Here’s a quiz question: how much would you say the supply of non-Russian gas to Europe (including the UK) has gone up since the invasion of Ukraine?
It’s a pretty important question. After all, in the years before the invasion, Russian gas (coming in mostly through pipelines but, to a lesser extent, also on liquefied natural gas [LNG] tankers) accounted for more than a third of our gas.
If Europe was going to stop relying on Russian gas, it would need either to source that gas from somewhere else or to learn to live without it. And while there might, a few decades hence, be a way of surviving without gas while also nursing important heavy industries, right now the technology isn’t there.
For decades, Europe – especially Germany, but also, to a lesser extent Italy and other parts of Eastern Europe – built their economic models on building advanced machinery, with their plants fuelled by cheap Russian gas.
All of which is why that question matters. And so too does the answer. The conventional wisdom is that Europe has shored up its supplies of gas from elsewhere. There’s more methane coming in from Azerbaijan, for one thing. And more too in the form of LNG from Qatar and (especially) the US.
But now let’s ponder the actual data. And it shows you something else: in 2024 as a whole, the amount of gas Europe had from non-Russian sources was up by a mere 0.5% compared with the 2017-21 average.
This isn’t to say that there wasn’t more gas coming in, primarily from LNG tankers, most (but not all) of them from the US. But that extra LNG was only enough to compensate for a sharp fall in gas produced domestically, for instance by the UK and the Netherlands. The upshot was that to all extents and purposes, the non-Russian part of the European gas mix was basically flat.
That’s a serious problem, given the amount of gas coming in from Russia has fallen by 37% over the same period. Essentially, Europe’s total gas consumption has fallen by an unprecedented amount without being supplemented from elsewhere.
Now, to some extent, some of that lost energy has been supplemented by extra power from renewable sources. The UK, for instance, saw the biggest amount of its power ever coming from wind and other green sources last year. However, green electricity only goes so far. It cannot heat houses with gas boilers; it cannot provide the intense heat needed for many industrial processes. And look at the numbers in Europe and you can see the consequences.
With the continent having effectively to ration gas, the industrial heart has borne the brunt. Look at chemicals production in the UK and it’s down by more than a third in recent years. Look at energy-intensive industrial output in Germany and it’s down by 20% since the invasion of Ukraine. The continent is deindustrialising, and the shortage of gas is at least part of the explanation.
And that shortage is about to become even more acute in the coming months. Because the flow of gas coming from Russia is going to fall yet further. There are, broadly speaking, four routes for Russian gas into Europe. The Yamal pipelines are old Soviet pipes running through Belarus; the Nord Stream pipes run (or rather ran) under the Baltic. There are pipes going through Ukraine towards Slovakia and Austria and then there’s the newest pipes, running through the Black Sea to Turkey.
As of late last year, only two of these routes were still operational: Yamal had been shuttered following sanctions by both sides in 2022; Nord Stream was damaged by an attack later in 2022. And now, following a failure to renew the terms of a transit agreement between Ukraine and Russia, the Ukraine route has just shut too. The amounts of gas we’re talking about aren’t enormous: around 4% of total European supply, as of 2024. But even so, it’s a further blow and will mean more rationing in the coming months. European deindustrialisation will probably continue or accelerate.
According to Jack Sharples, senior research fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies: “In the big picture, the loss of 15 billion cubic metres in 2025 for Europe as a whole equates to 4% of supply in 2024. So, enough to push the market a little tighter in the context of a global LNG market that remains tight, but nothing like the impact of losing Russian pipeline gas supply in 2022.”
Still, this isn’t the only challenge facing the market right now. This time last year, the continent had a near-unprecedented amount of gas stored away. But the amount of gas in storage – a key buffer – has dropped rapidly in recent months, partly because it’s been a little colder than in the previous year, partly because gas has had to step in to provide power when the wind dropped and renewables output disappointed.
The result is the continent starts the year with gas storage at a much lower level than policymakers would like – only 71% full. Admittedly this is higher than the nerve-wrackingly low level of early 2022 (54%). And it’s implausible that Europe will actually exhaust its supplies. But it makes it more likely that the continent will have to pay high prices in the summer to replenish its supplies.
Put it all together and you can understand why wholesale gas prices are climbing higher. The UK may not receive any gas directly from Russia, but it’s plugged into this market, so any shortages on the other side of the channel directly affect the prices we pay here too. And those prices are now up to the highest level since the spring of 2023. This is, it’s worth saying, way lower than the highs of 2022. But it’s enough to suggest bills might be heading up soon.
Shares in UK banks have fallen sharply on the back of a report which urges the chancellor to place their profits in her sights at the coming budget.
As Rachel Reeves stares down a growing deficit – estimated at between £20bn-£40bn heading into the autumn – the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said there was an opportunity for a windfall by closing a loophole.
It recommended a new levy on the interest UK lenders receive from the Bank of England, amounting to £22bn a year, on reserves held as a result of the Bank’s historic quantitative easing, or bond-buying, programme.
It was first introduced at the height of the financial crisis, in 2009.
The left-leaning think-tank said the money received by banks amounted to a subsidy and suggested £8bn could be taken from them annually to pay for public services.
It argued that the loss-making scheme – a consequence of rising interest rates since 2021 – had left taxpayers footing the bill unfairly as the Treasury has to cover any loss.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:28
Why taxes might go up
The Bank recently estimated the total hit would amount to £115bn over the course of its lifetime.
The publication of the report coincided with a story in the Financial Times which spoke of growing fears within the banking sector that it was firmly in the chancellor’s sights.
Her first budget, in late October last year, put businesses on the hook for the bulk of its tax-raising measures.
Ms Reeves is under pressure to find more money from somewhere as she has ruled out breaking her own fiscal rules to help secure the cash she needs through heightened borrowing.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:17
Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?
Other measures understood to be under consideration include a wealth tax, new property tax and a shake-up that could lead to a replacement for council tax.
Analysts at Exane told clients in a note: “In the last couple of years, the chancellor has been protective of the banks and has avoided raising taxes.
“However, public finances may require additional cash and pressures for a bank tax from within the Labour party seem to be rising,” it concluded.
The investor flight saw shares in Lloyds and NatWest plunge by more than 5%. Those for Barclays were more than 4% lower at one stage.
A spokesperson for the Treasury said the best way to strengthen public finances was to speed up economic growth.
“Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms,” they added.
The man dubbed “Britain’s most hated boss” for his controversial policy of sacking hundreds of seafarers and replacing them with cheaper agency staff is to quit.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Peter Hebblethwaite, the chief executive of P&O Ferries, is leaving the company.
Sources said he had decided to resign for personal reasons.
Mr Hebblethwaite joined the ranks of Britain’s most notorious corporate figures in 2022 when P&O Ferries – a subsidiary of the giant Dubai-based ports operator DP World – said it was sacking 800 staff with immediate effect – some of whom learned their fate via a video message.
The policy, which Mr Hebblethwaite defended to MPs during subsequent select committee hearings, erupted into a national scandal, prompting changes in the law to give workers greater protection.
Under the new legislation, the government plans to tighten collective redundancy requirements for operators of foreign vessels.
More from Money
In a statement issued in response to a request from Sky News, a P&O Ferries spokesperson said: “Peter Hebblethwaite has communicated his intention to resign from his position as chief executive officer to dedicate more time to family matters.
Image: Peter Hebblethwaite gives evidence to a committee of MPs in 2022. Pic: PA
“P&O Ferries extends its gratitude to Peter Hebblethwaite for his contributions as CEO over the past four years.
“During his tenure the company navigated the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, initiated a path towards financial stability, and introduced the world’s first large double-ended hybrid ferries on the Dover-Calais route, thereby enhancing sustainability.
“We extend our best wishes to him for his future endeavours.”
A source close to the company said it anticipated making an announcement on Mr Hebblethwaite’s successor in the near term.
A former executive at J Sainsbury, Greene King and Alliance Unichem, Mr Hebblethwaite joined P&O Ferries in 2019, before taking over as chief executive in November 2021.
Insiders claimed on Friday that he had “transformed” the business following the bitter blows dealt to its finances by the COVID-19 pandemic and – to some degree – by the impact of Britain’s exit from the European Union.
Image: A union protest is shown at the height of the mass sackings row in 2022
P&O Ferries carries 4.5 million passengers annually on routes between the UK and continental European ports including Calais and Rotterdam.
It also operates a route between Northern Ireland and Scotland, and is a major freight carrier.
The company’s losses soared during the pandemic, with DP World – its sole shareholder – supporting it through hundreds of millions of pounds in loans.
Its most recent accounts, which were significantly delayed, showed a significant reduction in losses in 2023 to just over £90m.
The reduction from the previous year’s figure of almost £250m was partly attributed to cost reduction exercises.
The accounts also showed that Mr Hebblethwaite received a pay package of £683,000, including a bonus of £183,000.
“I reflected on accepting that payment, but ultimately I did decide to accept it,” he told MPs.
“I do recognise it is not a decision that everybody would have made.”
The row over his pay was especially acute because of his admission that P&O Ferries’ lowest-paid seafarers received hourly pay of just £4.87.
Mr Hebblethwaite had argued since the mass sackings of 2022 that the company would have gone bust without the drastic cost-cutting that it entailed.
The company insisted at the time that those affected by the redundancies had been offered “enhanced” packages to leave.
Last October, the then transport secretary, Louise Haigh, said: “The mass sacking by P&O Ferries was a national scandal which can never be allowed to happen again,” adding that measures to protect seafarers from “rogue employers” would prevent a repetition.
“This issue has been ignored for over 2 years, but this new government is moving fast and bringing forward measures within 100 days,” Ms Haigh added.
“We are closing the legal loophole that P&O Ferries exploited when they sacked almost 800 dedicated seafarers and replaced them with low-paid agency workers and we are requiring operators to pay the equivalent of National Minimum Wage in UK waters.
“Make no mistake – this is good for workers and good for business.”
The minister’s description of P&O Ferries as “rogue”, and suggestion that consumers should boycott the company, sparked a row which threatened to overshadow the government’s International Investment Summit last October.
Sky News’s business and economics correspondent, Paul Kelso, revealed that DP World had withdrawn from participating in the event, and paused a £1bn investment announcement.
The company relented after Sir Keir Starmer publicly distanced the government from Ms Haigh’s characterisation of DP World.
Donald Trump has cancelled a loophole from today that had allowed consumers and businesses to be spared duties for sending low-value goods to the United States.
The so-called de minimis exemption had applied across the world before Trump 2.0 but the president has taken action – and the UK may soon follow suit – as part of his trade war.
The relief had allowed goods worth less than $800 (£595) to enter the US duty-free since 2016.
But now, low-cost packages face the same tariff rate as other, more expensive, goods.
The reasons for the latest bout of protectionism are numerous and the ramifications are country and purpose specific.
What is changing?
It was no accident that China was the first destination to be slapped with this rule change.
More on Donald Trump
Related Topics:
The duty exemption on low-value Chinese goods was ended in May as US retailers, in fact those across the Western world, complained bitterly that they were being undercut by cheap clothing, accessories and household goods shipped by the likes of Shein and Temu.
From today, Mr Trump is expanding the end of the de minimis rule to the rest of the world.
Why is Trump doing this?
Image: Number of de minimis packages imported in to the US since 2018
The president is not acting purely to protect US businesses.
More duties mean more money for his tariff treasure chest, bolstering the goodies already pouring in from his base and reciprocal tariffs imposed on trading partners globally this year.
The Trump administration has also called out “deceptive shipping practices, illegal material and duty circumvention”.
It also believes many parcels claiming to contain low-value goods have been used to fuel the country’s supplies of fentanyl, with the importation of the illegal drug being used by the president as a reason for his wider trade war against allies including Canada.
How will it apply?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:35
New tariffs threaten fresh trade chaos
Under the new rules, only letters and personal gifts worth less than $100 (£74) will still be free of import duties.
Charges will depend on the tariff regime facing the country from where the goods are sent.
Fox example, a parcel containing products worth $600 would raise $180 in extra duties when sent from a country facing a 30% tariff rate.
It has sparked chaos in many countries, with postal services in places including Japan, Germany and Australia refusing to accept many items for delivery to the US until the practicalities of the new regime become clearer.
What about the UK?
All goods not meeting the £74 exemption criteria now face a 10% charge because that is the baseline tariff the US has slapped on imports from the UK.
We were spared, if you remember, higher reciprocal tariffs under the so-called “trade deal”.
How will the process work?
All shipping and delivery companies will be wading through the changes, with the big international operators such as DHL, FedEx and the like all promising to navigate the challenge.
Royal Mail said on Thursday that it would be the first international postal service to have a dedicated operation.
It said consumers could use its new postal delivery duties paid (PDDP) services both online and at Post Offices.
But it explained that business customers faced different restrictions to individuals.
Businesses would be charged a handling fee per parcel to cover additional costs and duties would be calculated based on where items were originally manufactured.
While business account customers could be handed an invoice for the duties, it explained that consumers would have to pay at the point of buying postage.
No customs declaration would be required, it concluded, for personal correspondence.
Is the US alone in doing this?
The answer is no, but it remains a fairly widespread relief globally.
The European Union, for example, removed de minimis breaks back in 2021, making all e-commerce imports to the bloc subject to VAT.
It is also now planning to introduce a fee of €2 on goods worth €150 or less to cover the costs of customs processing.
Should the UK do the same?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:00
July: The value of ‘de minimis’ imports into Britain
The UK has been under pressure for many years to follow suit and drop its own £135 duty-free threshold as retailers battle the cheap e-commerce competition from China we mentioned earlier.
A review was announced by the chancellor in April.
Sky News revealed in July how the total declared trade value of de minimis imports into the UK in the 2024-25 financial year was £5.9bn – a 53% increase on the previous 12-month period.
Any rise in revenue would be welcomed, not only by UK retailers, but by Rachel Reeves too as she looks to fill a renewed black hole in the public finances.