Business

MPs have approved Doug Gurr as fit to become the next permanent chair of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), but warned ministers that additional safeguards are needed to protect the regulator’s independence and address potential conflicts of interest.

In a report published on Thursday following a pre-appointment hearing earlier this week, the House of Commons Business and Trade Committee said it was satisfied that Mr Gurr has “the professional competence and independence required” to take on the role as defined by the Government. However, the committee stressed that serious concerns remain about the context of his appointment and the broader direction of competition policy.

Mr Gurr, a former senior executive at Amazon, was questioned extensively by MPs about his ability to act independently, particularly given the circumstances surrounding the removal of the previous chair amid pressure to align the watchdog more closely with the Government’s pro-growth agenda. Committee members made clear that the CMA must not prioritise investment or consolidation over consumer welfare, warning that growth cannot come at the expense of competition.

MPs also expressed unease about potential conflicts of interest arising from Gurr’s long and senior career at Amazon, one of the world’s largest technology companies and a business that could fall within the CMA’s new digital market regime. The committee suggested ministers consider whether he should recuse himself from any future decision about designating Amazon with Strategic Market Status under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.

The hearing also became a wider examination of the CMA’s recent performance. MPs noted that staff numbers at the regulator have almost doubled over the past decade, yet competitive pressures in the UK economy have not improved. They criticised what they described as slow market investigations during the cost-of-living crisis and weak enforcement action in certain high-profile cases.

Concerns were also raised about the CMA’s handling of digital competition issues, including delays in seeking remedies from Google over its relationship with news publishers and the limited commitments secured from Google and Apple regarding their mobile ecosystems. The committee questioned whether the watchdog had been sufficiently assertive in deploying its new statutory powers.

Internal challenges within the CMA were also highlighted. A recent budgeting error forced a 10 per cent reduction in staff, and internal surveys suggest that only around a quarter of employees expect to remain at the organisation for the next three years. MPs indicated that rebuilding morale and confidence inside the regulator would be a significant task for the new chair.

Another issue scrutinised during the hearing was the time commitment attached to the role. The CMA chair is currently expected to dedicate two days a week to the position. The committee questioned whether that allocation is sufficient for a regulator operating at the centre of politically sensitive and economically significant decisions, particularly during periods of crisis or intense scrutiny.

While the committee ultimately endorsed Mr Gurr’s appointment, it warned that it is “not the hallmark of a robust recruitment process” to have secured only one appointable candidate for such a critical role.

Liam Byrne, the committee’s chair, said the CMA sits at the heart of whether markets work for consumers or against them. He said that although Mr Gurr is professionally competent to take on the job, ministers must take steps to maximise confidence in the appointment.

“Growth cannot mean greater concentration,” Byrne said. “Investment cannot come at the expense of consumer welfare. And operational independence must be protected in fact, not just in theory.”

The final decision now rests with the Business Secretary, but the committee’s report makes clear that Parliament will be watching closely to ensure that the CMA remains an independent and effective guardian of competition in the UK economy.

Read more:
MPs back Doug Gurr for CMA chair but demand safeguards over conflicts and independence

Instagram will begin notifying parents if their teenagers repeatedly search for suicide or self-harm related content, marking the first time owner Meta has proactively flagged search behaviour rather than simply blocking it.

From next week, parents and teenagers enrolled in Instagram’s “Teen Accounts” supervision programme in the UK, US, Australia and Canada will receive alerts if a young user searches for harmful terms within a short period of time. The feature will be rolled out globally at a later stage.

Previously, Instagram restricted access to certain harmful material and redirected users to support resources. The new measure goes further by directly alerting parents via email, text message, WhatsApp or within the Instagram app itself, depending on available contact details.

Meta said the alerts are designed to flag sudden changes in search patterns that may indicate distress. Notifications will be accompanied by guidance and expert-backed resources to help parents navigate what are likely to be sensitive conversations.

The move has been met with sharp criticism from the Molly Rose Foundation, established by the family of Molly Russell, who died in 2017 aged 14 after viewing self-harm and suicide content online.

Chief executive Andy Burrows described the announcement as “fraught with risk”, warning that “forced disclosures could do more harm than good”.

“Every parent would want to know if their child is struggling,” Burrows said, “but these flimsy notifications will leave parents panicked and ill-prepared to have the sensitive and difficult conversations that will follow.”

He added that the onus should be on preventing harmful content from appearing in the first place, rather than shifting responsibility onto families after the fact.

The foundation previously published research claiming Instagram was still actively recommending content related to depression, suicide and self-harm to vulnerable young people. Meta rejected those findings, saying they misrepresented its safety efforts.

Ged Flynn, chief executive of Papyrus Prevention of Young Suicide, welcomed the attempt to increase transparency but argued that it did not address deeper systemic issues.

“Parents contact us every day to say how worried they are about their children online,” he said. “They don’t want to be warned after their children search for harmful content, they don’t want it to be spoon-fed to them by unthinking algorithms.”

‘Erring on the side of caution’

Meta said the system is designed to “err on the side of caution” and acknowledged that parents may occasionally receive alerts even when there is no serious cause for concern.

The company said the feature builds on broader Teen Account protections, which include automatically limiting exposure to sensitive material, restricting who can contact teens, and blocking certain harmful searches outright.

Two in-app screenshots released by Meta show alerts titled “Alert about your teen’s safety” followed by a screen offering advice on “How you can support your teen”.

Sameer Hinduja, co-director of the Cyberbullying Research Center, said the impact of the new feature would depend heavily on the quality of guidance provided alongside the alert.

“You can’t drop a notification on a parent and leave them on their own,” he said. “What matters is the immediate support and context that follows.”

Meta also confirmed that it plans to introduce similar parental alerts in the coming months if teenagers discuss self-harm or suicide with Instagram’s AI chatbot. The company said young people are increasingly turning to AI tools for advice and emotional support.

The expansion comes amid heightened scrutiny of social media companies’ impact on children’s mental health.

Australia recently passed legislation banning social media access for under-16s, while policymakers in Spain, France and the UK are considering similar measures. In the US, Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg and Instagram head Adam Mosseri have faced legal challenges and congressional hearings over allegations the company’s platforms were designed to attract and retain younger users.

For now, Instagram’s new alert system represents a shift in Meta’s child-safety strategy — moving from passive content restriction to active parental notification. Whether that approach proves protective or problematic will likely depend on how families, regulators and mental health experts respond in the months ahead.

Read more:
Instagram to alert parents if teens search for suicide and self-harm content

The number of young people not in education, employment or training has edged closer to one million, underlining mounting pressure on Britain’s fragile labour market and intensifying calls for targeted intervention from ministers.

Official figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that an estimated 957,000 people aged 16 to 24 were classified as Neet between October and December 2025. That represents 12.8 per cent of the age group, a slight rise on the previous quarter and perilously close to the one-million mark last seen in the aftermath of the global financial crisis.

While the total is marginally lower, by 0.4 percentage points, than the same period a year earlier, the quarterly increase reflects persistent weakness in youth employment prospects, particularly as hiring in hospitality, retail and graduate schemes continues to contract.

The ONS said the latest uptick was driven primarily by a rise in the number of young women classified as Neet. At the end of 2025, 12.2 per cent of young women were not in work, education or training, up on the previous quarter. By contrast, the number of young men in the same category fell slightly.

A young person is considered Neet if they are unemployed and actively seeking work, or economically inactive, meaning they are not seeking work and are not enrolled in education or training. The data shows that the number of unemployed Neets rose 12.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter, while economically inactive Neets fell by 6.6 per cent, suggesting more young people are attempting to re-enter the labour market but struggling to secure roles.

The UK jobs market remains subdued, with vacancies recently falling to their lowest levels in five years. Youth unemployment has been disproportionately affected by employers cutting entry-level hiring in response to rising wage costs and increased national insurance contributions.

Research from the Youth Futures Foundation has pointed to long-term sickness, mental health challenges and neurodivergence as key contributors to rising economic inactivity among young people in recent years.

Joseph, 24, from Solihull, who is autistic and has been unemployed for three years, described the difficulty of breaking into the workforce.

“There’s a real taboo around needing experience to get a job, but only being able to gain experience through a job,” they said. “Confidence can definitely be an issue. I’ve only ever worked one job that’s in person. I didn’t know how things worked, the commute into work, that sort of thing.”

Joseph said autism “can be a barrier but it can also be a strength”, adding that many employers fail to understand this. They are currently being supported by a youth worker from The King’s Trust to help secure paid employment.

Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden acknowledged that youth inactivity represents “a long-term challenge” and said the government was backing apprenticeships and paid work placements.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has pledged that young people who have been out of work or education for 18 months will be offered a guaranteed paid placement. Those who refuse may face benefit sanctions, a proposal that has drawn criticism from some campaigners.

An independent inquiry into the rise in youth inactivity, led by former Labour health secretary Alan Milburn, is under way and due to report this summer. Milburn has said he will examine systemic failings across employment support, skills provision, health and welfare.

Louise Murphy, senior economist at the Resolution Foundation, warned that the UK was “perilously close” to a youth unemployment crisis.

“Today’s data adds to the picture of a generation up against real and complex barriers to finding a good job and improving their living standards,” she said. “Acting sooner rather than later can help prevent these worrying trends becoming an entrenched crisis.”

The think tank has urged Reeves to make an exception to her policy-light Spring Statement and introduce additional measures to tackle youth unemployment directly.

The data also adds to pressure on ministers over plans to scrap the lower minimum wage rate for 16 and 17-year-olds. Some employers argue that equalising rates would make it too costly to hire younger workers at a time when margins remain tight.

Government sources have indicated that while ministers are reluctant to abandon the pledge, a delay is under consideration.

Ben Harrison, director of the Work Foundation at Lancaster University, said the figures demonstrated “the magnitude of the challenge facing young people and the government”.

“There is a considerable risk that more young people will slip into long-term worklessness unless government acts to address the causes of this rise,” he said.

The last time the number of young Neets exceeded one million was between July and September 2011, in the prolonged aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. Analysts warn that sustained weakness in entry-level recruitment risks scarring a generation, with long-term consequences for earnings and productivity.

The ONS cautioned that Neet figures can be volatile due to the smaller sample size relative to broader unemployment data. The statistics are derived from the Labour Force Survey, which has faced scrutiny over response rates and data quality in recent years. The ONS says it is working to improve the survey through increased interviewer recruitment and methodological reforms.

For now, however, the headline figure, nearly one million young people disconnected from work or education, stands as a stark reminder of the fragility of Britain’s youth labour market.

Read more:
Nearly one million young people out of work or education as Neet rate edges higher

When the Government’s entrepreneurship adviser, Alex Depledge, declared that Britain does not “need any more restaurants”, I’ll confess my first reaction was disbelief. My second was to reach for the data. And my third, after reading it, was a conclusion both simple and troubling: she has misidentified where entrepreneurship in this country actually lives and in doing so, is making it harder for it to survive.

Let me start with the basics. Hospitality employs 2.6 million people in the UK, 7.1% of the entire workforce. It generates £69.5 billion in gross value added. It contributes £54 billion in gross tax receipts annually. It is, by any reasonable measure, not a peripheral cottage industry but a cornerstone of the British economy. But here is the figure that should stop the Government’s entrepreneurship adviser in her tracks, one drawn from the House of Commons Library research briefing on hospitality, published in January 2026, which she may not yet have had the opportunity to read: 99.6% of hospitality businesses are SMEs, and 97.7% are small businesses. An adviser appointed to clear the path for more small enterprises might reasonably be expected to know that one of the most entrepreneurially dense sectors in the entire UK economy is the one she has just publicly dismissed.

But the argument I want to make goes beyond the statistics, important as they are. It goes to something more fundamental, something that Depledge, for all her intelligence and commercial experience, appears to have overlooked entirely.

Every business deal that gets done in this country, every investment secured, every partnership formed, every client relationship built, happens somewhere and through human contact. It happens over a coffee, over lunch, over dinner, at a networking event, at a conference, at a drinks reception. The hospitality sector is not separate from the high-growth economy that the Government’s adviser wants to build. It is the connective tissue of it. You cannot scale a clean tech company, close a venture capital round, or sign a manufacturing partnership without, at some point, sitting across a table from someone in a room that a hospitality business has made possible.

I want to give a concrete example of what smart support for hospitality entrepreneurship actually looks like, because it is already happening, just not by government. On our own university campus, we work with Aramark to provide catering for students, staff and events. Given the natural variation in demand across term time, Aramark does something rather clever: it brings in small, independent food truck operators on a rotating basis, giving them seven or eight hours a day of guaranteed footfall, exposure to a large and diverse customer base, and the kind of commercial experience that no business incubator programme can replicate. The result is a richer, more varied food offering for our community, and a genuine launchpad for small hospitality enterprises.

Pubs are doing the same. The Compton Arms in Islington, ranked in the UK’s Top 50 Gastropubs, has built its reputation on offering kitchen residencies to emerging independent food businesses, giving them a platform, a customer base, and the commercial experience to grow. It is not a charity model; it is a smart one. The chefs behind Four Legs did their residency at the Compton Arms and went on to open The Plimsoll. Walk into any good pub offering food, and you will find a similar story, Thai kitchens operating out of the back, independent suppliers stocking the bar, local producers on the menu. These are ecosystems of entrepreneurship that the Government’s own adviser appears not to have noticed.

Aramark and the Compton Arms have understood something that the Government has not: supporting small hospitality businesses is not charity. It is smart commercial strategy.

I would gently invite the Government’s entrepreneurship adviser to conduct a simple experiment. Consider a single working day. The morning coffee picked up on the way to the office supplied by an independent café, almost certainly an SME. The biscuits and drinks laid on for the first meeting of the day. Lunch, whether grabbed at a local restaurant or catered in. Networking event with colleagues or clients. A family dinner that evening. Count how many of those touchpoints involve a hospitality business. Count how many of the people who made those moments possible are employed in a sector she has suggested we do not need more of.

The Government says it wants to champion the industries of tomorrow. So do we. There is no disagreement about the importance of clean technology, advanced manufacturing, or the creative sector. But the framing of hospitality as somehow standing in the way of that ambition is a false choice and a damaging one. An economy that neglects its sixth largest employment sector, that has already seen restaurants shed 22% of their casual dining sites since 2020, and that continues to pile on costs through National Insurance increases and business rates reform, is not building for the future. It is hollowing out the present.

Britain’s hospitality sector does not need to be told it isn’t wanted. It needs a government and an entrepreneurship adviser that understands what it is and what it does well enough to support it properly.

Read more:
The Government’s entrepreneurship adviser says we don’t need more restaurants. She’s wrong and here’s why

The chief executive of PizzaExpress, the founder of MOBO Awards and the co-founder of one of Europe’s fastest-growing matcha brands are among the finalists for the 2026 Veuve Clicquot Bold Awards.

Now in its 54th year, the awards are the longest-running international honours dedicated to celebrating women in business. Founded in tribute to Madame Clicquot — who took over the Champagne house at 27 and defied the conventions of her era — the programme recognises women who combine commercial success with bold, transformative leadership.

The awards are split into two categories: the Bold Woman Award, honouring established leaders, and the Bold Future Award, spotlighting emerging entrepreneurs shaping the next generation of enterprise.

Among this year’s senior leaders is Paula MacKenzie, chief executive of PizzaExpress. Since taking the helm, MacKenzie has overseen a nationwide refurbishment programme, introduced new concepts including the PizzaExpress Pod, and expanded the brand both domestically and internationally. Under her leadership, the company has achieved record customer satisfaction levels and launched PX Records, its own record label, while raising more than £1m for charity.

Kanya King CBE, founder and CEO of the MOBO Group, is also shortlisted. Over three decades, she has grown the MOBO Awards from a niche celebration into a globally recognised cultural platform. In recent years she launched House of MOBO in South London and introduced MOBOLISE, a UK-first initiative aimed at equipping 100,000 Black talents with AI literacy and career development opportunities. The MOBO Awards mark their 30th anniversary in 2026.

Completing the trio is Smruti Sriram OBE, CEO of Bags of Ethics under parent company Supreme Creations. Sriram has positioned the business as a global leader in reusable packaging, working with brands including Dior, Harrods and Nike. Her vertically integrated supply chain model, which employs an 80% female workforce, has helped eliminate more than 30 billion single-use items worldwide while delivering consistent double-digit growth.

The Bold Future Award highlights ambitious founders building high-impact ventures.

Alisha Fredriksson, co-founder and CEO of Seabound, has developed a modular carbon capture system that can retrofit existing ships and reduce CO₂ emissions by up to 95%. In under four years, she has taken the business from concept to commercial deployment with major shipping operators, building a specialist team and securing £8.5m in funding.

Josephine Philips, founder of SOJO, has modernised the clothing repair sector by integrating proprietary technology, logistics and in-house operations. The platform now partners with brands including Ralph Lauren, Selfridges and Marks & Spencer.

Marisa Poster, co-founder of PerfectTed, rounds out the shortlist. At 28, she has helped scale the matcha-based drinks brand to a reported £50m in annual recurring revenue, with distribution in more than 30,000 retail and café locations across over 50 countries.

Previous winners of the awards include Julia Hoggett, Professor Sarah Gilbert and Anne Pitcher, reflecting the breadth of sectors represented, from finance and science to retail and culture.

Thomas Mulliez, president of Veuve Clicquot, said this year’s shortlist reflects the pioneering spirit of Madame Clicquot. “They are redefining what business can be — from tackling plastic pollution and fashion waste to cementing Black music at the heart of British culture.”

Sian Westerman, board member of the British Fashion Council and a judge for the awards, said the finalists exemplify resilience in the face of structural barriers that continue to challenge women in leadership and entrepreneurship.

The winners will be announced at a ceremony in London on 20 May, bringing together senior figures from across business, culture and industry to celebrate audacious female leadership.

Read more:
Veuve Clicquot unveils bold woman award shortlist for 2026

In recent years, mental health care has undergone a significant transformation. Advances in technology, combined with changing lifestyles and increased awareness of psychological wellbeing, have made online therapy not only acceptable but often preferable.

One of the most promising developments within this field is the digital delivery of Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR). Psylaris is at the forefront of this innovation, offering accessible, secure and effective therapeutic solutions that respond to the needs of today’s clients.

Understanding EMDR Therapy

EMDR is a well-established, evidence-based therapy primarily used to help individuals process traumatic or distressing experiences. Traditionally delivered in a face-to-face setting, EMDR works by helping the brain reprocess memories that have become “stuck”, reducing their emotional intensity over time. It has been widely recognised for its effectiveness in treating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, phobias and other trauma-related conditions.

While the core principles of EMDR remain unchanged, the way it is delivered has evolved. Through carefully designed digital platforms, it is now possible to offer remote EMDR without compromising clinical quality or safety.

The Rise of Remote Therapy

Remote therapy has grown rapidly, driven by the need for flexibility, privacy and accessibility. For many people, attending in-person sessions can be challenging due to work schedules, mobility issues, geographical distance or personal circumstances. Online therapy removes many of these barriers, allowing clients to engage in treatment from the comfort of their own homes.

Psylaris recognises that convenience should never come at the expense of therapeutic effectiveness. By combining clinical expertise with advanced digital tools, the organisation ensures that clients receive high-quality care regardless of location.

How Psylaris Delivers Remote EMDR

Psylaris has developed a secure and user-friendly environment specifically designed for digital mental health care. Remote EMDR sessions are conducted by trained professionals who guide clients through the therapeutic process using video communication and specialised online tools for bilateral stimulation.

These sessions closely mirror traditional EMDR therapy, while also offering unique advantages. Clients often report feeling more relaxed in familiar surroundings, which can support emotional openness and engagement. Therapists are able to tailor sessions to individual needs, maintaining the same ethical standards, confidentiality and professional oversight expected in face-to-face therapy.

Benefits for Clients and Professionals

The benefits of online EMDR extend beyond convenience. Clients gain greater control over their therapy journey, with increased flexibility in scheduling and reduced travel-related stress. This can lead to higher consistency in attendance and, ultimately, better therapeutic outcomes.

For professionals, digital delivery allows for more efficient practice management and the ability to reach clients who might otherwise have limited access to specialised trauma care. Psylaris supports practitioners with reliable technology, ongoing innovation and a strong commitment to clinical excellence.

A Future-Focused Vision for Mental Health

Mental health care continues to evolve, and digital solutions will play an increasingly important role in shaping its future. Psylaris is committed to responsible innovation, ensuring that new approaches are grounded in scientific research and ethical practice. By embracing technology while preserving the human connection at the heart of therapy, Psylaris offers a balanced and forward-thinking model of care.

Conclusion: Accessible, Effective and Human-Centred Care

Remote therapy is no longer a temporary solution; it is a permanent and valuable part of modern mental health care. With its focus on quality, accessibility and innovation, Psylaris demonstrates how remote EMDR can be delivered safely and effectively. For individuals seeking support, and for professionals looking to expand their practice, Psylaris represents a trusted partner in the ongoing journey towards psychological wellbeing.

Read more:
Remote EMDR Therapy: A Modern Approach to Mental Health with Psylaris

The future of The Fat Duck and other restaurants founded by Heston Blumenthal is in doubt after HM Revenue & Customs issued a winding-up petition against the chef’s parent company.

HMRC has moved against SL6 Ltd, which owns The Fat Duck in Bray, Berkshire, alongside the one-Michelin-starred The Hinds Head and several affiliated ventures. Around 130 staff are understood to be at risk should the petition proceed.

The action follows a further deterioration in the group’s finances. Accounts filed at Companies House show SL6 Ltd recorded a loss of £2.05m for the year to 2024, up from £1.39m the previous year, despite turnover of £8.9m.

Administrative expenses totalled £8.4m, including £2.3m in cost of sales, while staff costs rose to £4.07m, reflecting inflationary pressure and higher wage bills.

The company’s accounts reveal total debts of £2.7m, including £1.67m owed in taxation and social security and £5,417 in corporation tax. It also reported a bank overdraft of £806,091, more than the £697,605 held in cash, alongside several outstanding bank loans.

A strategic report signed by Ronald Lowenthal, who now controls SL6 Ltd after Blumenthal sold his stake in 2006, acknowledged a year of “tough economic conditions”, citing inflation across the supply chain, recruitment challenges and rising wage costs.

Lowenthal said the company had chosen not to pass the full burden of inflation on to customers, despite the impact on profitability. The Fat Duck’s signature 13-course tasting menu, “The Journey”, is currently priced at £350 per head.

Auditors Lawfords Consulting previously described the business as a “going concern”, noting management was seeking long-term funding to stabilise operations. However, HMRC’s decision to file a winding-up petition suggests negotiations may not have secured sufficient support.

A spokesperson for HMRC said it could not comment on individual cases but added that winding-up petitions are only filed after other recovery options have been exhausted.

The development comes at a difficult time for the UK hospitality sector, which has faced rising energy bills, food inflation and higher employment costs in recent years. Fine dining establishments have been particularly exposed to fluctuations in discretionary spending.

The timing is also notable given fresh political debate around the value of the hospitality sector. Comments this week from a senior government adviser suggesting Britain does not “need any more restaurants” have drawn criticism from industry figures already grappling with higher taxes and regulatory pressures.

Blumenthal, famed for inventive dishes such as snail porridge and “Sound of the Sea”, became one of Britain’s most recognisable chefs through The Fat Duck’s experimental cuisine and television appearances. The restaurant has long been regarded as a cornerstone of modern British gastronomy.

If the winding-up petition proceeds and the company cannot secure funding or reach a settlement with HMRC, the case could result in compulsory liquidation, placing one of Britain’s most celebrated culinary brands in jeopardy.

Read more:
Heston Blumenthal’s restaurant empire under threat after HMRC winding-up petition

Aston Martin has confirmed it will cut 20% of its workforce after annual losses widened sharply, as the luxury carmaker battles weak global demand and the impact of US trade tariffs.

The Gaydon-based manufacturer said net losses jumped 52% last year to £493.2m, while operating losses reached £259.2m. The company employs about 3,000 people globally, meaning around 600 roles are expected to go, with the majority of cuts understood to affect UK operations.

Aston Martin said the restructuring programme would generate annual savings of approximately £40m, with most of those savings realised during 2026. It did not provide a detailed timetable for the redundancies but confirmed that roles across the business, including factory positions, would be affected.

The carmaker blamed “extremely disruptive” US tariffs introduced under Donald Trump, as well as subdued demand in China, the world’s largest automotive market. The company has already warned that tariffs have significantly affected sales in the US, one of its key territories.

In a statement, Aston Martin said: “Having undertaken at the start of 2025 a process to make organisational adjustments to ensure the business was appropriately resourced for its future plans, we had to take the difficult decision at the end of 2025 to implement further changes. This latest programme will ultimately see the departure of up to 20% of our valued workforce.”

The job cuts form part of a broader effort to stabilise the company’s finances after years of volatility. Alongside the workforce reduction, Aston Martin has trimmed its five-year capital expenditure plan to £1.7bn, down from £2bn, by delaying investment in electric vehicle development.

The move signals a shift in strategy as the company prioritises short-term cash preservation over accelerated electrification. It comes amid a wider slowdown in EV demand across the luxury segment and mounting pressure on automakers from rising borrowing costs and trade uncertainty.

Aston Martin said it expects further cash outflows in 2026 but forecast a “material improvement” in financial performance, supported by the launch of its Valhalla hybrid supercar. Around 500 deliveries of the £850,000 model are expected to contribute to improved margins.

The company is targeting gross margins in the high 30% range and adjusted earnings before interest and taxes close to break-even.

In a separate effort to bolster its balance sheet, Aston Martin last week agreed a £50m deal to sell perpetual branding rights to its Formula One team.

Despite the cost-cutting measures and asset disposals, the company faces continued scrutiny from investors over its long-running turnaround plan, as it attempts to rebuild profitability in a turbulent global market.

Read more:
Aston Martin to cut 20% of workforce as annual losses widen

John Lewis Partnership has abandoned its build-to-rent housing ambitions, retreating from a high-profile property diversification strategy as the group pivots back towards its core retail business.

The employee-owned retailer confirmed it would withdraw from the rental housing scheme first championed by its former chair, Sharon White, who had sought to reduce reliance on retail by generating 40 per cent of profits from non-retail ventures by 2030. That target was later scrapped.

The build-to-rent initiative, launched in partnership with Aberdeen, aimed to deliver around 1,000 rental homes across sites in Ealing and Bromley in London and Reading in Berkshire. Aberdeen had pledged to raise £500m from institutional investors to fund the developments.

However, John Lewis said that the funds were never secured due to shifting macroeconomic conditions.

“Our rental property ambition was based on a very different financial environment: one with more stable investment returns, lower borrowing costs and more affordable construction costs,” a spokesman said. “The current climate, higher interest rates, inflationary pressures and a more cautious property market, means the model no longer meets our investment criteria.”

The decision marks a significant strategic reset under Jason Tarry (pictured), the former Tesco executive who became chair in 2024. Tarry has sought to restore the partnership’s focus on retail performance after several years of financial strain and cancelled staff bonuses.

The group is now pursuing an £800m investment programme aimed at revitalising its department stores, alongside a £1bn investment in its Waitrose estate of 320 shops. Recent initiatives include a high-profile partnership to bring Topshop concessions into John Lewis stores as it seeks to win back younger customers.

The build-to-rent strategy had originally been positioned as a way to unlock value from surplus Waitrose land and car parks while creating a more stable, long-term income stream less exposed to retail volatility.

However, the proposals were controversial from the outset. Local communities and planning authorities raised concerns over building heights, density and the proportion of affordable housing. Although several schemes ultimately secured planning approval, in some cases after appeals and intervention by government inspectors, the projects required significant upfront investment.

While John Lewis has not disclosed how much has been spent to date, it is understood that several million pounds were invested in design, planning and legal costs before the scheme was halted.

The withdrawal underlines the pressure facing retailers that diversified into property during the era of low interest rates. Higher borrowing costs have eroded returns on residential development, while construction inflation has increased project risk.

For John Lewis, the move signals a return to fundamentals after what some critics inside and outside the partnership viewed as a distraction from its core business.

With the cost-of-living crisis squeezing consumer spending and competition intensifying across both fashion and grocery, the partnership is betting that renewed focus on shopkeeping, rather than landlord ambitions, offers a clearer path to restoring profitability and rebuilding confidence among its employee-owners.

Read more:
John Lewis pulls plug on build-to-rent venture amid retail reset