Connect with us

Published

on

You probably recall the stories about Leicester’s clothing industry in recent years: grim labour conditions, pay below the minimum wage, “dark factories” serving the fast fashion sector. What is less well known is what happened next. In short, the industry has cratered.

In the wake of the recurrent scandals over “sweatshop” conditions in Leicester, the majority of major brands have now abandoned the city, triggering an implosion in production in the place that once boasted that it “clothed the world”.

And now Leicester faces a further existential double-threat: competition from Chinese companies like Shein and Temu, and the impending arrival of cheap imports from India, following the recent trade deal signed with the UK. Many worry it could spell an end for the city’s fashion business altogether.

Gauging the scale of the recent collapse is challenging because many of the textile and apparel factories in Leicester are small operations that can start up and shut down rapidly, but according to data provided to Sky News by SP&KO, a consultancy founded by fashion sector veterans Kathy O’Driscoll and Simon Platts, the number has fallen from 1,500 in 2017 to just 96 this year. This 94% collapse comes amid growing concerns that British clothes-making more broadly is facing an existential crisis.

More on this story:
The modern slaves making our clothes in Leicester
How Leicester’s textile workers are being exploited
Boohoo failed in Leicester supply chain malpractice

In an in-depth investigation carried out over recent months, Sky News has visited sites in the city shut down in the face of a collapse of demand. Thousands of fashion workers are understood to have lost their jobs. Many factories lie empty, their machines gathering dust.

Graphic

The vast majority of high street and fast fashion brands that once sourced their clothes in Leicester have now shifted their supply chains to North Africa and South Asia.

And a new report from UKFT – Britain’s fashion and textiles lobby group – has found that a staggering 95% of clothes companies have either trimmed or completely eliminated clothes manufacturing in the UK. Some 58% of brands, by turnover, now have an explicit policy not to source clothes from the UK.

Seamstresses in former Leicester factory
Image:
Seamstresses in one of the city’s former factories

Clothing industry workers in Leicester
Image:
Clothing industry workers in Leicester

Jenny Holloway, chair of the Apparel & Textile Manufacturers Association, said: “We know of factories that were asked to become a potential supplier [to high street brands], got so far down the line, invested on sampling, invested time and money, policies, and then it’s like: ‘oh, sorry, we can’t use you, because Leicester is embargoed.'”

A trade fair tries to reignite enthusiasm for the city's clothing industry
Image:
A trade fair tries to reignite enthusiasm for the local clothing industry

Tejas Shah, a third-generation manufacturer whose family company Shahtex used to make materials for Marks & Spencer, said: “I’ve spoken to brands in the past who, if I moved my factory 15 miles north into Loughborough, would be happy to work with me. But because I have an LE1, LE4 postcode, they don’t want to work for me.”

Shahtex in Leicester used to make materials for Marks & Spencer
Image:
Shahtex in Leicester used to make materials for Marks & Spencer

Tejas Shah is a third-generation manufacturer
Image:
Tejas Shah, of Leicester-based firm Shahtex

Threat of Chinese brands Shein and Temu

That pain has been exacerbated by a new phenomenon: the rise of Chinese fast fashion brands Shein and Temu.

They offer consumers ultra-cheap clothes and goods, made in Chinese factories and flown direct to UK households. And, thanks to a customs loophole known as “de minimis”, those goods don’t even incur tariffs when they arrive in the country.

An online advert for Chinese fast fashion company Shein
Image:
An online advert for Chinese fast fashion company Shein

According to Satvir Singh, who runs Our Fashion, one of the last remaining knitwear producers in the city, this threat could prove the final straw for Leicester’s garments sector.

“It is having an impact on our production – and I think the whole retail sector, at least for clothing, are feeling that pinch.”

Inside one of the city's remaining clothesmakers
Image:
Inside one of the city’s remaining clothesmakers

While Donald Trump has threatened to abolish the loophole in the US, the UK has only announced a review with no timeline.

“If we look at what Trump’s done, he’s just thinking more about his local economy because he can see the long-term effects,” said Mr Singh. “I think [abolishing de minimis exceptions] will make a huge difference. I think ultimately it’s about a level playing field.”

Continue Reading

Business

‘Absolutely gutted’: £16,500 Glastonbury packages won’t be fulfilled after company goes bust

Published

on

By

'Absolutely gutted': £16,500 Glastonbury packages won't be fulfilled after company goes bust

Glastonbury ticket holders have been left thousands of pounds out of pocket after a luxury glamping company went bust.

Festival-goers who booked their tickets and accommodation with Yurtel have been told the company can no longer fulfil its orders and has ceased trading with immediate effect.

Money: Read all the latest news here

Some had spent more than £16,500 through Yurtel, with hospitality packages starting at £10,000.

In an email, Yurtel said it was unable to provide customers with any refunds, advising them to go through a third party to claim back the money once the liquidation process had started.

To add insult to injury, customers found out that Yurtel had failed to purchase the tickets for the 25 -29 June festival that they thought had been booked as part of their packages.

In a letter to customers, Yurtel’s founder Mickey Luke said: “I am deeply sorry that you have received this devastating news and am writing to apologise.

More on Glastonbury

“Yurtel is a hospitality business who pride themselves on looking after our customers, delivering a unique product and striving to create a better client experience year on year. Due to a culmination of factors over the past years, we have failed to be able to continue to do so and are heartbroken.”

The Money blog has contacted Yurtel to see if the business has anything to add.

Several people have also reported that they were unable to pay by credit card at the time of booking, with the company instead asking for a bank transfer.

This means they are unable to use chargeback to get a refund. You can read more about that here

The crowd watch soul singer Diana Ross fill the Sunday teatime legends slot on the Pyramid Stage during the Glastonbury Festival at Worthy Farm in Somerset. Picture date: Sunday June 26, 2022.
Image:
Pic: PA

‘I feel really ripped off’

One of those customers was Lydia, who told Money she was “absolutely gutted” after spending thousands.

This year’s festival was “really important” to her as she was forced to miss out last year despite having tickets due to a health issue that left her needing an operation.

“We tried to get Glastonbury tickets through the normal kind of route and couldn’t get them,” the accountant said.

She ended up booking with Yurtel in November, sending over all the funds a month later.

“It’s super expensive. It was really, really important to us. Last year was gutting with the surgery and the whole situation around that was very traumatic, so it was a very special thing to then get the opportunity to go this year. It’s really gutting,” she said.

“I feel really ripped off and I’m really disappointed in the festival, to be honest. I think that response is just pretty rubbish.”

More from Money:
Chef’s top steak tip
Secrets of a London cabbie

How roaming fees compare by network

Yurtel did not pay for festival tickets, Glastonbury says

Glastonbury said Yurtel was one of a small number of campsites local to the festival site – Worthy Farm – with limited access to purchase hospitality tickets for their guests in certain circumstances.

But, it had not paid for any tickets for the 2025 festival before going into liquidation, and so no tickets were secured for its guests, it added. Every year, Glastonbury’s website says that ticketing firm See Tickets is the only official source for buying tickets for the festival.

“As such we have no records of their bookings and are unable to take any responsibility for the services and the facilities they offer,” the festival said.

“Anyone who has paid Yurtel for a package including Glastonbury 2025 tickets will need to pursue any potential recompense available from them via the liquidation process as outlined in their communication to you.

“We are not able to incur the cost or responsibility of their loss or replacement.”

Instead, the festival has urged Yurtel customers to contact Yurtel@btguk.com to confirm their consent for personal data and details of their party to be shared with Glastonbury.

“We will then be able to provide details of alternative potential sources for those customers to purchase tickets and accommodation for this year’s festival,” the festival added.

‘Only option’ on offer is ‘pretty weak’

Lydia said she agreed for her details to be passed on to Glastonbury, and the festival has told her the only option is to pay for the tickets again from another provider.

“They are not giving us the opportunity to buy the tickets at face value. We would then have to go again and spend another stupidly unreasonable amount of money to be able to go. It’s pretty disappointing,” she added.

“It’s pretty weak that the only option they’re giving people who’ve already lost out on huge amounts of money is to go and spend huge amounts more money.”

It’s left her feeling like she won’t go to the festival this year – and she’s not hopeful about getting her money back.

She said: “To be honest, I just don’t think I can afford it.

“It’s already so much money wasted, and I’m not at all optimistic we’ll get anything back.”

Continue Reading

Business

Federal judges rule Trump tariffs can stay in place for now – as president rages at trade court’s ‘country threatening decision’

Published

on

By

Federal judges rule Trump tariffs can stay in place for now - as president rages at trade court's 'country threatening decision'

A federal appeals court has ruled that Donald Trump’s sweeping international tariffs can remain in place for now, a day after three judges ruled the president exceeded his authority.

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has allowed the president to temporarily continue collecting tariffs under emergency legislation while it considers the government’s appeal.

It comes after the Court of International Trade blocked the additional taxes on foreign-made goods after its three-judge panel ruled that the Constitution gives Congress the power to levy taxes and tariffs – not the president.

The judges also ruled Mr Trump exceeded his authority by invoking the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The CAFC said the lower trade court and the Trump administration must respond by 5 June and 9 June, respectively.

Trump calls trade court ‘backroom hustlers’

Posting on Truth Social, Mr Trump said the trade court’s ruling was a “horrible, Country threatening decision,” and said he hopes the Supreme Court would reverse it “QUICKLY and DECISIVELY”.

After calling into question the appointment of the three judges, and suggesting the ruling was based on “purely a hatred of ‘TRUMP’,” he added: “Backroom ‘hustlers’ must not be allowed to destroy our Nation!

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump asked about ‘taco trade’

“The horrific decision stated that I would have to get the approval of Congress for these Tariffs. In other words, hundreds of politicians would sit around D.C. for weeks, and even months, trying to come to a conclusion as to what to charge other Countries that are treating us unfairly.

“If allowed to stand, this would completely destroy Presidential Power — The Presidency would never be the same!”

The US president unveiled the controversial measures on “Liberation Day” in April, which included a 10% tariff on UK imports and caused aggressive sell-offs in the stock market.

Mr Trump argued he invoked the decades-old law to collect international tariffs because it was a “national emergency”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

From April: ‘This is Liberation Day’

Tariffs ‘direct threat’ to business – Schwab

The trade court ruling marked the latest legal challenge to the tariffs, and related to a case brought on behalf of five small businesses that import goods from other countries.

Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel for the Liberty Justice Center – a nonprofit representing the five firms – said the appeal court would ultimately agree that the tariffs posed “a direct threat to the very survival of these businesses”.

Read more:
Trump reduces Chicago gang founder’s sentence after Ye lobbying
‘I was going to die with this’: Ex-Diddy assistant breaks down
Trump furious over ‘TACO’ dig – what inspired the phrase?

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

US treasury secretary Scott Bessent also told Fox News on Thursday that the initial ruling had not interfered with trade deal negotiations with partners.

He said that countries “are coming to us in good faith” and “we’ve seen no change in their attitude in the past 48 hours,” before saying he would meet with a Japanese delegation in Washington on Friday.

Continue Reading

Business

Treasury to dispose of final shares in bailed-out NatWest Group

Published

on

By

Treasury to dispose of final shares in bailed-out NatWest Group

The government is preparing to sell the final publicly owned shares in NatWest Group on Friday, drawing a line under one of the world’s biggest bank bailouts after nearly 17 years.

Sky News understands that the Treasury is preparing to offload its remaining stake – which is down to roughly 0.1% – in the coming hours, with a public statement likely either later on Friday or on Monday morning.

Sources cautioned that the timings were still subject to change.

The final disposal of a stake which at one point represented more than 80% of NatWest’s share capital has been anticipated for weeks.

Last week, Sky News reported that British taxpayers were heading for a loss of just over £10bn on the 2008 rescue of NatWest, then known as Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), having pumped £45.5bn into the lender to prevent it – and the wider UK financial system – collapsing.

Confirmation of the sale of the Treasury’s final interest in NatWest will come almost 17 years after the then chancellor, Lord Darling, conducted what RBS’s boss at the time, Fred Goodwin, labelled “a drive-by shooting”.

Total proceeds from a government trading plan launched in 2021 to drip-feed NatWest stock into the market have so far reached about £13bn, with the final tally likely to be about £13.2bn.

More from Money

In addition, institutional share sales and direct buybacks by NatWest of government-held stock have yielded a further £11.5bn.

Dividend payments to the Treasury during its ownership have totalled £4.9bn, while fees and other payments have generated another £5.6bn.

In aggregate, that means total proceeds from NatWest since 2008 are expected to hit £35.3bn.

Under Rick Haythornthwaite and Paul Thwaite, now the bank’s chairman and chief executive respectively, NatWest is now focused on driving growth across its business.

It recently tabled an £11bn bid to buy Santander UK, according to the Financial Times, although no talks are ongoing.

Mr Thwaite replaced Dame Alison Rose, who left amid the crisis sparked by the debanking scandal involving Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader.

Sky News recently revealed that the bank and Mr Farage had reached an undisclosed settlement.

During the first five years of NatWest’s period in majority state ownership, the bank was run by Sir Stephen Hester, now the chairman of easyJet.

Sir Stephen stepped down amid tensions with the then chancellor, George Osborne, about how RBS – as it them was – should be run.

Lloyds Banking Group was also in partial state ownership for years, although taxpayers reaped a net gain of about £900m from that period.

Other lenders nationalised during the crisis included Bradford & Bingley, the bulk of which was sold to Santander UK, and Northern Rock, part of which was sold to Virgin Money – which in turn has been acquired by Nationwide.

The Treasury and NatWest declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Trending