One of the policy areas on which the Labour Party has been very specific during this general election campaign is its approach towards North Sea oil and gas production.
The party has been clear that it will raise existing windfall taxes first slapped on North Sea oil and gas producers in 2022 by Rishi Sunak, when he was chancellor, taking the total level of tax from the current 75% to 78%.
Ed Miliband, the shadow secretary of state for energy security and net zero, also proposes to take away tax reliefs Mr Sunak put in place alongside the windfall tax, to sugar the pill, which allowed producers to offset their investments in new production against their tax bills.
Mr Miliband, who has referred to these tax breaks as ‘loopholes’, argues this would bring the tax treatment of the British North Sea into line with that of the Norwegian North Sea. He is also proposing a ban on new oil and gas exploration licenses as part of what remains of his ‘green prosperity plan‘.
With Labour so far ahead in the polls, that is already having an effect on investment in the North Sea, with a trio of companies – Jersey Oil and Gas, Serica Energy and Neo Energy – announcing earlier this month that they are delaying, by a year, the planned start of production at the Buchan oilfield 120 miles to the north-east of Aberdeen.
Industry attacks
More from Business
Serica, which on average has produced 43,781 barrels of oil or oil equivalent per day so far this year, sought today to remind politicians of the potential consequences of their actions.
David Latin, Serica’s chairman and interim chief executive, unleashed a furious attack on the proposals – telling shareholders: “I have been involved in this industry for more than 30 years and have worked all over the world.
Advertisement
“Other than when I was responsible for a company which had significant assets in a war zone, I have never encountered a situation which was so challenging when it comes to making investment decisions, and planning for the future more generally, as it is in the UK at present.”
Reminding his audience that the UK consumes almost twice as much oil and gas as it produces, Mr Latin said that deficit would persist even as the country sought to reduce its consumption of hydrocarbons, with the gap being filled by imports.
He added: “These imports worsen our national balance of payments, only deliver jobs and taxes to foreign countries and, typically, have higher production and transportation carbon emissions by the time they get to our shores.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Criticising the Conservatives for persisting with windfall taxes despite oil and gas prices having returned to historically normal levels and Labour for proposing to raise those taxes, Mr Latin said there were a number of misconceptions around the tax regime – not least the notion that the windfall tax is being paid largely by oil majors like Shell and BP.
He went on: “As to the claim that the tax is being paid by the “oil and gas giants”, it is in fact independent companies like Serica who are most affected. The ‘majors’ account for only around a third of UK production and the vast majority of their profits are made overseas and are not touched by increasing tax rates on UK production.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
5:03
Labour ‘not turning off the taps’ of oil and gas
“Indeed, for those companies such as Serica that continued to invest in their assets during periods of lower commodity prices prior to the invasion of Ukraine, the current fiscal regime represents a further punishment for risk capital committed to its portfolio during the very low commodity prices seen in the COVID period.
“Closing ‘loopholes’ in UK oil and gas tax seems to mean different things to different people.
“Whatever is meant, I wish to be crystal clear that reducing tax relief for capital expenditure below the rate at which tax is payable would make investment in the vast majority of UK North Sea projects unprofitable, meaning that these projects, and the jobs and tax revenues they would generate, simply will not happen.”
Union criticism of Labour
But criticism of Labour’s policy was also coming today from another direction.
Unite, the UK’s biggest union and traditionally Labour’s biggest financial supporter, also has concerns banning new oil and gas exploration licences that could force the UK to import more gas when it still has plenty of its own.
Today it published an open letter, urging a rethink on the ban, signed by nearly 200 local firms from Scottish towns dependent on the oil and gas industry – while some of those businesses joined Unite members in a demonstration outside Aberdeen’s Maritime Museum.
Image: Unite members protest outside the Aberdeen Maritime Museum. Pic: Unite
Sharon Graham, Unite’s general secretary, said: “Until Labour has a concrete plan for replacing North Sea jobs and ensuring energy security, the ban on new oil and gas exploration licenses should not go ahead.
“Labour must not allow oil and gas workers to become this generation’s coal miners. Scotland’s oil and gas communities are crying out for a secure future and that is what Labour must deliver.”
However, while businesses are warning that Labour’s policy will drive investment elsewhere and unions worry about the impact on jobs and local communities in north-east Scotland, there are others who think the party could go further.
Image: Offshore workers show support for Unite’s no ban without a plancampaign. Pic: Unite.
Not going far enough
While Unite was staging its demonstration in Aberdeen, some 50 protestors from a group calling itself Stop Polluting Politics were staging one of their own 553 miles to the south at the Labour Party headquarters in Southwark, southeast London.
They allege that the party has “financial ties to polluting corporations” and have criticised a decision by Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, to accept a £10,000 campaign donation from Lord Donoughue, the Labour peer, who has in the past chaired the Global Warming Policy Foundation – a climate change sceptic lobby group.
They allege that Ms Reeves’s decision to ‘water down’ Mr Miliband’s ‘green prosperity plan’ in February this year was influenced by the donation – something Lord Donoughue himself has vehemently denied.
It all highlights how energy policy threatens to become a major headache for Labour should it win the election a week today.
The energy supplier Ovo is plotting the sale of a stake in its software arm at a ‘unicorn’ valuation as part of efforts to strengthen the balance sheet of Britain’s fourth-largest residential gas and electricity group.
Sky News has learnt that Ovo, which has just under 4m retail customers, has appointed Arma Partners, the investment bank, to explore options for Kaluza.
It replicates a move by larger rival Octopus Energy – revealed by Sky News – to hire advisers to work on a demerger of its Kraken software arm at a potential valuation of well over $10bn (£7.4bn).
Kaluza, which describes itself as an energy intelligence platform and this week announced a licensing partnership with the French-based energy group Engie, is 80%-owned by Ovo.
The remaining 20% is owned by AGL, an Australian energy company which bought a stake last year in a deal valuing Kaluza at $500m (£395m).
Industry sources said that Ovo was likely to seek a valuation for Kaluza in any new transaction of well over $1bn, although they added that there were questions about the software business’s path to sustainable profitability and its pipeline of new customers.
One analyst suggested that Kaluza’s majority-owner could pitch a valuation for Kaluza – run by chief executive Melissa Gander – of as much as $2.5bn based on annual recurring revenue (ARR).
More on Energy
Related Topics:
Kaluza recently bought Beige Technologies, an Australian energy software specialist, in order to strengthen its presence in the Asia-Pacific region.
The prospective Kaluza stake sale comes amid a wider effort by Ovo to bolster its financial position.
Rothschild, the investment bank, has been orchestrating talks with potential investors about a plan to inject in the region of £300m into the company.
At one point, this is understood to have included discussions with Iberdrola, the owner of rival supplier Scottish Power.
Centrica, the owner of British Gas, may also have expressed an interest in examining a deal, according to banking sources.
A deal with another third party is said to be likely before the end of the year.
On Friday, Sky News revealed that the company – like Octopus Energy – had so far failed to meet targets imposed as part of a new capital adequacy regime overseen by Ofgem, the industry regulator.
A spokesperson for Ovo said it had “taken proactive measures to align with Ofgem’s new capital rules, working constructively to meet the requirements.”
Ovo recently named Dame Jayne-Anne Gadhia, the former boss of Virgin Money, as the independent chair of its retail arm.
Founded by Stephen Fitzpatrick, the entrepreneur who now owns London’s Kensington Roof Gardens, Ovo’s existing shareholders include the private equity firm Mayfair Equity Partners, Morgan Stanley Investment Management and Mitsubishi Corporation, the Japanese conglomerate.
Under Mr Fitzpatrick, who launched Ovo in 2009, the company positioned itself as a challenger brand offering superior service to the industry’s established players.
Ovo’s transformational moment came in 2020, when it bought the retail supply arm of SSE, transforming it overnight into one of Britain’s leading energy companies.
Its growth has not been without difficulties, however, particularly in relation to its challenged relationship with Ofgem and a torrent of customer complaints about overcharging.
The group is now run by David Buttress, who was briefly Boris Johnson’s cost-of-living tsar after leaving the top job at Just Eat, as its chief executive.
Kaluza declined to comment on the appointment of Arma Partners.
Harrods has warned its e-commerce customers that their personal data may have been taken in an IT systems breach.
Information like customers’ names and contact details was taken after one of Harrods’ third-party provider systems was compromised, the luxury London department store said.
Affected customers have been informed and reassured that the impacted data is “limited to basic personal identifiers”, a spokesperson said.
Account passwords or payment details were not affected in the breach.
“The third party has confirmed this is an isolated incident which has been contained, and we are working closely with them to ensure that all appropriate actions are being taken. We have notified all relevant authorities,” Harrods added.
“No Harrods system has been compromised and it is important to note that the data was taken from a third-party provider.”
Friday’s breach is “unconnected” to the attempts in May, the spokesman said.
Two men aged 19, a 17-year-old boy and a 20-year-old woman were arrested in July over their suspected involvement in cyber attacks on Harrods, Marks & Spencer, and the Co-op.
They were arrested on suspicion of blackmail, money laundering, offences linked ot the Computer Misuse Act, and participating in the activities of an organised crime group, the National Crime Agency said.
All four have been bailed pending further inquiries.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Nursery hackers: ‘There’s more to come’
It comes as hackers claim to have stolen pictures, names and addresses of thousands of children in a cyber attack on a nursery chain in London.
The group, calling itself Radiant, has released personal information about children and staff at the Kido nursery chain on the dark web and demanded a ransom from the company.
Donald Trump has revealed a fresh round of trade tariffs on several key sectors, with the most punitive rate likely to affect UK businesses.
The US president used his Truth Social account last night to confirm that a new 100% tariff would apply to any branded or patented pharmaceutical product from 1 October.
He said that to escape the clutches of that duty, a company must have already broken ground on a new US factory.
From the same date, a 50% tariff would be applied to all imported kitchen and bathroom cabinets while upholstered furniture faced a 30% rate.
A 25% tariff faced shipments of heavy trucks.
The president did not confirm whether the duties would be lower for nations to have agreed trade deals with his administration, including the UK and European Union.
More from Money
Each faces a blanket 10% and 15% rate on their exports respectively at the moment.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
What does UK-US trade deal involve?
It is likely, however, that the new duties will be applied in line with other, higher, sectoral tariffs that are currently in place above those agreed rates.
“The reason for this is the large scale “FLOODING” of these products into the United States by other outside Countries,” Trump said in his post.
The lack of detail around the application of the planned new tariff rules means further uncertainty for companies potentially affected.
Shares in pharmaceutical firms listed in Asia fell sharply overnight as industry bodies rushed to seek clarification on the new rules.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Will trade deal with Trump cost UK green jobs?
AstraZeneca – the UK’s most valuable listed company – already has vast US manufacturing and research operations.
In July, as the threat of tariffs loomed large, it revealed plans for a further $50bn investment by 2030.
US figures show the country imported $233bn of drugs and medicines from abroad last year.
A 100% tariff rate, even on some of those shipments, risk ramping up the cost of US healthcare.
By imposing the 100% tariff rate, Mr Trump wants to bring prices down through encouraging domestic production.
US industry groups lined up to oppose the planned measures.
The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America said non-US companies were continuing to announce hundreds of billions of dollars in new US. investments. “Tariffs risk those plans,” it said.
The US Chamber of Commerce urged a U-turn on any truck tariffs.
It said the five nations to be worst affected – Mexico, Canada, Japan, Germany, and Finland – were “allies or close partners of the United States posing no threat to US national security.”.