Month: May 2025

Revolut, the UK’s most valuable fintech company, has selected Paris as its new European headquarters, announcing a €1 billion investment in France over the next three years as part of its continued European expansion.
The London-based digital bank confirmed it is applying for a French banking licence and will make the French capital its operational base for western Europe, creating over 200 new jobs, in addition to the 300 staff it already employs in Paris.
The move marks one of the biggest foreign investments in France’s financial sector in a decade and is being welcomed by French officials as a coup for Paris. Éric Lombard, France’s finance minister, said the decision strengthened “Paris’s position as the leading financial hub in Europe”.
While Revolut insists its UK operations will remain unaffected, the decision has sparked renewed debate over London’s post-Brexit competitiveness. With Revolut maintaining its global headquarters in London and stating that “no jobs will be relocated” from the UK, the company emphasised its “ongoing commitment to the UK market”.
Nonetheless, the timing of the announcement has intensified concerns in the Square Mile and Westminster, where there is growing anxiety that the capital is losing ground to global financial centres such as New York, Amsterdam, and now Paris.
Founded in 2015 by Nik Storonsky and Vlad Yatsenko, Revolut has grown into a $45 billion-valued fintech powerhouse, offering services including cross-border payments, currency exchange, and cryptocurrency trading. The company now boasts 55 million users, with more than 40 million in Europe, and employs over 10,000 people, including 1,300 in the UK.
Its pre-tax profits soared to £1.1 billion last year, and the company has ambitions to reach 100 million customers globally.
With its French banking licence underway and Lithuanian banking permissions already allowing operations across the EU, Revolut is focused on expanding its banking services across Europe. It also recently secured a long-awaited UK banking licence, paving the way for a UK retail banking launch.
The announcement adds further weight to speculation that Revolut will seek a stock market listing in the United States — a move that would be seen as a major blow for London’s IPO ambitions, especially given Revolut’s status as a symbol of Britain’s fintech strength.
Industry observers fear that if Britain’s most valuable start-up opts to float in New York, it could dissuade other fast-growing tech firms from listing on the London Stock Exchange, undermining government efforts to revitalise the UK capital markets.
Revolut’s Paris expansion is part of a wider post-Brexit trend of financial services firms increasing their European footprints to retain seamless access to EU markets. The company stressed that London remains central to its strategy, but the scale of investment and job creation in France is likely to raise eyebrows.
As Britain’s economic policymakers consider how to retain and attract global capital and talent, Revolut’s decision serves as a timely reminder of the high-stakes competition between financial hubs — and the delicate balancing act between global ambitions and domestic priorities.
Read more:
Revolut names Paris as European HQ with €1bn investment, raising fresh concerns for London

Paul Avins is not your average business coach. After 20 years at the coalface of entrepreneurial development, the CEO of Massive Action Coaching has helped over 550 companies scale past £1 million in revenue — with many reaching £5 million, £10 million, and even exiting for eight-figure sums. But if you think this is another motivational speaker peddling mindset clichés and Instagram aphorisms, think again.
“I’ve never believed in the guru model,” says Avins. “I don’t want clients to think their success is about me. It’s about what we build together.”
We’re sitting in a quiet corner of his office just outside Oxford just ahead of his third Scale-Up Summit, where his team – dubbed “Team Purple” – runs a suite of mastermind groups, scale-up summits and business retreats aimed at entrepreneurs ready to build what Avins calls “grown-up businesses.”
If that phrase sounds unusual, that’s because Avins has spent the better part of two decades redefining what it means to scale responsibly. He’s as likely to talk about mitochondrial health and hydrogen water as he is gross margin or AI automation — all in pursuit of creating high-performance entrepreneurs who don’t just burn bright and burn out.
Nine years ago, Avins suffered a life-threatening asthma attack that led to cardiac arrest. He flatlined for over four minutes. “I’d bought into the classic founder lie,” he recalls. “‘I’ll trade off my health while I build the business, and fix the rest later.’ But later doesn’t always come.”
That experience changed everything. Today, Avins speaks openly about burnout, the mental health cost of leadership, and the critical role of what he calls “founder fitness.”
“I started investing in my health the same way I’d invest in a marketing funnel. Your business can’t scale if the CEO is broken.”
His daily toolkit now includes red light therapy, IV vitamin drips, intermittent fasting and obsessive tracking using biometric wearables. “You’re not going to get to eight figures running on caffeine and chaos,” he says. “You need stamina, clarity, and a nervous system that isn’t fried.”
From “managing director” to “scale-up CEO”
But Avins’ sharpest insights aren’t just physiological — they’re psychological. His thesis is simple: to scale your company, you must first scale your identity.
“One of the biggest red flags I hear from business owners is, ‘I’m still putting out fires every day,’” he explains. “If you’re the one doing that, you’re not the CEO — you’re still the operator.”
He’s on a mission to eradicate the title of “Managing Director” altogether.
“It’s a disempowering title. It implies maintenance, not momentum. A scale-up CEO creates growth — they don’t get caught in the day-to-day.”
This isn’t just semantic. Avins runs the UK’s No.1 Scale-Up Mastermind, F12, where members report average growth of 300% in under 12 months. What’s different? Avins says it comes down to consistency, strategy, and community.
“The first thing I teach clients is this: what got you to £100k won’t get you to £1m. And what got you to £1m definitely won’t get you to £5m.”
He breaks the scale-up journey into distinct phases — each requiring a fresh set of tools, systems, and mental models. “People cling to the same tactics that got them early traction, but scaling is a different game. It’s about team, systems and culture — not hustle.”
That structured thinking is what’s made Avins a trusted mentor to CEOs across sectors — from e-commerce to education, healthcare to hospitality. The combined annual turnover of businesses in his masterminds is now close to £250 million.
But perhaps his biggest impact has been creating a genuine community of growth-minded leaders — people who cheer each other on, share vulnerabilities, and don’t posture or pitch.
“I’ve been to a lot of events full of ego and posturing. Ours aren’t like that,” says Carly Myers, one of Avins’ newest collaborators. “People walk into his world and feel seen, supported and challenged.”
That spirit is most alive at Avins’ flagship event: the Scale-Up Summit. Now in its third year, the two-day event in May brings together ambitious entrepreneurs, practical educators, and unexpected talent — including a robotic artist who recently sold work for £1m at Sotheby’s.
“We don’t do the bait-and-switch stuff. No one’s being pitched a £25k course every hour,” says Avins. “You come to learn, to grow, and to meet people who’ll expand your world.”
Why most advice fails to scale
He’s wary of generic business advice — the “just follow these five steps” school of thought that permeates social media.
“The truth is, the strategy to get from £0 to £100k is totally different from getting to £1m — and then to £5m, and so on,” he says. “There’s no universal formula. There’s just the right move at the right time, for the right business.”
So what are the constants? For Avins, there are three: consistency, evolving your strategy, and surrounding yourself with the right people.
“Entrepreneurship is lonely. At two in the morning, when payroll’s due and a supplier’s dropped out, who do you call? That’s why we built this community.”
His masterminds regularly include six- and seven-figure founders helping each other navigate global expansion, team challenges and industry disruption. “Sometimes a five-minute conversation in the bar saves you five months of stress,” he says.
Despite his aversion to hype, Avins has no shortage of ambition. He describes himself as a strategist, but also a sherpa — someone who’s climbed the mountain and knows how to help others ascend safely.
“I tell people: you don’t climb Everest on your first go. Start with a smaller mountain, build your muscle, and scale from there.”
And when the going gets tough?
“Hold the vision, do the work,” he says. “Your job is to look up and keep the dream alive — while doing the work to become the person who can achieve it.”
Whether it’s a retreat in Spain or a two-day summit in London, Avins creates environments of deep transformation. “The best ideas happen when you step out of your routine and into a room where everyone’s thinking bigger.”
It’s why he places such value on in-person events, even in a digital-first world.
“You don’t know who you’re going to sit next to — but they might just change your life,” he says.
Paul Avins may be one of the most trusted names in scale-up coaching, but what sets him apart isn’t just his track record — it’s his refusal to put himself at the centre of the story.
“I’m not here to build a cult of personality,” he says, matter-of-factly. “I’m here to help people build businesses that last — and lives they love living.”
That’s what he calls real success. And in a noisy world of business bravado, it’s a message worth hearing.
Read more:
‘My job is to grow this, not run it’: Paul Avins on why scale-up success starts with identity

British exporters have voiced deep frustration over post-Brexit border checks, blaming unclear customs guidance, rising costs, and poor communication from HMRC for supply chain delays and growing operational stress.
A new report commissioned by HMRC and carried out by Ipsos offers one of the first detailed “warts and all” appraisals of the UK’s border processes since leaving the EU. The study, based on interviews with 35 traders and freight agents, found that while most reported goods movements to be “generally smooth”, many also described the system as costly, opaque and emotionally draining for staff.
“It gets to staff”: cost and confusion on the frontlines
Several businesses described being left in the dark when their goods were stopped at the border, with no clear information on who to contact or how to resolve the issue.
“One member of staff told me he doesn’t want to work in this area as he ‘can’t stand the stress of it all’ — it really gets to staff,” said one large exporter.
The financial impact of delays was also severe. A medium-sized export agent said: “If you have issues, there’s usually a financial penalty. Storage fees escalate quickly. A single £600 fine can wipe out all your profit on a job.”
Several traders said it was difficult to find accurate contact information for HMRC, with one small agent describing the process of resolving issues as “painful” and saying: “They won’t speak to us. Even finding the right email required speaking to three different people — and then it just went to Border Force, not even the relevant desk.”
Border-related delays and red tape have led to logistical uncertainty, making it harder for companies to plan transport schedules and fulfil delivery commitments.
From hiring additional drivers to covering fines for missed delivery windows, businesses are now facing a post-Brexit trade landscape riddled with hidden costs and inefficiencies.
Despite the pain points, a number of traders noted improvements in recent months. One said, “It was mayhem after Brexit, but recently, it’s been a lot better.” Another added, “It might have just slowed things down ever so slightly every now and again.”
However, William Bain, Head of Trade Policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, warned that the Ipsos interviews were conducted before full UK import controls came into force, including physical checks on food and plant products.
“Customs and border processes remain a daily pain point. That’s why we’re urging the UK-EU leaders’ summit to agree on a robust agri-food deal and to scrap safety and security declarations in both directions,” Bain said.
Such reforms, Bain argues, could simplify border processes for both UK and EU businesses — especially SMEs that lack the resources to navigate complicated customs regimes.
In a statement, HMRC said: “Businesses told us moving goods across the border was generally a smooth process. We’ll continue to use feedback to streamline procedures, improve guidance, and support the flow of legitimate goods. We’re committed to simplifying customs and reducing burdens while maintaining effective checks.”
Still, as full post-Brexit customs protocols continue to roll out, many businesses feel unprepared and under-supported. A large exporter summed up the mood:
“We get customer complaints due to border delays — but we get loads of complaints about loads of things.”
Read more:
‘HMRC won’t speak to us’: exporters frustrated by post-Brexit border checks and red tape

Inflation in the UK is forecast to accelerate sharply this month, with figures due next week expected to show the steepest monthly rise since October 2022, as households absorb a fresh wave of bill increases.
City analysts predict that the Office for National Statistics (ONS) will report inflation climbing to 3.6% in April, up from 2.6% in March — marking the largest month-on-month jump in more than two years.
This surge is being driven by widespread increases to energy and water bills, alongside rising employer payroll costs, higher minimum wages, and other administrative charges introduced at the start of the new financial year.
In April, Ofgem raised the energy price cap by 6.4% to £1,849, while the average annual household water bill rose by 26% (£123) to £603 — both major contributors to the expected inflation jump.
Sanjay Raja, chief UK economist at Deutsche Bank, forecast inflation to reach 3.4%, citing “historically large increases in energy and water bills” and additional inflationary pressure from changes to council tax, vehicle excise duty, and air passenger duty.
“Index-linked and administrative bills will be on the rise,” said Raja. “A later than usual Easter will also add to price momentum.”
Asset manager Investec anticipates a 3.3% reading, noting that the rise “will not come as a surprise to the Bank of England.” Economists expect several Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) members to comment on the data next week.
While global energy prices have eased, and the pound has strengthened against the dollar — lowering the cost of imports — domestic pressures are intensifying.
From April 6, businesses have faced a £25 billion rise in employers’ national insurance contributions, alongside a 6.7% increase in the minimum wage — both policies introduced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in last year’s October Budget.
These increases are expected to hit sectors such as retail, leisure, and hospitality, which employ large numbers of low-paid and part-time workers.
Analysts at Pantheon Macroeconomics echoed these concerns: “Payroll tax hikes and the minimum-wage increase that kicked in at the start of April are likely to be the perfect excuse for a range of firms to jack up prices.”
Raja also suggested price increases could filter into cultural services, including concerts and gallery admissions, noting the Bank of England previously estimated that the NIC changes would add 0.2 percentage points to inflation.
Despite the near-term spike, inflation is forecast to hover around 3% for the rest of 2025. Investors still expect the Bank of England to deliver two further quarter-point interest rate cuts before the year ends, following cuts in February and May, which brought the base rate to 4.25% — its lowest level in over two years.
While short-term pressures remain, the overall inflation trajectory is expected to stabilise. However, policymakers will need to weigh the impact of domestic fiscal changes and global trade tensions — including tariff uncertainty following President Trump’s policies — as they navigate the path toward sustainable growth and price stability.
Read more:
UK inflation set for sharp rise in April after surge in household bills

Dame Amanda Blanc, chief executive of Aviva, has warned that giving the government power to force pension funds to invest in UK assets would be a serious misstep, describing such a move as “a sledgehammer to crack a nut”.
Speaking on Thursday, Blanc insisted that defined contribution pensions must be invested in the best interests of individual savers, and that any effort to compel schemes to allocate capital to specific UK assets would risk undermining that principle.
Her comments come amid rising tensions between the Treasury and the pensions industry over the Mansion House Accord, a voluntary agreement signed this week by 17 of the UK’s biggest workplace pension providers, including Aviva, Legal & General, Aegon, and Phoenix.
Under the accord, providers committed to allocating at least 10% of their default pension funds to private markets by 2030, with half of that—around £25 billion—going into UK-based assets such as infrastructure, start-ups, and other private investments.
While the Treasury estimates the pledge could generate £50 billion in new investment, it has emerged that a forthcoming review may recommend the government be given powers to mandate asset allocations if providers fail to meet their targets.
Blanc pushed back firmly on the proposal: “Mandation, we do not believe, is the right thing. The government needs to consider the unintended consequences. There is a whole chain of people—employee benefit consultants, employees, workers—who need to change behaviour, not just pension funds.”
“It’s like a sledgehammer to crack a nut. You have to be able to get everybody on board to do the right thing.”
The warning highlights growing unease in the pensions industry that government intervention could conflict with trustees’ fiduciary duties, potentially forcing them to make investment decisions that are not in the best interest of scheme members.
While Chancellor Rachel Reeves has said she does not believe mandation is necessary, she has notably refused to rule it out, telling reporters earlier this week: “I’m never going to say never, but I don’t think it’s necessary.”
That ambiguity has provoked a backlash from several key signatories to the Mansion House Accord, including Royal London, Aon, and Mercer, who argue that pension funds must retain autonomy to invest in a way that best serves savers.
Under the voluntary scheme, pension funds made it clear their commitments are conditional—subject to fiduciary duty and reliant on government and regulatory action to remove barriers to private market investment.
The debate is playing out as the government seeks ways to mobilise long-term domestic capital to drive economic growth and support national priorities. But industry leaders warn that undermining the independence of pension funds could backfire.
Blanc made her comments as Aviva reported strong Q1 trading, with general insurance premiums rising 9% year-on-year to £2.9 billion. The company is currently navigating a £3.7 billion takeover of Direct Line, and the Competition and Markets Authority confirmed it has launched a preliminary inquiry. Blanc said the inquiry was expected and would not delay the deal, which is set to complete mid-year.
As the Treasury prepares to publish its pensions investment review, Blanc’s comments are likely to be influential in shaping the debate—and may increase pressure on the government to steer clear of making investment in UK assets a legal requirement.
Read more:
Aviva warns against forcing UK pension funds to buy domestic assets

Gold prices are on course for their sharpest weekly decline in six months, weighed down by a stronger US dollar and renewed optimism following a de-escalation in US-China trade tensions.
Spot gold slipped 0.8% in early trading on Friday to $3,213.56 per ounce, bringing total losses this week to 3.3% — the worst weekly performance for the precious metal since November 2024.
While gold has still gained 22% year-to-date, largely driven by investor anxiety over President Trump’s fluctuating import tariff policies, easing geopolitical tension has prompted traders to reduce exposure to safe-haven assets. The metal hit a record high above $3,300 an ounce just four weeks ago.
Meanwhile, the US dollar has gained 0.4% this week and is on track for a fourth consecutive weekly gain, supported by resilient economic data and shifting expectations around the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policy.
“Gold prices faced heavy selling pressure this week as markets cheered a de-escalation in the US-China trade war,” said Ilya Spivak, head of global macro at Tastylive.
Earlier this week, the US and China agreed to temporarily reduce tariffs imposed in April, boosting investor sentiment. Data from the US also showed softer-than-expected producer prices and a slowdown in retail sales, while consumer inflation in April rose less than forecast.
Gold, typically favoured in periods of low interest rates and uncertainty, saw reduced demand as traders interpreted the data and diplomatic thaw as signs of stabilisation.
Still, analysts say gold continues to enjoy strong structural support.
“On the plus side, gold price dips continue to attract buyers,” noted Tim Waterer, chief market analyst at KCM. “That shows the precious metal remains a favoured asset, with the global growth and inflation outlooks still looking rather murky.”
In contrast, Bitcoin surged past $100,000 this week, rebounding more than 25% from last month’s six-month low of $76,000, as risk appetite returned to markets.
While gold’s current correction may reflect improved short-term sentiment, macroeconomic clouds — including uncertain trade dynamics, persistent inflation risk, and central bank policy shifts — continue to keep the outlook mixed for both precious metals and global markets.
Read more:
Gold set for steepest weekly drop in six months as trade fears ease and dollar strengthens

The government’s long journey to exit its crisis-era investment in NatWest is nearly complete, after the Treasury disclosed on Thursday that its stake in the bank has dropped below 1% — a symbolic threshold that signals the near-final chapter in the UK’s biggest banking bailout.
The latest stock exchange filing revealed that the Treasury now owns just 0.9% of the FTSE 100 lender, down from 1.98% at the end of April, following steady sell-downs in recent months through a managed trading plan. The strategy — in place since 2021 — gradually releases shares into the market, and is expected to fully unwind the government’s holding within weeks.
NatWest, formerly known as Royal Bank of Scotland Group, narrowly avoided collapse during the 2008–09 financial crisis, when it was rescued with a £45.5 billion bailout, leaving taxpayers with an 84% stake in the institution. The scale of the rescue made it one of the most prominent symbols of the crisis, and its return to private hands marks a defining moment in the clean-up operation.
Successive governments have chipped away at the holding since George Osborne launched the first sell-off in 2015. However, all share disposals have crystallised losses for taxpayers, with the stock consistently trading below the 502p per share average bailout price. NatWest shares closed at 498p on Thursday, up 1%, bringing them within touching distance of breakeven.
Despite the losses, the government’s exit removes the final legacy of the UK’s sweeping financial rescue programme. Previous bailouts of Lloyds Banking Group, Northern Rock, and Bradford & Bingley have already been wound down, with Lloyds fully privatised in 2017.
The return to full private ownership comes as NatWest CEO Paul Thwaite sharpens the bank’s growth strategy. In recent months, the group has acquired most of Sainsbury’s banking operations and a £2.5 billion mortgage portfolio from Metro Bank. Thwaite also made an ambitious — but unsuccessful — move to acquire Santander’s UK high street operations.
A NatWest spokesperson welcomed the progress: “Returning the bank to full private ownership is an ambition we share with the government, and one that we believe is in the interests of all our shareholders.”
The Treasury’s remaining shares are being offloaded quietly into the market, avoiding large, disruptive block sales. Once complete, the government’s departure will mark the end of a 16-year journey that saw NatWest shrink dramatically, restructure under four chief executives, and steadily rebuild its reputation and balance sheet.
With the UK government poised to finally close the book on one of the most turbulent chapters in British banking history, NatWest is now firmly focused on its future — and proving it can thrive in a fully privatised environment.
Read more:
NatWest nears full reprivatisation as taxpayer stake falls below 1%

HM Revenue & Customs has issued its first tax avoidance Stop Notices to an individual, ordering Paul Baxendale-Walker, a struck-off solicitor and former barrister, to cease promoting two schemes deemed abusive and artificial by the tax authority.
In a landmark move, HMRC confirmed that these Stop Notices mark the first time the orders have been issued to an individual rather than a company, underscoring the government’s intent to clamp down on tax avoidance regardless of how schemes are structured.
The two arrangements, promoted by Mr Baxendale-Walker, involve offshore trusts and complex structures designed to allow users to access their funds while avoiding tax. HMRC has assessed these as schemes without genuine business purpose, aimed solely at exploiting tax loopholes.
Jonathan Smith, HMRC’s Director of Counter Avoidance, said: “The courts have already concluded that Mr Baxendale-Walker designed and sold multiple tax avoidance schemes that don’t work as claimed. These Stop Notices send a clear message: we will use every tool at our disposal to protect public finances from tax avoidance.”
The notices were issued under the government’s strengthened anti-avoidance framework, which forms part of a broader strategy to close the tax gap and protect funding for vital public services.
Tax avoidance Stop Notices are formal legal orders requiring the recipient to immediately cease the promotion of specific schemes. Failure to comply can lead to significant financial penalties or even criminal prosecution.
Mr Baxendale-Walker, who has previously been the subject of legal action and enforcement proceedings related to tax avoidance, is now barred from marketing or facilitating these two specific schemes.
The schemes in question have now been added to HMRC’s list of tax avoidance arrangements subject to Stop Notices, which is available to the public on GOV.UK.
HMRC is calling on the public and professional advisers to report any continued promotion of these schemes. Anyone aware of Mr Baxendale-Walker continuing to market them is urged to contact the department via its website.
Individuals who believe they may have used a tax avoidance scheme — whether promoted by Baxendale-Walker or others — are advised to contact HMRC immediately by emailing: CAGetHelpOutOfTaxAvoidance@hmrc.gov.uk
This move represents a significant step in the government’s ongoing effort to combat aggressive tax planning and signals that individual promoters, not just companies, are now firmly in HMRC’s sights.
Read more:
HMRC issues first individual tax avoidance Stop Notices to former solicitor Paul Baxendale-Walker

Fossil fuel giants, luxury travel users, and shareholders profiting from polluting industries could be forced to contribute directly to climate resilience measures under a new bill to be introduced in Parliament on Thursday.
The Climate Finance Fund (Fossil Fuels and Pollution) Bill, tabled by Labour MP Richard Burgon, calls for the creation of a dedicated fund to finance flood defences, home insulation programmes, and other climate-related protections. It proposes new levies on oil and gas firms, capital gains and dividends from polluting industries, and high-emission luxury activities including superyachts and private jets.
“Fossil fuel giants have driven us to the cliff edge of climate catastrophe,” said Burgon. “They’ve made obscene profits while millions suffer the consequences. It’s only right that those most responsible for the crisis fund the urgent climate action needed, both at home and abroad.”
Though the bill stands little chance of becoming law as a private member’s motion, it marks the start of a broader campaign inside and outside Parliament to mobilise public and political support for a “polluter pays” approach to climate finance.
The proposal comes amid mounting concerns over the politicisation of net zero policy, particularly following the local electoral success of Reform UK, which has openly criticised climate initiatives as unfair to lower-income households. Yet polling commissioned by Global Witness and conducted by More in Common suggests significant cross-party support for making major polluters contribute more.
According to the survey, two-thirds of UK adults are concerned about increasing damages from climate change, and 70% of Reform-leaning voters support higher taxes on fossil fuel firms and other high-emitting businesses.
Flossie Boyd, senior campaigner at Global Witness, said the findings challenged assumptions about climate scepticism: “Despite Reform leaders’ vocal opposition to climate action, the poll reveals most Reform-leaning voters are worried about climate change and want to see the firms and individuals most responsible taxed more.”
The bill also proposes the removal of fossil fuel subsidies, and would expand existing taxation frameworks to include dividends, capital gains, and luxury emissions. These funds would be ringfenced for domestic and international climate adaptation efforts, such as preparing communities for flooding, extreme weather events, and rising sea levels.
Louise Hutchins, campaigns director at Stamp Out Poverty, said: “There’s huge public support for making big polluters pay up for the climate damage they’ve caused. When five oil and gas corporations made over $100 billion in profits in 2024, it’s time ministers started looking to those responsible.”
The push for a dedicated climate damage fund comes as the UK government faces key decisions about future climate finance commitments, both domestically and internationally. While Chancellor Rachel Reeves has reaffirmed her government’s commitment to net zero, the path to paying for it — and who foots the bill — remains politically charged.
With growing voter appetite for fairer funding mechanisms and sustained pressure from civil society groups, the “polluter pays” campaign may yet gain further political traction in the run-up to the next general election.
Read more:
MP launches bill to make polluters pay for climate damage and resilience