Category: Uncategorized

Former business secretary Sir Vince Cable has called for a police and government investigation into the conduct of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor during his tenure as the UK’s trade envoy, following the release of US justice department files that appear to show he shared official and commercial information with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The newly released documents suggest that Andrew, who served as Britain’s special representative for international trade and investment from 2001 to 2011, forwarded UK government documents and commercially sensitive material to Epstein.
Sir Vince, who was secretary of state for business and trade during part of Andrew’s tenure, described the alleged behaviour as “totally unacceptable” and said the matter should be scrutinised by law enforcement authorities.
“We need a police or DPP check on whether criminal corruption took place and a government investigation into how this was allowed to happen,” he said.
Andrew has consistently and strenuously denied any wrongdoing.
According to the documents, in 2010 Andrew forwarded an email exchange concerning Royal Bank of Scotland and Aston Martin to a contact, David Stern, who subsequently passed it to Epstein. The correspondence reportedly included details about RBS restructuring plans and comments regarding its then chief executive, Stephen Hester, as well as references to internal tensions at Aston Martin.
It remains unclear whether the information originated directly from Andrew’s official role. At the time, RBS was majority-owned by the taxpayer following its financial crisis bailout. Andrew was also a customer of the bank and may have had separate dealings with management.
Further emails cited in the US files indicate that Andrew may have shared government visit reports relating to Vietnam, Singapore and China with Epstein. Separate correspondence suggests information about Iceland was passed from Treasury sources to banker Jonathan Rowland.
Under official guidance, trade envoys are bound by confidentiality obligations covering sensitive commercial and political information obtained during official visits.
Thames Valley Police confirmed it had consulted specialists at the Crown Prosecution Service regarding the allegations.
Labour MP Sarah Owens, chair of the women and equalities committee, said Andrew must answer questions from police and Parliament. Fellow Labour MP Rachael Maskell called for greater transparency and accountability, arguing that Andrew should be stripped of his remaining constitutional roles.
King Charles has previously expressed “profound concern” over allegations surrounding his brother. Buckingham Palace has said it stands “ready to support” police if requested.
The latest disclosures add to longstanding scrutiny of Andrew’s association with Epstein. Additional images released in the US document tranche have further intensified calls for him to testify in the United States.
The former duke recently relocated from his Windsor residence to the Sandringham estate in Norfolk as pressure surrounding the case continues to mount.
Read more:
Andrew’s time as trade envoy should be investigated, says Vince Cable

BrewDog has been put up for sale after the Scottish craft beer group appointed restructuring specialists to explore fresh investment and strategic options.
The Aberdeenshire-founded brewer has hired AlixPartners to oversee a structured process that could result in new investors coming on board or parts of the business being sold off.
Founded in 2007 by James Watt and Martin Dickie, BrewDog grew from a small Ellon-based brewery into an international brand with operations in the US, Australia and Germany, alongside around 60 bars across the UK. It currently employs approximately 1,400 people.
In a statement, the company said the decision followed “a year of decisive action” in 2025, including cost-cutting and efficiency measures, as it sought to strengthen its long-term sustainability in what it described as a challenging economic environment.
A BrewDog spokesperson said the appointment of AlixPartners was a “deliberate and disciplined step” aimed at evaluating the next phase of investment. The company added that it expected to attract substantial interest and that its bars and breweries would continue to operate as normal.
An internal email to staff said no decisions had yet been made and stressed that day-to-day operations would be unaffected while advisers reviewed strategic options.
The move comes after a turbulent period for the brewer. BrewDog reported a £37m loss last year and announced job cuts in October. Earlier this year it confirmed the closure of 10 UK bars, including its flagship Aberdeen venue.
Last month, the group halted production of its gin and vodka brands at its Ellon distillery as part of efforts to “sharpen” its focus on core beer operations.
In recent years BrewDog has frequently attracted headlines, both for bold marketing campaigns and for controversies over workplace culture. In 2024 it faced criticism after announcing it would no longer hire new staff on the real living wage, opting instead to pay the statutory minimum. Co-founder James Watt subsequently stepped down as chief executive, taking on a new role as “captain and co-founder”, while Martin Dickie exited the business last year for personal reasons.
AlixPartners declined to comment on the sales process.
The potential sale marks a significant turning point for one of Britain’s most recognisable craft beer brands, which once positioned itself as a disruptor to global brewing giants and attracted thousands of small-scale investors through its “Equity for Punks” fundraising scheme.
Read more:
BrewDog put up for sale as advisers explore break-up options

Ford Motor Company has been overtaken in global vehicle sales for the first time by Chinese electric car giant BYD, underscoring the dramatic shift under way in the global automotive industry.
Ford’s sales slipped 2 per cent last year to just under 4.4 million vehicles, while BYD sold 4.6 million, climbing to sixth place in the global rankings of car manufacturers.
The milestone is symbolic for an industry shaped by Ford’s legacy. Founder Henry Ford revolutionised mass car ownership with the Model T in the early 20th century. More than a century later, the company that defined industrial car production is being outpaced by a Chinese electric vehicle specialist.
BYD’s growth has been driven by its expanding portfolio of affordable, high-tech electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. Among its best sellers are the SEAL U DM-i and the Dolphin electric city car, priced at under £19,000 in some markets.
In contrast, Ford has scaled back lower-cost small cars in Europe, phasing out the Ford Fiesta during the pandemic and pivoting towards higher-margin SUVs and crossovers. Its entry-level Puma now starts at more than £26,000.
Ford’s sales in the US rose, but the company has lost ground in Europe and China — markets where electric competition is intensifying.
Felipe Munoz, an independent automotive analyst, said the trend was widely anticipated. “BYD is still in expansion mode. Even if sales in China slow, it’s relying on exports to grow,” he said.
“Ford, meanwhile, remains heavily dependent on the US, where growth is modest, and has only a minor presence in China. Europe is also stagnant. This divergence is likely to continue.”
Western carmakers, including Ford, have struggled to navigate the electric vehicle transition. In December, Ford took a $19.5bn (£14bn) charge to scale back EV production, citing weaker-than-expected demand.
Munoz said Ford’s electrification strategy was complicated by its exposure to North America. “North American consumers are not enthusiastic about electric cars, and government support has been inconsistent,” he said.
Ford has attempted to regain a foothold in China through a joint venture with Jiangling Motors, launching an all-electric version of its Bronco SUV. However, its Chinese market share has fallen from nearly 5 per cent a decade ago to less than 2 per cent today.
“Let’s see how the Bronco Electric performs,” Munoz said. “But so far, nothing significant has changed.”
Despite global challenges, Ford remains Britain’s third-largest car brand. According to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, it sold about 119,000 vehicles in the UK in 2025, representing a 5.9 per cent market share, an 8 per cent increase on the previous year.
BYD, while still smaller in the UK, is growing rapidly. It sold around 51,400 cars last year, achieving a 2.5 per cent market share, but with sales rising almost sixfold.
At the top of the global league table, Toyota retained its crown for the sixth consecutive year with sales of 11.3 million vehicles.
For Ford and other Western manufacturers, BYD’s ascent signals more than just a ranking shift, it reflects a deeper rebalancing of power in an industry increasingly defined by electrification, cost efficiency and Chinese technological ambition.
Read more:
Ford overtaken by BYD as China reshapes global car industry

Blue-blooded fund manager Schroders is set to be sold to American rival Nuveen in a £9.9bn deal that will end more than two centuries of independence and deliver another setback to the London Stock Exchange.
Nuveen, part of the Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America (TIAA), has agreed to acquire Schroders for 612p per share – a 34 per cent premium to the firm’s closing price of 456p. The transaction will create one of the world’s largest asset managers, overseeing around $2.5tn (£1.8tn) in assets.
The deal marks a historic turning point for Schroders, founded in 1804 by John Henry Schroder. The Schroder family still controls roughly 44 per cent of the company and is expected to receive at least £4bn from the sale. Family members Leonie Schroder and Claire Fitzalan Howard currently sit on the board.
Schroders’ chairman, Dame Elizabeth Corley, said London would “remain at the heart of this enlarged business” as the combined group’s non-US headquarters, despite the firm’s planned departure from public markets.
Executives said there were no plans for “material reductions” in headcount and that both Schroders and Nuveen would continue to operate as standalone brands following completion, which is expected by year-end.
Richard Oldfield, Schroders’ chief executive since November 2024, described the deal as a strategic response to industry pressures. “In a competitive landscape where scale can help deliver benefits, Nuveen is a partner that shares our values and respects the culture we have built,” he said.
William Huffman, chief executive of Nuveen, said the transaction would “unlock new growth opportunities for wealth and institutional investors” by broadening the firm’s global footprint.
Schroders has long been a fixture of the FTSE 100, but its growth has stalled amid structural changes in the asset management industry. Its share price fell to a decade low of 302p last April as investors shifted towards cheaper passive funds rather than paying higher fees for active stock-picking strategies.
The firm has also struggled to compete with US giants such as BlackRock and Blackstone, which have aggressively expanded into higher-margin alternatives such as private credit.
Although Schroders has pursued acquisitions in private markets, it has failed to translate those investments into sustained shareholder returns. Under Oldfield, the company embarked on a cost-cutting programme targeting £150m in savings.
Schroders’ departure from the London market adds to a growing list of high-profile exits from the UK exchange, intensifying concerns over the City’s ability to retain and attract major listed firms.
Nuveen said that any future relisting would likely involve a dual listing in London and another international exchange.
Headquartered in Chicago, Nuveen manages $1.4tn in assets, with a strong focus on the US market. The acquisition will be funded through cash and £3bn in debt.
For the City of London, the sale of one of its most historic financial institutions underscores the mounting consolidation pressures reshaping global asset management, and the shifting gravitational pull of capital markets towards the United States.
Read more:
City stalwart Schroders to be sold to US rival in £9.9bn deal

Tangible, a fintech platform focused on helping hardtech companies access and manage structured debt financing, has raised a $4.3 million seed round as it looks to modernise how capital-intensive businesses fund growth.
The round was led by Pale Blue Dot, with participation from MMC, Future Positive Capital, Unruly, SDAC, Prototype Capital and Aperture. The funding will be used to scale Tangible’s team and deepen automation across its platform.
Hardtech companies, spanning sectors such as energy, transport, advanced manufacturing and compute infrastructure, are increasingly seen as central to tackling some of the biggest macroeconomic challenges of the coming decades. BlackRock estimates that $68 trillion of new infrastructure investment will be required by 2040 to meet global demand.
Yet despite renewed interest in physical innovation, financing remains a major bottleneck. Traditional venture capital models often struggle to support asset-heavy businesses, which typically require large amounts of upfront capital. As a result, many early-stage hardtech companies rely on expensive equity funding to finance capital expenditure, increasing dilution and, in some cases, threatening long-term viability.
At the same time, private credit, now a $3.5 trillion market, is increasingly well positioned to meet this demand. However, deploying debt capital efficiently into hardtech remains complex and resource-intensive, particularly for lenders reliant on bespoke documentation and manual processes.
Tangible was founded to address this gap. Its AI-powered platform standardises the data, documentation and ongoing reporting required by lenders, reducing underwriting time and costs while enabling founders to run structured debt facilities without building in-house finance teams.
Hampus Jakobson, general partner at Pale Blue Dot, said: “Most of the innovations shaping the future, from vehicles and data centres to robotics, are fundamentally physical, and they shouldn’t be financed by venture equity alone. Tangible opens up new financing options for hardtech businesses, and we strongly believe in the team’s vision to bridge this structural gap.”
William Godfrey, co-founder and chief executive of Tangible, said demand for physical assets was accelerating as governments and businesses push reindustrialisation, energy security and technological sovereignty. “As hardtech companies scale at speed, investors need modern infrastructure to deploy capital just as fast,” he said.
“Legacy processes based on bespoke documentation and manual coordination no longer cut it. Tangible provides the financial infrastructure that makes hardtech easier to diligence for institutional credit, allowing companies to raise asset-backed financing faster and with less friction.”
The company said the new funding would support the build-out of automation across collaboration, diligence and reporting workflows, helping to reduce transaction costs and shorten time-to-close for both founders and lenders.
For hardtech firms facing mounting capital pressures, Tangible is positioning debt as a viable alternative to either heavy dilution, or failure.
Read more:
Tangible raises $4.3m seed round to unlock scalable debt finance for hardtech firms

Children are routinely exposed to adverts for weight-loss injections, diet products and cosmetic procedures online, according to a new report by Dame Rachel de Souza, who has called for tougher regulation of social media platforms.
The report, based on a survey of 2,000 children aged 13 to 17 alongside focus groups, found that young people were being “bombarded” with content promoting body transformation, despite restrictions on certain types of advertising.
Respondents reported seeing ads for weight-loss drugs and diet products, as well as skin-lightening treatments, some of which are illegal to sell in the UK. Others described beauty and cosmetic content, including promotions for lip fillers and aesthetic procedures, as “unavoidable” across major social media platforms.
Dame Rachel said the content was “immensely damaging” to young people’s self-esteem and urged ministers to consider a ban on targeted social media advertising to children.
“We cannot continue to accept an online world that profits from children’s insecurities and constantly tells them they need to change,” she said. “Urgent action is needed to create an online environment that is truly safer by design.”
The findings come amid the rollout of the Online Safety Act, which aims to make the internet safer for users, particularly children, by placing duties on platforms to remove harmful material quickly.
Dame Rachel’s report suggests amending the Act to introduce a clearer “duty of care” obliging platforms to prevent children from being shown body-image related advertising in the first place. She also recommended changes to Ofcom’s Children’s Code of Practice to explicitly protect young users from “body stigma” content.
Ofcom said such material is already covered under its existing code. “Body stigma content can be incredibly harmful to children, which is why our rules require sites and apps to protect children from encountering it and to act swiftly when they become aware of it,” a spokesperson said. The regulator added it would not tolerate technology firms “prioritising engagement over children’s online safety”.
The commissioner also called for stronger enforcement of rules governing the online sale of age-restricted products and suggested the government consider limiting children’s access to certain social media platforms altogether.
Dr Peter Macaulay, senior lecturer in psychology at the University of Derby, said restricting advertising to children was a necessary step but not sufficient on its own. “We also need stronger platform accountability, improved enforcement of age-appropriate design standards and better education to help children critically navigate online pressures,” he said.
A government spokesperson said ministers had always been clear that the Online Safety Act was “not the end of the conversation” and confirmed that a national consultation had been launched on further measures, including the possibility of banning social media use for under-16s.
The debate highlights growing concern among policymakers about the commercial drivers behind youth-facing content, as platforms face mounting pressure to demonstrate that their business models do not undermine children’s mental health.
Read more:
Children ‘bombarded’ with weight-loss drug ads online, commissioner warns

London-based Mozart AI has raised $6 million in an oversubscribed seed funding round led by Balderton Capital, as the startup looks to reshape how music is created in the age of artificial intelligence.
The fundraise follows a $1.1 million pre-seed round completed last summer, taking Mozart AI’s total funding to more than $7 million. The latest investment coincides with the launch of the company’s long-awaited mobile app and comes amid rapid early traction for its AI-powered “Generative Audio Workstation”.
Mozart AI is positioning itself as a creator-first alternative to legacy digital audio workstations, many of which have dominated music production since the 1990s. Its platform is designed to support everyone from professional producers refining chart-ready releases to bedroom musicians creating and sharing their first tracks online.
The company says more than 100,000 users signed up within two months of its beta launch in September, with over one million songs already created. Artists using the platform include producers and collaborators linked to A$AP Rocky, Avicii and Kodak Black, while some tracks created using the software have already surpassed 10 million streams on Spotify.
Alongside Balderton, the seed round attracted participation from Mercuri, EWOR and a group of high-profile angel investors including Eventbrite co-founder Kevin Hartz, Oscar-winning director Charles Ferguson and Frame.io founder Emery Wells.
The funding will be used to expand Mozart AI’s team, further develop its core technology and build on the viral momentum generated by its beta launch, ahead of a full public release.
Built by musicians, the platform combines traditional digital audio workstation functionality with AI-driven tools that assist rather than replace the creative process. Users can create music from scratch with AI support or generate tracks using prompt-driven “agentic” workflows.
Features include context-aware stem generation, real-time suggestions for MIDI progressions and drums, synth and effects creation, and the ability to remix sounds into new styles. Time-consuming production tasks such as quantisation and time stretching are handled automatically, while built-in video tools allow users to create and share music videos directly to social platforms.
Crucially, Mozart AI says artists retain full copyright over their work. The platform is built on commercially cleared third-party generative models, including those from ElevenLabs, which are trained exclusively on licensed material, enabling users to release and monetise their music without legal uncertainty.
Sundar Arvind, chief executive and co-founder of Mozart AI, said the company’s aim was to remove technical barriers without diluting artistic control. “Far from replacing creativity, AI is levelling up the adrenaline-filled process through which musicians compose and discover the right sounds,” he said. “We’re building toward a world where a spark of creativity can be turned into a release-ready, monetisable song in minutes.”
Industry figures echoed that sentiment. Ash Pournori, songwriter and former manager of Avicii, said the most successful AI music platforms would be those that empower rather than threaten artists. Meanwhile Umair Ali, producer for Kodak Black and Lil Baby, described Mozart AI as “an always-on sketchpad” that accelerates ideation without flattening the creative process.
Daniel Waterhouse, general partner at Balderton Capital, said the investment reflected a belief that AI tools must work with musicians, not against them. “Mozart AI enables artists to spend more time experimenting and iterating on ideas, rather than wrestling with clunky legacy software,” he said.
Founded by a team that blends musical and technical expertise, Mozart AI has moved from concept to premium product in less than a year. With fresh funding secured and a growing user base, the company is now betting that its artist-led vision can help define the next generation of music technology.
Read more:
Mozart AI raises $6m to put artists at the heart of AI-powered music creation

Plant-based drinks maker Oatly has lost a long-running legal fight over its use of the word “milk” in marketing, after the UK Supreme Court ruled that it cannot trademark or use the slogan “post-milk generation” in connection with dairy alternatives.
The case, brought by Dairy UK, centred on whether the term “milk”, which is protected under EU-derived food labelling rules still in force in the UK, can be used in a trade mark for plant-based products.
On Wednesday, the UK Supreme Court upheld an earlier Court of Appeal ruling that “milk” is a reserved term that can only refer to animal-derived products. Judges said the phrase “post-milk generation” could confuse consumers about whether Oatly’s products were entirely milk-free or merely contained reduced levels of dairy.
The decision reinstates the original position of the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO), which had refused Oatly’s 2021 trade mark application.
Oatly’s UK and Ireland general manager, Bryan Carroll, criticised the outcome, calling it “a way to stifle competition” that creates “an uneven playing field for plant-based products that solely benefits Big Dairy”.
Under the ruling, Oatly must cancel its UK trade mark registration for “POST MILK GENERATION” and cannot use the phrase to market dairy-free alternatives. However, because the regulation applies only to food products, the company is still permitted to sell pre-existing merchandise such as T-shirts bearing the slogan.
The dispute reflects a broader regulatory framework under which certain food designations, including milk, cheese, butter and yoghurt, are legally reserved for animal-derived products. Although the UK has left the EU, the relevant regulation continues to apply as “assimilated law”.
Richard May, partner at law firm Osborne Clarke, said the ruling confirms the UK’s alignment with EU standards. “The key principle is straightforward: if a product is not derived from animal milk, it cannot be marketed using reserved dairy designations such as ‘milk’ or ‘cheese’,” he said.
Laurie Bray, senior associate and trade mark attorney at Withers & Rogers, said the judgment was decisive. “It has taken the highest court in the land to decide once and for all whether a plant-based milk alternative can be branded as ‘milk’. The outcome is not what Oatly was hoping for,” she said.
Bray added that the ruling may prompt Dairy UK or its European counterparts to challenge Oatly’s EU trade mark registrations covering similar wording.
The case comes amid growing debate across Europe over the labelling of plant-based foods. Last year, the European Parliament voted to tighten rules on the use of terms such as “oat milk” and “veggie burger”, although the measures have yet to be formally adopted.
European farming groups argue that such terms mislead consumers and dilute established product definitions. Environmental campaigners and alternative protein producers, by contrast, have warned that overly restrictive labelling harms innovation and sustainability goals.
For UK plant-based brands, the Supreme Court’s decision sends a clear signal. While factual descriptors such as “dairy-free” remain permissible, the use of protected dairy terminology in branding or trade marks is likely to face legal challenge.
The ruling marks the end of a protracted dispute for Oatly, and underscores how regulatory definitions can shape the fast-growing plant-based food and drink market.
Read more:
Oatly loses ‘milk’ branding battle in UK Supreme Court

Ed Miliband has approved a sweeping expansion of renewable energy projects across the UK, backing solar farms that could cover an area of farmland close to the size of Manchester, alongside dozens of new onshore wind developments.
On Tuesday, the energy secretary awarded consumer-funded subsidies to 134 new solar farms across England and a further 23 in Wales and Scotland. He also approved 28 large onshore wind projects, mainly located on hillsides in Scotland and Wales.
Among the schemes given the green light is the vast West Burton solar farm on prime agricultural land on the Lincolnshire–Nottinghamshire border, as well as one of the UK’s most northerly solar developments on farmland in north Aberdeenshire. Miliband has also approved England’s largest onshore wind project in a decade, the 20 megawatt Imerys Wind Farm on a former mining site in Cornwall.
Under the government’s Contracts for Difference (CfD) regime, operators of the new projects will receive a guaranteed minimum price for the electricity they generate for up to 20 years after becoming operational, with the difference funded through levies on consumer energy bills.
The announcement was welcomed by renewable energy developers and industry groups, who argue that large-scale solar and onshore wind are among the cheapest ways to generate new electricity.
However, countryside and community campaigners warned that the decision risks long-term damage to farmland and rural landscapes.
Claire Coutinho, Labour’s shadow energy secretary, said the subsidies would ultimately raise household bills. “The true cost of this power, once you add in network charges and back-up, is far higher,” she said. “All this will do is make electricity more expensive, when what we need is cheaper power to support growth and living standards.”
The approvals include 4.9 gigawatts (GW) of solar capacity, 1.3GW of onshore wind and four experimental tidal schemes totalling 21 megawatts. They follow confirmation earlier this month of subsidies for 8.4GW of offshore wind capacity.
Campaign groups argue that the land impact of solar is being underestimated. Rosie Pearson, chair of the Community Planning Alliance, said: “This represents further destruction of countryside and best farmland while warehouse roofs, car parks and houses sit empty of solar panels. Add the pylons that accompany these schemes and rural areas are being industrialised.”
Based on previous developments, the solar farms approved could cover more than 40 square miles of mainly agricultural land, close to the size of Manchester, which spans about 45 square miles. The solar industry counters that improved panel efficiency could reduce the final land take to around 36 square miles, roughly equivalent to Stoke-on-Trent.
Concerns were also raised about the pace of onshore wind development in Scotland. Helen Crawford of the Highland Community Council Convention on Major Energy Infrastructure said communities were being left behind by planning decisions. “The lack of strategic spatial planning has created a democratic deficit between communities and policymakers,” she said.
Industry bodies rejected claims that the projects would push up costs. James Robottom of RenewableUK said new onshore wind would protect consumers from volatile gas prices, while Chris Hewett, chief executive of Solar Energy UK, described the approvals as “proof positive” that solar delivers the cheapest available power.
Miliband defended the decision, saying the expansion would strengthen energy security and cut bills over the long term. “By backing solar and onshore wind at scale, we’re driving bills down for good and protecting families and businesses from the fossil-fuel rollercoaster controlled by petrostates and dictators,” he said.
Under the latest CfD terms, new onshore wind farms will receive a minimum price of £75.50 per megawatt hour (MWh) in today’s prices, while solar projects will receive £68.17 per MWh. That compares with market prices of around £60 per MWh for electricity expected to be delivered in summer 2028.
The Office for Budget Responsibility has previously warned that CfD levies on consumer and business energy bills are projected to rise from £2.3 billion in 2024–25 to around £5 billion by 2030–31, intensifying the political debate over who ultimately pays for the UK’s clean energy transition.
Read more:
Miliband backs solar and wind projects covering farmland nearly the size of Manchester