The Conservative Party will on Wednesday unveil a letter signed by scores of small business-owners in a last-ditch bid to convince undecided voters that they can be trusted as the stewards of Britain’s economy.

Sky News understands that the Tories are planning to publish a letter signed by between 100 and 150 SME bosses that will argue that a Labour government would risk damaging their business.

Follow live general election updates

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Sources said the letter was expected to be released on Wednesday, the final day before Britain goes to the polls.

Neither the text of the letter nor the names of the signatories were clear on Tuesday.

A business-owner approached to sign it, but who declined, said he was surprised the Tories had not done more to exploit differences between the two main parties on potential capital gains tax changes during the campaign.

One insider described it as “a last-ditch bid” to reverse some of the momentum behind Labour, which has published a series of letters during the election campaign backed by businesspeople.

One of those, however, was widely derided for featuring the name of just one FTSE-100 chair or CEO – the JD Sports Fashion chairman Andrew Higginson.

Another focused on proposed reforms of the Apprenticeship Levy.

Letters with the endorsement of business leaders have become a regular feature of UK political campaigns, with the Tories historically able to command significant support from prominent figures.

The absence of such a letter during this campaign has been perceived as a reflection of the party’s poor performance in the polls and its recent record in government.

The Conservative Party declined to comment.

This is the story of how an obscure company based in an office block on a quiet street in Glasgow became an accessory in Vladimir Putin’s war on Ukraine. It is the story of how Europe and Russia remain locked in a tense relationship of economic dependence, even as they supposedly cut their ties. It is the story of the uncomfortable truth behind why the cost of living crisis came to an end.

But before all of that, it is the story of a ship – a very unusual ship indeed.

If you ever spot the Yakov Gakkel as it sails through the English Channel or the Irish Sea (I first set eyes on it in the Channel but at the time of writing it was sailing northwards, about 20 miles off the coast of Anglesey) you might not find it all that remarkable.

At first glance it looks like many of the other large, nondescript tankers and cargo vessels passing these shores. Its profile is dominated by an enormous blue prow which reaches high out of the water and ends, 50 metres further back, at its unexpectedly angular stern.

Yet the ship’s slightly odd shape – all hull and barely any deck – is the first clue about what makes the Yakov Gakkel so special. Because this is one of the world’s most advanced liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers, with an unusual trick up its sleeve.

LNG tankers are extraordinary ships, with insides so cleverly engineered they are capable of holding vast amounts of natural gas at temperatures of approximately −163C.

For all that the world is embracing renewable energy, natural gas remains one of the most important energy sources, essential for much of Europe’s heating and power, not to mention its industries. For the time being, there is no cheap way of making many industrial products, from glass and paper to critical chemicals and fertilisers, without gas.

Once upon a time, moving natural gas from one part of the world to another necessitated sending it down long, expensive, vulnerable pipelines, meaning only countries with a physical connection to gas producers could receive this vital fuel. But LNG tankers like the Yakov Gakkel are part of the answer to this problem, since they allow gas producers to send it by sea to anywhere with a terminal capable of turning their supercooled methane back into the gas we use to heat our homes and power our grids.

But the Yakov Gakkel can also do something most other LNG tankers cannot, for that enormous blue double hull allows it to carve through ice, enabling it to travel up into the Arctic Circle and back even in the depths of winter.

And that is precisely what this ship does, more or less constantly: travelling back and forth between Siberia and Europe, through winter and summer, bringing copious volumes of gas from Russia to Europe. It is part of the explanation for how Europe never ran out of gas, even after the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

This is not, it’s worth saying, the conventional wisdom. Back when Russia invaded Ukraine, European policymakers declared they planned to eliminate the continent’s reliance on Russian gas – which accounted for roughly a third of their supplies before 2022.

And many assumed that had already happened – especially after the Nord Stream pipeline, the single biggest source of European gas imports, was sabotaged in late 2022. But while volumes of Russian pipeline gas into Europe have dropped dramatically, the amount of Russian LNG coming into Europe has risen to record levels.

Russia helps Europe replenish gas stores

Today, Europe still depends on Russia for around 15% of its gas, an ever-growing proportion of which now comes in via the sealanes, on tankers like the Yakov Gakkel. And while the US has stepped in to make up some of the volumes lost when those pipelines stopped, only last month Russia overtook the US to become the second biggest provider of gas to the continent. It’s further evidence that those LNG volumes carried on ships through the North Sea, the Irish Sea and the English Channel, are increasing, rather than falling.

This Russian gas has helped Europe replenish its gas stores, it has helped keep the continent’s heavy industry going throughout the Ukraine war. And this dependence has not come cheap: the total amount Europe has paid Russia for LNG since 2022 comes to around €10bn.

The continued presence of Russian gas running through European grids is at least part of the explanation for why European energy prices have fallen so sharply since those post-invasion highs. Back then, many in the market were pricing in a complete end of Russian gas supply to Europe – something that would have had disastrous consequences. But it never actually happened.

Perhaps this explains why the continent’s politicians have, so far, stopped short of banning imports of Russian gas: they are aware that their economy would struggle to withstand another sharp spike in inflation – which would almost certainly eventuate if it stopped taking Russian gas altogether.

This week, European leaders agreed to stop allowing Russia to use its ports to “trans-ship” its LNG – essentially acting as a stop-off point towards other destinations. However, those transshipments account for only a fraction – at most a quarter – of the Russian gas coming in on tankers to Europe. The vast majority ends up in Belgium, France and Spain, heating European homes, fuelling power stations and powering machinery in factories.

While European leaders have imposed wide-ranging sanctions and price caps on shipments of oil, no such controls exist for liquefied natural gas. So the Yakov Gakkel and a fleet of LNG tankers carry on sailing between Siberia and various ports in Europe – Zeebrugge, Dunkirk, Montoir and Bilbao – keeping the continent supplied with the Russian hydrocarbons it still cannot live without.

British firm’s role in lucrative trade

But there is another reason why this ship is particularly unique, for the Yakov Gakkel – this critical cog in the financial machine that helps finance the Russian regime – is actually part-owned and operated by a British company.

That brings us back to a street overlooking the Clyde in Glasgow, where, in a glass-fronted office block, you will find the operational headquarters of a company called Seapeak. The chances are you haven’t heard of Seapeak before, but this business owns and operates a fleet of LNG tankers all across the world.

That fleet includes the Yakov Gakkel and four other LNG icebreakers that ply this Siberian trade. That a British company might be facilitating this lucrative trade for Russia might come as a surprise, but there is nothing illegal about this: the sanctions regime on Russia just turns out to be significantly more porous than you might have thought.

We tried repeatedly to speak to Seapeak – to ask them about the Yakov Gakkel and whether they felt it was appropriate – given the UK has forsworn LNG imports – that a British company and British workers are helping administer this Russian trade. We sent emails with questions. However, they did not respond to our calls or our emails.

When, after weeks of efforts to get a response, I visited their offices in Glasgow, I was met by a security guard who told me Seapeak would not see me without an appointment (which they were refusing to give me). Eventually I was told that if I would not leave they would call the police.

Seapeak is not the only British company helping keep Russian gas flowing. While British insurers are banned from protecting oil tankers carrying Russian crude, there’s no equivalent sanction on Russian LNG ships, with the upshot that many of these tankers are insured by British companies operating out of the Square Mile.

We spent some time tracking another icebreaking tanker, the Vladimir Rusanov, as it approached Zeebrugge. It is insured by the UK P&I Club, which also insures a number of other LNG carriers.

In a statement, it said: “The UK Club takes great care to observe all applicable sanctions regulations in relation to Russian energy cargoes, but the direct carriage of LNG from Yamal to Zeebrugge, and provision of insurance services for such carriage, is not presently sanctioned. If the EU and G7 nations were to change their policy… the Club would of course comply by adjusting or withdrawing its services, as necessary.”

The transport of Russian gas into Europe – its dependence on British operators and insurers – is only one small example of the loopholes and omissions in the UK sanctions regime. But while government ministers have expressed concern about the effectiveness of the broader sanctions regime, there is still scant evidence they intend to tighten up this corner of it.

Before the election was called the Treasury Select Committee was in the middle of collecting evidence for its own inquiry into the regime, which was expected to focus on insurers of vessels taking Russian goods. However, the inquiry was wound up prematurely when the election was called in May.

Read more on Sky News:
EU sanctions target Russian gas for first time
Russian oil still seeping into the UK

In the meantime, ships like the Yakov Gakkel carry on taking billions of cubic metres of gas from the gas fields of Yamal in Siberia down to Europe, in exchange for billions of euros. And those and other hydrocarbon revenues are one of the main explanations for how Russia is able to produce more missiles and weapons than the Ukrainians.

So Europe carries on fuelling its industry and its power and heating grids with molecules of gas coming from Siberian gasfields, while assuring itself it’s doing everything it can to fight Vladimir Putin.

It is, in short, a discomforting situation. But given the alternative is to induce another cost of living crisis, there is little appetite in Europe to change things.

Hulme Grammar School in Oldham doesn’t feel like a bastion of privilege, but the children whose parents pay around £15,000 a year for them to attend are nevertheless among an elite minority.

A selective fee-paying school, Hulme is one of around 2,500 independent schools that educate 7% of the school population, a minority that is the target of one of Labour’s few unapologetically tax-raising policies.

If elected, Labour says it will end the VAT exemption on fees, making them subject to 20% tax, raising an estimated £1.6bn the party says will be used to hire 6,500 teachers in the state sector that educates 93% of children.

Private school parents fear the increase will be passed on directly, pricing some children out, while industry bodies claim some schools will close.

Oldham is one of the poorest towns in England and Hulme is one of the country’s more affordable independent schools, its fees around the national average and well short of the £50,000 charged by Eton and the prime minister’s alma mater Winchester College.

Headteacher Tony Oulton, state educated and with experience working on both sides of Britain’s educational divide, says Labour’s policy misrepresents the majority of private schools and punishes parents.

“The sector is not Eton or Harrow or Winchester, the big posh boarding schools largely based in the south of England.

“The majority is made up of schools like mine where parents are making real sacrifices to pay the school fees because that’s how they are choosing to prioritise their spending.”

‘They are prioritising education the way some prioritise holidays’

Even without the Labour policy, fees at Hulme will rise 5.5% next year, a figure Mr Oulton says reflects the wider costs pressures, primarily wages for teachers. He says he cannot absorb the VAT rise without sacrificing the 24-child class size limit he believes parents are paying for.

“I lament the political debate, the loss of nuance and insight into the impact on children.

“The idea they are buying privilege and separation would not resonate with parents here. They don’t recognise the rhetoric that sits around this, that they are part of some privileged elite. They are prioritising education the way some prioritise holidays.”

Privately educated children do nevertheless enjoy advantages. At £15,000 the average fee is double the £7,500-per-head funding in the state sector, and selection allows independent schools to choose who they want to educate.

Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies meanwhile shows that private school attendance is concentrated among the wealthiest households, with three quarters of pupils drawn from the 30% of highest earners, and most from the top 10%.

This perhaps explains why Labour has felt able to concentrate one of its few openly tax-raising policies on the sector.

It argues that the needs of the state system, relied on by 93% of parents, make it popular while unspoken is the possibility that complaints of those who can afford fees in the first place will elicit little sympathy.

They are relaxed too about warnings that increasing fees will lead to an exodus of pupils that will put state schools under pressure.

Private school rolls have remained constant despite average fees increasing almost 50% in the last decade, and state secondary registers are forecast to fall 7% in the next decade as a population bulge passes through the system.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

State education is facing undeniable challenges, including recruitment and retention, with one in four teachers leaving after three years in classrooms.

The growth in demand for special educational needs provision is also putting schools and local authorities under pressure. Some 576,000 children had an active education and health plan in January, almost as many as the total private school roll of around 615,000.

Headlands School in Bridlington faces typical challenges, all while working to clear a £1m deficit from its budget.

Assistant head teacher Adam Wooley said the issues for state education go beyond the school gate.

“It is not just about school funding but funding all the services around young people. A million people are in child poverty so there is only so much schools can do if children come in hungry, cold and without that stable foundation,” he says.

“I take the argument from private schools and parents that it is a squeeze on people being aspirational for their children, but all parents are aspirational. State schools can and absolutely should be a place where you can send your child and aspire to great things, but that needs funding.”