I read the article.
If it's purely that took advantage of an aspect of the tax law that allows them to balance profits in one year against losses in another, I have no issue with that - it's an entirely fair law in my opinion. It sounds like they've done something more than that - there's a claimed £1.6m profit over 8 years, but how that's been managed I don't know. If it's been reinvested into the group, well, there you go.
Not one for defending Hammond, but there's a marked difference between a relatively small UK based construction company that makes a profit some years and a loss in others managing it's taxes, and a massive multi-national essentially buying its way out of the tax system by funnelling all the profit to a country where they've negotiated a sweetheart deal.