News

Romania’s High Court of Cassation and Justice, equivalent to the UK’s Supreme Court, fully acquitted  Gabriel ‘Puiu’ Popoviciu in a ruling on 15 January 2025.

This ruling is final and irrevocable and it maintains the Bucharest Court of Appeal resolution from July 2024, through which all the defendants were acquitted in the case surrounding the Băneasa shopping, office and residential development.

In her July 2024 ruling, Judge Liana Arsenie, the head of the Court of Appeal,  had exonerated Popoviciu, along with the other ten defendants in the case. In the judgment she handed down, she was critical of  prosecutor Nicolae Marin (of Romania’s National Anti-Corruption Directorate, known as the DNA) and his conduct in the case. Her ruling, all of which was reconfirmed this week in the High Court of Cassation and Justice, was that she was ordering the acquittal of all 11 defendants on the grounds that that the alleged offences do not exist. As Judge Arsenie explained at the time, “The investigating authority assigned fictitious roles and functions and imagined authority relationships. The prosecution was built on a scenario imagined by the prosecutor.” She highlighted “truncated interpretations, the breaking of logical-legal algorithms and the attribution of criminal connotation to the exercise of civil rights and obligations.”

Popoviciu and his ten fellow defendants had been accused by Nicolae Marin of abuse of office, bribery and favouring the offender in connection with SC Băneasa Investments SA’s project on a 224-hectare plot of land where the largest shopping, office and residential complex in Romania was built. The July 2024 verdict from Bucharest’s Court of Appeal found that these allegations, involving an alleged gift of a bottle of whiskey and a PET bottle of homemade plum brandy, plus the offer of a position for the witness Motoc Ion, who later confirmed he never received such an offer, were completely fabricated by prosecutor Nicolae Marin. The July 2024 acquittal judgement came as a result of the review and retrial of the case and firmly concluded that the defendants were convicted abusively. The January 2025 decision by Romania’s Supreme Court, upholding the full acquittal of the defendants, was the very final step in the legal process. There can be no doubt that, after an 18-year long legal ordeal, Popoviciu and his fellow defendants have won a resounding victory in their case.

The legal battle had not been limited to Romania. In July 2023, the UK’s Supreme Court discharged Romania’s extradition request for him. That was the UK court’s final decision on the matter and meant that Popoviciu would not be extradited to Romania. That final UK outcome followed the 11 June 2021 decision by London’s High Court to refuse Popoviciu’s extradition to Romania. In that ruling, British judge Lord Justice Holroyde stated: “The evidence shows a real risk that the appellant suffered an extreme example of a lack of judicial impartiality, such that there can be no question as to consequences for the fairness of the trial.” Edward Fitzgerald KC said that Popoviciu would suffer a “flagrant denial of justice” if sent back to serve his sentence in Romania.

The director of a Brussels-based human rights group commented: “This was a robust decision, building on and confirming the Bucharest Court of Appeal’s ruling last July, as well as earlier decisions in the UK courts in Mr Popoviciu’s favour. However, for those of us focused on human rights within the European Union, there is concern that Mr Popoviciu suffered such an injustice and indeed what several courts have now ruled was persecution at the hands of a prosecutor. Such abuse of the legal system does not belong in an EU country, one that is now even a member of the Schengen area.”

Read more:
Romania’s High Court of Cassation and Justice definitively exonerates Gabriel Popoviciu

Let me start by saying that I, like every self-respecting political junkie, have watched and adored The West Wing — all seven seasons, multiple times.

So before you roll your eyes and think here we go again, another musings-on-Sorkin piece, let me declare it plainly: the show remains as close as modern television gets to pure, unadulterated political catnip

It’s become a universal language, so much so that every English-speaking politician from Tony Blair and David Cameron to Canada’s Justin Trudeau has insisted, at some point, on comparing themselves to President Josiah Bartlet and his merry band of idealistic staffers.

The starry-eyed, walk-and-talk-laden world that Aaron Sorkin conjured up has seduced even the loftiest of policy heavies. Tony Blair’s love for it was famously well-documented: apparently No.10 once invited John Spencer – the late, great Leo McGarry – to break bread with Blair’s real-life chief of staff, Aaron Sorkin. One wonders if they also tried to rope in Martin Sheen to give them one of those soaring, paternal pep talks that always ended with him sauntering down the corridor while rousing orchestral chords hammered home the point.

And let’s not forget Bill Clinton’s adviser, Gene Spurling, who was not only a leading policy mind but served as an expert adviser on the show. Blair’s office invited him to dinner too, bridging that gap between fiction and reality so seamlessly that one might have expected C.J. Cregg to walk in and brief them on the daily crisis. The West Wing was the political soap du jour. It gave politicos the same rush a teenage pop fan might get from meeting the entire lineup of their favourite band backstage. For a certain generation, it was cultural currency — and, crucially, it made politics look downright cool, something that was in desperately short supply.

Fast-forward to 2017 (or indeed 2025, if we’re looking back and counting the years of regret). Enter Donald Trump as President. The question arises: how far removed is he from the luminous Sorkin universe? Trump is the antithesis of Bartlet, right? The brash spectacle, the Twitter rants, the preference for punchy, provocative soundbites over nuanced, reasoned debate — all of it seems anathema to the measured, idealistic, legislative artistry that Sorkin’s scripts so worshipfully championed. President Bartlet was a Notre Dame economics professor with a Nobel Prize, a man who’d pour over reams of data before making the slightest peep. Trump? Definitely not scribbling cross-charts of comparative advantage in the Oval Office.

And yet, watch carefully, and you’ll find moments of The West Wing in Trump’s presidency, whether we like it or not. The genius of Sorkin’s masterpiece lay in its ability to turn the daily drudgery of politics into compelling drama — the big set-piece speeches, the grand pronouncements, the staff’s unwavering devotion to their man. Trump’s White House might not do subtle, but it certainly goes big. And it’s that flair for drama, that showmanship, which paradoxically echoes the power The West Wing had over its audience. In a strange way, Trump turned the real West Wing into something more akin to a reality show, with cliffhangers every week and the press corps eternally breathless. We might not like it, but it’s got its own narrative arcs that might make Sorkin, in some bizarre alternate universe, nod in recognition.

Meanwhile, across the pond, we have to wonder if Keir Starmer’s people are busy working out which streaming platform the show is still on in the UK or hitting up eBay for the DVD’s and a Player to play them on for some marathon session ahead of strategy meetings. You can almost imagine a staffer breathlessly proclaiming: “We need to find our ‘Let Bartlet be Bartlet’ moment!” Indeed, according to The Times, the phrase “Let Starmer be Starmer” has just strolled into mainstream commentary. Let’s not forget it was “Let Bartlet be Bartlet” that became a rallying cry in the show — a reminder for our dear President Jed Bartlet to be his own best self. Now we’re hearing it of Starmer, and perhaps that’s the closest one gets to a truly British version of Sorkin’s flair. The noble counsel, the rousing phrase, the vow not to compromise. Sean Kemp quipped on Twitter this morning that this fresh bit of Starmer-lore completes “whatever the fourth goal of a hat trick is called.” Precisely.

But, aside from comedic parallels, one of the most intriguing endorsements of The West Wing came from Justin Trudeau who admitted on The West Wing Weekly podcast that he found the show entirely relatable, right down to the everyday grind of the job and the ephemeral “moments of moral clarity.” He even boasted that he used a 2002 Bartlet debate scene — you know, the one where the President annihilates his opponent’s shallow “10-word” answers — as prep for his own contests. And, fair play to him, it worked. Trudeau pranced into office with youthful swagger and rhetorical vision. Yet, as events have shown, the real political stage can’t be so finely scripted, nor can all the future’s curveballs be condensed into a snappy Sorkin speech.

The allure of that Sorkin speech, though, is something no political obsessive can quite resist. Take a quick spin through the best five minutes of any political programme, the opening scene of Sorkin’s The Newsroom (there’s a conveniently viral clip on YouTube, if you’ve got five minutes). There’s Jeff Daniels as Will McAvoy, cornered into an uncomfortably direct answer, launching into a blistering monologue about why America isn’t the greatest country in the world. It’s raw, it’s electric, it’s borderline heretical, and it’s how a great many political onlookers secretly long for politicians to speak: with honesty untainted by spin, delivering zingers that’d knock James Carville’s socks off. But in real life, that brand of oratory is as rare as hen’s teeth — especially now that spin itself has become a zero-sum game, the lifeblood of the permanent campaign. The only British politician who does come close is Nigel Farage, which might explain why he is now gaining in polls for his common-people direct style.

So here we are, decades into the mania for Sorkin’s seminal drama, and it remains the shining, unattainable standard for political conduct. It’s still quoted in press briefings, dinner parties, and, yes, Prime Minister’s Questions. The notion that every new prime minister (or indeed president) might be the next Jed Bartlet has proven more ephemeral than the soggy phrase “the new normal.” Yet, ironically, that might be part of The West Wing’s enduring genius: it presented not the real political sphere but the ideal. It’s an allegory for how we wish politics could be — high-minded, passionate, and infused with moral clarity — and not how it usually is, full of cheap jibes and shady negotiations behind closed doors.

So how far from The West Wing is Donald Trump? It’s tempting to say a million miles, that Sorkin’s measured erudition and Trump’s brash staccato simply don’t speak the same language. But I’m not entirely sure. They share a sense of showmanship, albeit on opposite ends of the rhetorical scale. Both delighted their respective audiences; Bartlet with refined moral passion, Trump with punchy populist jabs. If The West Wing taught us anything, it’s that political theatre resonates deeply. We want a big, emotional story, a sense of the moral arc bending the right way (or at least some way). Trump’s new presidency will be show of a very different sort, but a show it will certainly be. And perhaps that’s the real lesson: The West Wing showed how deeply politics and performance intersect. Whether you prefer the quicksilver repartee of Bartlet’s White House or the combative streetfighter style of Trump’s, both are indelibly etched into modern political culture.

In the end, I suspect all these references to The West Wing in politics — from Blair’s dinner guests to Starmer’s rhetorical pep talk, from Trudeau’s binge-watching will keep surfacing for years to come. As long as there are leaders who want to conjure that golden combination of intellect, charm, and unstoppable moral gravitas, Sorkin’s script will remain the Platonic ideal. And we’ll keep measuring real politicians by how far they fall short. Or, in Trump’s case, by how far he soared off in a completely different direction. One thing’s for sure: President Bartlet is still in that mythical corridor, walking and talking, as relevant as ever. And long may he remain so.

Read more:
Bartlet vs. Trump: the surprising West Wing secrets that still shape global politics

‘Russian oligarch’ has become a buzzword for Western audiences in the last two decades, but Alekszej Fedoricsev insists that he is neither an oligarch nor Russian.

Born in the Soviet Union, values-driven and self-made businessman has Hungarian, not Russian, citizenship, and he likes to make clear that his primary business operations have been in Ukraine, not in the Russian Federation.

Fedoricsev has been in the news, and that’s why his identity is important. In July, Italian police froze 41 million euros assets, including the capture of his incredible Tuscan castle. The reasons for what Fedoricsev’s lawyers call a ‘corporate raid’ are very much disputed.

Fedoricsev is a commodity trader. He created the FEDCOM Group in the 1990s and as for today the company became one of market-leaders having expertise in the storage, shipping and distribution of a variety of commodities. Ukraine became a centre of FEDCOM’s operations, with the Black Sea ports, especially in Odessa, at the heart of Ukraine’s vital grain exporting industry. Trans Invest Service (TIS) grain terminals, that belongs to Fedoricsev, is the no. 1 port in Ukraine and no. 2 on the Black Sea in terms of cargo trans-shipment. It was launched in 1994 on the basis of a Soviet-era abandoned berth for the import of mineral fertilizers.

As he continues to make clear, Fedoricsev is a significant investor in Ukraine’s infrastructure, with over 30 years of operation, its own investments in the development of the port and the industry in general exceeding $1 billion. Over the course of its operation, TIS has paid more than $360 million in taxes and fees to the stat; it strenuously denies having paid taxes to Russia since the invasion of Ukraine. It creates jobs and provides salaries for about 5,000 people.

In the first part of the last decade, Ukraine agreed numerous deals for exporting grain with China. In return for $3 billion in credit lines, China asked for around 3 million tones of grain a year. Fears of international food shortages made this grain especially important. But these huge deals also had complex political consequences.

Ukrainian anti–corruption agencies have a troubled history, and continue to be beset by problems. The National Anti–Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) was set up with American support to drive reform, especially in the light of heightened Russian aggression against Ukraine. The country’s failure adequately to deal with endemic corruption and money–laundering continue to dent its chances of integration into central European institutions.

In April 2017, FEDCOM executives were in Kyiv for a conference on the Black Sea grain industry. During a public presentation, the Vice President was escorted out of the building by NABU officials, and questioned, allegedly for twelve hours. For Fedoricsev and his firm, the cause was simple: opponents together with political figures had decided to create a campaign of persecution in order to seize his assets on the basis of false corruption allegations. With the state of the grain industry increasingly problematized by Russian aggression, opponents dishonest opponents wanted to take control of Fedoricsev’s infrastructure. More particularly, Ukraine was struggling to meet the terms of the $3 billion deal with China, and it wanted to remove the fees incurred by private companies like FEDCOM. Charging the owner of that company with corruption — a term thrown around a lot in Ukraine — was the best way to go about that.

Taken off the sanctions list by President Zelensky in 2020, Fedoricsev was placed back in the spotlight by the seizure of his assets in 2024 — although it is claimed that there have been sixty attempts on his assets since 2014. The Italian judiciary were responsible for seizing the 41 million euros assets last year at the best of NABU, which is a cause of outrage to Arnaud Zabaldano, the lawyer whose eponymous litigation firm, based in Monaco, is representing Fedoricsev. He is apparently known as the ‘smartest, toughest and quickest litigator in the Principality’. They deny the claims made by NABU that Fedoricsev used different companies to hide the wealth he made through TIS and was therefore denied to the Ukrainian government.

Monaco is Fedoricsev’s established home. He has made his name in the region for his ownership of the successful basketball team AS Monaco Basket. Apart it 2025 will become millstone as it’ll be 30th consecutive year when FEDCOM is sponsoring AS Monaco soccer club.

For Zabaldano and his client, the persecution of Fedoricsev is representative of a wider problem. The Zelensky government has continued to lay claims against numerous wealthy businessmen who have moved away from the country, and accused them of cooperating with or benefiting the Russian government. In the eyes of the lawyers in Monte Carlo, this is draining talent away from Ukraine, and such politically motivated attacks cover up — rather than address — the deep–seated corruption in the country. As one observer said to the Guardian newspaper in Britain, ‘This is a tragedy in which there will be no winners’, because the government has insisted on targeting corporate governance breaches, rather than the most pressing corruption cases.

Fedoricsev remains in Monaco, with his successful teams, and the truth of the case will not likely be made clear in the near future. Since the case against Boris Berezhovsky in the British Commercial Court, many businessmen under attack from Eastern European governments do not see the London courts as the bastion of justice they once were. It is certainly clear that the Ukrainian government, and their international bakers, need to ensure transparency on the reasons for their international prosecutions — and persuade more people that they are on a secure route to creating a more functional political system. Enforcing legitimate means of justice — with Fedoricsev and many businessmen like him — looks increasingly difficult as the illegal Russian war in Ukraine continues.

Written by Patrick Maxwell

Read more:
Alekszej Fedoricsev and the Continued Drama of Ukrainian Corruption

CSGO or Counter-Strike: Global Offensive skins continue to remain hugely popular, especially with the change to CS2 or Counter-Strike 2.

No matter whether you are a trader who wants to streamline his inventory or a casual player, you must be aware of the finest platforms where you can sell your CSGO items.

Characteristics of the best sites for selling CSGO items

If you are on the lookout for the best sites where you can sell your CSGO items, then you must look for the following features:

The site should provide high rates but low fees

The best sites, like skinomat.com, always offer the most competitive rates that are prevalent in the industry. This means you will earn more money by selling your skins than other platforms. These platforms minimize fees and maximize payouts to ensure that everyone has been getting the maximum value from their inventory.

Fast payouts

Another important feature of a reliable site is it gives importance to efficiency. Hence, people get their money quickly. As people get fast payouts from their transactions, they can have the necessary funds in moments.

Secure and Trusted

If you manage to find a reliable site, you will find it to be using only progressive security measures. Additionally, it will have a stellar reputation too. These sites do everything from their end to protect people’s transactions and accounts. Countless people trust these sites because they are reliable.

User-friendly interface

To choose a site, you must observe its intuitive design. This design makes it convenient for both seasoned traders and newcomers to sell skins. These sites make people’s jobs easier by guiding them all through the process.

Several options for payment

You will never find a reliable site that offers people only one method of payment. Every dependable and trustworthy website supports various methods of payment, including cryptocurrency, direct bank transfers, and PayPal. As users get this kind of flexibility, they are assured that they have been receiving the funds the way they want them to be.

The best websites intend to form an independent platform. They make it easier for people to sell their items even when they don’t spend a lot of effort and time. They believe that every person should be capable of monetizing their equipment. Players rely on these sites because they can get money instantly.

The ideal way to proceed

If you are like countless others who wish to sell their items on a reliable site, you need to log in to your account. After this, you must put the Trade URL. See that both your profile and inventory are public. Additionally, Steam Guard should enable your account. In the next step, you should choose the inventory items that you wish to monetize. You will find the platform to be presenting you with lots of selling offers, and they are calculated according to the data that is being accumulated from other similar websites. Now, if you come across something interesting, you must accept it. Additionally, you have to select your chosen method of payout. When you put all the required information, you will be capable of collecting your due money, keeping botheration at bay.

Read more:
Selling CSGO Items- How Easy Is That?

Britain has recorded its highest number of company closures for two decades, with the final quarter of 2024 seeing 198,046 businesses struck off the official register.

The figure, revealed by research firm Beauhurst, surpasses levels last reached in 2021 and in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

Henry Whorwood, managing director of research and consultancy at Beauhurst, said the increase in business dissolutions is largely a consequence of last year’s budget measures, combined with a difficult financing climate. “We really need to make sure this doesn’t get worse,” he added.

Separately, data from Zempler Bank, a small-business lender, points to an 8 per cent drop in new company formations throughout 2024, taking the total to 807,000. Rich Wagner, chief executive of Zempler, suggested the higher costs and stricter policing of new incorporations could be deterring many would-be entrepreneurs. Last year Companies House was granted new powers and raised incorporation fees from £12 to £50, which coincided with a year-on-year dip of almost 20 per cent in registrations between May and December.

Wagner said it remains to be seen if these changes will mean fewer, but more resilient, businesses in the long run:

“It will be interesting to see whether the changes at Companies House, which may have the effect of weeding out those who aren’t serious about starting a company, result in a higher proportion of businesses surviving, even in challenging economic conditions.”

Despite nearly 900,000 new companies being registered in 2023, a portion of those were shell entities created for future use, and more than 40,000 were subsidiaries of existing companies. Online retail saw the highest number of formations during that period (82,000), followed by property-letting firms (49,000).

Read more:
UK sees record wave of business closures amid tough environment

Tie-ups with retailers such as B&Q, Screwfix and Ann Summers have helped Deliveroo to raise its profit forecast, after the food delivery group recorded a strong uptick in orders.

The FTSE 250 firm, which debuted on the London Stock Exchange in 2021, told shareholders that adjusted underlying profit for the year to 31 December is likely to come in at the upper end of its £110 million to £130 million guidance.

Will Shu, Deliveroo’s founder and chief executive, said that “strong growth in groceries” and an expanding product range have enabled the business to “bring even more of the neighbourhood to consumers’ doors”. Over the past year, the company partnered with several well-known retail names including The Perfume Shop and Not On The High Street.

Deliveroo said its total number of orders increased by 3 per cent to 77.5 million during the final quarter of last year, with the UK and Ireland contributing 43.1 million of these orders—a 5 per cent jump on the same period in the previous year.

Overseas markets proved more mixed. While the UAE and Italy saw continued growth, France showed “some ongoing market softness” and Hong Kong remained “difficult” due to strong competition from Chinese rival Meituan, which entered the market in May 2023.

Sean Kealy, an analyst at Panmure Liberum, suggested that Deliveroo might consider withdrawing from Hong Kong given the challenging environment there.

Deliveroo’s gross transaction value (GTV)—the total cost of all food orders plus delivery charges—rose by 7 per cent to £1.97 billion in the three months to December. Quarterly revenue, which excludes payments to restaurants and riders, increased by 6 per cent to £545 million.

For the whole of last year, revenue amounted to £2.07 billion, a 3 per cent uplift, while total GTV climbed 6 per cent to £7.4 billion from 296 million orders.

Founded in London in 2013, Deliveroo now operates in ten markets with around 180,000 restaurant partners, employing about 140,000 riders. Shu, who once personally delivered pizzas, retains a 6.1 per cent shareholding in the business, while Amazon is the biggest shareholder, holding 13.7 per cent.

Though Deliveroo’s 2021 initial public offering was seen by some as disappointing—its shares sank by almost a third on debut—Thursday’s upbeat trading update lifted the stock by 6.6 per cent, closing at 138p.

Read more:
Deliveroo raises profit guidance on back of surging orders

The Small Business Charter (SBC) has appointed entrepreneur Byron Dixon OBE, founder and chief executive of freshness-technology firm Micro-Fresh, as its new chair.

Dixon takes over from outgoing chair Michael Hayman MBE, marking a key leadership shift as the organisation celebrates its tenth anniversary.

Dixon is best known for establishing Micro-Fresh, a multi-award-winning business that develops odour-control and antimicrobial solutions for textiles, healthcare, construction, food and beverages, packaging, and the automotive industry. Operating both in the UK and overseas, Micro-Fresh stands as a testament to Dixon’s belief in supporting small enterprises, particularly when it comes to harnessing expertise and research from universities and business schools.

He has long championed the role of higher education in driving entrepreneurial growth and innovation, especially for startups and smaller firms. In his new position, Dixon will guide SBC’s mission of empowering UK economic growth through business schools that excel in supporting small businesses, student-led enterprises, and local communities.

On his appointment, Dixon commented: “I am honoured to take on the role of chair of the Small Business Charter Management Board. Small businesses are a vital part of the UK economy, and business schools play a critical role in their development. As an entrepreneur, I have personally experienced the expertise and support that these schools provide, which have been invaluable in helping me to grow my business. I look forward to working with the team and network of accredited schools to strengthen the impact they have on small businesses in every part of the economy.”

Flora Hamilton, executive director of the Small Business Charter, said: “We are delighted to welcome Byron. His extensive experience as a successful entrepreneur and passion for the role of business schools in supporting small businesses make him perfectly suited to lead the SBC at this pivotal time. His leadership will build on our mission to connect business schools with small businesses to foster growth, innovation, and productivity.”

Read more:
New chair at Small Business Charter as Byron Dixon OBE takes the helm

Workers in the North of the UK have become more likely to receive a pay rise than their Southern counterparts, according to the new Salary Trends Report 2025 from Totaljobs.

The research, drawing on 17.5 million online job adverts and a survey of 3,000 people, found that 84% of employees in the North East benefited from a boost in pay last year, compared with just 69% in the South East.

Excluding London, Northern regions outperformed the South for salary growth, with 83% of workers in Northern Ireland receiving a pay rise, followed by Scotland (78%), the North West (77%) and Yorkshire (73%). Meanwhile, the South West of England also lagged behind, seeing 70% of employees enjoy a pay increase.

Despite these trends, London remains the best-paid region overall, with 77% of those in the capital reporting a salary bump. Totaljobs said the figures point to a shifting economic landscape, in which Northern hubs such as Manchester, Newcastle and Edinburgh are gaining prominence as cost-of-living advantages attract more talent.

The highest paying sectors in Newcastle, the largest employment hub in the North East, are Legal (£44.2k average salary), Technology (£43.8k) and Engineering (£42.7k). In Belfast, top-earning jobs include Technology (£42.5k), Property (£41.1k) and Education (£40.4k). North of the border, Edinburgh offers especially strong prospects in Technology (£49.8k), Insurance (£48.4k) and Construction (£45.2k).

Natalie Matalon, Chief People Officer at Totaljobs (part of The Stepstone Group), said: “Pay cheques tend to go a lot further in the North than they do in the South and – while there is clearly still a big North-South divide – places like Manchester, Newcastle and Edinburgh are becoming increasingly attractive places to live and work.”

Despite more than three-quarters of UK workers receiving a pay rise last year and signs that inflation is cooling, 56% continue to worry about their finances, with those in Wales (63.7%) and Yorkshire (63.5%) feeling most concerned.

Financial uncertainty is also shaping labour market movements, as 31% of employees plan to look for a new job in 2025, mainly driven by the prospect of higher pay. According to the report, 72% of candidates cite salary as their top priority when choosing a role.

Matalon added: “Jobseekers on average are only considering new roles offering at least a 13% pay rise. With macro-economic uncertainty, employees won’t leave the relative safety of their current employer without meaningful gain to balance the risk.”

Read more:
North east outstrips South as UK’s pay rise capital

The UK’s economy grew by just 0.1 per cent in November, below forecasts of 0.2 per cent, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The subdued figure, announced on Friday, underscores the continued weakness in Britain’s recovery as Labour’s new government grapples with stubborn inflation, lukewarm consumer confidence, and looming global trade risks.

The ONS data revealed a slight upturn from two months of 0.1 per cent contraction, but analysts in the City had hoped for stronger growth. The disappointing figure prompted a modest slide in sterling, which dipped by 0.10 per cent against the dollar to $1.22 and by 0.25 per cent against the euro to €1.18.

Despite the lacklustre GDP figures, equity markets were buoyant. The FTSE 100 closed up 1.1 per cent, or 90.77 points, at 8,391.90, with the FTSE 250 also rising 1 per cent, up 194.08 points to 20,527.70. Government bond yields stayed flat, reflecting a fragile balance between investor caution and optimism sparked by surprisingly lower inflation data released earlier this week.

Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, acknowledged that while the economy had inched forward, more substantial progress will “take time”. Latest three-month data from the ONS confirms zero growth over the period to November, further highlighting the uphill battle facing the government.

Business sentiment remains wary in the wake of Labour’s October budget, which raised national insurance contributions by £25 billion and increased government spending by £70 billion. Many companies warn that this could force them to cut jobs and raise prices as they adapt to fresh tax obligations.

Reeves defended her plans, insisting that she has ended the “instability” wrought by the Conservatives: “This new government has come in with a determination, a No 1 mission, to grow the economy. That takes time,” she said. She will meet regulators to urge a stronger pro-growth focus, ahead of the spring statement and updated forecasts from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) on 26 March.

The incoming inauguration of Donald Trump as US president has raised concerns about a potential trade war. Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, expressed unease about “the possibility of tariff war between friends,” pointing specifically to Trump’s pledge of at least 10 per cent on imports to the US.

Reeves also faces pressure to keep public finances in check. With market borrowing costs rising, speculation is mounting that the chancellor may be forced to either raise taxes or rein in spending further. For now, she maintains that the government remains committed to “root out waste in public spending” while prioritising growth.

The ONS’s unexpected dip in December inflation to 2.5 per cent has sparked optimism that the Bank of England could begin lowering interest rates, currently at 4.75 per cent. Thomas Pugh, economist at RSM UK, predicted a quarter-point rate cut in February as “a sure bet”.

Lower rates may offer respite to borrowers who have faced rapidly rising mortgage costs over the past year. Alan Taylor, the newest member of the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee, indicated that four or five interest rate reductions could be on the table in 2025, a signal that the Bank is now more focused on stimulating an economy at risk of prolonged stagnation.

November’s modest 0.1 per cent growth in services contrasted with a 0.4 per cent uptick in construction and a 0.4 per cent dip in production. While construction was buoyed by commercial developments, manufacturing and oil and gas extraction continued to slump. Analysts warned these figures hardly alter the sense of a stalled economy heading into 2025.

The OBR projects 2 per cent GDP growth for 2025, although some City experts consider this overly optimistic, especially if a possible trade war, tax hikes, or another global downturn materialise.

For Reeves, sparking a sustained recovery is proving a formidable challenge. With eight months in office, Labour’s chancellor is under pressure to showcase tangible results. The City’s verdict on November’s GDP data was swift: “For a government that has said growth is its top priority, this is not great news,” said HSBC. Analysts at Deutsche Bank also warned of “stagnation,” rather than real momentum, in the second half of 2024.

Hopes remain pinned on a combination of slightly softer interest rates, improved consumer sentiment, and government investment in 2025 to usher in a more robust recovery. Yet the UK’s persistent growth woes — now Labour’s to fix — hang in the balance.

Read more:
UK economy struggles to gain momentum as GDP growth disappoints at 0.1%

Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, has joined the contest to succeed Justin Trudeau as leader of Canada’s ruling Liberal Party.

His announcement comes just over a week after Trudeau stepped down, amid dismal polling and growing discontent from his own MPs, ending a nine-year tenure at the helm of Canadian politics.

Carney, 59, will stand in the Liberal leadership race on 9 March, with a general election to follow soon after. The Liberals, in power since 2015, are widely expected to lose, as Canada’s Conservatives — led by firebrand populist Pierre Poilievre — command a substantial lead in the polls.

“I’m doing this because Canada is the best country in the world, but it could still be even better,” Carney said in his hometown of Edmonton, Alberta. He identified the nation’s most pressing issues, including stagnant wages, the climate crisis, soaring house prices, and the threat of a fresh tariff war with former US president Donald Trump.

Carney is likely to underscore his finance credentials, having overseen both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, the only person to have led two G7 central banks. “I’m here to earn your trust,” he said. “I’m here to ask for your support.”

Carney’s chief challenger in the leadership contest appears to be Chrystia Freeland, 56, the former finance minister whose recent resignation over disagreements with Trudeau precipitated his own departure. Once the new party leader is chosen in March, a confidence vote is expected to trigger a general election later in the year.

Poilievre, 45, leads the Conservative Party and is heavily favoured to become Canada’s next prime minister. His pledge to rein in the national budget, crack down on crime, and eliminate carbon taxes has resonated with disenchanted voters. He dismissed Carney in the past as “the ultimate liberal insider” and “Just like Justin”.

Read more:
Carney sets his sights on leadership as Canada faces election countdown