Starmer has one last chance to save dying British industry
Britain's whisky exports to India will face significantly lower tariffs. And at least some cars and steel can be sold to the US at a lower rate of tax than other countries are paying. With the India and US trade deals signed over the last few days this should have been a great week for British exporters. But there is just one catch. None of it will make any difference unless we have a more competitive industrial base.
The Government is meant to be finalising its strategy for manufacturing, including most crucially a plan to bring down energy costs. But, in reality, the trade deals give the Starmer Government one last chance to save Britain's dying industry – because very soon it will have disappeared completely.
British exporters should be feeling a lot more confident this week. The deal with India will give them far better access to what is already the world's fourth-largest economy, and, at least by some projections, may well be the largest by the middle of the century.
The deal with Donald Trump was far more modest, and only scaled back some of the 'liberation day' tariffs he imposed on April 2. Still, it lifted the levies on the steel and car industries, and it gave the UK better terms for trading with what remains the world's largest market than any of our European rivals. Both of them were significant victories.
Here's the problem, however. You can't sell more spirits into India if you can't get planning permission to expand the distillery or if the workers are too expensive to employ. Likewise, you can't sell more steel into the US if plants are closing down because energy costs are twice the American levels, and you can't ship more cars across the Atlantic if net zero regulations have closed down the factories that used to make them. Even the best trade deal in the world can't help you sell products you don't make any more.
The real problem is that our industrial base has been in rapid decline. The figures are sobering. The UK has slipped out of the top 10 manufacturing countries in the world, and now ranks only 12th, behind Italy and Mexico.
There has been a 38pc fall in chemicals output since 2021, electrical equipment is down by 50pc, and even pharmaceutical production, which is meant to be one of our strongest industries, has been declining at an annual 6pc rate for the last decade.
Only on Friday, we learnt that one of the UK's largest chemicals plants, the Saudi owned Olefins 6 facility in Teesside, is now at risk of closure as well.
A trade deal is not going to change any of those trends. It won't bring down crippling energy costs that have driven industrial prices in the UK to some of the highest levels in the world. It won't bring down the employment taxes that have already been pushed up by this Government to levels that have made it too expensive to employ people, nor will they fix a minimum wage that has reached levels where it has destroyed jobs, or employment laws that make it too risky to hire anyone.
And they won't change crushing regulations that make it virtually impossible to expand a factory even if demand increases, or impose crippling targets that double the cost and triple the time it takes to expand. All of those have made the UK one of the hardest, most expensive countries in the world to make things. In the face of so many obstacles, it is hardly surprising that so many companies are giving up, such as at the huge Grangemouth crude processing plant that stopped production last month.
The Government is meant to be finally unveiling its industrial strategy over the summer with sectors such as defence, life sciences and advanced manufacturing singled out for extra help. Intriguingly, the advance briefings suggest that it will include some ideas for tackling sky-high energy costs, although it is hard to see how that will be possible without watering down the commitment to be a 'world leader' on hitting net zero or allowing new developments in the North Sea, or even – gasp! – taking another look at how safe fracking has proved in the US and Canada.
If it just involves subsidies, or some waffle about GB Energy, that is not going to help anyone. The industrial strategy when it finally arrives needs to target sectors with the potential for high growth, but most crucially it needs to start taking down the barriers that have made life so tough for manufacturing. The trade deals should provide the perfect opportunity for the government to be a lot bolder and more radical than it could have been only a few weeks ago. It now needs to summon up the political will to start making some changes.
After this week, the global market is more open to British manufacturers than it has been for a generation or more, and certainly more open than it would be if we were still trapped within the European Union.
If we can build on them, access to the US and India, and many other countries as well, can improve over the next few years. But you can't export stuff you have lost the capacity to make. In reality, the trade deals will only work if they are accompanied by radical domestic policies to improve our competitiveness.
With its industrial strategy set to be unveiled over the summer, and with trade deals starting to get signed, the Starmer government has one last chance to rescue an industrial base that is in steep decline. If it does not seize the moment – and depressingly there is very little evidence that it will – then very soon it will be too late to rescue what little of our manufacturing industry remains.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Britain will 'without a doubt' spend £10 billion extra on defence, says Labour
LABOUR'S Defence Secretary John Healey said spending 3% of GDP on defence was no longer an 'ambition' but a certainty. The UK Government's 10-year defence plan, which is due to be announced on Monday, is said to be 'unaffordable' without the increased spending, The Times has reported. Prime Minister Keir Starmer had previously outlined the 3% target by 2034 as an 'ambition', but Healey has now said it is a certainty. Healey's comments mean the Labour Government would be committed to spending more than £10 billion extra on defence every year despite criticism over proposed cuts to public services. READ MORE: Labour has 'given up' on by-election amid SNP-Reform contest, says John Swinney In February, Starmer announced that the UK would spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by April 2027, raiding the international development budget, which was a decision branded by the Scottish Government as 'deeply disappointing'. At the same time, Starmer also outlined an 'ambition' to reach 3% by 2034, a target which was reportedly described by government sources as still an 'ambition' this week. However, Healey (below) told The Times on Saturday: 'In the next parliament, this country will spend 3 per cent of our GDP on defence.' When pressed whether this was a firm commitment, he said he had 'no doubt' Britain would be spending 3% 'in the next parliament'. He said there was a 'certain decade of rising defence spending', adding: 'It allows us to plan for the long term. It allows us to deal with the pressures.' It is unclear whether Healey's comments were an attempt to pressure the Treasury into approving the spending or if it was a commitment that has been agreed across Whitehall. It was also reported that the review, which was due to be published during VE Day week this month, into Britain's defence spending had been delayed because of rows with the Treasury. One source told The Times there had been 'discontent that the Ministry of Defence is using it to push for more defence spending'. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has estimated that reaching 3% of GDP by the next parliament would cost the UK an additional £17.3bn in 2029-30. The 130-page review reportedly will warn of the 'immediate and pressing' danger posed by Russia and will also describe Iran and North Korea as 'regional disruptors'. The review comes as other government departments are still negotiating how much they will have to spend over the next three years. A Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: 'This government has announced the largest sustained increase to defence spending since the end of the Cold War — 2.5 per cent by 2027 and 3 per cent in the next parliament when fiscal and economic conditions allow, including an extra £5 billion this financial year. 'The review will rightly set the vision for how that uplift will be spent, including new capabilities to put us at the leading edge of innovation in Nato, investment in our people and making defence an engine for growth across the UK — making Britain more secure at home and strong abroad.' NATO member states are expected to agree to a defence spending target during a summit in June with the target reportedly possibly being as high as 3.5% of GDP.


CNBC
28 minutes ago
- CNBC
ETFs and corporate treasuries should support bitcoin's uptrend in June as tariff uncertainty lingers
In the tug of war between the macroeconomic and crypto adoption stories, blockchain adoption is starting to taking over the bitcoin narrative. Institutions and corporations combined to drive up bitcoin in May. The cryptocurrency ended the month about 10% higher, its second straight monthly rise, driven by strong inflows into bitcoin exchange-traded funds and continued purchases of bitcoin by corporate treasury departments. Bitcoin ETFs saw $5.6 billion in inflows this month, when the number of bitcoin held by public companies grew 4% to $85.6 billion, according to Bitcoin Treasuries . Investors expect the trend to continue in June, and to benefit bitcoin's long-term performance. The uncertainty of President Donald Trump's tariff policy has so far helped bitcoin more than hurt it – the initial sell-off in risk assets after Trump's tariffs were unveiled in April pulled it down to about $76,000, but bitcoin still finished the month up 13.5%. That said, analysts say not to dismiss the downside risk just yet. "The fact that significant policy adjustments can be made at any time, especially around tariffs, makes near-term pricing incredibly difficult," said Chris Rhine, head of liquid active strategies at Galaxy Digital. "The cumulative weight of this policy uncertainty will likely lead to a sharper slowdown in economic activity, particularly in consumer-driven end markets, increasing the likelihood of monetary policy support." In other words, lower interest rates. 1M mountain Bitcoin (BTC) in May Investors have cheered crypto's seeming decoupling from equities in recent weeks, benefiting when there's liquidity in the market and stocks do well, but also in risk-off scenarios where crypto has provided a haven from uncertainty. That best-of-both-worlds scenario has helped support bitcoin's price and bring new buyers to the market. Unfortunately, that dynamic hasn't been meaningfully tested yet, said Federico Brokate, head of U.S. business at 21Shares, a financial technology company focused on providing access to cryptocurrency investments through exchange-traded products. "The macro story is still very important," Brokate said. "If we continue to see that in June, that's going to be very bullish for the asset, price wise. We haven't seen this play out over a sustained period of time, so this is something that a lot of us will be paying attention to over the next few weeks." After reaching a new all-time high on May 22 of $111,999, bitcoin retreated to the $104,000 level Friday after Trump reignited fears of a trade war with China . In a social media post, the president claimed China "violated" its current trade agreement with the U.S., one day after Treasury Secretary Bessent said in a Fox News interview that U.S.-China trade talks "are a bit stalled." The shadow of unpredictability aside, investors are optimistic about bitcoin's direction, primarily monitoring bitcoin ETF flows, corporate treasury announcements and regulatory developments. After an early block, the 'GENIUS' Act, short for Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins, advanced to the Senate on May 19 and is likely to come up for a floor vote in early June. Whether it passes with bipartisan support or fails to pass, the outcome will likely have an impact on sentiment around bitcoin, Galaxy's Rhine said. Wells Fargo expects "a difficult road ahead" in light of a separate bill to regulate stablecoins in the House, analyst Andrew Bauch said in a note this week. From a technical standpoint, looking solely at price charts, bulls are likely to hold the reins in June, according to Tracy Jin, chief operating officer of crypto exchange MEXC. "[They'll] aim to defend the $109,000 support level, a potential target for downward pressure from hedge funds holding put options," she said. With a new record behind it, bitcoin has now opened the door to the $113,000 to $115,000 zone. That represents "serious resistance on the way to a strategic target of $130,000, Jin said, adding: "If the current pace is maintained and the $115,000 level is successfully overcome, the price may reach $130,000 in June."
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Qudian First Quarter 2025 Earnings: EPS: CN¥0.90 (vs CN¥0.38 loss in 1Q 2024)
Revenue: CN¥25.8m (down 54% from 1Q 2024). Net income: CN¥150.1m (up from CN¥73.6m loss in 1Q 2024). EPS: CN¥0.90 (up from CN¥0.38 loss in 1Q 2024). Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. All figures shown in the chart above are for the trailing 12 month (TTM) period Qudian shares are up 4.6% from a week ago. What about risks? Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for Qudian you should know about. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.