Ministers ask Hunt for £300m to avert mass British Steel job losses
Ministers are urging the chancellor to provide £300m of taxpayers’ money to avert the closure of British Steel’s two blast furnaces – a move that would trigger the loss of thousands of industrial jobs in northern England.
Sky News has learnt that Grant Shapps, the business secretary, and Michael Gove, the levelling-up secretary, wrote to Jeremy Hunt this month to warn that the demise of British Steel could cost the government up to £1bn in decommissioning and other liabilities.
In their letter, a copy of which has been seen by Sky News, Mr Hunt was asked to consider the economic case for supporting both British Steel, which is owned by a Chinese conglomerate, and the wider UK steel industry.
“Every other G20 nation has maintained domestic steel production and, while we do not think that this should come at any cost, we do believe it is in HMG’s interest to offer well-designed and targeted funding which unlocks private investment, achieves a good outcome for taxpayers, and enables transformed, decarbonised and viable domestic steel production to continue in the UK in the long-term,” Mr Shapps and Mr Gove wrote.
“We do not want to become reliant on steel sources elsewhere in the same way that energy security has become self-evidently important.
“Moreover, our steel requirement will increase by 20% due to large domestic infrastructure projects already committed to in the UK.”
One industry source briefed on the discussions in Whitehall said the chancellor had instructed Treasury officials to scrutinise the request.
The letter to Mr Hunt warned that British Steel “does not have a viable business without government support”.
The British Steel plant in Scunthorpe
“Closing one blast furnace would be a stepping-stone to closure of the second blast furnace, resulting in a highly unstable business model dependent on Chinese steel imports,” Mr Shapps and Mr Gove wrote.
“The local economic impact of closing both blast furnaces is estimated to be in the region of £360m to £640m, with a further £500m to £1bn liability for HMG through compulsory liquidation, insolvency and land liabilities (though £40m could potentially be raised through asset recovery”.
“Given the magnitude of the liabilities due to fall on HMG in the event of blast furnace closure, and following the PM’s steer, we would like officials to test whether net government support in the region of £300m for British Steel could prevent closure, protect jobs and create a cleaner viable long-term future for steel production in the United Kingdom.”
The fate of British Steel, which was bought by Jingye Group out of a previous insolvency process less than three years ago, has become increasingly unclear in recent months as the current owners have indicated that they would not maintain its operations without taxpayer funding.
British Steel employs about 4,000 people, with thousands more jobs in its supply chain dependent upon the company.
According to the letter to Mr Hunt, British Steel has already informed the government that it could close one of the Scunthorpe blast furnaces as soon as next month, with the loss of 1,700 jobs.
This would be “followed by the second blast furnace closing later in 2023, creating cumulative direct job losses of around 3,000”, Mr Shapps and Mr Gove wrote.
The plea to Mr Hunt followed a round of talks between Mr Shapps and Jingye earlier in December about supporting Britain’s second-largest steel producer.
Mr Shapps’ predecessor, Jacob Rees-Mogg – who lasted just weeks as business secretary under Liz Truss – opened formal talks with Jingye in October about the provision of government funding to help British Steel decarbonise.
One of the pre-conditions set by Whitehall for the discussions was that Jingye would not cut jobs at British Steel while the discussions were ongoing, although the recent letter to Mr Hunt said that ministers “cannot guarantee the company will choose to support jobs in the short term”.
Tata Steel, which is the biggest player in the UK steel sector, has also requested financial help from the government.
Responding to an enquiry from Sky News, a government spokesman said: “The government is committed to securing a sustainable and competitive future for the UK steel sector and we are working closely with industry to achieve this.
“We recognise that businesses are feeling the impact of high global energy prices, including steel producers, which is why we announced the Energy Bill Relief Scheme to bring down costs.
“This is in addition to extensive support we have provided to the steel sector as a whole to help with energy costs, worth more than £800m since 2013.”
The request for financial support from Jingye poses a political headache for ministers, given the scale of the potential job losses which might result from a refusal to provide taxpayer aid.
An agreement to provide substantial taxpayer funding to a Chinese-owned business, however, would inevitably provoke outrage among Tory critics of Beijing.
China’s role in global steel production, after years of international trade rows about dumping, would make any subsidies even more contentious.
In May 2019, the Official Receiver was appointed to take control of the company after negotiations over an emergency £30m government loan fell apart.
British Steel had been formed in 2016 when India’s Tata Steel sold the business for £1 to Greybull Capital, an investment firm.
As part of the deal that secured ownership of British Steel for Jingye, the Chinese group said it would invest £1.2bn in modernising the business during the following decade.
Jingye’s purchase of the company, which completed in the spring of 2020, was hailed by Boris Johnson, the then prime minister, as assuring the future of steel production in Britain’s industrial heartlands.
British Steel has previously said of its negotiations with Whitehall: “We are continuing formal talks with the UK Government to help us overcome the global challenges we currently face.
“The government understands the significant impact the economic slowdown, rising inflation and exceptionally high energy and carbon prices are having on businesses like ours and we look forward to working together to build a sustainable future.”
The business secretary will next week hold talks with dozens of private sector bosses as the government contends with a significant corporate backlash to Labour’s first fiscal event in nearly 15 years.
Sky News has learnt that executives have been invited to join a conference call on Monday with Jonathan Reynolds, in what will represent his first meaningful engagement with employers since Wednesday’s budget statement.
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, unsettled financial markets with plans for billions of pounds in extra borrowing, and unnerved business leaders by saying she would raise an additional £25bn annually by hiking their national insurance contributions.
An increase in employer NICs had been trailed by officials in advance of the budget, but the lowering of the threshold to just £5,000 has triggered forecasts of a wave of redundancies and even insolvencies across labour-intensive industries.
Sectors such as retail and hospitality, which employ substantial numbers of part-time workers, have been particularly vocal in their condemnation of the move.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
On Friday, the Financial Times published comments made by the chief executive of Barclays in which he defended Ms Reeves.
“I think they’ve done an admirable job of balancing spending, borrowing and taxation in order to drive the fundamental objective of growth,” CS Venkatakrishnan said.
His was a rare voice among prominent business figures in backing the chancellor, however, with many questioning whether the government had a meaningful plan to grow the economy.
Mr Reynolds held a similar call with business leaders within days of general election victory, and over 100 bosses are understood to have been invited to Monday’s discussion.
A spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade declined to comment ahead of Monday’s call.
First things first: don’t panic.
What you need to know is this. The budget has not gone down well in financial markets. Indeed, it’s gone down about as badly as any budget in recent years, save for Liz Truss’s mini-budget.
The pound is weaker. Government bond yields (essentially, the interest rate the exchequer pays on its debt) have gone up.
That’s precisely the opposite market reaction to the one chancellors like to see after they commend their fiscal statements to the house.
In hindsight, perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised.
After all, the new government just committed itself to considerably more borrowing than its predecessors – about £140bn more borrowing in the coming years. And that money has to be borrowed from someone – namely, financial markets.
But those financial markets are now reassessing how keen they are to lend to the UK.
The upshot is that the pound has fallen quite sharply (the biggest two-day fall in trade-weighted sterling in 18 months) and gilt yields – the interest rate paid by the government – have risen quite sharply.
This was all beginning to crystallise shortly after the budget speech, with yields beginning to rise and the pound beginning to weaken, the moment investors and economists got their hands on the budget documentation.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Chancellor challenged over gilt yield spike
But the falls in the pound and the rises in the bond yields accelerated today.
This is not, to be absolutely clear, the kind of response any chancellor wants to see after a budget – let alone their first budget in office.
Indeed, I can’t remember another budget which saw as hostile a market response as this one in many years – save for one.
That exception is, of course, the Liz Truss/Kwasi Kwarteng mini-budget of 2022. And here is where you’ll find the silver lining for Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves.
The rises in gilt yields and falls in sterling in recent hours and days are still far shy of what took place in the run up and aftermath of the mini-budget. This does not yet feel like a crisis moment for UK markets.
But nor is it anything like good news for the government. In fact, it’s pretty awful. Because higher borrowing rates for UK debt mean it (well, us) will end up paying considerably more to service our debt in the coming years.
Rachel Reeves leaving 11 Downing Street before the budget. Pic: PA
And that debt is about to balloon dramatically because of the plans laid down by the chancellor this week.
And this is where things get particularly sticky for Ms Reeves.
In that budget documentation, the Office for Budget Responsibility said the chancellor could afford to see those gilt yields rise by about 1.3 percentage points, but then when they exceeded this level, the so-called “headroom” she had against her fiscal rules would evaporate.
Read more:
Chancellor defends £40bn tax rises
Hefty tax and spending plans a huge gamble – analysis
In other words, she’d break those rules – which, recall, are considerably less strict than the ones she inherited from Jeremy Hunt.
Which raises the question: where are those gilt yields right now? How close are they to the danger zone where the chancellor ends up breaking her rules?
Short answer: worryingly close. Because, right now, the yield on five-year government debt (which is the maturity the OBR focuses on most) is more than halfway towards that danger zone – only 56 basis points away from hitting the point where debt interest costs eat up any leeway the chancellor has to avoid breaking her rules.
Now, we are not in crisis territory yet. Nor can every move in currencies and bonds be attributed to this budget.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Markets are volatile right now. There’s lots going on: a US election next week and a Bank of England decision on interest rates next week.
The chancellor could get lucky. Gilt yields could settle in the coming days. But, right now, the UK, with its high level of public and private debt, with its new government which has just pledged to borrow many billions more in the coming years, is being closely scrutinised by the “bond vigilantes”.
A Halloween nightmare for any chancellor.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports7 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway