Labour has launched its Great British Energy policy – do we need it?

Published

12 months ago

May 31, 2024

admin

The establishment of Great British Energy is among the last remnants of the ‘green prosperity plan’ devised and championed by Ed Miliband, the shadow secretary of state for energy security and net zero, three years ago.

The former Labour leader’s vision was to spend £28bn per year in the first five years of an incoming Labour government on decarbonising the UK economy.

However, as the current leader Sir Keir Starmer recognised, the issue was swiftly weaponised by the Conservatives because all the money – as Mr Miliband himself had made clear – would have been borrowed.

More importantly, the plan did not survive contact with Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, who has made fiscal responsibility her priority.

The £28bn-a-year spending pledge was watered down in February this year to one of £23.7bn over the life of the next parliament.

A sizeable chunk of that will be on Great British Energy, described by Mr Miliband as “a new publicly owned clean power company”, which Labour has said will be initially capitalised at £8.3bn.

And, instead of the money being borrowed, Labour is now saying “it will be funded by asking the big oil and gas companies to pay their fair share through a proper windfall tax”.

What’s a windfall tax and what’s it got to do with green energy?

Before going further, it’s worth explaining what the current windfall tax is.

The existing ‘temporary energy profits levy‘ was launched by Rishi Sunak, as chancellor, in May 2022 and imposed an extra 25% tax on the profits earned by companies from the production of oil and gas in the UK and on the UK Continental Shelf in the North Sea.

Due to expire at the end of 2025, it raised £2.6bn during its first year.

Jeremy Hunt, as chancellor, raised the levy to 35% from the beginning of last year and extended its life to the end of March 2028. That ‘sunset clause’ was extended to the end of March 2029 in Mr Hunt’s spring budget earlier this year.

It effectively means that the total tax burden on North Sea oil and gas producers is now 75%.

Labour made clear in February this year that this would rise to 78%. It also plans to remove some of the investment incentives Mr Sunak put in place when it announced the current windfall tax.

That will undoubtedly have consequences.

Offshore Energies UK, the industry body, has said that, in its first year, the existing energy profits levy led to more than 90% of North Sea oil producers cutting spending. It has warned that Labour’s plans could cost 42,000 jobs in the North Sea and some £26bn in economic value.

So the increase in the windfall levy will have consequences for the overall tax take.

It is therefore important for Labour to make clear what changes in investment and hiring it is factoring in from companies operating in the North Sea as a result of higher taxation.

The big operators are already deserting the region. It was reported this week that Shell and Exxon Mobil are close to selling their jointly-controlled UK North Sea gas fields – marking the US giant’s final exit from the North Sea after 60 years.

And Harbour Energy, the biggest independent operator in the North Sea, has slashed investment in the region, along with hundreds of jobs, since the energy profits levy was introduced. It too is seeking to diversify away from the North Sea – having seen the energy profits levy wipe out its entire annual profits during the first year of the impost.

What will Great British Energy even own?

The second big question is what assets will be owned by Great British Energy.

Labour said overnight: “Great British Energy’s early investments will include wind and solar projects in communities up and down the country as well as making Scotland a world-leader in cutting edge technologies such as floating offshore wind, hydrogen, and CCS (carbon capture and storage).”

What is unclear, though, is whether this will involve buying existing assets from private sector operators, building new assets from scratch or co-investing in new projects.

It is worth asking the question because only the latter of these two options will actually add to the UK’s energy generation and storage capacity.

And, if it is to be the second or third options, the question is what return on capital employed Great British Energy will be seeking to achieve.

A risk that money could be wasted

All commercial operators seek to achieve a return on capital which exceeds their cost of capital.

Now, as a sovereign debt issuer with a good credit rating, the UK government enjoys a lower cost of capital than most corporates. But there will still be a nagging concern – given the traditionally poor stewardship of state-owned enterprises in the UK – that, without the discipline imposed by having shareholders, some of the money will be wasted.

Investments of this kind are risky and volatile.

An example of this came last week when SSE, one of the UK’s biggest and best-run renewable energy generating companies, admitted that Dogger Bank A, its giant wind project off the Yorkshire coast, will not be fully operational until next year rather than this year.

Is it needed when billions are being spent on green investments?

A third question is why, precisely, Great British Energy is needed at all.

The UK is already decarbonising more rapidly than any other major economy and is also investing heavily.

The Department for Energy and Net Zero recently estimated that there will be some £100bn worth of private investment put towards the UK’s energy transition by 2030.

National Grid announced only last week that it plans to invest £31bn in the UK on the transition between now and the end of the decade.

SSE is investing £18bn in renewable capacity in the five years to 2026-27. Scottish Power, another of the big renewable energy companies, recently announced plans to invest £12bn between now and 2028.

So it is not entirely obvious why a comparatively small state-owned company is even necessary.

Energy security and cost

Labour’s justification is partly based on energy security – Sir Keir has in the past queried why a Swedish state-owned power company, Vattenfall, should be the biggest investor in onshore wind in Wales – and partly on prices.

It said overnight: “Great British Energy is part of our mission to make Britain a clean energy superpower by 2030 – helping families save £300 per year off their energy bills.”

Again, though, this raises further questions.

Mark McAllister, the chairman of energy regulator Ofgem, told the Financial Times this week that energy bills were unlikely to fall substantially over the decade partly due to the costs of building out the electricity network to support the transition to renewables.

He told the FT: said: “As we build in more and more renewables, we’re also building in the price, amortised over many years, of the networks as well.

“If we look at the forecasts for wholesale prices and then build on top of that the costs of the network going forward, I think we see something in our view that is relatively flat in the medium term.”

And that begs the biggest question of all, not just for Labour, but for all the parties: why is it being left to a regulator, rather than the politicians, to spell out the costs to households of the energy transition?

Business

Gail’s backer plots rare move with bid for steak chain Flat Iron

Published

10 hours ago

May 25, 2025

admin

Gail's backer plots rare move with bid for steak chain Flat Iron

A backer of Gail’s bakeries is in advanced talks to acquire Flat Iron, one of Britain’s fastest-growing steak restaurant chains.

Sky News has learnt that McWin Capital Partners, which specialises in investments across the “food ecosystem”, has teamed up with TriSpan, another private equity investor, to buy a large stake in Flat Iron.

Restaurant industry sources said McWin would probably take the largest economic interest in Flat Iron if the deal completes.

They added that the two buyers were in exclusive discussions, with a deal possible in approximately a month’s time.

The valuation attached to Flat Iron was unclear on Sunday.

Flat Iron launched in 2012 in London’s Shoreditch and now has roughly 20 sites open.

The chain is solidly profitable, with its latest accounts showing underlying profits of £5.7m in the year to the end of August.

It already has private equity backing in the form of Piper, a leading investor in consumer brands, which injected £10m into the business in 2017.

Flat Iron was founded by Charlie Carroll, who retains an interest in it, but the company is now run by former Byron restaurant boss Tom Byng.

Houlihan Lokey, the investment bank, has been advising Flat Iron on the process.

McWin has reportedly been in talks to take full control of Gail’s while TriSpan’s portfolio has included restaurant operators such as the Vietnamese chain Pho and Rosa’s, a Thai food chain.

A spokesman for McWin declined to comment.

Business

AA owners line up banks to steer path towards £4.5bn exit

Published

1 day ago

May 24, 2025

admin

AA owners line up banks to steer path towards £4.5bn exit

The owners of the AA, Britain’s biggest breakdown recovery service, are lining up bankers to steer a path towards a sale or stock market listing next year which could value the company at well over £4bn.

Sky News has learnt that JP Morgan and Rothschild are in pole position to be appointed to conduct a review of the AA’s strategic options following a recovery in its financial and operating performance.

The AA, which has more than 16 million customers, including 3.3 million individual members, is jointly owned by three private equity firms: Towerbrook Capital Partners, Warburg Pincus and Stonepeak.

Insiders said this weekend that any form of corporate transaction involving the AA was not imminent or likely to take place for at least 12 months.

They added that there was no fixed timetable and that a deal might not take place until after 2026.

Nevertheless, the impending appointment of advisers underlines the renewed confidence its shareholders now have in its prospects, with the business having recorded four consecutive years of customer, revenue and earnings growth.

A strategic review of the AA’s options is likely to encompass an outright sale, listing on the public markets or the disposal of a further minority stake.

Stonepeak invested £450m into the company in a combination of common and preferred equity, in a transaction which completed in July last year.

That deal was undertaken at an enterprise valuation – comprising the AA’s equity and debt – of approximately £4bn, the shareholders said at the time.

Given the company’s growth and the valuation at which Stonepeak invested, any future transaction would be unlikely to take place with a price of less than £4.5bn, according to bankers.

The AA, which has a large insurance division as well as its roadside recovery operations, remains weighed down by a substantial – albeit declining – debt burden.

Its most recent set of financial results disclosed that it had £1.9bn of net debt, which it is gradually paying down as profitability improves.

AA owners over the years

The company has been through a succession of owners during the last 25 years.

In 1999, it was bought by Centrica, the owner of British Gas, for £1.1bn.

It was then sold five years later to CVC Capital Partners and Permira, two buyout firms, for £1.75bn, and sat under the corporate umbrella Acromas alongside Saga for a decade.

The AA listed on the London Stock Exchange in 2014, but its shares endured a miserable run, being taken private nearly seven years later at little more than 15% of its value on flotation.

Under the ownership of Towerbrook and Warburg Pincus, the company embarked on a long-term transformation plan, recruiting a new leadership team in the form of chairman Rick Haythornthwaite – who also chairs NatWest Group – and chief executive Jakob Pfaudler.

For many years, the AA styled itself as “Britain’s fourth emergency service”, competing with fierce rival the RAC for market share in the breakdown recovery sector.

Founded in 1905 by a quartet of driving enthusiasts, the AA passed 100,000 members in 1934, before reaching the one million mark in 1950.

Last year, it attended 3.5 million breakdowns on Britain’s roads, with 2,700 patrols wearing its uniform.

The company also operates the largest driving school business in the UK under the AA and BSM brands.

In the past, it has explored a sale of its insurance arm, which also has millions of customers, at various points but is not actively doing so now.

By recruiting a third major shareholder last, the AA mirrored a deal struck in 2021 by the RAC.

The RAC’s then owners – CVC Capital Partners and the Singaporean state fund GIC – brought the technology-focused private equity firm, Silver Lake, in as another major investor.

A spokesman for the AA declined to comment on Saturday.

Business

US-EU trade war fears reignite as Europe strikes back at Trump’s threat

Published

2 days ago

May 24, 2025

admin

US-EU trade war fears reignite as Europe strikes back at Trump's threat

Fears of a US-EU trade war have been reignited after Europe refused to back down in the face of fresh threats from Donald Trump.

The word tariff has dominated much of the US president’s second term, and he has repeatedly and freely threatened countries with them.

Money blog: Trump sends message to UK on energy bills

This included the so-called “liberation day” last month, where he unleashed tariffs on many of his trade partners.

On Friday, after a period of relative calm which has included striking a deal with the UK, he threatened to impose a 50% tariff on the EU after claiming trade talks with Brussels were “going nowhere”.

The US president has repeatedly taken issue with the EU, going as far as to claim it was created to rip the US off.

However, in the face of the latest hostile rhetoric from Mr Trump’s social media account, the European Commission – which oversees trade for the 27-country bloc – has refused to back down.

EU trade chief Maros Sefcovic said: “EU-US trade is unmatched and must be guided by mutual respect, not threats.

“We stand ready to defend our interests.”

Fellow EU leaders and ministers have also held the line after Mr Trump’s comments.

Polish deputy economy minister Michal Baranowski said the tariffs appeared to be a negotiating ploy, with Dutch deputy prime minister Dick Schoof said tariffs “can go up and down”.

French trade minister Laurent Saint-Martin said the latest threats did nothing to help trade talks.

He stressed “de-escalation” was one of the EU’s main aims but warned: “We are ready to respond.”

Mr Sefcovic spoke with US trade representative Jamieson Greer and commerce secretary Howard Lutnick after Mr Trump’s comments.

Mr Trump has previously backed down on a tit-for-tat trade war with China, which saw tariffs soar above 100%.

Sticking points

Talks between the US and EU have stumbled.

In the past week, Washington sent a list of demands to Brussels – including adopting US food safety standards and removing national digital services taxes, people familiar with the talks told Reuters news agency.

In response, the EU reportedly offered a mutually beneficial deal that could include the bloc potentially buying more liquefied natural gas and soybeans from the US, as well as cooperation on issues such as steel overcapacity, which both sides blame on China.

Stocks tumble as Trump grumbles

Major stock indices tumbled after Mr Trump’s comments, which came as he also threatened to slap US tech giant Apple with a 25% tariff.

The president is adamant that he wants the company’s iPhones to be built in America.

The vast majority of its phones are made in China, and the company has also shifted some production to India.

Shares of Apple ended 3% lower and the dollar sank 1% versus the Japanese yen and the euro rose 0.8% against the dollar.