The approach of business to general elections is not what it was.
Not that long ago, it was common for big corporates to make donations to political parties, including big FTSE 100 names such as SmithKline Beecham, United Biscuits, General Accident and Whitbread.
Most of these donations would go to the Conservatives but there were some companies, such as Marks & Spencer and Pearson, which also made donations to other parties.
Some, such as Hanson – whose founder Lord Hanson was a loyal supporter of Margaret Thatcher – continued to do so even after the 1992 Cadbury Report recommended companies stop making contributions to political parties.
Even after the political contributions dried up, FTSE 100 chief executives were not shy about endorsing or criticising politicians at election time.
In 1997, a number of well-known business people including Robert Ayling of British Airways, Bob Bauman of the old British Aerospace (now BAE Systems) and George Simpson of GEC endorsed Tony Blair’s Labour ahead of that year’s election, while John Major’s Conservatives also had plenty of backers.
More from Business
Business people were also happy to speak out about particular policies. Ahead of the 1997 election, BT’s chairman, Sir Iain Vallance, lashed out at Labour’s proposals for a windfall tax on the privatised utilities while Brian Stewart, chief executive of the pubs and brewing giant Scottish & Newcastle, criticised Labour’s plans to create a Scottish Parliament with tax-raising powers.
None of that happens any more. Most CEOs, while having their own political opinions like the rest of us, prefer to keep them to themselves. The more astute, realising that it makes sense to speak to politicians, are careful to ensure they are seen to be behaving even-handedly and not expressing a preference for one side or the other.
Advertisement
Business wish-lists
That does not mean businesses do not have their own wish-lists of policies.
This is particularly true of small businesses. Their wish-list has not changed in the last couple of decades and is topped by wanting a change in the law to enforce prompt payments from larger businesses to their suppliers and the reform of business rates, which is also a bugbear for larger companies in sectors such as retail and hospitality.
Higher up the corporate food chain, what big businesses crave most is clarity and consistency in policy.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:45
Why has an election been called?
As Dame Amanda Blanc, chief executive of insurance, savings and pensions giant Aviva, told Sky News today: “Obviously we’re apolitical. What we want is for the environment to be one where we can invest, with certainty. You know, we want consistency and stability and so that whoever is the winner of the election, we want the election to be decisive, and we really want there to be certainty for us to be able to invest in things like UK infrastructure.”
Dame Amanda, who has served on both the prime minister’s business council and on the business taskforce put together by shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves, added: “We’ve invested £9.5bn in UK infrastructure in the last three years.
“Our commitment is £25bn over the next 10 years. In order to do that, you have to have a more certain environment. And so that’s what we look forward to.”
That desire for stability and consistency was why the brief tenure of Liz Truss in 10 Downing Street was so damaging and why, off the record, a lot of business executives will admit to being grateful to Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt for restoring order to public finances after the firestorm created by Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget in September 2022.
They feel it is the first time, since David Cameron was in office, that a PM had the corporate world’s back. Theresa May alienated a lot of globe-trotting CEOs with her infamous 2016 speech in which she said “if you believe you are a citizen of the world, you are a citizen of nowhere”. She was replaced by Boris Johnson who, as foreign secretary in 2018, infamously said “f*** business.” And then came Ms Truss.
If business leaders are grateful to Messrs Sunak and Hunt, there is also warmth towards Sir Keir Starmer and Ms Reeves for their constructive approach.
Yes, there is some unease about deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner’s proposals to ban zero-hours contracts, end fire and rehire and to give workers full rights and protections from day one of their employment.
But there is a sense that after the leadership of Gordon Brown, Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn, who went into the 2019 election campaign threatening to nationalise much of the energy industry, the water industry and BT’s broadband network, this is the most pro-business Labour leadership since the days of the much-missed Tony Blair.
While big businesses chiefly seek stability and consistency of policy, that is not to say they do not have specific wish-lists of their own.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:32
Sky News election studio unveiled
The big leisure, hospitality and luxury goods companies would like the restoration of VAT-free shopping for international visitors, the loss of which, they argue, has driven business away from the UK to destinations like Paris and Milan.
Most businesses with property interests – which is nearly all of them – would like to see a more coherent planning regime. Housebuilders would like a relaxation of rules requiring a proportion of housing developments are devoted to affordable homes.
Shoplifting scourge
Retailers would like the police to be required to make tackling the scourge of shoplifting a greater priority.
Manufacturers, in particular, would like to see an easing to some trade frictions that have built up since Brexit.
And carmakers – currently under threat of being fined if a certain proportion of their sales are not electric vehicles – would like to see a restoration of government incentives to buy EVs and for the roll-out of EV charging points.
Businesses, it is often pointed out, do not have votes.
But they do create the jobs and wealth on which this country relies. Those hitting the campaign trail over the next six weeks will need no reminding of that.
The Post Office is proposing a big hike in the fees that banks pay to allow their customers to access its network as it attempts to secure additional funding to boost postmasters’ pay.
Sky News understands that more than two dozen banks and building societies are considering a proposal submitted to them recently by the Post Office that would see the next banking framework costing them between £350m and £400m annually – up from about £250m-a-year under the current deal.
Banking sources said the roughly 30 high street lenders were due to respond to the Post Office’s proposal in the early part of the spring.
A deal costing the banks at least £350m a year is expected to be finalised by the autumn, the sources added.
The additional proceeds from the next agreement, which expires at the end of this year, will be used in part to strengthen the new deal for sub-postmasters unveiled by Post Office chairman Nigel Railton in November.
Under the banking framework agreement, the 30 banks and mutuals’ customers can access the Post Office’s 11,500 branches for a range of services, including depositing and withdrawing cash.
The service is particularly valuable to those who still rely on physical cash after a decade in which 6,000 bank branches have been closed across Britain.
More from Money
In 2023, more than £10bn worth of cash was withdrawn over the counter and £29bn in cash was deposited over the counter, the Post Office said last year.
A new agreement with the banks will come at a critical time for the Post Office, whose new leadership team is trying to place it on a sustainable long-term footing.
Reliant on an annual government subsidy, the reputation of the network’s previous management team was left in tatters by the Horizon IT scandal and the wrongful conviction of hundreds of sub-postmasters.
A Post Office spokesperson said: “Our partnership with 30 banks and building societies ensures that no one who relies on cash is left behind, made possible by our postmasters in almost every community of the country.
UK business goes into the new year in a surly mood.
New Chancellor Rachel Reeves‘s hike in employer’s National Insurance contributions (NICs) in her autumn budget will raise the cost of employing people and that is likely to have an impact on both hiring and investment.
For individual sectors, there are specific challenges: the car industry, for example, is still grappling with the threat of penalties where electric vehicles are too low a proportion of their overall sales.
Consumer-facing businesses are also under considerable pressure, not only from the rise in employer’s NICs but also the forthcoming rise in the national living wage, something which particularly hurts the hospitality sector.
That sector, along with retail, also faces a challenge in that consumer confidence remains subdued.
The plight of retailers was underlined by a spate of profit warnings just before Christmas, since when there has been evidence of weak footfall in the sales period.
It is not all doom and gloom though with, for example, conditions in the house building sector expected to gradually improve during 2025.
More from Money
The new year will also pose other challenges.
Businesses of all shapes and sizes will spend an increasing amount of time trying to figure out how to incorporate generative artificial intelligence into their operations.
And, for some big multinationals and exporters, there may be a further headwind in the form of tariffs imposed by the incoming Trump administration in the US.
Multinationals doing business in or with France and Germany may also see their earnings hit by the tepid economic conditions in both countries – with activity in the latter put on hold until after the snap election in February.
Flatlining economy
The UK economy is flatlining, at best, as it enters the new year.
From being the fastest growing economy in the G7 during the first half of 2024, the UK stagnated during the third quarter of the year as the incoming government ladled on the doom and gloom in a bid to underline what it presented as its dire economic inheritance, hitting business and consumer confidence in the process.
Things may actually have worsened since then, as the latest figures from the Office for National Statistics suggest the economy contracted during October, while the Purchasing Managers Index survey data from S&P Global for November point to a contraction in activity in that month too.
The Bank of England expects the economy to have flatlined during the final three months of the year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:01
Why has growth ground to a halt?
The forthcoming rise in employer’s NICs is likely to have a dampening effect on activity although, in all probability, this is more likely to show up in depressed hiring activity, rather than a significant rise in unemployment, since there remain more than 800,000 unfilled job vacancies in the economy.
The UK’s long-running skills shortages – a consistent factor during the first quarter of this century – continue to drag on growth.
Unfortunately, neither households or businesses can expect the Bank of England to ride to the rescue, with the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) now likely to deliver fewer interest rate cuts during 2025 than had been expected even a few months ago.
The headline rate of inflation, which rose to 2.6% in November, is likely to remain stubbornly above the bank’s target rate throughout the year and that will continue to be a cause for concern for the MPC.
The biggest cause of economic uncertainty faced by the world in 2025, though, is whether Donald Trump will press ahead with the tariffs he promised US voters during the presidential election campaign and, if he does, whether other countries will respond in kind – sparking a damaging trade war that would hit global growth.
The UK, the EU and Japan have all indicated they would seek to avoid tit-for-tat retaliatory measures – but China is unlikely to take such an approach.
Mixed picture for household finances
Household finances will be mixed in the UK during 2025.
Consumer confidence began to fall in November, even as the Bank of England was cutting interest rates, while the latest political monitor from pollsters Ipsos Mori suggest that two-thirds of Britons expect the UK’s general economic condition will deteriorate over the next 12 months.
An increase in the household energy price cap in January and in water bills in April will also eat into disposable incomes.
More damaging still will be a rise in council tax bills in April after the government gave local authorities permission to raise council tax by up to 5%.
Most are expected to do so – saddling one household in every 10 with an annual council tax bill of more than £3,000.
Adding to the pressure will be higher shop prices.
Food inflation, which had been falling since early 2023, began to rise again in September 2024 and that will continue because all of the UK’s biggest grocery retailers, including Tesco, Sainsbury’s and Marks & Spencer – have warned that the hike in employer’s NICs will result in higher prices.
Weighed against that is the likelihood of at least two interest rate cuts from the Bank of England, benefiting households with mortgages, although would be first time buyers will still find housing affordability a challenge.
It must also be remembered that, with employment at record levels, the vast majority of UK households ought to be able to at least maintain their standard of living provided the main breadwinner remains in work.
Wages have tracked above the headline rate of inflation now for the best part of two years – although earnings growth is likely to slow in the second half of the year as employers grapple with their higher tax bill
A committee of MPs has called for the government to be fined if it fails to provide redress quickly enough to victims of the Horizon software scandal, as its report said the Post Office has spent at least £136m on legal fees.
New legally enforceable time limits for each stage of claim processing should be introduced, a report from the Business and Trade Committee (BTC) has said.
If a claim by a victim of the Post Office Horizon scandal does not move in line with the time limits they should receive the financial penalties paid by the government.
Many more incurred large debts, lost homes, experienced relationship breakdown, became unwell in an effort to repay the imagined shortfalls and some took their own lives.
Four schemes have been launched as the state and the Post Office attempt to redress the wrongs.
More on Post Office Scandal
Related Topics:
Making redress less punishing
But the process of seeking compensation is “akin to a second trial for victims”, the committee chair Liam Byrne said.
It is “imperative” applicants receive upfront legal advice paid for by scheme operators rather than applicants, the committee’s report said, as evidence given by claimants’ solicitors said when they get legal advice, their financial redress offers double.
Applications place an “excessive burden” on claimants to “grapple complex legal concepts” on the amount of redress they’re owed and requests for information about the losses Horizon caused, despite no longer having access to Horizon data.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:05
Sir Alan Bates threatens legal action
There have been delays in processing requests for disclosures from the Post Office, the report found.
It comes as the Post Office spent £136m on legal costs, meaning government legal representatives are “walking away with millions”, according to the committee.
Vast majority of redress not paid
Despite this, the BTC said the “vast majority” of redress has not been paid.
As many as 14% of those who applied to the Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS) to compensate for losses incurred via the faulty computer programme have still not settled their claims despite applying before the original 2020 deadline.
It cost £67m to administer the Horizon Shortfall Scheme, a bill equal to 27% of redress paid, amounting to £26,600 per claim.
Repeating calls
The topic of who operates the schemes has been revisited by the committee as it reiterated its call for the Post Office to have no involvement and for independent adjudicators to be appointed instead.
The government removed the Post Office from schemes involving convictions but the organisation still administers the HSS.
It also repeated its rebuffed demand for the appointment of an independent adjudicator for each scheme. The committee wants these adjudicators to manage cases and ensure claims move through the process swiftly.
In response, a spokesperson for the Labour-run Department for Business and Trade said: “Since entering government, we have worked tirelessly to speed up the process of providing the victims of the Horizon scandal with full and fair redress including by launching the Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme earlier this year.
“We are settling claims at a faster rate than ever before with the amount of redress paid doubling since July, with almost £500m being paid to over 3,300 claimants as of the end of November.”