Firm part owned by mega rich UK family wants taxpayer cash to save factory
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds hit out at conglomerate Associated British Foods as it launches closure plans while talks continue
An industry giant part owned by one of Britain's richest families yesterday ratcheted-up pressure on the government for taxpayers' money to save one of its factories.
Associated British Foods, better known for owning high street fashion chain Primark, kicked off a consultation to close its Vivergo Fuels plant near Hull, with the loss of 160 jobs. The site makes bioethanol, which is used in petrol. ABF says the plant is losing £3million a month and blamed the government for failing to tackle an influx of cheap bioethanol from abroad, which to set to worsen under Labour 's trade deal with US President Donald Trump.
But the move to an 'orderly wind-down' drew criticism from Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, given negotiations are ongoing. Speaking to reporters at the British Chambers of Commerce annual conference in London, he said: 'We are willing to engage with them and potentially put government money into a restructure. I regret Vivergo's decision to start consultations as to let the workforce go and close the plant. It is premature because we are in good faith in those negotiations.'
The plea for government money comes despite ABF having a stock market value of £14.6billion, and making more than £1.9bn profit last year.
The Weston family was ranked sixth in this year's Sunday Times Rich List, worth £17.7bn. They own a just under 21% stake in conglomerate ABF's majority shareholder. George Weston is chief executive of ABF.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said last week "the answer can't always be yes" when industries request support. But it comes days after the government revealed its flagship Industrial Strategy to boost investment in the UK.
Insiders said the timing of the consultation was that ABF wanted to conclude the process, if needed, by the end of its financial year.
Bioethanol is a "green" alternative used in fuels such as petrol and diesel. It is a plant-based material that is produced by fermenting and distilling crops such as wheat and corn. The Vivergo plant began operating in late 2012.
The future of Britain's other major bioethanol producer, German-owned Ensus in North Yorkshire, is also unclear.
In a statement, ABF later added: 'ABF cannot continue to absorb losses at the plant. That is why a timely solution is vital. Our clear preference is to find that solution through this process and to get back to running a business that can thrive in the long term."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions
THE HAGUE, June 26 (Reuters) - For U.S. President Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin is a man looking for an off-ramp to his bloody three-year assault on Ukraine. But according to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Russian leader may be just getting started. If the alliance does not invest in its defense capabilities, Rutte warned the annual NATO summit on Tuesday, Russia could attack an alliance country within three years. By most measures, this year's NATO summit in The Hague was a success. Member states largely agreed to a U.S. demand to boost defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product. Trump, who once derided the alliance as a "rip-off," said his view had changed, while a budding bromance blossomed between him and Rutte, who compared the U.S. president to a stern "daddy" managing his geopolitical underlings. But the summit, which ended on Wednesday, also highlighted the widening gap between how the U.S. and Europe see the military ambitions of Russia, the bloc's main foil. That is despite some lawmakers in Trump's own Republican Party hardening their rhetoric in recent weeks, arguing that while the president's ambition to negotiate an end to Russia's war in Ukraine is laudable, it is now clear that Putin is not serious about coming to the table. In a Wednesday press conference, Trump conceded that it was "possible" Putin had territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. But he insisted that the Russian leader - buffeted by manpower and materiel losses - wanted the war to end quickly. "I know one thing: He'd like to settle," Trump said. "He'd like to get out of this thing. It's a mess for him." Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed Trump's view in a sideline interview with Politico, saying the U.S. was holding off on expanding its sanctions against Moscow, in part to keep talks going. "If we did what everybody here wants us to do - and that is come in and crush them with more sanctions - we probably lose our ability to talk to them about the ceasefire," he said. The message from others at the summit was starkly different. A senior NATO official told reporters in a Tuesday briefing that Putin was not in fact interested in a ceasefire - or in engaging in good-faith talks at all. "Regardless of battlefield dynamics, we continue to doubt that Russia has any interest in meaningful negotiations," the official said. Russia's ambitions, the senior official said, go beyond control of "certain territories at their administrative lines," as Rubio put it. Putin is instead bent on imposing his "political will" on neighboring states. Rutte put the Russian threat in existential terms. "If we do not invest now," he said on Tuesday, "we are really at risk that the Russians might try something against NATO territory in three, five or seven years." The U.S. is not the only NATO member with a more optimistic view of Russia. Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a longtime Trump ally and critic of European institutions, said Russia was "not strong enough to represent a real threat to NATO." Still, as the alliance's largest contributor and most powerful member, Washington's position is a central preoccupation in most NATO capitals. The White House, asked for comment, referred to Trump's comments at the Wednesday press conference. In response to a request for comment, a separate NATO official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, disputed that there were differing assessments within the alliance, pointing to a NATO declaration on Wednesday which referenced the "long-term threat posed by Russia." The Russian embassy in Washington referred to Thursday comments by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, who criticized NATO for wasting money on defense. "It seems that only by invoking the fabricated 'Russian threat' will it be possible to explain to ordinary people why their pockets are being emptied once again," she said. The U.S. State Department and the Ukrainian embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment. The lack of a common understanding about Putin's goals will complicate future diplomatic plans to wind down the war, said Philippe Dickinson, the deputy director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council and a former British diplomat. "To reach a peace agreement, it's not just something that Trump and Putin can agree themselves," Dickinson said. "There does need to be European involvement. That needs to mean that there is some sort of sharing of views among allies on what Putin is trying to achieve." European leaders likely have not given up on trying to change Trump's views on Russia, Dickinson said. But they were always unlikely bring up thorny conversations at the NATO summit. The alliance's main goal was to simply get through it without major blowups, he said, an aim that was accomplished. Still, peace came at a cost - the lack of substantive discussion around Ukraine and Russia, he argued, was conspicuous. "The lack of a Russia strategy is a real glaring omission from what the summit could have produced," Dickinson said.
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
US dollar plunges to multi-year low
Traders are significantly increasing their bets on more aggressive interest rate cuts by the Federal Reserve this year. This shift in market sentiment follows Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's testimony, which was widely interpreted as dovish, hinting at earlier rate cuts. Consequently, the US dollar plunged to multi-year lows against the euro and sterling. Market data now shows a 23% probability of a July rate cut and a 93% likelihood for a September cut, with traders anticipating 66 basis points of cuts by year-end. Additional pressures on the dollar include criticism of Powell by Donald Trump, upcoming trade negotiations, and a pending tax and spending bill.
Reuters
31 minutes ago
- Reuters
TRADING DAY Markets 'run it hot'
ORLANDO, Florida, June 26 (Reuters) - TRADING DAY Making sense of the forces driving global markets By Jamie McGeever, Markets Columnist The dollar slid and stocks surged on Thursday as investors ramped up bets that U.S. interest rates will soon be cut, after President Donald Trump, in his latest attack on Fed Chair Jerome Powell, reportedly said he may name his replacement early. In my column today I look at where the "pain trades" for investors may lie in the second half of the year. More on that below, but first, a roundup of the main market moves. If you have more time to read, here are a few articles I recommend to help you make sense of what happened in markets today. Today's Key Market Moves Markets 'run it hot' Juice the economy. That seems to be the Trump administration's broad plan, which will be achieved in time by tax cuts, deregulation, and loose fiscal policy. And loose monetary policy. Most definitely loose monetary policy. Pressure from the White House on the Fed to cut interest rates is nothing new. The president has unleashed several verbal tirades towards Chair Jerome Powell for not doing so, branding him "very stupid", "very dumb" and of "low IQ". Powell's term as chair expires in May next year, and he insists he can't be fired. So Trump is now considering naming his replacement early, who could operate as a "shadow" Fed chair, undermining Powell's influence. It remains to be seen how effective or even viable this would be. But the fact it's being floated is pouring fuel on market moves that were already beginning to catch fire - the dollar is tumbling, Fed rate cut bets are being ramped up, stocks are flying, and "Big Tech" is getting its mojo back. The dollar on Thursday slumped to its lowest in more than three years against a basket of major currencies - performing especially poorly against European currencies - and is on track for its worst first half of any year in over half a century. The Trump administration will likely be quite happy with the way markets are reacting - a more export-competitive dollar, lower short-term yields, and higher stocks. And if you look further out, higher nominal growth and above-target inflation to inflate away the debt. The danger is these moves snowball and the dollar goes into a more rapid freefall, triggering widespread market dislocation. But we're not there yet, and investors are running with it. Hawkish Fed could inflict markets' biggest 'pain trades' As the first half of the year closes, financial markets are in limbo, waiting to see how the kaleidoscope of global trade deals will – or won't – come together after July 9, when Washington's pause on its "reciprocal tariffs" expires. But if investors are wrong-footed, which trades will be the most vulnerable? The state of suspended animation in today's markets is remarkably bullish. U.S. growth forecasts are rising, S&P 500 earnings growth estimates for next year are running at a punchy 14%, corporate deal-making is picking up, and world stocks are at record highs. The uncertainty immediately following President Donald Trump's April 2 "Liberation Day" tariffs seems a distant memory. The relief rally has ripped for nearly three months, only taking a brief pause during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran. It's a pretty rosy outlook, some might say too rosy. If we do see a pullback, what will be the biggest "pain trades"? The major pressure points are, unsurprisingly, in asset classes and markets where positioning and sentiment are most overloaded in one direction. As always with crowded trades, a sudden price reversal can push too many investors to the exit door at once, meaning not all will get out in time. To identify the most overloaded positions, it's useful to look at the Bank of America's monthly global fund manager survey. In the June survey, the top three most-crowded trades right now are long gold (according to 41% of those polled), long "Magnificent Seven" tech stocks (23%), and short U.S. dollar (20%). This popularity, of course, means these three trades have been highly profitable. The "Mag 7" basket of Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet and Tesla shares accounted for well over half of the S&P 500's 58% two-year return in 2023 and 2024. The Roundhill equal-weighted "Mag 7" ETF is up 40% this year, and the Nasdaq 100 index, in which these seven stocks make up more than half of the market cap, this week hit a record high. Meanwhile, the gold price has virtually doubled in the last two-and-a-half years, smashing its way to a record high $3,500 an ounce in April. And the dollar is down 10% this year, on track for its worst first half of any year since the era of free-floating exchange rates was established more than 50 years ago. In some ways, these three trades are an offshoot of one fundamental bet: the deep-rooted view that the Federal Reserve will cut U.S. interest rates quite substantially in the next 18 months, a scenario that would make all these positions money-spinners. Even though the Fed's revised economic projections last week were notable for their hawkish tilt, rates futures markets have been upping their bets on lower rates, largely due to dovish comments from several Fed officials and a sharp fall in oil prices. Traders are now predicting 125 basis points of rate cuts by the end of next year. Economists at Morgan Stanley are even more dovish, forecasting no change this year but 175 basis points of cuts next year. That would take the Fed funds range down to 2.5%-2.75%. Lower borrowing costs would be especially positive for shares in companies that can expect high future growth rates, like Big Tech. Low rates are also, in theory, good for gold, a non-interest-bearing asset. But, on the flip side, it's difficult to construct a scenario in which the economy is chugging along, supporting equity performance, while the Fed is also slashing rates by 175 bps. Easing on that scale and at that speed would almost certainly signal that the Fed was trying to put out a raging economic fire, most likely a severe slowdown or recession. While risk assets may not necessarily collapse in that environment, over-extended positions would be exposed. Granted, this isn't the first time investors have banked on Fed cuts in the past three years, and we have yet to see a major blow-up as a result. Markets have handled "higher-for-longer" rates much better than many observers warned, soaring to new highs in the process. Still, if "pain trades" do emerge in the second half of the year, it will likely be because of one sore spot: a hawkish Fed. What could move markets tomorrow? Want to receive Trading Day in your inbox every weekday morning? Sign up for my newsletter here. Opinions expressed are those of the author. They do not reflect the views of Reuters News, which, under the Trust Principles, opens new tab, is committed to integrity, independence, and freedom from bias.
