Asked by: Helen Morgan (Liberal Democrat - North Shropshire)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps she is taking to ensure that policyholders with protected characteristics are not discriminated against by insurance companies.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)
Insurers make commercial decisions about pricing and the terms of cover they offer based on their assessment of the relevant risks.
However, the government is determined that insurers treat customers fairly and insurers must comply with relevant legislation, including the Equality Act 2010. The Act generally prohibits discrimination based on certain personal characteristics, though the law accepts that some exceptions apply for insurance.
The Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) rules also require insurers to treat customers fairly. The FCA requires firms to ensure their products offer fair value (i.e. if the price a consumer pays for a product or service is reasonable compared to the overall benefits they can expect to receive). The FCA has robust powers to monitor firms and, where necessary, to take action against firms that do not comply with its rules.
The Government also seeks to ensure that people are able to access the financial products they need. That is why I published a Financial Inclusion Strategy in November which includes interventions to increase household financial resilience through insurance and help people find the right insurance product for their needs.
Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will make an assessment of the potential impact of introducing the full 20p discount to the business rates multiplier for retail, hospitality and leisure on the hospitality sector.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The 5p reduction in the Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) multipliers is worth nearly £1 billion per year and will benefit over 750,000 properties. Unlike RHL relief, the new multipliers are permanent, giving businesses certainty and stability, and there will be no cap, meaning all qualifying properties on high streets across England will benefit.
The Government is paying for this through a high-value multiplier on the top one per cent of most expensive properties. This includes many large distribution warehouses, such as those used by online giants. The high value multiplier is 33% more than the multiplier for small RHL properties.
Legislation set the maximum reduction to 20p as the bounds within which the Government could choose to operate, rather than a commitment to reduce the multipliers by this amount.
Asked by: Julian Smith (Conservative - Skipton and Ripon)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing the full 20p discount to the business rates multiplier for retail, hospitality and leisure.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The 5p reduction in the Retail, Hospitality and Leisure (RHL) multipliers is worth nearly £1 billion per year and will benefit over 750,000 properties. Unlike RHL relief, the new multipliers are permanent, giving businesses certainty and stability, and there will be no cap, meaning all qualifying properties on high streets across England will benefit.
The Government is paying for this through a high-value multiplier on the top one per cent of most expensive properties. This includes many large distribution warehouses, such as those used by online giants. The high value multiplier is 33% more than the multiplier for small RHL properties.
Legislation set the maximum reduction to 20p as the bounds within which the Government could choose to operate, rather than a commitment to reduce the multipliers by this amount.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Warwick (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact and role of accelerator and innovation programmes that support the growth of early-stage financial technology firms.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
As set out in the Government’s Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, the UK aims to be the world’s most technologically advanced global financial centre, and to remain a leading jurisdiction for Fintech firms to start up, scale and list.
The Strategy set out a comprehensive package of reforms to maintain the UK’s global leadership in Fintech. This includes creating a competitive regulatory environment by making it quicker and easier for new firms to achieve regulatory authorisation, as well as welcoming the City of London Corporation and the British Business Bank facilitating greater access to finance. The Financial Conduct Authority and Prudential Regulation Authority have launched a joint Scale-Up Unit to enhance engagement with fast-growing innovative firms.
Research England is also supporting activity in FinTech through the INFINITY programme, a partnership led by the University of Nottingham and the University of Birmingham to help researchers explore commercial opportunities in financial technology. There has been good engagement so far, with over 100 research projects developing their business potential and a number of ventures now progressing towards market.
Asked by: Lord Gilbert of Panteg (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Livermore on 9 December 2025 (HL12629) and 27 January (HL13469), whether any special advisers briefed Budget 2025 policy announcements to the media (1) prior to formal ministerial statements made to Parliaments, and (2) without an accompanying official government announcement.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Treasury, its Ministers and Special Advisers place the utmost importance on Budget information security. As set out in the Budget Information Security Review, Ministers, officials and Special Advisers act in line with the Macpherson Principles, the Civil Service Code and the Special Advisers’ Code.
Consistent with these principles, there are occasions where the Government will trail and/or announce policy ahead of a Budget to provide context and help the public understand major fiscal events.
Any such communications are tightly controlled, respect Parliament, and protect market-sensitive information.
For Budget 2025, Special Advisers acted in accordance with these rules and principles.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Warwick (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risks associated with the expansion of buy-now-pay-later lending through digital wallets and online marketplaces; and how the new regulatory framework will ensure effective affordability checks and consumer protection.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government is aware that Buy‑Now, Pay‑Later (BNPL) products have become a standard feature of digital wallets and online marketplaces, allowing consumers to defer payment at the point of sale. While these products can be a convenient way to help spread the cost of purchases, the lack of regulation has left some consumers exposed to harm, particularly through unaffordable borrowing.
To address this, in July 2025 Parliament passed legislation to bring BNPL products within Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulation. The new rules will take effect this July, with the FCA having confirmed the final regulatory requirements in February.
Under the new regulatory regime, BNPL firms will be required to carry out proportionate but robust affordability assessments before lending, informed by appropriate checks on consumers’ financial circumstances and existing borrowing commitments. Firms will also be required to provide clear, timely and prominent information on repayment terms, the consequences of missed payments, and what rights consumers have, enabling them to make informed decisions. In addition, consumers will gain access to established protections for credit users, including the Financial Ombudsman Service and section 75 rights under the Consumer Credit Act. Together, these measures will support the continued use of BNPL products while ensuring appropriate consumer safeguards are in place.
Asked by: Angus MacDonald (Liberal Democrat - Inverness, Skye and West Ross-shire)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what comparative assessment her Department has made of the (a) VAT Registration Threshold and (b) rate of inflation between 2014 and 2026.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
At £90,000, the UK has a higher VAT registration threshold than any EU country and the joint highest in the OECD. This reflects the Government’s approach to balance the impacts on small businesses, with the needs of the wider economy and the public finances. Such a comparatively high threshold means the majority of UK businesses are not in the VAT system at all, reducing administrative burdens and supporting growth.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Warwick (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of fintech investment platforms on competition, costs and investment choice in the self-invested personal pension market; and what steps they are taking to support innovation in digital pension products while maintaining appropriate regulatory safeguards.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government has not made a formal assessment of the impact of Fintech investment platforms on competition, costs and investment choice in the self-invested personal pensions (SIPPs) market.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is the regulator responsible for the SIPPs market. The FCA regularly reviews their relevant rules and regulations to ensure they are appropriate for the current market context. This includes supporting growth and innovation while maintaining appropriate regulatory safeguards to protect consumers.
As set out in the Government’s Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, the UK aims to be the world’s most technologically advanced global financial centre, and to remain a leading jurisdiction for Fintech firms to start up, scale and list.
Asked by: Helen Morgan (Liberal Democrat - North Shropshire)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that SMEs not party to (a) NFU Mutual and (b) Bath Racecourse litigation are not permanently deprived of the right to an indemnity due to the expiration of limitation periods.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), as the independent regulator for financial services, sets the conduct standards required of insurance firms. This includes rules requiring insurers to handle claims fairly and promptly.
The Supreme Court published its final judgment in the FCA’s Business Interruption Insurance test case in 2021. At the time of the judgment, the FCA set out its expectation that insurers should communicate to all impacted policyholders what the judgment meant for their claim and should move quickly to resolve claims as determined by the judgment.
The FCA court case did not cover all potential issues with business interruption policies. The FCA has been clear that, in the event of further court rulings, insurers will need to consider carefully how the rulings impact claims they have already decided.
The FCA considered the issue of new ‘stop the clock’ guidance as part of its response to Stewarts LLP on 23 January. The FCA was clear that insurers must look at claims that have already been made in light of any new legal rulings to see if any action must be taken. Where no claim has been submitted, it is not clear why an insurer would not be able to rely on relevant time limits set out in the insurance policy, subject to the particular circumstances of each claim and compliance with the FCA’s broader rules.
The FCA is continuing to supervise firms to ensure they are meeting their expectations and has robust powers to take action where necessary.
Asked by: Helen Morgan (Liberal Democrat - North Shropshire)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of valid Covid-19 business interruption claims becoming time-barred in March 2026 on the insurance sector.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), as the independent regulator for financial services, sets the conduct standards required of insurance firms. This includes rules requiring insurers to handle claims fairly and promptly.
The Supreme Court published its final judgment in the FCA’s Business Interruption Insurance test case in 2021. At the time of the judgment, the FCA set out its expectation that insurers should communicate to all impacted policyholders what the judgment meant for their claim and should move quickly to resolve claims as determined by the judgment.
The FCA court case did not cover all potential issues with business interruption policies. The FCA has been clear that, in the event of further court rulings, insurers will need to consider carefully how the rulings impact claims they have already decided.
The FCA considered the issue of new ‘stop the clock’ guidance as part of its response to Stewarts LLP on 23 January. The FCA was clear that insurers must look at claims that have already been made in light of any new legal rulings to see if any action must be taken. Where no claim has been submitted, it is not clear why an insurer would not be able to rely on relevant time limits set out in the insurance policy, subject to the particular circumstances of each claim and compliance with the FCA’s broader rules.
The FCA is continuing to supervise firms to ensure they are meeting their expectations and has robust powers to take action where necessary.