Britain's carmakers to get £2.5 billion boost to help transition to electric
Britain's car makers will get a £2.5 billion government boost to help them transition to building electric vehicles - and supporting thousands of manufacturing jobs.
The cash will be distributed through competitions over 10 years, where companies can bid for support for a range of projects from start up prototypes to huge gigafactories.
The aim of the DRIVE35 project is to keep British manufacturing and the supply chain that supports it competitive as the industry shifts to zero-emissions vehicles.
"We're helping British carmakers get to the front of the pack by working hand in hand with investors to build a globally competitive electric vehicle supply chain in the UK,' Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told the Sunday Mirror.
The money will be spent in two parts - £2 billion to support car factories, battery plants and startups by 2030, with a further £500m for research and development to be spent by 2035.
'We're taking action to back the industry for the future with the biggest set of announcements for the sector in the last decade,' Mr Reynolds added.
'This includes securing a landmark trade deal with the US to bring down tariffs for British car manufacturers, measures in our modern Industrial Strategy to lower electricity prices and updating the [zero-emissions vehicle] mandate, supporting UK manufacturers to safeguard jobs, and secure the future of the sector."
The automotive industry added £21.4 billion to the UK economy in 2024, and currently employs 132,000 people.
The UK was also the biggest electric vehicle market in Europe the same year - and the third in the world with over 382,000 EVs sold – up a fifth on the previous year.
The UK's Zero Emission Vehicles mandate requires car manufacturers to sell an increasing share of electric cars every year, with the goal of eliminating the sale of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030.
New hybrids will still be allowed to be sold until 2035.
Mike Hawes, Chief Executive of the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), the car industry's trade association, said: 'The creation of this dedicated automotive programme is further evidence of the sector's importance to economic growth.
'Delivered as part of the Industrial Strategy, DRIVE35 has the potential to unlock investment and innovation in the UK, supporting jobs and creating wealth across the country.
'The importance of a long term, cross-government strategy with specific measures for automotive cannot be understated given the challenges facing the sector amid geopolitical uncertainty and fierce global competition.
'DRIVE35, and the wider measures identified in the Industrial Strategy, must now be implemented at pace to ensure the UK is amongst the leaders in next generation automotive technologies.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
From freezers to browsers: What these five Chinese car brands did before they made cars
One in 10 cars sold in Britain last month were made in China, latest figures from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders show. In the past week, three car makers hailing from China have announced they will launch in Britain. But this new period of automotive brings a lot to debate - price wars, the threat of cheap EVs, and security issues for starters. And another gripe people have with new Chinese car makers is many aren't actually car makers. Instead, many are tech brands masquerading as car companies. As opposed to legacy European brands like Audi, Mercedes-Benz and Volkswagen, these new Chinese companies don't have automotive histories going back over a hundred years. Instead many of them have technology-based roots or in some cases, even more unusual beginnings. We've dug into the pasts of four of China's automotive powerhouses to get to know them a bit better. And we've looked into a fifth that bucks the technology trend, standing proud as a car maker that has always and only made cars. Geely - from fridge parts to EVs... How it started: Geely's origins have a colder start, as the automotive powerhouse began life as a refrigerator parts manufacturer. In 1986, Eric Li founded Huangyan Refrigerator Parts in Taizhou City in the Zhejiang Province of China. For eight years it made refrigerators, freezers and construction and decorative materials. Then in 1994 Huangyan Huatian Motorcycles Factory was established – the predecessor of Geely and the Geely trademark was registered. It wasn't until 1997 that Geely entered the automotive industry. It wanted to produce affordable cars for those on tight budgets, and in doing so it became China's first privately-owned auto manufacturer. How it's going: In 2002, Geely entered into China's top 10 automakers, and by 2010 was in a position to acquire Volvo. Taking 100 per cent of the shares of Volvo Car Corporation from Ford, Geely started its Western expansion and quickly snapped up 51 per cent of Lotus in 2017, and 9.69 per cent of Daimler AG (Mercedes-Benz owner) in 2018. Thanks to these acquisitions Geely Auto was the first Chinese car brand to sell one million vehicles. In 2024, Geely achieved record-breaking sales of almost 2.2 million vehicles – a 34 per cent year-on-year increase. Sales outside China increased 21 per cent year-on-year, to almost 1.22 million units. And electrified sales grew over 52 per cent to almost 45 per cent of aggregate sales. Geely will debut under its own name in Britain with the arrival of its EX5 SUV towards the end of the year. BYD – mobile phone batteries to the world's biggest EV maker How it started: BYD was founded in November 1994 by Wang Chuanfu, a Chinese chemist and entrepreneur. He wanted to compete against expensive Japanese battery manufacturers and become a world leader in energy generation, energy storage and rechargeable batteries. In 1996, BYD began manufacturing lithium-ion batteries for modern day smartphones, just as there was a boom in the devices. Throughout the early 2000s, BYD supplied batteries to Motorola and Nokia - at the time two of the biggest players in the mobile phone industry. In 2003, BYD was in the position to sidestep into the automotive industry, acquiring a small car maker called Xi'an Qinchuan Automobile. It's first combustion car, the F3, arrived in 2005, before releasing the plug-in hybrid F3DM in 2008. Warren Buffet invested 10 per cent ($230million) and BYD became famous. BYD really took off when it introduced its lithium-ion Phosphate Blade battery in 2020 which increased space utilisation by 50 per cent and delivered a range boost also of up to 50 per cent. How it's going: BYD began exporting outside China in 2010. By 2024, it reached an annual overseas sales figure of 417,204 units – a 71.86 per cent increase on 2023. By 2030, BYD aims to sell half its cars outside its native land. In 2024, BYD sold 4,272,145 vehicles globally, marking a substantial increase from 427,302 in 2020. As of March 2025, BYD's sold 11.6 million EVs to date. Tesla on the other hand – who used to be the biggest EV maker in the world - has sold 7.5 million EVs. China's Geely, the owner of Volvo, Polestar and Lotus, is the third biggest EV manufacturer in the world, and yet has just 1.4 million EVs comparatively. BYD is now the largest electric car maker in the world after dethroning Tesla in 2023. Xpeng – search browsers to AI cars How it started: Xpeng is core of the tech-to-car Chinese movement, as it was founded in 2014 as a smart driving technology company. It wanted to redefine the driving experience and use artificial intelligence to craft its EVs. Why did it have this angle? Because it was created by He Xiaopeng, a self-made tech trailblazer who built UCWeb – China's most popular mobile browser. He sold it in 2014 to Alibaba for $4.3billion before pivoting to automotive after being inspired by Tesla and sustainable transport. In 2017, Xpeng revealed its first model, the Xpeng G3, an electric SUV, with deliveries commencing in 2018. Then in 2020 it launched the P7, which made headlines for its AI driving mode. This year Xpeng officially launched in the UK with the G6 all-electric coupe SUV which costs from £39,990. XPeng says 'it is a technology company at heart' and wants to use technology to transform the future of mobility – from road EVs to ones that fly. In this way it is fully embracing its technology origins, not trying to shy away or downplay them. How it's going: In the first half of 2025 Xpeng delivered 197,189 vehicles, already topping its total deliveries for last year which stood at 190,068 vehicles. It's a year-on-year increase of 279.01 percent and marks the eight consecutive month since November 2024 that Xpeng's deliveries have exceeded 30,000 units. As of June XPeng has entered over 40 countries and regions globally and has set itself a goal that half of future sales coming from overseas markets. Its cumulative sales to date tally up to 752,957. Xiaomi – the smartphone maker turned EV maker How it started: The latest left field entrant to the car market is smartphone maker Xiaomi. Xiaomi was founded in April 2010 by Chinese entrepreneur Lei Jun, former president of the software company Kingsoft, along with seven partners. By 2024, it was the third largest smartphone vendor globally, with a market share of 13.8 per cent. Headquartered in Beijing Xiaomi Auto is a subsidiary of electronics company Xiaomi and officially entered the EV market in March 2021 after announcing a $10billion investment in the sector. A combination of US sanctions on their smartphone business and the booming Chinese EV market gave Xiaomi an opportunity to diversify and use its strengths in hardware, software and user experience to expand into this rapidly growing sector. Promising a 'revolutionary EV experience' the first model, the Xiaomi SU7 was unveiled in 2023. How it's going: In June the U7 went on sale and within three minutes Xiaomi said it received 200,000 pre-orders. The orders required a non-refundable deposit of 5,000 yuan (£509) for the vehicles, which are priced from 253,500 yuan to 329,900 yuan. This is unprecedented new vehicle demand in China, where monthly sales of 10,000 units for a single model are a success in its highly competitive EV market. It outdoes annual deliveries of other electric car makers, and could overtake Tesla's sales in China of 480,000 units. The Xiaomi SU7 Ultra is already the fastest electric production car to have lapped the Nurburgring in just 7m 04.95s. Chery - the Chinese car maker that started by making cars How it started: Chery is in rare company in the Chinese automotive world because it is, and always has been, a car manufacturer. This will make naysayers rejoice. Chery founded in 1996 by a group of government officials who established the automotive company to reduced poverty in Anhui and drive wider economic development. Engine-manufacturing equipment was bought from Ford in the UK, and tooling from VW's Seat. Factory construction commenced in early 1997, with the first vehicles rolling off the production line towards the end of 1999. Mass production came a year later. How it's going: It became the first passenger car company in China to export complete vehicles and as of 2024 it sold more cars last year than BMW: Chery shifted a whopping 2.6million units in 2024 - a 38.4 per cent increase on 2023. It's been China's top exporter of passenger vehicles for 21 consecutive years. By production it was China's third-largest automotive maker in 2024. Chery has launched two sub-brands in the UK in the last year, Omoda and Jaecoo, which have already gained two per cent market share. This is Money exclusively revealed this week that Chery is coming to the UK this summer under its own brand, with two SUVs going on sale soon. The first will be revealed at Goodwood Festival of Speed.
Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Savers urged to make their money go further by doing one simple thing
Multi award-winning Chartered Financial Planner, Certified Coach, author of The Money Plan, and Sunday Mirror columnist We are living in a time of extreme uncertainty and the anxiety that comes along with it. Against the backdrop of recent high inflation and market turmoil we have wars, AI technology disruption, the cost of living crisis, and economic hardship. It's natural to wonder what effect these world events will have on our long-term investment performance. While these challenges certainly warrant our attention and deep concern, they don't have to be a reason to panic about markets when you're focused on long-term investing. Imagine it's 25 years ago and the year is 2000. Devolution – The Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly had recently been established (in 1999), marking a significant shift in UK constitutional politics. The Millennium Dome – Opened on 1 January 2000 in Greenwich to celebrate the turn of the new millennium. The US stock market – The Dow Jones Industrial Average had already passed 11,000 in 1999, but in 2000, the tech-heavy NASDAQ peaked above 5,000 before correcting over the next two years. Tony Blair – Was serving as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, having first taken office in 1997. The internet is in its infancy, Y2K looms, and everyone is worried about the Russian financial crisis. A stranger offers to tell you what's going to happen over the course of the next 25 years. Here's the big question: Would you invest in the stock market knowing the following events were going to happen? And could you stay invested? Asian contagion Russian default Tech collapse 9/11 7/7 Stocks' 'lost decade' Great Recession Global pandemic Second Russian default Ukraine invasion Israeli invasion of Gaza With everything I just mentioned, what would you have done? Gotten into the market? Gotten out? Increased your equity holdings? Decreased them? Well, let's look at what happened. From 2000 to now, the world stock market has returned, on average, over 7 per cent a year. A pound invested at the beginning of the period would be worth over £6 now. These returns are very much in line with what returns have been over the history of the stock market. How can that be? The market is doing its job. It's science. Investing in markets is uncertain. The role of markets is to price in that uncertainty. There were a lot of negative surprises over the past 25 years, but there were a lot of positive ones as well. The net result was a stock market return that seems very reasonable, even generous. It's a tribute to human ingenuity that when negative forces pop up, people and companies respond and mobilise to get things back on track. Human ingenuity created incredible innovations over the past 25 years. Plenty of things went wrong, but plenty of things went right. There's always opportunity out there. Think about how different life is from the way it was in 2000: the way we work, the way we communicate, the way we live. For example, the gross domestic product of the US in 1999 was $10.25 trillion and is projected to grow to over $30.51 trillion in 2025. I am an eternal optimist, because I believe in people. I have an unshakable faith in human beings' ability to deal with tough times. In 2000, few would have forecast a 7% average return for the stock market. But that remarkable return was available to anyone who could open an investment account, buy a broad-market portfolio, and let the market do its job. Investing in the stock market is always uncertain. Uncertainty never goes away. If it did, there wouldn't be a stock market. It's because of uncertainty that we have a positive premium when investing in stocks vs. relatively riskless assets. In my opinion, reaping the benefits of the stock market requires being a long-term investor. By investing in a market portfolio, you're not trying to figure out which stocks are going to thrive, and which aren't going to be able to recover. You're betting on human ingenuity to solve problems. The pandemic was a big blow to the economy. But people, companies and markets adapt. That's my worldview. Whatever the next blow we face, I have faith that we will meet the challenge in ways we can't forecast. I would never try to predict what might happen in the next 25 years. But I do believe the best investment strategy going forward is to keep in mind the lesson learned from that stranger back in 2000: Don't panic. Invest for the long term.
The National
5 hours ago
- The National
UK politicians are in the pockets of the rich. Is that democracy?
At Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, Keir Starmer responded to a question from Green Party co-leader Adrian Ramsay about growing calls to introduce a tax on wealth for the super-rich – those with assets above £10 million – by saying he wouldn't 'take advice' from the Greens, and insisting that 'we can't just tax our way to growth'. We can, it seems, cut our way to growth though, as long as it's those already at the greatest risk of poverty who'll bear the brunt. On Wednesday evening, 333 Labour MPs voted to cut disability benefits by £2 billion per year, halving the health element of universal credit for new claimants, and cutting it altogether for new claimants aged under 22. At a certain point, when the faces and the colour of the rosettes change but the glaring injustices remain the same, we have to ask ourselves why. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer (Image: Yui Mok) A common refrain among politicians is that right-wing policies that make life harder for social security claimants – or immigrants, or any other marginalised group – are popular. So popular that they have no choice but to implement them with gusto, because that's the will of the people, I guess. Meanwhile, I suppose we are to imagine that the average British voter is kept up at night worrying about the prospect of millionaires and billionaires being asked to pay more into our public services. As Tory leader Kemi Badenoch put it at PMQs, a wealth tax would be 'a tax on all of our constituents' savings, their houses, their pensions'. Who among us doesn't know and love someone with more than £10m in assets lying around? And surely we can all agree that they're the real victims? Back in the real world, a YouGov poll last week found that 75% of people in the UK would support introducing a wealth tax of 2% on wealth above £10m. Earlier this year, YouGov conducted another poll on behalf of Oxfam which found that 79% of over 16s in Scotland would rather the government tax the richest than make cuts to public spending. (Image: YouGov) And while it's true that some voters do believe that the welfare system is too generous, and the immigrants are draining the country of resources, it's important to remember that large sections of the British media, with their own vested interests, have spent not years but decades pushing precisely this narrative. It's disingenuous at best to persuade someone of something and then behave as though it was their idea all along. Alongside campaign groups Tax Justice UK and Patriotic Millionaires UK, Oxfam identified that the government could raise up to £24bn per year through a wealth tax which would apply to only 0.04% of the population. At the same time, charities and experts from across the UK and beyond – extending to the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – have highlighted the damage that cuts to social security could cause to people's ability to make ends meet or simply live with dignity. So, if it's not the electorate telling politicians which policies to pursue, and it's not the data or the impassioned pleas of experts that persuade them, then what is it that drives them to make these decisions? READ MORE: Mark Brown: Why I plan to join Scotland's new radical left party Surely the answer is obvious by now. Time and again, right-wing and supposedly centrist politicians prove that nothing matters to them than the feelings of their rich donors and supporters – and nothing matters more to those wealthy individuals and large corporations than money. Successive governments' inaction on a range of urgent issues – from climate change, to energy prices, to raising taxes to fund crumbling public services – becomes far easier to understand once you realise that standing up to behemoth corporations and their numerous beneficiaries could cost these politicians dearly. If power for power's sake is the goal, if fuelling the party machine with big donations is a worthwhile end in and of itself, and if securing oneself a cushy position after – or perhaps during – your time in office is the ultimate prize, then making an enemy out of the 1% is a senseless endeavour. The dramatic decline in political party membership numbers over the past several decades mean that parties have become more and more reliant on a small pool of wealthy donors. Analysis by the Electoral Reform Society found that, during the 2024 election campaign, Labour received £6.7m from 'mega-donors', which made up 68.5% of their total donations up to polling day. This equates to 42 times the amount they took from the same type of donors during the 2019 election campaign. David Lammy secured a personal donor a job at the Foreign Office (Image: PA) When we ask ourselves how it is that the Labour Party have sold out on so many principles in such a short period of time, the answer is in the question. What chance does the average person – or community – stand to have their voice heard and acted upon by those in power while principles and policies are being sold to the highest bidder? Just last week, it was revealed by the Democracy for Sale substack that Foreign Secretary David Lammy gave a taxpayer-funded job in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office to the former UK president of multinational PR company WPP after she donated £5000 to his office ahead of the election. This is only the latest in a series of jobs for donors that Labour have been scrutinised over. Under the ideal of democracy which we are encouraged to believe the UK represents, every eligible voter should have an equal say in elections and, by extension, an equal opportunity to have a say in the decisions the elected parliament makes. How far must our political leaders stray from this principle before we recognise that we are no longer ruled by democracy but plutocracy: a society controlled by people with great wealth or income? Consider that the UK's 50 richest families hold more wealth than 50% of the population, according to analysis from the Equality Trust. And while the top 20% hold 63% of the UK's wealth, the bottom fifth have only 0.5% of the wealth. READ MORE: The best way to defeat Reform UK? Expose the gaping holes in their politics Polls might show that the vast majority of the British public want to see the wealthy taxed more, but to imagine that this information would seize the Prime Minister with an urgency to act would be to believe that all views, experiences, voices or lives are equal. You only need to look at how this government – the progressive alternative to the old government – treats the most vulnerable to know that isn't true, not under this system. As long as money talks and those without are silenced, most of us will be out here screaming into the void. In case that seems too bleak a note to end on, a reminder: it doesn't have to be this way. Just look at the growing fervency with which the Tories and now Labour have sought to quash dissent through the criminalisation of peaceful protest, and the proscription of activist groups they don't like as terrorists. Even the frantic efforts of the Government to censor a rap group, Kneecap, over political statements is revealing. These are the actions of power under threat. They are terrified of ordinary people speaking their minds and telling them in no uncertain terms that enough is enough. That, alone, should act as motivation to keep doing just that.
