# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A collection of study resources on competition policy - Any policy which seeks to promote competition & efficiency in markets and industries.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Water firms have been accused of exploiting their monopoly power and neglecting the environment.

The critcism comes from Environment Secretary Michael Gove, who said some firms had paid no tax and hidden their earnings offshore.

And he promised to back the regulator Ofwat in tightening up rules to protect bill-payers and the environment.

The industry body Water UK has yet to respond.

But Mr Gove's speech to a water industry conference must have made uncomfortable listening.

He complained that water firms had paid out almost all of their £18bn profits to shareholders, instead of re-investing it in mending leaks and protecting the environment.

And he named names: The boss of United Utilities taking home £2.8m a year; the head of Severn Trent, £2.4m.

The secretary of state said last year Anglian and Southern paid zero corporation tax, whilst Thames has paid no corporation tax for a decade.

He suggested: "Some of their best brains appear to be as intent on financial engineering as much as real engineering."

Mr Gove promised to back recommendations from the regulator Ofwat due to be published in April - and said he would not hesitate to increase the pressure.

He told the firms: "You may be private companies, but you have a responsibility to the public who can't take their custom elsewhere."

The politician complained that three billion litres of water still leak out every day - and said the figure has barely improved in the past four years.

He said there had been no investment in new nationally significant supply infrastructure, such as major reservoirs, since privatisation.

Craig Bennett from Friends of the Earth welcomed the comments but said Mr Gove could do much more himself to improve management of water.

"Defra are not doing enough," he told BBC News. "They are still allowing new houses on flood plains - and there is constant backsliding on the need to use water more efficiently."

Dr Matt Prescott from the Environmental Rating Agency told BBC News: "The environmental problems with the industry are a signal of financial problems

"We need effective regulation - it's clearly not happening at the moment. Politicians can't just have an obsession with bills."

Dr Prescott said that during the recent prosecution of Thames Water at Aylesbury Crown Court they found that the Environment Agency did not have direct access to independently sourced pollution monitoring data.

Instead, they had to rely on to water companies to self-monitor pollution levels discharged from sewage works.

"We think these forms of self-regulation should stop," he said.
Follow Roger on Twitter @rharrabin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Water firms have been accused of exploiting their monopoly power and neglecting the environment. The critcism comes from Environment Secretary Michael Gove, who said some firms had paid no tax and hidden their earnings offshore. And he promised to back the regulator Ofwat in tightening up rules to protect bill-payers and the environment.

# data[].attributes.headline
Broadband price to fall as Ofcom clamps down on BT

# data[].attributes.subject
Broadband price to fall as Ofcom clamps down on BT

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Become an FT Subscriber.

Gain a global perspective on the US and go beyond with curated news and analysis from 600 journalists in 50+ countries covering politics, business, innovation, trends and more.

Choose the subscription that is right for you

For 4 weeks receive unlimited Premium digital access to the FT's trusted, award-winning business news

MyFT - track the topics most important to you

FT Weekend - full access to the weekend content

Mobile & Tablet Apps - download to read on the go

Gift Article - share up to 10 articles a month with family, friends and colleagues

All the benefits of Digital plus:

Lex - our agenda setting daily column

In-depth analysis - on trade, emerging markets, M&A, investing and more

ePaper - a digital replica of the newspaper

Gift Article - share up to 20 articles a month with family, friends and colleagues

All the benefits of Premium plus:

The FT delivered to your home or office Monday to Saturday, including the FT Weekend paper and supplements

Learn more and compare subscriptions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Become an FT Subscriber. Gain a global perspective on the US and go beyond with curated news and analysis from 600 journalists in 50+ countries covering politics, business, innovation, trends and more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Donald Trump's announcement that the US would impose a 25% tariff on the imports of steel entering the US has shaken the stock market and rattled some of America's closest trading partners.

The President is expected to sign the order to impose the tariffs next week.

But for workers in America's steel industry, the decision was the fulfilment of a promise President Trump made to them during the 2016 election.

"Just like the American steel from Pennsylvania that built the Empire State Building, it will be American steel that will fortify America's crumbling bridges," President Trump said at a campaign rally.

But for some US steelworkers, the decision to act may already be too late.

Workers in limbo

Kimberly Allen may be one of them. For the last 23 years, she has worked 12-hour shifts at the Conshohocken steel mill in Pennsylvania.

It's a job that allowed her to provide for her son as a single mother and one that will be hard to replace if she loses it during two rounds of cuts set for April and August.

"I was able to build my house and provided a good lifestyle for my son, but now I'm in jeopardy of having to start all over again," she says.

The 47-year-old followed her father's footsteps when she entered the steel industry and was able to earn up to $75,000 (£54,500) some years.

In September 2017 the plant's owner ArcelorMittal announced it planned to idle the rolling mill and cut at least 150 of the 205 workers.

The mill will not be fully closed and the company could restart production if the prospects for US steel change.

"Right now we are in limbo," Ms Allen says.

Kemeen Thompson, president of the local union, said it was President Trump's promise to protect manufacturing jobs and tackle trade imbalances that convinced many union members to vote for him.

Pennsylvania is a traditional stronghold for the Democratic Party, but Donald Trump was able to win over many blue-collar workers who were a key to his victory in that state.

Like President Trump, Mr Thompson says his members aren't anti-trade they just want it to be more balanced.

"We're not saying don't trade, but it has to be fair trade," says Mr Thompson.

That's a sentiment often repeated by President Trump.

Many of the members, he says, are unprepared to look for jobs again. Most have worked in the Conshohocken steel mill for over a decade.

Chuck Hauer, a Trump-voter who has worked in the plant for nearly a quarter of a century, says the plant has seen dips and faced job cuts before, but not like this.

"This time was different. This time we were given a date and a hard number [for the job cuts]," he says.

The steel industry in the US directly employed just 140,000 people in 2015 according to the American Iron and Steel Institute.

The organisation, which represents US steel companies, was quick to heap praise on the White House's announcement.

Trade retaliation

But while the industry may now be breathing a sigh of relief others fear the tariffs could lead to a hike in the price of cars and construction. It could also lead to retaliation from other trading partners.

Imposing these steel tariffs could "erode the rules-based world trade system," according to Chad Bown, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

Countries are likely to challenge the US decision in international court arguing it violates World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, he says.

Most US steel imports come from Canada, Brazil and South Korea. President Trump and the US steel industry though has focused much of their blame on China.

Mexico, China and the European Union have all said they would consider punitive tariffs.

Among the EU's discussed targets for retaliation are bourbon from Kentucky and dairy from Wisconsin. Those states are home to the highest ranking members of the US congress.

These tariffs could also derail the renegotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and trade talks with South Korea.

"If you try to use trade restrictions here you won't hurt China you will hurt your friends," says Mr Brown.

Cheap metal

In 2005, China produced nearly a third of the world's steel. By 2017, it was nearer to half the global supply.

But as China's economy slowed and the amount of Chinese domestic construction dipped, so did local steel consumption. Prices of the metal have fallen for the past five years as excess supply in China weighted on the international market.

The US tariffs won't cause that oversupply to go away and workers in Conshohocken know that. For now, they are just grateful the US President has finally acted.

Chuck Hauer is doubtful the move will save his role, but he believes it will help the industry which he says is the "cornerstone of America".

For the wider US economy through a potential trade war could put the future of many more industries into limbo.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Steel tariffs - what impact will they really have?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Donald Trump's announcement that the US would impose a 25% tariff on the imports of steel entering the US has shaken the stock market and rattled some of America's closest trading partners. The President is expected to sign the order to impose the tariffs next week.

# data[].attributes.headline
College built to provide specific skills for Stansted

# data[].attributes.subject
College built to provide specific skills for Stansted

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The £11m Stansted Airport College, designed by Pascall+Watson, is the first on-site college of its kind at any major UK airport and is a joint venture between Harlow College and London Stansted. When the college opens in time for the 2018 autumn term, it will aim to boost the skills of students in the region and provide a pipeline of future talent for the airport and the 200 plus on-site companies.

The two-storey facility, located on a one acre site on land made available by the airport, has received two separate £3.5 million grants from the South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP) Local Growth Fund and Essex County Council, and is also supported by a £300,000 grant by Uttlesford District Council.

The college will welcome more than 500 students each year and offer courses designed to bridge the skills gap in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths) subjects as well as specific airport areas such as aircraft and airport engineering, business studies, logistics and supply chain management, asset management, hospitality and customer service.

The development of the college is critical to supporting Stansted's ambitious future growth plans and will provide skilled on-site workers and training opportunities for young people in the regional community surrounding the airport.

Climate Change and Industry Minister, Claire Perry, said:"Today we have launched our new, modern Industrial Strategy which aims to help young people develop the skills to do the high-paid, high-skilled jobs of the future.

"The new college here at Stansted is a prime example of our Industrial Strategy in action. Public and private sector working together to improve the skills of young people and delivering a pipeline of talent that will boost the local economy

Stansted Airport's Chief Operating Officer, Brad Miller, said: "Today is an exciting day for both the airport and the region and we are delighted that the Minister was able to join us all at London Stansted and witness first-hand the role this initiative will play in delivering the Government's Industrial Strategy.

"The Stansted Airport College is a great example of the private and public sector working together on behalf of our region to try to deliver part of the solution to a very real problem.

"As a rapidly growing and ambitious airport and employer of 12,000 people, it is vital for us to develop and retain the right talent and skills.

"The airport sits within an area of low unemployment so it can often be challenging for companies to fill vacancies across our site. The aim of the project is to help address the growing skills gap in engineering, hospitality and customer service across our region, develop talent and provide more opportunities for local people to join us as we play an ever more critical role in providing UK runway capacity over the next decade."

Karen Spencer, Principal and Chief Executive of Harlow College, said:"We are delighted to be working with London Stansted on the UK's first Airport College. Further Education Colleges are central to delivering high quality technical skills and improving the country's economic productivity. As a College, we firmly believe that working jointly with employers strengthens our curriculum and also provides a clearer line of sight to the workplace for young people. We genuinely believe our strapline - Not Just Courses, Careers."

Cllr Kevin Bentley, Essex County Council's Cabinet Member for Economic Growth, said: "We are very proud to have helped create this project to build an aviation college at Stansted Airport and we are thrilled to be a key funding partner in this unique venture which will make a great impact on the Essex economy. The college will be a valued and important training facility and will help bridge the technical and engineering skills gap in the county that are identified by the Essex Employment and Skills Board. Our investment supports our bold ambitions to achieve the best for our residents and we are committed to support them to achieve the skills and qualifications they need to reach their potential.

"Uttlesford district benefits from excellent transport links, both nationally and internationally, which offer businesses numerous and varied opportunities to reach a global clientele. Coupled with a growing local workforce, Stansted Airport College will help Essex to become one of the strongest and fastest growing economies in the UK."

Christian Brodie, Chairman of the South East Local Enterprise Partnership, said: "It is vital that we support key economic sectors and businesses like Stansted Airport and our further education providers such as Harlow College. The new college will help the airport access the skills it needs to boost productivity and at the same time generate local employment for our young people.

"For the Northern Powerhouse and Midlands Engine to succeed the Government must continue to invest in our area's infrastructure and skills. To support growth elsewhere in the country and help the Government deliver its Industrial Strategy we must have a strong South East, as it is here that drives the UK economy."

Cllr Vic Ranger, Uttlesford District Council's Cabinet Member for Communities & Partnerships, said: "The College will create an environment in which skills and training can be tailored to what employers need, and open up exciting opportunities and career paths for local young people. It will be the first Further Education College in Uttlesford and we are delighted to support such a trailblazing initiative."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Work begins on Stansted Airport's new technical college as Industrial Strategy is launched

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Minister of State for Climate Change and Industry, Claire Perry MP, was at London Stansted Airport yesterday (Monday) to see the start of the construction phase of the new on-site technical college and to also launch the Government's Industrial Strategy.

# data[].attributes.headline
UK’s new industrial strategy is a breakthrough moment

# data[].attributes.subject
UK’s new industrial strategy is a breakthrough moment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Become an FT Subscriber.

Gain a global perspective on the US and go beyond with curated news and analysis from 600 journalists in 50+ countries covering politics, business, innovation, trends and more.

Choose the subscription that is right for you

For 4 weeks receive unlimited Premium digital access to the FT's trusted, award-winning business news

MyFT - track the topics most important to you

FT Weekend - full access to the weekend content

Mobile & Tablet Apps - download to read on the go

Gift Article - share up to 10 articles a month with family, friends and colleagues

All the benefits of Digital plus:

Lex - our agenda setting daily column

In-depth analysis - on trade, emerging markets, M&A, investing and more

ePaper - a digital replica of the newspaper

Gift Article - share up to 20 articles a month with family, friends and colleagues

All the benefits of Premium plus:

The FT delivered to your home or office Monday to Saturday, including the FT Weekend paper and supplements

Learn more and compare subscriptions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Become an FT Subscriber. Gain a global perspective on the US and go beyond with curated news and analysis from 600 journalists in 50+ countries covering politics, business, innovation, trends and more.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why the UK’s industrial strategy is useless

# data[].attributes.subject
Why the UK’s industrial strategy is useless

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A friend of mine at university, when exams came round, liked to draw up a revision schedule.

He'd spend days crafting a document of beauty, choosing different colours for each subjects, carefully noting down his meals and breaks for leisure. Eventually, he was done, and ready to revise. Cue panic, as he realised how little time he'd got left. His detailed, honed plan would be discarded as he frantically tried to prepare.

I was reminded of my pal last week when the Government presented its industrial strategy. If ministers were hoping for a blizzard of favourable publicity they were disappointed: Prince Harry's engagement, announced the same day, swamped everything. Nevertheless, there were some approving nods.

It was long overdue; evidence of joined-up thinking, finally, in Whitehall; a blueprint for a new commercial dawn. All that is true. It looks smart, reads well, is full of certainty and promise. My student pal would certainly approve.

But like his timetable, will it really achieve anything? Ours is a country where to build just one runway at an airport has taken 24 years of argument, and the decision is still awaited. This, don't forget, is way before any soil is turned. It's a nation that has just one motorway running its length. The road is on one side, the west; on the other, in the east, there are major conurbations, and people and businesses have to make do with a two-lane highway and lots of roundabouts.

Getting resolution on anything, to the point where action results, is an interminable process. It's much easier churning out papers, making speeches and attending photo-calls, than rolling up sleeves and attempting to achieve real change.

Indeed, the strategy has a deja-vu feel. It's as if many of the platitudes we've heard down the years have all been harnessed in the single report. Nevertheless, what is new is that they've been put together at all, that someone understands that we must improve our infrastructure, equip children with the right skills, rebalance the economy, invest in technology, cut red tape, boost small to medium businesses and help them reach the next level, and more - and do them all together not piecemeal.

The fear is that this crafted, thought-through document will be consigned to a shelf, that it will languish, to be revisited the next occasion someone decides we ought to do something about our industrial make up. For it to begin to be enacted upon requires buy-in from politicians and civil servants, from the finance and investment communities, from planning authorities and regulators. It necessitates one person to be given total authority, to wrest the silo mentality that dominates so much of our thinking, and to impose their will over the vested interests of others.

There are some relatively short-term wins we could make. We have to start taking business seriously. That means a shift in attitude at Westminster, so the Business Secretary - who heads the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy - is afforded greater status, with a department that is regarded as pivotal and vital. For too long, the business brief has been kicked around, seen its title changed by successive prime ministers, given a job description invented on the hoof, and mandarins permanently in a state of flux. The Business Secretary and their officials should be granted coveted status, with the same over-riding power over the fragmented public service machine as the Chancellor and Treasury.

We must think local. While it's true that a project such as Heathrow expansion has barely crawled along, transformation has been accomplished elsewhere. Often, that progress is at a regional, localised level. Anyone doubting what can be achieved when people put their minds to it, and work together not against each other, only has to view the centres of Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool and Birmingham.

And we must go small. Banks have to lend to our fledgling enterprises, to assist them to grow and develop. We've no shortage of startups, but we have too many that fail within three years. Frequently, too, it's not just money, especially working capital, they desire, but advice on how to manage, and to market.

And digital. We should aim to be the world's first fully digital major economy. Instead of focusing all our energies, and funding, on the transport of people, which we know will lead to decades of wrangling, we should be pursuing the speedy and free transport of data for everyone, everywhere - with everything that entails, from installing cabling and towers, to writing industry standards to educating school pupils in coding and writing software.

But business has to help itself as well. Our attitude to money-making has been coloured by the greed and behaviour of some of those at the top of commercial life. They've poisoned the atmosphere so that any attempt to promote an enterprise culture, to argue for anything that is deemed to be "pro-business" is opposed and criticised. This has coloured our media and politics, meaning that initiatives are scrutinised through an "anti-capitalist" prism. Business has few friends, no one is listening and responding, and as a result, little gets done.

Producing an industrial strategy is a useful exercise, putting it into practice requires discipline and determination. Just look at my friend and his revision diary.
Chris Blackhurst is a former editor of The Independent, and executive director of C|T|F Partners, the campaigns and strategic communications advisory firm
Reuse content

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why the UK's industrial strategy is about as much use as a revision timetable

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A friend of mine at university, when exams came round, liked to draw up a revision schedule. He'd spend days crafting a document of beauty, choosing different colours for each subjects, carefully noting down his meals and breaks for leisure. Eventually, he was done, and ready to revise.

# data[].attributes.headline
Industrial Strategy to boost Productivity

# data[].attributes.subject
Industrial Strategy to boost Productivity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The government is to highlight five key areas where the UK needs to improve its performance when it reveals on Monday the details of a new industrial strategy designed to increase productivity.

Greg Clark, the business secretary, will announce the creation of an independent watchdog to monitor progress made in boosting innovation, upgrading infrastructure, increasing the level of workplace skills, ensuring that the strength of the City is reflected in funds for companies and spreading prosperity to all parts of the country.

A white paper to be published by Clark will also reveal that the government intends to set up long-term strategic deals in four sectors seen as having growth potential: construction, life sciences, automotive, and artificial intelligence.

New investment in the UK by the US-owned life sciences company Merck, known as MSD in Europe, creating 950 jobs, shows the benefits of the sort of partnership between Whitehall, the private sector and universities the government wants to create in its four sector deals, he will say.

"Our life sciences sector is one of the UK's fastest developing industries, with a turnover in excess of £64bn, employing 233,000 across the UK.

"MSD's commitment today, and the wider sector deal investment we have secured, proves the process outlined in the industrial strategy can give companies the confidence and direction they need to invest in the UK. It will ensure Britain continues to be at the forefront of innovation and represents a huge vote of confidence in our industrial strategy."

The white paper's focus on five core areas follows extensive consultation since the publication of a green paper at the start of the year. Clark believes the need for an industrial strategy has been made all the more pressing by last week's budget, in which the Office for Budget Responsibility halved its forecast of the UK's long-term productivity trend to 1%. The white paper will note that the need for the UK to seize available opportunities has been made more important by the Brexit vote.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, announced plans in the budget to raise UK spending on research and development from 1.7% to 2.4% of national income by 2027, a fillip to Clark's goal of fostering new ideas and turning them into commercial products. The government thinks extra spending on R&D could mean bout £80bn of additional investment in advanced technology in the next decade.

But Clark also wants the white paper to concentrate on some of the other factors he believes explain the gulf between UK productivity and that of countries such as Germany. In particular, he wants the white paper to focus on Britain's poor skills record, its under-investment in infrastructure and on narrowing the productivity gap not just between the south-east and the rest of the UK but also within regions themselves.

Clark has also been receptive to the idea proposed by the CBI that there should be an independent industrial strategy commission - based on the OBR model - to provide an objective assessment of progress towards the white paper's goals.

The paper will identify four grand challenges, global trends that the government sees as shaping the future: artificial intelligence; clean growth; an ageing society; and future mobility from driverless cars to drones.

Industrial strategy went out of fashion in the Conservative party after the defeat of the 1974-9 Labour government by Margaret Thatcher. But Clark believes a new approach based on competition rather than on picking winners will help address Britain's long-term problems.

The business secretary believes the government has a role to play in putting UK companies at the vanguard of the new wave of technologies such as robotics and genomics, but he also thinks the white paper can help improve productivity in more traditional sectors, such as food and drink.

"We are at one of the most important, exciting and challenging times there has ever been in the history of the world's commerce and industry," Clark will say.

"We are renowned for innovation and discovery, with some of the best universities and research institutions in the world producing some of the most inventive people on earth.

"We have commercial and industrial sectors - from advanced manufacturing to financial services; from life sciences to the creative industries - which are competitive with the best in the world.

"But any serious strategy should address the weaknesses that stop us achieving our potential, as well as our strengths, and this industrial strategy does that. Britain's productivity performance has not been good enough, and is holding back our earning power as a country.

"So this industrial strategy deliberately strengthens the five foundations of productivity: ideas, people, infrastructure, business environment and places."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
White paper to set out industrial strategy in bid to boost UK productivity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The government is to highlight five key areas where the UK needs to improve its performance when it reveals on Monday the details of a new industrial strategy designed to increase productivity.