tolerance for bullying across the civil service”, adding: “The deputy prime minister leads a professional department, driving forward major reforms, where civil servants are valued and the level of ambition is high.”
Tomatoes and riot acts
Within hours of the story breaking on 11 November, two more emerged from Mr Raab’s earlier time at the MoJ.
One told The Sun he had thrown tomatoes from his salad at staff.
Another in the Mirror said he had been given the nickname “The Incinerator” because of how quickly he “burns through” employees.
A spokesman for the deputy PM dismissed the salad attack claim as “complete nonsense” and denied a high turnover of staff in his departments.
All three of the articles also claimed the permanent secretary, Antonia Romeo, warned Mr Raab to treat staff with respect on his return, with one source, who was not in the room at the time, saying she had “read him the riot act”.
Boris Johnson appointed Dominic Raab to his cabinet after he took office in 2019
The next day, a single source told ITV News that the Cabinet Office had been informed about concerns over Mr Raab’s behaviour when he was Brexit secretary in 2018.
The Observer picked up the story, saying a “formal expression of concern” had been sent to a senior official in the Department for Exiting the European Union, alleging “unprofessional, even bullying, conduct of the minister towards his private office”.
The Cabinet Office told the newspaper at the time that it had “no record of any formal complaints” being passed on.
Surveys and support
Days later, the focus fell on to Mr Raab’s time as foreign secretary, between July 2020 and September 2021.
A survey was leaked to ITV News showing eight people working in his private office at the time claimed to have been bullied or harassed at work, while 15 staff reported witnessing another person being bullied or treated unfairly.
The results were anonymous, though, so neither the perpetrator nor victim could be identified.
In response, a spokesman for Mr Raab said he had “high standards, works hard and expects a lot from his team as well as himself”, but that he “worked well with officials” and “always acts with the utmost professionalism”.
As Rishi Sunak travelled to the G20 summit in Bali on 13 November, he faced questions about the reappointment of Mr Raab, but insisted he did not “recognise that characterisation” of his colleague and was “unaware” of any formal complaints being made against him.
Rishi Sunak gave his support to his deputy while on a flight to Bali for the G20
The next day, Monday 14 November, an interview with a former top official at the Foreign Office during Mr Raab’s tenure set tongues wagging again.
Former permanent secretary Lord Simon McDonald was asked on LBC whether the previous days’ bullying allegations were plausible, and he replied: “Yes.”
He added: “Dominic Raab is one of the most driven people I ever worked for, he was a tough boss.
“Maybe they are euphemisms, but I worked closely with him and I didn’t see everything that happened.”
Within hours, another story in The Guardian claimed Mr Raab had been warned about his behaviour towards officials at the Foreign Office on multiple occasions by none other than Lord McDonald.
The paper also alleged that Lord McDonald had several informal conversations with the head of the propriety and ethics team at the Cabinet Office about him between 2019 and 2020 about the issue.
A spokesman for Mr Raab told The Guardian: “Dominic had frequent discussions with his permanent secretary at the Foreign Office about how best to run the department and ensure that it delivered to the highest standard in challenging circumstances such as during COVID.”
Behaviour and high standards
Lord McDonald was back on the airwaves on Tuesday, talking to Times Radio about Mr Raab. He went further than in his LBC interview, saying many colleagues were “scared” to go into the then foreign secretary’s office when he was in charge.
The peer said Mr Raab “was not aware of the impact of his behaviour on the people working for him and couldn’t be made to see that impact”, adding: “Colleagues did not complain to me formally, it was kind of their professional pride to cope, but many were scared to go into his office.”
He said the minister’s defence was that “he treated everybody in the building in the same way – he was as abrasive and controlling with junior ministers and senior officials as he was with his private secretaries.”
Again, Mr Raab’s spokesman insisted he had “acted with professionalism and integrity in all of his government roles”, adding: “He has an excellent record of driving positive change in multiple government departments by working well with officials.
“He holds everyone, and most of all himself, to the high standards that the British people would expect of their government.”
Lord McDonald was the top civil servant at the Foreign Office during Mr Raab’s tenure.
There was another accusation coming his way – this time from Labour’s Lisa Nandy, who shadowed Mr Raab when he was at the Foreign Office.
She told Sky News she had heard “a number of rumours this was a pattern of behaviour”, adding: “It’s been something of an open secret in Westminster for the last few years there is a problem in the justice department, there was a problem in the Foreign Office – it was apparently particularly directed towards women.
“I think it’s really damning that Rishi Sunak has appointed Dominic Raab to this post knowing that this is potentially an issue.”
But Mr Raab’s spokesman “categorically” denied the allegation, while his team said suggestions he has a woman problem was “nonsense”.
A source close to Mr Raab said: “This is baseless mudslinging with no grounding in reality, and undermines serious cases of bullying and inappropriate behaviour.”
The investigation
Wednesday of that week meant Prime Minister’s Questions and it was down to Mr Raab, as Mr Sunak’s deputy, to stand in while the boss is away at the G20 summit.
But the drama came early as two hours before his appearance, he sent out a tweet, revealing he had written to the PM to request an independent investigation into two formal complaints that had been made against him – one at the Foreign Office and another at the Ministry of Justice.
Mr Raab said he had “never tolerated bullying, and always sought to reinforce and empower the teams of civil servants working in my respective departments”.
But he promised to “cooperate fully” with the investigation and “respect whatever outcome you decide”.
Mr Sunak replied, agreeing this was “the right course of action”, adding: “Integrity, professionalism and accountability are core values of this government. It is right that these matters are investigated fully.”
Investigation expanded
The formal complaints are being investigated by senior lawyer Adam Tolley KC.
Just over a week after the investigation opened, Downing Street revealed its scope was expanding to include a third complaint – this time relating to Mr Raab’s time as Brexit secretary in 2018.
A day earlier, Mr Raab insisted he has “behaved professionally at all times” as he faced fresh allegations of bullying and intimidating behaviour.
Dominic Raab sat alongside Rishi Sunak at PMQs on 14 December, moments before the new complaints emerged.
BBC Newsnight reported that a number of the deputy PM’s former private secretaries across multiple departments were preparing to submit formal complaints.
Newsnight was also told that Mr Raab used his personal email account for government business at two separate departments – once as recently as 2021.
But Mr Raab said: “I have always adhered to the ministerial code, including the use of my iPhone.”
Come December, and the investigation was expanded again.
The PM’s official spokesman confirmed five additional complaints had been added to Mr Tolley’s in-tray relating to Mr Raab’s first stint as justice secretary between September 2021 and September 2022.
That made a total of six relating to this department and eight complaints overall.
More complaints emerge
In January, The Guardian reported that around 24 civil servants are thought to be involved in the complaints, making the inquiry much broader than originally anticipated.
Reports have also emerged of Mr Raab behaving like a “controlling and abusive partner” and leaving staff feeling suicidal.
A source told The Mirror: “He changes his behaviour depending on whether you are a civil servant he has control over or another government minister.”
Mr Raab’s spokesman refused to comment on those allegations, but a week earlier the cabinet minister had told the BBC: “I’m confident I behaved professionally throughout, and of course the government takes a zero-tolerance approach to bullying.”
Mr Raab added that he was “always mindful of the way I behave” but made “no apologies for having high standards”.
Pressure piles on PM
The three permanent secretaries who led officials working under the cabinet minister are thought to have given evidence to the investigation.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Investigation into Dominic Raab should continue before action is taken, says minister
The report is not expected for several weeks, but opposition parties and union leaders have urged Mr Sunak to suspend his colleague until the investigation has concluded.
Shadow justice secretary Steve Reed said the number and severity of the allegations mean Mr Raab should be suspended “in the interests of safety” but said Mr Sunak “is too weak to do that”.
Dave Penman, the leader of the FDA union which represents senior civil servants, echoed this, telling BBC Radio 4’s Today: “That’s not to prejudge the investigation, that’s to say if there are serious allegations of bullying and extensive allegations like this, that one of the considerations is how do you protect employees from that sort of behaviour? And while it’s being determined, you would normally suspend someone, given the seriousness and extent of those accusations.”
No 10 has insisted it is right to wait for the investigation to be concluded before taking any action. It has not put a timeframe on when the investigation will finish, only saying it is hoped it will be concluded “swiftly”.
Speaking during a Cabinet awayday at his Chequers grace-and-favour retreat, Mr Sunak said; “I appointed an independent investigator to have a look at that matter. I’ll wait for that independent investigator to complete that investigation and report back to me.”
On the 10th anniversary of the Shoreham air disaster, the families of some of those killed have criticised the regulator for what they describe as a “shocking” ongoing attitude towards safety.
On 22 August 2015, a vintage fighter jet plummeted out of the sky and crashed into one of the busiest roads in Sussex, killing 11 men.
Most of them weren’t even watching the aerobatic display overhead when they were engulfed in a fireball that swept down the dual carriageway.
A crane removes the remains of the fighter jet that crashed on the A27. File pic: Reuters
Jacob Schilt, 23, and his friend Matthew Grimstone, also 23, were driving to play in a match for their football team, Worthing United FC.
Both sets of parents are deeply angry that their beloved sons have lost their lives in this way.
“It obviously changed our lives forever, and it’s a huge reminder every 22nd of August, because it’s such a public anniversary. It’s destroyed our lives really,” his mum, Caroline Shilt, said.
“It was catastrophic for all of us,” Jacob’s father, Bob, added.
Jacob Schilt died in the Shoreham disaster
Matthew Grimstone on his 23rd birthday, the last before he died in the Shoreham disaster
‘They had no protection’
Sue and Phil Grimstone argue that the regulator, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), has not been held accountable for allowing the airshow to take place where it did.
“At Shoreham, the permission given by the CAA did not allow displaying aircraft to perform over paying spectators or their parked cars,” they said.
“But aircraft were permitted to fly aerobatics directly over the A27, which was in the display area, a known busy road.
“This was about ignoring the safety of people travelling on a major road in favour of having an air show. They had no protection.”
Sue and Phil Grimstone say the CAA has not been held accountable
A programme for a memorial for Jacob Schilt and Matthew Grimstone
Caroline and Bob Schilt
A series of catastrophic errors
The crash happened while the experienced pilot, Andy Hill, a former RAF instructor, was attempting to fly a loop in a 1950s Hawker Hunter jet.
But he made a series of catastrophic errors. His speed as the plane pitched up into the manoeuvre was far too slow, and therefore, he failed to get enough height to be able to pull out of the dive safely. The jet needed to be at least 1,500ft higher.
Mr Hill survived the crash but says he does not remember what happened, and a jury at the Old Bailey found him not guilty of gross negligence manslaughter in 2019.
Andrew Hill arrives at the Old Bailey in London in 2019.
Pic: PA
When the inquest finally concluded in 2022, the coroner ruled the men had been unlawfully killed because of a series of “gross errors” committed by the pilot.
The rules around air shows have been tightened up since the crash, with stricter risk assessments, minimum height requirements, crowd protection distances, and checks on pilots.
But Jacob and Matt’s families believe the CAA still isn’t doing enough to protect people using roads near airshows, or other bystanders not attending the events themselves.
Emergency services attend the scene on the A27.
Pic: PA
The families recently raised concerns about the Duxford airshow in a meeting with the CAA.
While aircraft are no longer allowed to fly aerobatics over the M11, they do so nearby – and can fly over the road at 200ft to reconfigure and return. If the M11 has queuing traffic in the area, the display must be stopped or curtailed.
The Grimstones believe this demonstrates accepting “an element of risk” and are frustrated that the CAA only commissioned an independent review looking at congested roads and third-party protection earlier this year.
“We feel the CAA are still dragging their feet when it comes to the safety of third parties on major roads directly near an air show,” they said.
The family have complained about the CAA to the parliamentary ombudsman.
A memorial for the Shoreham Airshow victims on the banks of the Adur in Shoreham
‘There are still question marks’
Some experts also believe the CAA has questions to answer about a previous incident involving Mr Hill, after organisers of the 2014 Southport Airshow brought his display to an emergency stop because he had flown too close to the crowd, and beneath the minimum height for his display.
In its investigation into the Shoreham disaster, the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) later found that while the CAA inspector present had an informal discussion with the pilot, no further action was taken, and the incident was not reported to the AAIB.
Retired pilot Steve Colman has spent many years looking into what happened at Shoreham, and he believes the CAA failed to fulfil their statutory obligation to fully investigate and report the incident at Southport.
“You have to ask the question – if the Southport incident had been investigated, then was Shoreham more likely or less likely to have occurred?” he said. “I think there can only be one answer – it’s less likely to have occurred.”
Tim Loughton, who was the MP for Shoreham at the time, believes a balance must be struck.
“We don’t want to regulate these events out of existence completely. A lot of the smaller air shows no longer happened because they couldn’t comply with the new regulations […], but certainly there are still question marks over the way the CAA conducted and continues to conduct itself. I would welcome more parliamentary scrutiny.”
Read more from Sky News:
London Underground workers to strike
Man charged with killing ice cream seller
Shoreham air crash victims (from clockwise top left) Matthew Grimstone, Graham Mallinson, Tony Brightwell, Mark Reeves, Matt Jones, Maurice Abrahams, Richard Smith, Jacob Schilt, Daniele Polito, Mark Trussler, Dylan Archer
Rob Bishton, chief executive at the CAA, said: “Our thoughts remain with the families and friends of those affected by the Shoreham Airshow crash.
“Following the crash, several investigations and safety reviews were carried out to help prevent similar incidents in the future. This included an immediate review of airshow safety and a full investigation by the Air Accidents Investigation Branch. All recommendations and safety improvements from these reviews were fully implemented.
“Airshows continue to be subject to rigorous oversight to ensure the highest possible safety standards are maintained.
“At a previous airshow in 2014 the pilot involved in the Shoreham accident was instructed to abort a display by the show’s flying director. This incident was investigated by the UK Civil Aviation Authority and regulatory action was taken.”
Mr Bishton added: “As part of the work to review the safety oversight of airshows following the tragic Shoreham crash, the actions taken by the regulator following such a stop call were enhanced.”
But the families of those killed still believe much more could be done.
A jury has been discharged in the trial of a former Church of England priest who ran a rave-inspired “cult” group.
Christopher Brain, 68, from Wilmslow, Cheshire, was the leader of the Nine O’Clock Service (NOS) in Sheffield between 1986 and 1995.
He was charged with one count of rape and 36 counts of indecent assault between 1981 and 1995 against 13 women.
Brain, who denied all the charges, was found guilty of 17 counts of indecent assault relating to nine women and acquitted of 15 similar charges.
The 11-strong jury, sitting at Inner London Crown Court, was discharged by Judge Freya Newbery on Thursday after failing to reach a verdict on five counts, having started deliberations on 12 August.
Chris Brain. Pic: South Yorkshire Police
The judge told the jurors: “I am going to discharge you now on those counts. For you, it all comes to an end now. I am really grateful for such a lot of time that you have given.”
A further hearing to determine whether prosecutors believe there are grounds for a retrial for the charges was set for 4 September.
The prosecution previously told jurors that NOS, which was aimed at younger people, “presented itself to the outside world as a progressive force for good”.
But the court heard Brain “dominated and abused his position” to sexually assault a “staggering number of women from his congregation”, including during massages.
He denied brainwashing people to satisfy his sexual desires or ostracising female followers from friends and family.
Brain arriving at court on Thursday. Pic: PA
Church of England: ‘Truly sorry’
Joanne Grenfell, lead bishop for safeguarding in the Church of England, and Alexander Kubeyinje, national safeguarding director, released a joint statement in which they said they were “truly sorry”.
“Our thoughts and prayers today are with the women who have bravely come forward to share their testimonies.
“The conviction of Chris Brain on 17 counts of indecent assault has resulted in lasting damage to their lives, and they were an appalling abuse of power in leadership that should never have happened. We are truly sorry.”
Services initially took place at St Thomas’ Church in Sheffield before moving to The Rotunda in Ponds Forge
In a statement, Pete Wilcox, Bishop of Sheffield, echoed that same comment, adding that he was “deeply sorry” for the harm suffered.
“Where concerns were raised in the past and were not acted upon properly, that was a failing of the Church. For those institutional failures, I offer an unreserved apology. We are committed to supporting those affected.
“Words will never undo the harm that has been caused. We will, however, continue to work to ensure the Church is a safe place for everyone.”
He added the diocese would continue to cooperate with police, adding that there was a safeguarding team available to offer support and counselling.
‘Devious and arrogant sexual predator’
Detective Superintendent Eleanor Welsh, senior investigating officer at South Yorkshire Police, said: “Brain is a devious and arrogant sexual predator who caused these women significant harm through his abuse of power and cruel manipulation of their faith.
“While I am pleased with the guilty verdicts, I know for the victims it can never take away what Brain did to them. However, I hope that it brings some comfort to know they have had a voice, they have been heard, and the jury has accepted that Brain is a serial sex offender.”
Read more from Sky News:
Skydiver deliberately fell to death
RMT workers announce strikes
Steel firms forced into liquidation
‘Lycra Lovelies’ looked after Brain
At its peak, the weekly Nine O’Clock Service – held at 9pm on a Sunday – attracted up to 600 people.
Prosecutors say a “homebase” team of “attractive women”, wearing lingerie or other revealing clothing, known as “the Lycra Lovelies” or “the Lycra Nuns”, was set up to look after Brain, his wife and his daughter at their home.
The women said they slept on the floor and were issued with detailed instructions on how to prepare meals, clean, answer the phone, and even how to treat the family dog, the court heard.
‘Homebase team’ were given instructions on cooking and cleaning for Brain. Pic: South Yorkshire Police
Some members donated large sums of money, gave up their inheritances or homes to NOS and lived in poverty, the jury was told.
Brain’s lifestyle was described as “extravagant” in comparison, as he had a mobile phone and car, wore designer clothes and ate at nice restaurants.
‘Chrisnapping’
One woman described Brain as a “predator hiding in plain sight” who “would pick off women who he viewed as vulnerable”.
The court heard the term “Chrisnapped” was used to describe how Brain would pick up women off the street in his car before he stroked their legs and talked about sex.
NOS collapsed in 1994 after women made allegations about Brain and the Church of England set up places for vulnerable alleged victims to get help and therapy.
Retired Bishop Stephen Lowe said in pre-recorded evidence that he confronted Brain about claims he had “abused” 20 to 40 women, and he replied: “I thought it was more, maybe perhaps double”.
‘Raging narcissism’
Jurors were also told Brain’s Church of England ordination was “fast-tracked” in 1991, and he wore the same cassock worn by actor Robert De Niro in the movie “The Mission” at the ceremony.
Brain resigned from his holy orders in 1995 amid “enormous media interest” but prosecutors suggested he agreed to be interviewed for a BBC Everyman documentary because of his “raging narcissism”.
In the programme, Brain admitted being “involved in improper sexual conduct with a number of women”, but said this was only after a lengthy development of a friendship.
Giving evidence, Brain cut a very different figure from the charismatic cult leader described by witnesses, as he mumbled and was frequently asked to raise his voice.
He told the jury that any touching was done with “100%” consent and suggested the women had “to exaggerate these things to make it either sexual or controlling” in order “to make a criminal case”.
One of the UK’s last remaining steel companies has been pushed into compulsory liquidation – and will fall into government control.
Speciality Steels UK (SSUK), part of the Liberty Steel empire owned by metals tycoon Sanjeev Gupta, employs nearly 1,500 people at sites in Rotherham and several other locations across South Yorkshire.
Behind Tata Steel and British Steel, it is the third-largest steel producer in the country.
Politics live: New migrant stats released
Sky News reported that negotiations had been underway for a deal to rescue the firm, however, they seem to have been rendered unsuccessful.
The government-run Insolvency Service confirmed it will be acting as the liquidator. It added that Teneo Financial Advisory Limited would be assisting in running the company from now on.
While the GFG Alliance, the holding company, says it is disappointed by the decision, local politicians and unions are highly critical of the group.
The government is taking over – but it doesn’t want to own SSUK
The collapse of Speciality Steel UK (SSUK), the UK’s third-largest steel producer, did not come as a surprise to government officials, who have in recent days been planning for this outcome.
After all, the business has been limping on for some time, weighed down by financial mismanagement and a mounting debt pile. Problems began in 2021 for GFG Alliance – the holding company, which is a conglomerate run by the metals magnate Sanjeev Gupta. Its main lender, Greensill Capital, collapsed with £3.7bn of loans to GFG still outstanding. Administrators for Greensill are still trying to recover the money.
There have been legal claims and probes since then, although GFG denies any wrongdoing. The true scale of SSUK’s financial woes are not even known because the company has not filed audited accounts for more than five years. Sanjeev Gupta is being prosecuted for failing to file accounts for many of his other businesses too.
SSUK’s creditors pushed for the company’s liquidation, but the government was braced to step in. However, the development does little to provide certainty for the business’s 1,500 workers in South Yorkshire.
The government will cover wages and costs for now but, as a letter sent by the Department for Business and Trade made clear earlier this month, the government has no intention to “own SSUK”. As with British Steel, which collapsed back in April (albeit for different reasons), the government is stepping up, but is hoping a new buyer will be found soon.
The government says wages will continue to be paid by the liquidator. A spokesperson adds that the government is still “committed to a bright and sustainable future for steelmaking and steel-making jobs in the UK”.
Financial assistance was not able to be given to SSUK by the government due to its existing financial and corporate challenges, including ownership and management.
Read more
Whitehall on alert for collapse of steel empire
BlackRock backs Gupta’s bid to keep control
Why did British Steel need saving
In a statement today, GFG’s chief transformational officer, Jeffrey Kabel said: “The decision to push Speciality Steel UK into compulsory liquidation, especially when we have support from the world’s largest asset manager to resume operations and facilitate creditor recovery, is irrational.
“The plan that GFG presented to the court would have secured new investment in the UK steel industry, protecting jobs and establishing a sustainable operational platform under a new governance structure with independent oversight.
“Instead, liquidation will now impose prolonged uncertainty and significant costs on UK taxpayers for settlements and related expenses, despite the availability of a commercial solution.
“Liberty has pursued all options to make its SSUK viable, including efficiency improvements, reorganisations, customer support, several attempts to find a buyer for the business and intensive negotiations with creditors to restructure debt liabilities. Liberty’s shareholder has invested nearly £200m, recognising the vital role steel plays in supplying the UK’s strategic defence, aerospace and energy industries.
“GFG will now continue to advance its bid for the business in collaboration with prospective debt and equity partners and will present its plan to the official receiver. GFG continues to believe it has the ideas, management expertise and commitment to lead SSUK into the future and attract major investment. GFG’s other significant business interests in the UK remain unaffected.
“Despite many challenges facing the group and the difficult market conditions, GFG has invested over £2bn into the UK economy since 2013, ensuring the survival of many GFG businesses despite operating losses and safeguarding thousands of jobs that would otherwise have been lost.”
Sanjeev Gupta in front of a the Liberty Steel Group sign. File pic: PA
Sarah Champion, the Labour MP for Rotherham, said GFG’s statement was “full of hollow promises”.
She added: “We know Liberty is a golden goose, but one they have starved for years.
“The speciality steel we make is unique and in high demand, it makes no financial sense that GFG furloughed the plant for nearly two years.
“Strategically, the government cannot allow Liberty Steel to fail. I am confident they will do all in their power to let it flourish.”
👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne’s on your podcast app👈
Charlotte Brumpton-Childs, the national officer for the GMB union, also attacked GFG.
She said: “This is another tragedy for UK steel – and the people of South Yorkshire – this time brought on by years of chronic mismanagement by the owners.
“But this represents an opportunity for the UK government to take decisive action – as it did with British Steel – to protect this vital UK industry.”
A government spokesperson said: “We know this will be a deeply worrying time for staff and their families, but we remain committed to a bright and sustainable future for steelmaking and steel-making jobs in the UK.
“It is now for the independent Official Receiver to carry out their duties as liquidator, including ensuring employees are paid, while we also make sure staff and local communities are supported.”
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment3 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike