Oral Answers to Questions
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
The Government will support good growth in every postcode, including in Cornwall and Gloucester. We have already established No. 10 North to work in partnership with local leaders, businesses and communities, and at the Budget next month we will publish plans for further fiscal devolution, including greater retention of business rates revenue for local councils and strategic authorities.
Alex McIntyre
I thank the Minister for her answer. I fully support the Government’s exciting agenda of devolution, which takes power out of Whitehall and puts it into the hands of residents and communities like mine. However, my constituency of Gloucester does not have a metro mayor, and we are not part of a combined authority. I am determined to ensure that Gloucester is not left behind and is included in these important plans going forward. Can the Minister confirm how we can work together to ensure that Gloucester feels the benefits and investment from the Government’s devolution agenda?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is a great champion for his constituency. The Cabinet statement on devolution set out the Government’s ambitions to accelerate devolution across the country by establishing a strategic authority for every area in England that wants one by the end of 2028. All strategic authorities, including those without a mayor, will benefit from greater powers over skills, transport and housing.
Perran Moon
As the furthest southerly Labour MP in the UK, I note several recent announcements of funding going to the north of England and mayoral strategic authorities. I have been very encouraged by the Prime Minister’s comments on Cornish devolution, and there is no requirement for Cornwall to join a mayoral strategic authority, but can the Minister elaborate on how changes to regional funding arrangements will support the Cornish economy?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for his area. As he said, the Prime Minister has been engaging with Cornwall—including, importantly, with its six MPs, including my hon. Friend—on a devolution agreement. This will support the Cornish economy through stronger statutory powers on transport and housing, and the ability to introduce an overnight visitor levy, which can be invested in projects that drive growth in the region. As he will know, the Government are already investing in Cornwall’s high potential sectors with the £30 million Kernow industrial growth fund.
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
I welcome the Chief Secretary to her new position, but what words of comfort could she give the residents of Salisbury in Wiltshire, a unitary authority? We are not part of a combined authority and we do not have a metro mayor. Since this Government came in, we have seen the lowest settlement or one of the lowest three settlements on police funding and local government funding, and we have seen the withdrawal of funding for our road network in the south of Wiltshire. There is a concern that, with the focus elsewhere in big urban metropolitan areas, rural England will be forgotten. Is that not likely to be the case?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the right hon. Gentleman, in whose footsteps I am again following by taking on another job that he did in government. As a former Environment Secretary, living in a rural area of Buckinghamshire myself and representing a semi-rural seat, I reassure him that this Government of course care about driving growth in rural areas. There is great potential there, which is why we are supporting our farmers through a £2.7 billion a year sustainable farming budget, and we are also improving connectivity in rural areas.
Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)
Notwithstanding the Minister’s response to the hon. Member for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), my constituency neighbour, does the Minister not need to reflect on the fact that Cornwall, being the poorest region in the country and therefore entitled to EU objective 1 aid, is now receiving no regional funding whatsoever? That is simply not sustainable for a region that really does need additional support to get growth happening.
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question, but I disagree with his assessment. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Alex McIntyre), there are opportunities for areas that do not opt to have a mayor, but set up as foundation strategic authorities to gain the benefit of retaining more business rates and of greater powers over skills, transport and housing.
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Sir Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
Public sector productivity is improving, with the NHS delivering 3.5% productivity growth in 2025-26, beating its 2% target. The Government will continue to drive public sector efficiency so that taxpayers’ money delivers the best possible public services. In addition, we are investing in AI adoption across the public sector to help realise the overall target of £14 billion of efficiencies by 2028-29, as agreed at the last spending review.
Sir Jeremy Hunt
May I welcome the Chief Secretary to the Treasury to her new role? If she has any questions, may I recommend an excellent book by a former Chancellor, which has a number of tips? [Laughter.] The public sector is 20% of our national output, so it offers a major opportunity for the Government to improve our national productivity. Was it wise to give the ASLEF train drivers on the Avanti West Coast route an above-inflation pay rise without any apparent productivity quid pro quo? With the public finances so tight, should the rule not be that above-inflation increases must have productivity gains sitting alongside them?
Emma Reynolds
We in the Treasury Front-Bench team are wondering when the third book in the trilogy will come along and what it might be called. We have a guess for the title of the next book. I thank him for his advice in his books and in his recent Financial Times article. On train drivers and their pay, I am proud to be part of a Government who have avoided strikes that impact on public spending.
Seema Malhotra (Feltham and Heston) (Lab/Co-op)
Public sector productivity is improving, with the latest Office for National Statistics figures showing output continuing to grow faster than inputs, and Departments being challenged to improve efficiency and modernise outdated processes. Can the Minister confirm that the Government expect that will have a positive impact for residents in Feltham and Heston and people across the country, ensuring that Government services are faster, better and easier to access?
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. Driving public sector productivity is extremely important in two ways: first, because we get better value for money for taxpayers for the tax that people are putting in, including taxpayers in our own constituencies; and secondly, as she says, we are driving efficiencies, faster service delivery and using AI in the NHS to really drive improvements in care, as well as delivering more bang for buck.
Mark Garnier (Wyre Forest) (Con)
Many commentators have commented about public sector productivity underperformance. EY tells us that the public sector has underperformed to the point where it has cut GDP growth by 3% since 2019. The Institute for Government highlights an average of nearly 1% underperformance every year for that same period. Morgan Stanley reminds us that in the last year private sector productivity was up 1.8%, but public sector underperformance dragged it back into negative territory. Despite that, public sector pay was up over 6% last year, against private sector pay up just 2.8%. Why are the Government rewarding poor performance and does the Chancellor think that is sustainable?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that we are focused on driving public sector productivity to reach the efficiency targets I talked about. We are holding each Department to account on that. As I said earlier, we are seeing great progress in the NHS, which is making a huge contribution to our productivity gains as a Government.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
Rosie Duffield (Canterbury) (Ind)
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
I thank the hon. Lady for raising this important issue. I would be very happy to meet her.
Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)
Emma Reynolds
We are improving funding for local government as a result of the spending review, and I would be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss that further. It is also obviously a question for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Amanda Hack (North West Leicestershire) (Lab)
When CoalWorks in my constituency fundraised for a defib, the charity London Hearts reached out to it. Because it is a charitable organisation, there was no VAT on the purchase, meaning that CoalWorks could afford to buy two. However, when the Kings Arms in Coleorton recently fundraised, it had to pay VAT because it did not go via a charity partner. Will the Minister make an assessment of the potential impact of removing VAT on defibs for community-based purchases?
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
The Northern Ireland Executive have been without a budget this year, and in the last six months the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has been engaging with the Executive parties. What latitude or support has the Chancellor given the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland to enable a budget to be agreed in Northern Ireland, and what steps will the Government take if the Northern Ireland Executive are unable to set a budget?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that I am working extremely closely with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland who, as he will know, is in discussions with all the parties in the Northern Ireland Executive. We need to make sure that a budget is set for Northern Ireland so that the Executive can continue to deliver vital local public services.
Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
I was pleased to see that the Chancellor was in the west midlands yesterday meeting manufacturing apprentices alongside Mayor Richard Parker. What conversations has he had with the mayor about using new devolution powers to invest in local skills and employment, and what will he do to make sure that young people in Wolverhampton North East get more local opportunities to benefit from?
Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Gateshead South) (Lab)
What conversations has the Chancellor had with the Department of Health and Social Care on providing compensation to those harmed by valporate and vaginal mesh, as per the Hughes report, which was published over two years ago?
Emma Reynolds
I reassure my hon. Friend that I am working extremely closely with the Health Secretary and discussing overall levels of NHS spending—of course, the Department has the biggest budget across the Departments. The NHS is performing well, but I will take back the specifics that she mentioned.
Lara Bird (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry) (SNP)
Monifieth in my constituency is home to over 9,000 people and is the central connection point for a vast rural community across Angus. Despite an application in 2023, a banking hub was denied because the regulations are not fit for rural communities. Will the Minister commit to meet me to discuss how those regulations impact rural communities and see if we can finally get Monifieth the banking hub that it needs?
Economic Growth
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 week, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
With permission, I will make a statement on the Government’s plan to deliver good growth in every postcode.
At the G20 in North Carolina last week, the Chancellor and I met Finance Ministers from leading economies to discuss our shared economic challenges. Global instability, conflict and trade frictions are continuing to drive up inflation and interest rates around the world. While these shocks are international in nature, their impact is also being felt here in the UK—from the cost of the weekly family shop to the cost of Government borrowing.
Britain has shown resilience in the face of these pressures and the economy is now turning a corner: our growth was the fastest in the G7 in the first half of this year, Government borrowing fell to its lowest level in six years last year and interest rates have been cut six times since the general election. We are building on our strengths—our world-class universities and our world-leading sectors, such as life sciences, defence, technology, creative industries and financial services—and, because of the choices that this Labour Government have already taken, we are in a stronger position today to capitalise on the opportunities for growth across our economy.
In the context of a more uncertain world, we must continue to make responsible choices. Fiscal discipline will underwrite every promise this Government make. Both the Prime Minister and the Chancellor have made clear their commitment to meeting the fiscal rules, with a buffer against uncertainty. We will address the long-term pressures on our public finances to put debt on a sustainable downward path. As the Chancellor said earlier today, there is nothing progressive about spending £1 in every £10 on debt interest.
In his statement to this House last week, the Prime Minister laid out a clear diagnosis of what has gone wrong in our economy: political power was centralised, the economic fundamentals were privatised or outsourced, and our country was de-industrialised. The solution is a fundamental shift in the way our country works. No. 10 North and the Treasury are working together to build a stronger, more strategic centre of government and a more active state. Together, we will support the ambitions of local leaders and exert public influence and direction over the essentials, including transport and housing. We will devolve power and resources to local leaders. London is of course an economic powerhouse, but if our city regions could emulate the success of second cities in France and Germany, growth in our country could be transformed.
The Chancellor has instructed public investment institutions to focus on regional growth. To build on our high growth areas, the Oxford-Cambridge corridor and the northern growth corridor, he has today announced a new £150 million northern scale-up fund, delivered by the British Business Bank, to back the most innovative and fast-growing firms from Liverpool to Newcastle. The new Northern 500 will also bring together 500 of the north’s most ambitious mid-sized businesses into a single growth community, focused on scaling, investment and productivity. The National Wealth Fund will establish new strategic partnerships with South Yorkshire, the Liverpool city region, the north-east and Cardiff, giving those areas support to build their investment pipelines. At the Budget next month, the Government will go further, with a road map for fiscal devolution—a permanent transfer of power and resources from Whitehall to our regions. This plan will drive economic growth and productivity in three key areas: supporting investment, boosting innovation and getting more people into good jobs.
First, I will turn to investment. Business investment has increased by nearly 5% since the general election, but in a highly competitive world we must do more to reduce the barriers that firms face. The Government will tackle the thicket of consultation, litigation and administration that is holding up private investment, including by extending our reforms of judicial review from energy to all major infrastructure. We will bring an end to the consultation culture across Government, supported by new guidance from the Attorney General on legal risk to give Ministers confidence to make decisions. As the Chancellor has set out, we will make further changes to the Treasury’s Green Book, reducing the discount rate from 3.5% to 3%, to ensure that the Treasury rulebook does not go against key regional infrastructure projects and that places across the country get a fairer hearing in spending decisions. Work is already under way to progress place-based business cases in Plymouth, Birmingham, Liverpool and Port Talbot, and at the Budget we will publish guidance to allow more areas to do the same.
The second driver of growth is innovation. The UK has a fantastic record on innovation. We are world leaders in frontier technologies, quantum computing, nuclear fusion, space technology and AI. But too often, ideas born here have to go elsewhere to find the capital they need to scale. Today we are setting out a new ambition to double the number of unicorns in this country. The Government will identify and back these high-potential firms, providing them with the necessary capital to scale. New cross-economy sandboxing powers will also enable firms to test frontier technologies safely. Building on the important work already taking place in defence and sovereign AI, the Chancellor will work with Government Departments to earmark new, dedicated funds to back British innovation.
The third vital driver of growth is jobs. Our objective is to get more people into good, highly skilled jobs, and to make the most of the untapped talent that exists across the country. That is why, two weeks into office, the Prime Minister set out a bold new plan to transform technical education, and why, this autumn, Alan Milburn will set out his full recommendations to Government on how to address the blight of youth unemployment. This is our moral duty—not only our fiscal duty—because it cannot be right that so many young people are stuck on benefits.
The plan for growth is underpinned by fiscal discipline. It will hand power to local leaders and unlock the potential of our regions. It will build a strong, strategic centre of Government and enable greater public direction and influence over the essentials. It will back British business, goods and exports, creating wealth and prosperity in all parts of the country. It is a plan to build hope and optimism across our economy, and to drive good growth in every postcode. I commend this statement to the House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
Richard Fuller (North Bedfordshire) (Con)
I thank the Minister for her statement and for early sight of it. On a day when the country was listening for a message of change, it was the same old, same old: a continuity Chancellor, with continuity policies and a continuity team of Ministers in the Treasury. Does the Minister recognise the harsh irony that—given the Government could find plenty of money to hire 14,000 more civil servants in SW1—the Chancellor chose to go to the west midlands, just a few miles away from Jaguar Land Rover, but had nothing at all to say about it?
The Minister talked about Government borrowing falling to its lowest levels, but I wonder: can she also talk about the cost of Government borrowing? Can the Minister confirm that the cost of Government borrowing for 30 years is now at its highest rate for 28 years? The Minister talks about there being nothing progressive about spending £1 in every £10 on debt interest—well, amen to that—but why then did this Government choose to increase borrowing by £500 billion over the course of this Parliament? The Minister talked about the northern scale-up fund, which is an interesting initiative, but can she advise us who will be making the investment decisions and assure the House that they will not be subject to political direction?
The Minister talks about a National Wealth Fund with new strategic partnerships and a permanent transfer of power and resources from Whitehall to the regions. Did she listen to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government say that local government reform is on hold? Can she confirm to the House what proportion of the country will qualify under that measure to be part of Labour’s largesse? My fear is that many parts of the country will not.
The Minister did talk, smartly, about removing the thicket of consultation and looking at judicial review and the consultation culture. The Opposition will be supportive of measures that she comes forward with in that regard. But then, after a brief moment of common sense, the Minster talked about reducing the discount rate from 3.5% to 3%. Can she confirm that the cost at which the Government are borrowing is going up and up—5.9% for 30 years—yet she has chosen this moment to reduce the rate at which the Government expect to get money back from 3.5% to 3%? Can she explain how those numbers add up?
Then, of course, there is the final cherry on the parfait: the Government will “identify and back” unicorns in this country. How will the Government identify those unicorns, and can the Minister explain how that is different from the discredited policy of Governments picking winners?
The Minister then returned to common sense with the announcement that Mr Milburn will set out his recommendations to the Government. Will she please advise the House—many Members will be concerned about this—on what date Mr Milburn will make his recommendations?
Today, the Government—the Minister and the Chancellor—had an opportunity to at least have mentioned the high cost of energy that is crippling British manufacturing. They could have ruled out tax increases, providing more certainty for businesses that they can invest. The Government could have said that they would take up the offer from the Conservative Leader of the Opposition to work together on meaningful reform and reductions in welfare, so that we make work pay. But we did not hear any of that. Instead, we are heading to a Budget where a Labour Government have again run out of money and where a Labour Government will once again increase taxes to cover their fiscal incompetence—same old continuity Labour.
Emma Reynolds
It is a great pleasure to be opposite the hon. Gentleman again, as we were earlier in this Parliament. I will address his points, but I say kindly to him that I would rather be continuity Labour than continuity Liz Truss.
The hon. Gentleman was right to mention Jaguar Land Rover. It is a concerning time for the workforce, and the Business Secretary is working closely with the chief executive and the leader of the trade union Unite, bringing them together tomorrow to discuss the situation. Jaguar Land Rover has made clear that it faces competitive global headwinds, but we have done a lot to support the automotive industry, and Jaguar Land Rover in particular, given the loan guarantee that we provided last year in the wake of its cyber-attack. The Business Secretary and the Government are also providing help to the automotive sector to bear down on the cost of energy.
I think the hon. Gentleman said that he agreed with me in some areas, which is always good to hear. We can agree that there is nothing progressive about spending so much money on servicing our debt. As a Government we are committed to fiscal discipline and the fiscal rules because we want to bring down the cost of Government borrowing, but we are not immune to the global instability that means that the cost of borrowing is also increasing for every other G7 country. However, we have the fastest growth in the G7, and we are cutting our deficit faster than any other G7 country; business confidence and investment are up; productivity is up; interest rates have been cut six times since the election; and consumer confidence is up. While the hon. Gentleman talks down our economy, me, the Chancellor and the whole ministerial team will be talking up the British economy.
The hon. Gentleman asked a serious question about the northern scale-up fund. The British Business Bank will make those decisions independently of Government, as should always be the case. He is right to ask for reassurance about that, and I have provided it. We are a Government that are serious about devolving power to every part of the country. We will have more to say about that at the Budget and will set out a fiscal devolution road map as well.
The hon. Gentleman accused me nicely of talking smartly about the thicket of consultation, saying that I had some common sense, and I thank him for that. He has been in Government too, in the Treasury, and I fondly remember our meetings together back then. It is good that there is agreement across the Chamber that we need to ensure that those sorts of things do not gum up the system, that Ministers are able to take decisions, and that we are able to get infrastructure built in this country.
I respectfully disagree with the hon. Gentleman on the Green Book discount rate. We say proudly that we are reducing the discount rate to 3%, because there have been times in the past when the Treasury has stood in the way of good regional infrastructure projects that have a long-term benefit. I am proud that we are ensuring that those projects get a fairer hearing.
The hon. Gentleman will know that we have made changes to tax to support unicorns in last year’s Budget, and we are opening up opportunities to public procurement. I think he mentioned pudding at the end—parfait, I think it was—and although I am a big fan of pudding myself, I will not respond to that.
On the serious question of the Alan Milburn review, I cannot give the hon. Gentleman a timeline, but I will repeat what I said in my statement: it is our moral duty as a Government to ensure that we have more young people back in the labour market. That is why we have already introduced the youth guarantee, so that young people who have been out of work for longer than 18 months will get a paid placement by the Government, as well as introducing a grant for businesses that take on unemployed young people. It is a very serious issue, and one that we will address.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I welcome the Chief Secretary’s statement and her commitment that the British Business Bank’s new fund will not be interfered with politically, because when the Treasury Committee looked at the National Wealth Fund, we were very clear that it needed to be able to get on and do its job crowding in that private investment. There should not be a chop-and-change approach to the policy; it should not be a delivery vehicle for different Government policies, as Governments can change.
I have spent my career backing devolution, but there is a challenge here, is there not? The Chief Secretary has to ensure that the money that taxpayers give to Government to spend is spent well, but there is a gap, with our regionally elected mayors, in the oversight and scrutiny of that public spending. Devolution is a good thing, but what is she going to put in place to ensure that those mayors and the devolved authorities can report back about how well they are spending taxpayers’ money, and if they are not spending it well, what will the consequences be?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the Chair of the Treasury Committee for her question, and I agree with her: public financial institutions must make independent decisions about the businesses that they support. The Chancellor has talked today about new strategic priorities for the NWF, and that is also the right thing to do. That goes in parallel with what my hon. Friend was saying.
On oversight of mayoral strategic authorities, my hon. Friend is right that if we are going to devolve more power and, critically, more resources, there should be more oversight. The First Secretary of State has talked about the role of others, including Members of this House, in holding mayoral strategic authorities to account when they receive those new powers.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Charlie Maynard (Witney) (LD)
I thank the Chancellor and the Minister for their speech and statement. We know that the Conservatives’ Brexit deal has hit national GDP by as much as 8%, costing the country up to £90 billion a year in lost tax revenues. Will the Government now pull the largest zero-cost growth lever available to them by negotiating a growth and defence partnership with the EU, including joining the single market and a new customs union, rather than clinging to the same failed red lines, which are costing businesses billions every year? Being outside the single market and the customs union directly links to the 13% fall in the UK’s export of goods since 2022, which has hit traditional manufacturing regions the worst—the same places that the Government’s reindustrialise-the-north agenda claims to prioritise. I would like to understand whether she acknowledges the reality of that linkage or not.
I welcome the Chancellor’s emphasis on the importance of fiscal credibility and, linked to that, meeting the fiscal rules. However, the reality is that those rules have been easily gamed by successive Governments, with our budgetary process being summarised as speculation without scrutiny, short-term headroom chasing and gaming the system, with an approach of jam today, which is spending, and pain tomorrow, which is tax, but tomorrow never arrives. The result is that it has been more than 25 years since we had a balanced Budget, and our national debt is now six times larger than 20 years ago.
Will the Chief Secretary demonstrate that she is serious about tackling our debt and agree that a key way to do that is to grow our economy? Will she consider what we can learn from how other countries such as Switzerland, Sweden and New Zealand have addressed and solved their budget process problems?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his questions and will try to do them justice in the short time available. The Chancellor said this morning that Brexit has hammered British exports. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that there is a link between the fall in exports and the barriers the previous Conservative Government put up with our nearest and biggest trading partner, which is exactly why this Government are renegotiating a reset with our European partners. We promised in our manifesto that we would not join the single market, but we will bring down those barriers at the border, particularly with the sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that we are currently negotiating with the EU—there will be further announcements on that in due course—which will benefit our agrifood industry by making it easier to export to the European Union.
The hon. Gentleman asked about the fiscal rules. I do not agree with his analysis: we have brought forward the fiscal rules to apply over three years to get around some of the gaming that he talks about. We are serious about tackling our debt and, as I said in my statement, we are reducing our deficit at the fastest rate in the G7.
I am always interested to learn from other countries; I think we should always be open to that. I would be interested to hear more about what the hon. Gentleman had in mind.
Several hon. Members rose—
Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement and agree that London is indeed a powerhouse for growth. However, as a Member of Parliament for an outer London borough, I know, and she will recognise, that that wealth is not felt by every Londoner. With industrialisation and job creation being priorities for the Government, will the Minister reassure us that those priorities will reach the postcodes of my constituency?
Emma Reynolds
I absolutely agree. As the Chancellor stressed this morning, and as the Prime Minister has repeatedly said, this Government will drive good growth in every postcode. My hon. Friend is right that the situation in London is not simple; it is an economic powerhouse, but there are high levels of poverty in many parts of London. I assure her that we will focus on Barking and other parts of London, too.
Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)
Last week, the Prime Minister boasted in the same breath that we had the fastest growth in the G7 and that the decade of slow growth was caused by Brexit. If we are ahead of the pack, it cannot be caused by Brexit, can it?
Graham Stringer (Blackley and Middleton South) (Lab)
I strongly agree with the Government’s policy on devolution and better technical and scientific education, but all that will be for nought if we do not do something about the cost of energy. We cannot grow and compete as an economy when we have higher energy costs than our major industrial competitors. We have closed more than half our oil refineries in the past 20 years, which means we are now importing a majority of our energy. Will my right hon. Friend do something about those destructive policies?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to raise this matter. The cost of energy for UK businesses is higher than for those elsewhere. That is why the Business Secretary, working hand in hand with the Treasury, is bearing down on that cost through the British industrial competitiveness scheme, particularly for the industrial strategy’s eight growth sectors—we have done that for automotive, aerospace and other sectors that are key to driving economic growth.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)
Is it not the case that the bond markets are losing faith in the Government’s economic policies, and that the cost of borrowing, as we have heard from the shadow Minister, is at an 18-year high? That means, of course, that mortgage rates will increase, putting even more financial pain on many of our constituents. What does the Minister say to my constituents, who are likely to see three or four mortgage rate increases over the next 12 months?
Emma Reynolds
What the right hon. Gentleman is observing underlines the need for the Government to stick to our fiscal rules. The Chancellor is right to say that fiscal discipline is the bedrock of our economic security and national security. That is why we have committed to meeting those fiscal rules. In fact, we are meeting one of them early.
Rebecca Long Bailey (Salford) (Lab)
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury’s comments about regional growth and the active state are music to my ears, but rather than simply picking winners or de-risking private investment, how will she ensure that we get detailed local industrial strategies that build our domestic productive capacity and supply chains?
Emma Reynolds
I am glad to know that some of what I say is music to my hon. Friend’s ears. I can reassure her that that will be for mayoral strategic authorities to take forward. She is in a part of the country that has had great success in taking forward devolution and using those powers to drive economic growth. I am sure that her area will thrive under this Government, too.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
The Minister spoke about global instability. There is no doubt that energy costs are having an impact on the cost of doing business, but this summer, local businesses told me that domestic Government had raised the cost of doing business, through national insurance and business rates rises. Will the Chancellor do something about that in the next Budget?
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Gentleman invites me to write the next Budget, and I am not going to do that.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
The Chief Secretary to the Treasury is right that the UK has a vibrant ecosystem of innovative companies, but too many are looking to go overseas to realise their scale-up potential and become globally consequential companies, so I very much welcome the focus on using the state as a strategic partner to help them do that. That was exactly the message I heard from the chief executive officers and founders of companies whom I met in the summer. How will the Treasury work across Whitehall and the wider public sector to help drive that cultural mindshift?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for his question and his work on this agenda. I reassure him that, as the Chancellor set out this morning in his growth speech, we will work across Departments to ensure that we open up public procurement to smaller and start-up businesses, so that they stay here, rather than go elsewhere when they scale up?
Esther McVey (Tatton) (Con)
Does the Minister believe that putting up taxes is good or bad for economic growth?
Emma Reynolds
Sometimes it is necessary, in order to fund improvements in our national health service and to fill the £22 billion fiscal black hole that we inherited.
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Can I make a pitch to the Minister for a part of the country called the midlands, which I know that she knows well? Not everything is about the south or the north. There is a swathe of counties that form a band of engineering and manufacturing prowess in this country, from Shropshire through to Lincolnshire. They do not have the powerful mayors of the north or the economic growth that the south has had. In my constituency, the chemical industry talks to me about UK REACH double regulation, the steel manufacturers talk about the tariffs, and ceramics industry talks about access to the British industrial competitiveness scheme and the supercharger. If she wants good growth in every part of the country, including the midlands, how will we overcome those immediate challenges?
Emma Reynolds
Being from Wolverhampton, I agree with my hon. Friend that the midlands is a very important part of the country. He is a really powerful advocate for his area, and he will know that we have put forward a ceramics support package to ensure that his area, and others in the region, thrive.
Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)
I welcome the reference that the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has made to the Oxford growth corridor and localising power and resources, but my constituents are deeply concerned about ensuring that infrastructure comes before the many developments that the Government have in mind. Can she confirm that along the Oxford-Cambridge growth corridor there will be an “infrastructure first” approach, and can she let me and my constituents know which Minister now has responsibility for that corridor?
Emma Reynolds
As the Chancellor set out this morning, we are determined to speed up infrastructure provision. Frankly, compared to other countries, we are just too slow at building high-speed rail and other types of rail. We are determined to press ahead and ensure that we speed up infrastructure provision, so that we can develop other areas. I also have an interest in the Cambridge-Oxford growth corridor, because my constituency is not very far away.
Chris Curtis (Milton Keynes North) (Lab)
We are now on the fourth round of consultation on East West Rail, the latter rounds of consultation consulting on the outcomes of the earlier rounds of consultation. At the same time, we are in the middle of building the most expensive nuclear power station in the history of the human race because of the four rounds of consultation required for Sizewell C. When we tried to build the lower Thames crossing, the total consultation for the development consent order process was 359,000 pages. That is 250 times the length of “War and Peace”. It is right to go to war on these consultations, but can the Minister tell us how she will stop at nothing to ensure that we get infrastructure projects built more efficiently, so that we can save taxpayers far more money and drive economic growth?
Emma Reynolds
I share my hon. Friend’s impatience. I want to get things done, and so does the Chancellor. The Attorney General will provide guidance to Ministers, so that we can make quicker decisions. She will advise on where we need consultation and where we do not. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to be impatient for change; I am too.
Steve Barclay (North East Cambridgeshire) (Con)
Is it not bizarre that just a few hours after the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government came to the House to pause local government reorganisation on the basis of legal risk, so that she can have more consultation, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said, “We will bring an end to consultation culture and, with guidance from the Attorney General on legal risk, give Ministers the confidence to make decisions”? Will they have a greater appetite for legal risk, or will they pause to have more consultations? The two Ministers are saying opposite things.
Emma Reynolds
We have to get local government reorganisation right, so I make no apology for the Secretary of State coming to the House to update colleagues—for a couple of hours; it was a very long statement. I know that lots of Members from across the House have strong views on the issue, but it is important that the Government get this right.
Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) (Lab)
I will ask a slightly different question from the one I originally intended to ask. Every time we come to this Chamber to discuss the economy, we spend a lot of time debating public spending, but we never seem to discuss our trade deficit. We have not been in surplus since 1998. What will the Government do to ensure that we start paying our way in the world again?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is right to talk about the trade deficit. When I was at the G20 in North Carolina last week, there was a discussion about global trade imbalances, and that is something that we are considering putting on the agenda for our G20 presidency.
Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)
Labour promised £200 million for Grangemouth, none of which has materialised. Labour promised 1,000 jobs for GB Energy, and it turns out that a third of the 130 delivered so far are not actually in Scotland. If the Prime Minister’s localism project is not just for Manchester, what extra powers will be devolved to Scotland as a result of the decisions being made?
Emma Reynolds
Can I say gently to the hon. Lady that Scotland has rightly had plenty of devolution, but that does not mean that the two decades of SNP Government have been successful?
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
On that note, after two decades of failed SNP governance, 29% of children in Clackmannanshire are living in poverty. The Labour Government have lifted the two-child benefit cap, which will reduce that figure and help life chances. Improving economic growth is, of course, laudable, but could we go for some classic Labour redistribution of wealth, and also look at taxing multimillionaires and billionaires?
Emma Reynolds
I agree with my hon. Friend that it is simply not acceptable that we live in a country where children are in poverty. The last Government plunged 900,000 children into child poverty. We are proud to be the Labour Government who lifted the two-child limit and lifted 450,000 children out of poverty.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
On a day when Jaguar Land Rover has announced 4,000 job losses, how many more jobs have to be lost before the Government change course?
Emma Reynolds
As I said in response to the shadow Minister, the Business Secretary is working closely with the chief executive and leadership of the company. Jaguar Land Rover employs 30,000 people in different parts of the country. We supported the company last year in the wake of its cyber-attack. We are supporting automative with £4 billion in capital and research and development funding to manufacture zero-emission vehicles. My thoughts are with the workforce; this is a very difficult time. As I understand it, the company has said that, by and large, this will be done by voluntary redundancy as much as possible, and over two years.
Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)
Since 2020, Governments, Prime Ministers, Ministers, UK Research and Innovation and businesses have all supported the BioYorkshire project, which will address issues to do with the environment and the climate crisis, as well as providing good-quality jobs and a return for the Treasury. However, the Government have not been able to get money out of the door, so can the Minister say more about how she will invest and spend that money?
Emma Reynolds
I profoundly believe that we have to drive a win-win. We can deliver good infrastructure and good jobs and limit the number of consultations, and have an eye to the impact on the environment. I will come back to my hon. Friend on her specific question.
Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Reform)
Imagine that you are a worker at JLR worried about your future, and you have the misfortune of watching the Chancellor’s speech, which contains searing economic insights like,
“I want to see businesses make a profit.”
There was nothing about scrapping electric vehicle mandates, bringing down energy costs by getting rid of net zero targets, or bringing down the cost of employing people by getting rid of the increase in employers national insurance. Is it not the truth that it is the Government who are killing the British car industry, and they need to wake up and take action?
Chris Kane (Stirling and Strathallan) (Lab)
Like many parents all over the country, this month, my wife and I will drop off our child at university for the first time—in this instance, to begin an engineering degree. What assessment has the Minister made of the economic benefits of helping more young people into secure work? What assurance can she give all our young people starting in education or training this month that the Labour Government are alive to their fears about rising costs, technological changes and global uncertainty, and are working hard to ensure that economic conditions mean that they have a job when it is time for them to enter the jobs market?
Emma Reynolds
The Government are on the side of young people—both young graduates and those who pursue technical education. As the Prime Minister set out in his first two weeks in power, we want to ensure parity between technical education and university education, and to drive good growth in every postcode, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency.
Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)
As the Chief Secretary to the Treasury will know, many of those Jaguar Land Rover employees live in my constituency, but they are across the whole midlands. In August, the Government committed to consulting on the zero emission vehicle mandate. Will she undertake to ensure that the consultation is as quick as possible, so that we can give our car manufacturing firms the best chance to compete globally?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the right hon. Member for his question. We were once parliamentary neighbours, so I understand the concern that he is expressing. Over the weekend, I spoke to the Business Secretary about this issue. We are holding a consultation, which will be a quick one.
Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab/Co-op)
I heartily welcome my right hon. Friend to the Dispatch Box in her new role. In 1954, the Co-operative Permanent building society opened its office in Peterborough. In the 70 years since—now as Nationwide—it has provided advice and support for lenders and people buying a house. There are few better examples in this country of a commitment to our high streets and to growth in every postcode than building societies and the mutual movement. We have a manifesto commitment to double the size of the co-operative and mutual economy. We talk about growth in every postcode; will my right hon. Friend reassure me that the Government will do everything they can to ensure that the building society movement can play its part in rebuilding our country?
Emma Reynolds
I can absolutely do that. May I thank my hon. Friend for the work he does to further the cause of co-operatives and mutuals? When I was Economic Secretary, I very much enjoyed working with the sector, because building societies often offer more innovative products—to first-time buyers in particular—and do sterling work.
Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)
The rhetoric might have changed a bit under the new Prime Minister, but it seems that we have a continuity Chancellor on the policy front. The Minister talks about the failures of privatisation, but where is the action to bring water back into public hands? She talks about the need for an active state, but where is the action to tax wealth fairly, so that we can invest in the services we need? Fundamentally, we cannot get good growth unless it is both green and fair. We will not build sustainable prosperity by trashing nature and the climate.
Emma Reynolds
I do not believe in trashing nature and the climate either, but if we want to tackle climate change, we cannot stop every renewable project from going ahead, which is what the Greens would have us do, just as they would prevent the building of new nuclear power.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
My right hon. Friend talked about good growth in every postcode, which I welcome, as well as the £150 million scheme with the British Business Bank, but there was nothing for the midlands, which was ironic given where the Chancellor delivered his speech. The truth is, the midlands is being squeezed from the north and from the south. Will she help me to revisit the limit, resurrect the previously canned scheme on the A46, and meet me to discuss investment in our region?
Emma Reynolds
May I reassure my hon. Friend? One of our trailblazer projects in the place-based business cases is with Birmingham, which is obviously the beating heart of the west midlands.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
The Chancellor promised growth in every postcode, which must include rural communities such as Glastonbury and Somerton, and not just our cities and towns, yet rural England’s productivity sits at just 69% of the non-rural rate, costing our economy billions in lost revenue every year. That is not just a rural problem but a national one. What is the Chief Secretary doing to create opportunity in the countryside and unleash the full potential of rural Britain?
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Member will know that rural communities are close to my heart, given my previous ministerial role and because I have a semi-rural constituency. There is huge potential in rural communities. The Prime Minister visited rural Cornwall in his first few weeks in the job. We will do more, and we are doing more, to improve local transport and rural connectivity, including the £2 cap on bus fares. She is right to say that there is great potential, which we must realise.
Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)
Too often decisions have been made in Westminster with an assumption that investment, opportunity and growth flow naturally to the south, but in reality Portsmouth has been ignored and faces real pressure on housing, transport and education. Will the Minister work with me to ensure that my city and the people of Portsmouth are no longer an afterthought but at the heart of the Government’s plan for growth and opportunity?
Emma Reynolds
I can absolutely give my hon. Friend that reassurance. The Government are intent on driving good growth and job creation opportunities across the country—in the north, the south, the midlands and every other part, too.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)
The Government insisted on applying the social time preference rate to the disastrous Chagos deal to make an appalling deal look slightly better. Will the Minister confirm that the changes she has announced today as part of her Green Book revision will increase the cost of that deal by £288 million, which is 10 times the amount that she proposes to cut from the Army training budget this year?
Emma Reynolds
The Green Book discount rate is a tool of economic analysis. It does not change the cost of the deal.
Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)
Will the Minister confirm that the reforms to judicial review of infrastructure will apply to the West Yorkshire mass transit project? Does she consider that project to be nationally significant infrastructure?
Emma Reynolds
We are working with the mayor on that issue. Our colleagues will get back to you on that.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Hopefully they will get back not to me, but to the hon. Member.
Llinos Medi (Ynys Môn) (PC)
The Sea Shanty café on Ynys Môn is desperate for hope. Paying 20% VAT is simply unsustainable. Hospitality is a major employer on the island, but our businesses are being squeezed by rising costs. Cutting VAT to 10% would be a quick win, driving growth by giving businesses some breathing space and protecting jobs. Will the Chief Secretary consider that?
Emma Reynolds
The Prime Minister is clear that the hospitality sector is close to his heart. It is one that he worked closely with when he was Mayor of Greater Manchester. Earlier this summer we announced the business rate reductions for pubs, social clubs and live music venues, and we will go further in the Budget.
David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)
The Minister will know from her previous ministerial role that the cost of fuel is the single most important business cost for rural businesses. I am not asking her to write the Budget today, but will she convey to the Chancellor the importance of continuing the fuel duty freeze for rural businesses beyond the end of December?
Emma Reynolds
As I outlined to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), it is right that we focus on rural communities as well as urban areas and city regions. I will convey that message to the Chancellor, but I will not be writing the Budget right now.
Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)
The Government talk a lot about how they will create economic growth. There is no way for them just to legislate their way to growth; there are, however, plenty of ways to legislate against it, as small rural businesses in North Norfolk know only too well. Will the Minister tell those rural businesses what she is doing to help them grow? More importantly, what things that get in their way will she stop doing?
Emma Reynolds
As I said to the hon. Member for Glastonbury and Somerton (Sarah Dyke), we take the economic success of rural communities really seriously. We are improving connectivity, whether digital connectivity or local transport connectivity, to ensure that the areas are more successful, but there is obviously more to be done.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
For some years I have known the proprietor of a small to medium-sized aviation company that has come up with revolutionary aircraft designs with both civilian and military applications, but every time the Government of the day have ended up supporting the big operators in this field. How will the right hon. Lady’s new policy towards unicorns benefit somebody like that?
Emma Reynolds
The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise this issue. As I have said, we have given strategic steers to the public financial institutions to ensure that they are focusing on regional growth, and that is also about opening up opportunities for the kinds of businesses that he has mentioned.
Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)
The Chancellor has rightly identified trade frictions as a major impediment to economic growth. As a result of the Windsor framework, the internal market in the UK has been severely disrupted by EU-imposed restrictions on trade, which mean customs unions, mountains of paperwork and physical barriers. What steps does the right hon. Lady intend to take to remove this barrier to economic growth in Northern Ireland?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that when I was Environment Secretary I visited the port of Belfast and saw the kinds of checks that were going on there. The sanitary and phytosanitary agreement that we are negotiating with the EU will help to reduce that friction.
Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)
The Chief Secretary talks about £150 million for investment in the north. How much of that funding is actual new capital expenditure from this Government, or is it simply a repackaged, reannounced sum of money for the north?
Emma Reynolds
It is money that already sits with the British Business Bank, but the change is the focus on the north, on scale-up businesses, to ensure that we unleash their growth potential. We are not announcing new funding; we never said we were.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
Dewsbury and Batley is the capital of furniture, bed and upholstery manufacturing in the UK, but after Brexit it lost a lot of its export business. What are the Government going to do to support furniture, upholstery and supply chain manufacturers in Dewsbury and Batley as part of their investment in the north?
Emma Reynolds
The trade deals that we are doing, and also the reset of the relationship that we are taking forward with the EU, will bring down barriers with our biggest and closest market.
Ian Sollom (St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire) (LD)
The Minister cites our world-class universities and an ambition to double the number of UK unicorns that run frontier technologies such as quantum and AI, but does she recognise that those breakthroughs often come from the curiosity-driven frontier physics research in our universities, and that that research base now faces a £700 million funding gap?
Emma Reynolds
UKRI—UK Research and Innovation —invests in that sort of research, and the Government will continue to do that through UKRI.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
I, too, am a bit concerned that the Minister is missing a page of her statement, because there has been no mention of the east midlands. The Prime Minister was right when he blamed Margaret Thatcher for picking winners and abandoning whole regions, and that appears to be happening to the east midlands this time. In my constituency, Leicestershire and Rutland receives a grand total of zero pounds in infrastructure investment. On skills funding, Leicester gets £11.30 per head, compared with £52.10 in Greater Manchester and £66.19 in the west midlands, which is six times more. Can she reassure me, the people of the east midlands and my constituents in Leicester South that we will not be left behind?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the hon. Gentleman; the east midlands and the west midlands are really important. The changes that the Chancellor outlined to the discount rate today will benefit places such as his constituency, because they will ensure that we value the longer-term benefit of regional investment projects more fairly. As we have said, we will drive growth in every postcode and that includes his constituency.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
The concept of devolution and localisation is to empower local communities by bringing the decision-making process closer to them. In Birmingham, the city council is being forced to relinquish its planning powers to the regional mayor. That is anti-devolution. Does the Minister agree, and what will she do to ensure that the council does not lose its planning powers?
Emma Reynolds
I would disagree, because the mayoral strategic authorities are about local authorities coming together in a combined authority and working together across the borders of the west midlands—an area I know extremely well. This is about driving growth and driving good decisions across the region.
Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)
The Chief Secretary has promised good growth in every postcode. Blackburn has the talent, the institutions and the major employers—such as EG On the Move—that are willing to invest in local people, but we need Government investment to match that ambition. Will the Chief Secretary make Blackburn a test case for this plan and back an employer-led jobs and skills partnership to create good local jobs?
Emma Reynolds
We are working in close partnership with business, and the hon. Gentleman is right to say that we have to unleash talent and business investment in his own constituency and elsewhere, but as I said to the Chair of the Treasury Committee, the way that the public financial institutions work is by independently assessing the potential of firms and then backing them. That is what the Chancellor was talking about today. We set the strategic priorities and those independent economic organisations assess projects for their potential.
Living Standards: East of England
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Wera Hobhouse (in the Chair)
I will call Clive Lewis to move the motion, and I will then call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members that they may make a speech only with prior permission from the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister. There will not be an opportunity for the Member in charge to wind up, as is the convention for 30-minute debates. A Liberal Democrat Member has just requested to make a speech. I am happy with that. Minister, are you happy with that as well?
Clive Lewis (Norwich South) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered living standards in the East of England.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse. As I will be discussing nature, water and the far right, I would like to declare interests that meet the relevant test. The first is my role as vice-chair of the climate and nature crisis caucus. The second is that I have received donations from Compass and Betterworld Ltd, which have supported my work on water. The third is support I have received from the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung—try saying that after a few pints—to attend their parliamentarian forums on the far right. I have written about issues touched on in this debate—climate, water, the far right and economic growth—for The Guardian and Byline Times, which I have been paid for.
If we take an honest look at life in the east of England today, and in my city of Norwich, we do not see the prosperity that Governments have often boasted about. We see a region where too many people are running faster and faster just to stand still. In Norwich, wages remain below the national average. One in five workers earns less than the real living wage. One in six is trapped in insecure work—zero hours, agency or short-term scraps dressed up as jobs. Meanwhile, rents have risen by more than 20% since 2021. A quarter of private renters are handing over half or more of their income just to keep a roof over their heads. That is not prosperity; that is daylight robbery with a tenancy agreement.
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
It is a pleasure, as ever, to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South (Clive Lewis) for securing this debate and the opportunity to have a constructive discussion about living standards in the east of England. I thank other hon. Members who have contributed, including the hon. Members for Chelmsford (Marie Goldman), for North East Hertfordshire (Chris Hinchliff), for Strangford (Jim Shannon)—he is on form, as ever—and for North Norfolk (Steff Aquarone), and my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer). I do not have an enormous amount of time, so I will crack on with my speech.
This Government are committed to raising living standards for everybody across the UK and, of course, in the east of England, but it is worth pointing out that that is no small task. When we came to power, we took over from a Government who had dropped the ball on living standards—the last Parliament was the weakest on record for living standards. We were elected to turn that around, and through our Plan for Change we are delivering policies to kickstart growth that will boost living standards in every part of the UK. Indeed, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, we can expect living standards, measured by real household disposable income per capita, to rise by 2.6% over the course of this Parliament.
I will focus on a number of measures that we have taken to strengthen household income, particularly for those on low incomes. The first is that we have increased the national living wage, which will benefit around 3 million of the lowest paid workers and make them up to £1,400 better off. We are investing more than £0.5 billion in the Best Start family service over the 2026 to ’29 spending review period, making sure that every local authority has a family hub that is open to all, and focusing—this was mentioned by one of my hon. Friends—on areas with higher proportions of children from disadvantaged backgrounds. We are putting early years back at the heart of how we deliver stronger outcomes for our children, as it has ever been with Labour Governments, including this one and the previous Labour Government, with half a million children benefiting from the roll-out of the new 30 hours free childcare entitlement that we brought forward this week.
We will be investing £410 million per year by 2028-29 to expand free school meals in England to all children with a parent receiving universal credit, lifting 100,000 children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. We are providing £1 billion a year to reform crisis support, including the first ever multi-year settlement to transform the household support fund into a new crisis and resilience fund. We have frozen fuel duty, saving drivers about £3 billion this year, while extending the £3 bus fare cap until March 2027, keeping prices low on some 5,000 routes across England.
We are also protecting the pension triple lock and, in doing so, gave 1.2 million pensioners in the east of England a 4.1% increase to their basic or new state pension in April this year. At the recent spending review, we confirmed funding for our affordable homes programme; my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South spoke passionately about council houses. The 10-year affordable homes programme will involve £39 billion during that period. We have also committed to local transport priorities for some our larger city regions via the transport for city regions settlements.
For the east of England, we have confirmed £14.2 billion for Sizewell C, which, at peak construction, will create 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships, and wider economic benefits in Suffolk and the wider region. We have also made significant progress in creating the conditions for growth, with reforms to the national planning policy framework, which the Office for Budget Responsibility concluded will permanently increase the level of real GDP by 0.4% over the next 10 years—the biggest positive growth impact that the OBR has ever forecast for a policy with no fiscal cost.
We are going forward with the introduction of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill and, in the east of England, with support for the Oxford to Cambridge corridor, which will bring many benefits to local communities. That approach will drive growth in city regions, towns and communities and make the most of the opportunities in each part of the country to make people better off. We are already seeing the results of our plan working, with the Bank of England having reduced interest rates five times since we came to office, which will put downward pressure on mortgage payments.
However, we recognise, of course, that challenges remain. We must support those in immediate need while making the structural changes necessary to give our cities, towns and rural and coastal communities the resources and powers that they need to succeed. Through our plan for neighbourhoods, we are providing long-term funding directly to communities, delivering visible improvements on people’s doorsteps, championing local leadership and fostering stronger communities. Of the 75 places already announced in the plan for neighbourhoods, seven are in the east of England; each will receive up to £20 million over the next 10 years.
We are also driving forward devolution, pushing power down, as my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South discussed, giving local leaders the powers and resources to shape their own futures. The devolution priority programme will see two new mayoral strategic authorities established in the east of England, both in Greater Essex and in Norfolk and Suffolk, with inaugural mayoral elections in May next year. We have established the Cambridge Growth Company, which will work with local partners to unlock key developments and deliver an “infrastructure first” strategy for sustainable growth in the area.
The Government are providing certainty and stability through our commitment to in-flight local growth projects, including freeports and investment zones. Those programmes can and should be key tools for driving growth across the UK, including the east of England. We are committed to bringing them together as part of our modern industrial strategy.
I do not have very much time left, Mrs Hobhouse. The Government are committed to sustainable and secure economic growth, and we are bringing that about in three major ways: restoring stability, as we did in the Budget last year by introducing non-negotiable fiscal rules, to put the public finances back on a stable path; secondly, investment in renewal, within the fiscal rules made in the autumn, supporting the step change needed, as confirmed in our plans in the spending review period; and changing the economy to prioritise long-term growth through key reforms.
Every investment, reform and partnership is focused on one goal: raising living standards in the east of England and across the country, creating opportunities in every community. I know that we are all passionate about that. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich South again for bringing this important debate to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
The integrity and resilience of the UK’s financial system are fundamental to our country’s prosperity and security. A strong financial system supports jobs, businesses and families up and down the country, and helps to make Britain a safer and more prosperous place to live and work. However, the same openness that makes the UK attractive for trade and investment can be exploited by criminals and terrorists who try to move and hide their illicit money through our financial system. These activities are not victimless crimes; they fund serious criminal activity, undermine trust in our economy, and threaten the safety and wellbeing of our communities.
Today the Government are publishing two key documents that lay out our approach to identifying and managing these risks to UK citizens and their interests. The UK’s fourth national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing, published jointly between His Majesty’s Treasury and the Home Office[1] and HM Treasury’s response to the consultation on improving the effectiveness of the money laundering regulations[2] together represent a robust, risk-based approach where regulation is underpinned by a comprehensive assessment of current and emerging threats. Our aim is clear: to keep criminals’ money out of our economy, strengthen the defences of our financial system, and ensure the UK remains a secure and attractive place to do business.
The NRA takes account of the latest developments and information since the previous publication in 2020. The report has been laid before Parliament.
The key findings from this assessment are as follows:
The UK continues to be exposed to a high level of money laundering risk. Since 2020, the wider context has shifted due to increasing global insecurity, which has altered the risk landscape and the methodologies used by criminals
Money laundering increasingly overlaps with kleptocracy and sanctions evasion, as sanctioned actors use established laundering networks to hide funds.
The increasing adoption of new technologies are enabling novel methods for laundering and terrorist financing.
Cash-based money laundering remains a significant threat, including cash smuggling, use of cash-intensive businesses, money mules and misuse of legitimate channels including post offices to introduce criminal proceeds into the financial system.
Terrorist financing in the UK typically involves small sums for basic needs or overseas transfers, using both illicit and legitimate routes.
The NRA highlights both a strengthening of the UK’s defences and the evolving nature of the risks we face. Since the previous assessment, significant steps, including under the economic crime plan 2023-26, have enhanced the UK’s response. These steps, including expansion of public-private partnership working and legislative reforms, support the UK’s alignment with international standards, including those set by the Financial Action Task Force.
The findings of the NRA will directly inform policy, regulation and operational priorities for Government, law enforcement, supervisors and regulated businesses. By equipping these partners with up-to-date risk intelligence, we are ensuring that everyone involved can respond proportionately to the threats we face, protecting the UK’s reputation and making it a safer place to live, work and invest.
Alongside the NRA, the Government are publishing their response to a recent consultation on the money laundering regulations, which attracted over 200 responses from industry, law enforcement, supervisors and civil society. The Government will introduce targeted changes to the MLRs reflecting an evidence-led, risk-based approach, ensuring that regulation is focused on the highest risk activities and threats to the UK system, while closing loopholes such as those related to the registration of certain trusts.
The amendments include changes to requirements for enhanced due diligence for complex transactions and high-risk countries; clearer customer due diligence requirements for pooled client accounts and non-financial firms; closing a key loophole on registration of trusts owning UK land or property on the trust registration service; improved onboarding in bank insolvency scenarios; better information sharing between supervisors; and updated rules for crypto asset service providers and the sale of “off-the-shelf” companies. Other issues will be addressed through guidance, working closely with supervisors to ensure that regulated firms are taking a consistent and risk-based approach.
These reforms, together with the updated NRA, will further strengthen the UK’s defences against illicit finance, while supporting responsible businesses and protecting people’s savings and livelihoods. We remain committed to ongoing engagement with stakeholders and will keep the MLRs under review to respond to emerging risks.
These publications mark an important milestone in our plan for change, supporting economic growth while ensuring that our financial system works for people and businesses, and denies criminals and terrorists the resources they need to do harm.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-risk-assessment-of-money-laundering-and-terrorist-financing-2025
[2] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/improving-the-effectiveness-of-the-money-laundering-regulations
[HCWS847]
Financial Services Reform
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
With permission, Mr Speaker, I shall update the House on the content of the Leeds reforms.
The reforms encompass the Government’s financial services growth and competitiveness strategy, which is our 10-year plan for financial services. This plan will make the UK the global centre of choice for financial services investment by 2035, with all parts of the country benefiting from its success, building on our thriving regional financial services clusters around the country.
The financial services sector is one of this country’s largest and most productive sectors. It is worth 9% of total economic output and provides 1.2 million jobs across the UK’s nations and regions. Our strategy will unleash the potential of the sector to catalyse growth, enterprise and opportunity in the rest of the economy. That will mean that working people will get better returns on their savings, that home ownership will be unlocked for tens of thousands more people, and that more businesses will get access to the capital that they need to grow.
The Secretary of State for Business and Trade recently presented to this House our modern industrial strategy in which financial services was identified as one of the key eight growth driving sectors on which the Government will focus. This builds on the successes of our first year in office, which I am proud to highlight: the fastest growth in the G7 in the first quarter of this year; four interest rate cuts; faster wage growth in the past 10 months than the previous 10 years of the last Government; the FTSE100 yesterday at a record high; and business confidence at its highest in nine years. [Interruption.] I will not take lectures from the Conservatives, who presided over inflation at 11% and debt rising year after year.
Our vision is of an active state working in partnership with business, and the Leeds reforms were co-designed with industry. The Chancellor and I undertook extensive engagement in its preparation, and I was pleased to see financial services firms across the country and the Confederation of Business Industry welcome our reforms publicly. The reforms reintroduce informed risk taking into our financial services system to deliver prosperity for working people. We will always ensure that financial stability is a prerequisite for economic growth, and we continue to uphold our commitment to the high international standards that underpin the resilience of the global financial system.
I will briefly set out the details of our package to the House. First, the Government are delivering a competitive regulatory environment to attract investment and drive growth. We have set out plans to deliver the most significant reform to the Financial Ombudsman Service since its inception, ensuring that it no longer acts as a quasi-regulator and returning it to its original purpose as an independent, impartial dispute resolution service for complaints between consumers and financial services firms.
We are also streamlining the senior managers and certification regime to reduce the burdens imposed on firms by 50% and to reduce approval times. We have tasked the Financial Conduct Authority to report back by September on how it plans to address concerns about the application of the consumer duty for firms primarily engaged in wholesale activity.
Secondly, our reforms unlock capital for investment into our infrastructure and businesses. We are doing this by supporting the Bank of England’s changes to MREL—the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities—and by confirming our approach to Basel 3.1, implementing lower capital requirements for domestically focused banks from January 2027 while preserving flexibility in our approach for international banks to ensure that the UK remains competitive and aligned with international standards.
We are also committing to meaningful reform to ringfencing, while maintaining the aspects of the regime that support financial stability and protect customer deposits. We welcome the Financial Policy Committee’s review of the overall bank capital levels needed for UK financial stability and its decision to ease its loan-to-income restriction on mortgage lending. I am delighted that this decision will enable up to 36,000 additional first-time buyers to access mortgages in the first year.
Thirdly, we are making the UK the location of choice for fintechs to start up, scale and list, and we want the wider financial services sector to embrace innovation too. The FCA and the Prudential Regulation Authority will launch a scale-up unit to ensure that fast-growing businesses have the support they need to grow. The regulators will also introduce a new streamlined authorisation regime that will enable innovative firms to start operating while they await full approval. We are modernising and future-proofing the regulatory framework for payments and e-money, including stablecoin, and we are establishing a new model to deliver next-generation retail payments infrastructure.
Fourthly, we are seizing opportunities in key areas of UK leadership, from speciality insurance and asset management to sustainable finance. Our insurance sector has been world-leading for centuries, and we are committed to staying at the front of the pack by creating a new captive insurance framework and holding an industry showcase event later this year to sell the sector globally. We are also future-proofing the regulatory regime for our asset management sector, which is the second largest in the world, and we will publish draft legislation on that early next year.
The UK is already a leading global hub for sustainable finance. We have set out plans for a stable regulatory framework, and we are giving industry clarity by deciding not to pursue a green taxonomy and by focusing instead on ambitious policies that support investors to invest in the transition. I look forward to continuing to work with Lord Alok Sharma and the Transition Finance Council, which he chairs, to make the UK the leading international hub for raising transition finance.
Fifthly, we want to go further in building a new retail investment culture and boosting our capital markets’ competitiveness. We have taken great strides to reform our pensions system, led by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury, my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West (Torsten Bell), so that people can have better savings in retirement. We want savers to get the best returns on their savings. For too many their money is not working hard enough, and for too long advice on investments has been the preserve of only the wealthiest in society. To address this, the Chancellor has announced the biggest reform of the financial advice and guidance landscape in more than a decade and the introduction of targeted support in time for the new tax year. The Chancellor and I welcome the steps being taken by industry to help consumers engage with investing. I particularly thank Chris Cummings of the Investment Association for the work he is leading on that.
We are also considering reforming the individual savings account system to ensure better outcomes for both savers and the UK economy. We are allowing long-term asset funds to be held in stocks and shares ISAs next year. This will allow more individuals to invest in assets that will support the UK’s success while seeing better returns on their savings. To ensure that our capital markets support British business, we are announcing a new listings taskforce with the Office for Investment to attract world-leading businesses towards initial public offering in the UK. We are publishing a wholesale financial markets digital strategy to harness innovation as well as our ambitious design for the digital gilt instrument pilot.
Finally, we are taking steps to enhance the UK’s leadership in financial services, ensuring that the UK remains the most open and connected financial centre in the world. We will launch a concierge service—the Office for Investment: Financial Services—to attract international financial services firms to invest in the UK and grow their business. We are further facilitating cross-border activity with the publication of guidance on our overseas recognition regimes and a memorandum of understanding with UK regulators, a copy of which I will place in the Library in both Houses.
Through these steps, the Government have placed financial services at the heart of our growth mission. Our 10-year strategy is ambitious, includes the most far-reaching reforms to financial services for a decade, and will unleash the fantastic potential of our world-leading financial services sector. We are backing British businesses, unlocking home ownership for tens of thousands of people across the country, supporting savers to get better returns, and investing in our shared future. I commend this statement to the House.
Mark Garnier (Wyre Forest) (Con)
I am very grateful to the Minister for advance sight of her statement. There is much in these Leeds reforms—many of which were formerly known as the Edinburgh reforms—that can be welcomed, and some of the details were laid out by the Chancellor in her Mansion House speech last night.
The Conservatives will always support reforms to our financial sector that ensure that the City of London remains a global powerhouse, but the Chancellor’s rhetoric last night about growth and stability obscures the truth of this Government’s record of delivery. Inflation is now at 3.6%—the highest in the G7—and growth has all but stalled. Despite yesterday’s fanfare for reform, the reality is that having run short on other ideas, the Government are now forced to turn once again to the City of London for inspiration—a last throw of the dice, hoping that it will provide an engine for the growth that their policies are stifling.
Last night the Chancellor described her Government as a “beacon of stability”, but let us not forget the actual legacy that was handed over to her. We enjoyed near record levels of employment. Unemployment was at historic lows, and inflation was under control. That is the stable foundation on which this Government were handed the keys, yet they now preside over instability. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the OECD and the Bank of England have all sounded the alarm that our growth prospects have collapsed. The Government claim to be cutting red tape for industry, but let us remember that their plan to make work pay would in fact burden employers with over 70 new regulations, reminiscent of the 1970s.
The Chancellor’s talk of unleashing the power of the City comes even as her party threatens to smother businesses in paperwork and expense. When it comes to proposals for financial services, the Conservatives welcome much that gives the sector confidence and clarity, but warm words must be matched by careful delivery. On reforms to the Financial Ombudsman Service, there is agreement that it should return to its impartial roots as a fast and effective dispute resolution service, not a quasi-regulator, but so many business and consumers are awaiting clarity, so can the Minister confirm whether these changes will limit the FOS’s power to make backdated legal determinations, and what impact will the reforms have on ongoing legal proceedings, such as the crucial car finance case before the Supreme Court?
Streamlining the approach of the FCA and the PRA may remove unnecessary friction, but we must ensure that this does not become window dressing while critical challenges remain. The FCA and the PRA must accept that stability in the markets is not the only way to deliver growth. Both their objectives must be aligned and equally ambitious in their drive for reform.
The Chancellor trumpeted reforms to ISAs, including new rules for long-term asset funds, which we welcome if that broadens access to higher-return assets for ordinary savers, but there is still no certainty on the future of the cash ISA. Without clarity, the Government risk undermining their own ambition to promote home ownership and inclusive investment, which again was trumpeted by the Chancellor during her Mansion House speech last night.
On capital investment policy, we welcome MREL reform, which was a change I championed during the recent passage of the Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Act 2025. This will help challenger banks to compete and expand lending.
We cautiously welcome the Government’s review of ringfencing rules, but will they confirm that all options are being considered, including alignment with the US and the EU, which, as the Minister knows, never implemented ringfencing rules?
More broadly, the history of the last Labour Government reminds us that good intentions are never enough. The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000, introduced by the then Chancellor, along with the tripartite system, was well conceived but badly implemented, contributing to the events of the 2008 financial crisis. It falls to this Government now to demonstrate that they will not repeat those mistakes.
Finally, at Mansion House last night the Chancellor missed a crucial opportunity to be straight with the British people and rule out further tax rises. Will the Minister guarantee that working families and businesses will not face more tax increases? Will she rule out any further surprise raids on the British taxpayer?
Britain’s financial services sector has always thrived when reforms are clear. The test of these reforms will come when the full details emerge, but ultimately growth will come only when the Chancellor realises that hard-working people and businesses across the country are the real engines of economic growth.
Emma Reynolds
Well, half of that was all right, I suppose. I do want to start constructively and thank the hon. Member for his welcome for some of the reforms. I will answer some of his specific questions before I come to the wider points.
On the Financial Ombudsman Service, we have set out in great detail what we will do. As he will be aware, some of the changes require primary legislation. We are proposing an absolute time limit of 10 years, but with discretion for the FCA to give longer periods in the case of products with a longer lifetime. I cannot comment on the ongoing car finance issue, which as he knows is working its way through the courts.
The hon. Member talked about the regulators’ different objectives. We have been very clear with the regulators that we expect them to embed their secondary objective to facilitate economic growth and competitiveness while obviously complying with their other objectives. He will see that in the remit letters that the Chancellor sent to the regulators at the last Mansion House speech last November.
On ISAs, I welcome what the hon. Member said about long-term asset funds, which we think will unlock great opportunities for savers. We continue to consider reform to ISAs. We would like to ensure that more people have the opportunity and confidence to invest, which is why we hope that targeted support, which will be introduced by firms by the end of this tax year—we have worked at pace on this—will really shift the dial and give people that confidence to invest.
I think the hon. Member said he was in favour of what we are doing on MREL, and I know that he agreed with the Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Act, which we put through the House and is coming into force today. I thank him for his support on that.
On ringfencing, we have detailed which areas we will look at. I am happy to write to him further on that, but one area, for example, is sharing resources across the ringfenced and non-ringfenced parts of banks. We want to ensure that we strike the right balance between growth and stability.
I turn to the hon. Member’s points about economic stability. I will take no lessons from the Conservatives—I hate to say it. We had inflation at 11%, people paying extremely high mortgage rates and debt rising year after year. The only thing that was stable under their Government was wages, which were flatlining.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Minister for the statement and look forward to the Treasury Committee talking to—or interrogating—her, and indeed the Chancellor, about the detail as it emerges. Since the election, one of the things the Government have been talking about, leading on from the previous Government, is the secondary remit letters to the regulators about encouraging growth as a secondary objective. Can she tell us when the Government will be clear about their own appetite for risk in the sector so that both firms and the regulators know how far the Government will be prepared to go? She and I know from our experience in this place that if too many consumers suffer under any changes, this place is where that will be raised, and then there is a tendency for the Government to turn around and say, “Well, you went too far.” For the sake of the sector, the regulator and our constituents, will she tell us—or will she tell us when she can—where the Government’s line on risk will fall?
Emma Reynolds
I thank my hon. Friend for that thoughtful question. I am happy to talk to the Committee about that in more detail. What I will say is that the Leeds reforms regulate for growth instead of seeking to eliminate risk from the system altogether. We know that in order to get greater returns, there is a need to take informed risk. The reforms will enable firms and consumers to take informed risks. But we will always support the regulators and legislate in a way that protects consumers from bad practices and bad actors.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
Daisy Cooper (St Albans) (LD)
There is much to welcome in the statement. I hope that it sends a strong signal to the fintech sector and sustainable finance that UK plc is open for business, but it is important to get the balance right between growth and risk.
We Liberal Democrats welcome the announcement of a scale-up unit. Will it have a mandate to look at liquidity and valuation, which are two of the challenges that prevent British start-ups from scaling up here at home?
On the retail investment culture, we welcome plans to reform financial advice and guidance and to launch a national advertising campaign. We believe that we should trust people to weigh up the risk and rewards of investment, if they are properly informed. But we also know that money habits are formed at a young age. Will the Minister advise whether the Government have any plans to introduce financial literacy as part of the school curriculum—indeed, from cradle to grave? Will the Government confirm when they will bring forward any reforms at all to cash ISAs? The uncertainty around the issue is undermining their own goal of incentivising more investment.
On mortgages, many renters have been crowded out of getting on to the housing ladder, so this announcement will sound exciting to them, but what reassurance can the Minister provide that this additional lending will not result in boom and bust? With inflation jumping today, how many of those up to 36,000 first-time homeowners will realistically get on the housing ladder in the next year?
We welcome the streamlining of checks on senior managers, but will the Government confirm that those changes will not expose financial firms and their customers to greater risk? If the Government want a step change in economic growth, this is a start, but they must go further and faster by having a better trading deal with the EU.
Emma Reynolds
We have a very good deal with the EU, which we agreed in May this year and will continue to build on. I was pleased to have invited the European Commissioner for Financial Services, Maria Luís Albuquerque, who was at the dinner last night at the Mansion House. I will try to get through all the hon. Member’s questions.
On liquidity and valuations, I point out that we have some of the deepest capital markets in the world. Last year, the amount of equity capital raised in London was larger than in the next three European exchanges put together. However, I recognise the issues she talked about.
On the advertising campaign, Chris Cummings of the Investment Association is leading the secretariat. He will also be looking at risk warnings. That is not to say there should not be risk warnings, but that there should be a balance in risk warnings to ensure that warnings are also informing people of the benefits of investing over the long term.
The hon. Member rightly talked about the importance of financial education and capability. We will put forward suggestions on that in the financial inclusion strategy, which we will publish in the autumn. However, as this is a cross-Government effort, I reassure her that I am speaking and meeting actively with the Minister for School Standards so that we are aligned with the Department for Education’s curriculum review.
The hon. Member asked about mortgages. May I reassure her? Obviously, we have had extensive regulations since the global financial crash and we are not going back to the bad old days when there were no verification checks on affordability and 125% mortgages. But the system we have got means that people on modest incomes are unable to get on the housing ladder. Nationwide has said that because of the Bank of England’s recent decision, it will be able to help an additional 10,000 people a year with its helping hand mortgage to fulfil their dream of home ownership. I think that is a great step forward and will mean that people across the country, like many in this House, can benefit from the security of home ownership, and particularly those on modest incomes and in generations that are being deprived of such opportunities.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
I call John Grady, a member of the Treasury Committee.
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We are intent on building the 1.5 million homes that we promised at the election. I remind the chuntering hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition Front Bench that even before the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, the OBR scored the first stage of the planning reforms as the largest increase in GDP by the end of the scorecard of any non-fiscal lever in its history.
Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
The Economic Secretary may want to have a look at Hansard and make sure she got the right soundbite on the record about the 10 months of wage growth and the comparison. My understanding is that wage growth was indeed slow after the financial crash. We tried to compensate for that by increasing personal allowances, but wage growth has bounced back since the pandemic. She may want to correct the record if that is the case.
On the reforms, which have migrated from Edinburgh down to Leeds, the Treasury Committee will scrutinise the implementation. Is it her vision that they should be implemented over the next year, before the next Mansion House speech, rather than on the 10-year basis of the strategy as she outlined?
Emma Reynolds
I refer the hon. Lady to page 63 of the strategy, which is very useful. It sets out an ambitious timeline for implementing the reforms that the Chancellor set out at the Mansion House last night and in Leeds yesterday morning, and shows her that we have already taken action to implement some of the decisions we took in November last year, such as introducing the private intermittent securities and capital exchange system. PISCES is a new private intermittent securities market that is open for business, and for which we legislated in May. That demonstrates how we are working at pace. Other things will take a little longer, and her extensive experience in this place and in government means that she will understand that some of those things require primary legislation. However, she will see through the two-page summary at the back of the strategy how we plan to implement the reforms at pace to unleash the potential of the financial services sector.
Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)
Too many of my constituents are trapped in the rental market, paying off someone else’s mortgage instead of saving for a home of their own. Average rents in Birmingham have now passed £1,000 a month for the first time, driven sharply upwards since the mini-Budget. I strongly welcome the Chancellor’s Leeds reforms, which will help 36,000 first-time buyers on to the housing ladder. Will the Minister say more about what the Government are doing to boost housing supply so that home ownership can become a reality for more people in cities such as mine?
Emma Reynolds
As was said previously, the package that we announced yesterday, as well as the announcement by the Bank of England and the FCA’s discussion paper, go to the heart of making sure that we have the right balance between ensuring people have affordable mortgage products and ensuring that those products are accessible to more people up and down the country. As she will know—I am sure that she is referring to this—the Planning and Infrastructure Bill and some of the other planning reforms that we set forward are some of the most ambitious for a generation. They will unlock the potential for those homes to be built so that we can get more and more first-time buyers on to the housing ladder.
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
I warmly welcome the Leeds reforms; they build on many of the things that were done under the previous Administration and I acknowledge the consumer-facing changes on mortgages and ISAs and the aspiration to get more people investing. Those are positive things.
I will just say two things. First, on the listing review, we did one about four years ago and it is all just about implemented. I urge the Minister to look at culture and fiscal issues as much as at regulatory issues. Secondly, on the PRA and the scale of ambition on that side of the regulatory framework, in conversations with senior leaders at Mansion House last night, it was felt that the FCA’s level of ambition is high but that there must be wariness about a constant shifting of the goalposts and a lack of real change, particularly on the internal rating base and how banks can get their regulatory capital treated differently more quickly. It is taking too long and that needs to change urgently.
Emma Reynolds
I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we have not announced a listing review; we have announced a listings taskforce—[Interruption.] It is different, if hon. Members will let me explain. It is a joint piece of work between the Office for Investment, His Majesty’s Treasury and other Government Departments to make sure that we attract the best and brightest companies to list here in the UK. He is correct, though: many reforms were undertaken by his Government on listings, taking forward the Jonathan Hill and Mark Austin reviews, and we welcomed and supported those.
The right hon. Gentleman will have seen that yesterday the FCA published its final prospectus rules. Of course, we have to get the regulatory side of the equation right, but he is correct that there are other factors at play, which we are looking at. On the FCA and the PRA, all I will say to reassure him is that, as he knows, I hold the relationship with both those regulators as the Economic Secretary. We will continue to push them to be ambitious in supporting our growth agenda.
Clive Lewis (Norwich South) (Lab)
I just want to confirm that my name is Clive, not Cassandra, Lewis—and yet, I feel like the Trojan princess, forever warning of things that will go wrong but being ignored. Will the Minister provide reassurance, given that the Bank of England has repeatedly warned that loosening mortgage lending standards and allowing more people to borrow larger sums relative to their income can push up house prices and increase financial instability? I appreciate that these are not the same deregulations that took place before the 2008 crash, but given the state of the global economy, surely she will understand that many of us on the Government Benches are cautious about deregulating at a time of such instability. I understand that we want to get more people on the housing ladder and to increase growth, but there is a risk. I wonder whether that risk has been duly appreciated.
Emma Reynolds
I reassure my hon. Friend that our agenda is to streamline regulation and make it more proportionate, and that there remain firm guardrails and affordability checks for mortgage providers. At the moment, the level of repossessions is very low and banks and other mortgage providers do all they can to avoid repossessing people’s homes. As I said before, we will not go back to the bad old days of 125% mortgages and no verification of affordability. This is about rebalancing the system to make sure that more people can afford to buy their own home, but it is also about striking the right balance between ensuring that we take more informed risk while ensuring financial stability. He is right to ask the question.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
The Chancellor announced quite a list of reforms yesterday. I note that many were on the shopping list of industry, so the Committee will examine them closely to make sure they also work for the consumer and for the long-term stability of the economy. One change in particular, on ringfencing, will worry those with strong memories of the 2008 financial crash. The shadow Economic Secretary indicated that perhaps we need to look at removing the ringfencing entirely. That would be a big step backwards. These reforms were driven by the Liberal Democrat Vince Cable, and the idea was to separate everyday customer deposits from the risks of investment banking. Will the Minister give us assurances that the hard-earned savings of families across the country will not be put at risk by the speculative activity of people playing with other people’s money?
Emma Reynolds
It is always a great pleasure to come and give evidence to the hon. Gentleman’s Committee. I reassure him that the Government are upholding the ringfencing regime. We must strike the right balance between protecting financial stability and safeguarding depositors. Equally, we think that there are some flexibilities that should be explored within the ringfencing regime that will allow further growth and further capital to be deployed in the real economy.
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement and commend the work that she and the Chancellor have done on the wider Leeds reforms. I want to pick up on the forthcoming campaign to promote retail investment, which has the potential to reshape public understanding of risk, reward and financial planning. The problem with many similar campaigns is that they have failed to reach the people who most need them, so can the Minister provide a bit more detail about how the Treasury intends to work with both the financial services industry and civil society to ensure that the campaign delivers measurable benefits and improvements in financial capability across the whole population?
Emma Reynolds
My hon. Friend is a great campaigner on this issue, and he is absolutely right: this is not an easy nut to crack. We will work closely with the industry-led campaign. We need to give people who want to invest and save for the longer term the confidence to consider whether they can secure better returns through investing, rather than just holding large amounts—if they have those large amounts—of money in cash.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
Whenever I listen to the excellent Times Radio and other commercial broadcasters, I am always favourably impressed by the fact that at the end of every positive advertisement for a financial product, three words are said: “capital at risk”. Can the Minister assure the House that in the review of risk warnings that will be undertaken, that fundamental red flag, at the end of people pushing us to invest our money in some grand and profitable enterprise, will not be left out?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we are not suggesting getting rid of risk warnings. I think that is what he was asking me most directly. One of the investment platforms did some research into the wording of risk warnings, and he will probably know that there is quite a gender gap. If we look at the figures from the Financial Conduct Authority’s financial lives survey, we see that more men have the confidence to invest than women, for example. There are other demographic factors, too. We want to give people the option and the confidence to invest, but of course there will always be risk warnings. However, there is also a risk if someone holds all their savings in cash over the long term, due to inflation.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee’s inquiry into regional innovation and growth has repeatedly heard that access to capital outside London and the south-east is the biggest barrier to start-ups scaling up and delivering growth and jobs. The reforms that the Minister has set out to reintroduce informed risk taking, which I am sure will be prudently implemented, should realise capital to catalyse growth. Can she say a little about how this will deliver more capital investment into the productive economy of the north-east?
Emma Reynolds
I might not be able to give my hon. Friend the specifics about her region right now, but I will say that my colleague the Pensions Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West (Torsten Bell), has secured an ambitious industry-led accord—the Mansion House accord—that commits 17 pension funds, representing 90% of active defined-contribution savers, to invest 10% of their funds in private assets, half of which are to be in the UK. They will be on the hunt for good firms that could be successful in the future and that need capital to start up and scale up. We are also working closely with the British Business Bank on these issues, as my hon. Friend will know.
Rupert Lowe (Great Yarmouth) (Ind)
After 20 years in the City of London, over the last year I have had to endure a stream of what I would call financially illiterate verbal baby food. Today I hear the Chancellor talk about regulating for growth. You do not regulate for growth; you deregulate for growth. The genesis of our problems are the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority, which sprung from the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. This was a Labour Act that created the Financial Services Authority, which turned into the PRA and the FCA. Those two organisations have shut the City of London down. We are now a shadow of our former selves in terms of raising global capital, and I heard you say the opposite—
Madam Deputy Speaker
Order. You meant, “as the Minister hollows out”, not me. Minister—a swift response.
Emma Reynolds
Well, what do I say to that? I think there is, with the exception of the hon. Member, cross-party support for the twin peaks financial services regulation that we have. Of course, we need proportionate regulation to ensure that there are protections in place for consumers. He seems to be suggesting that we get rid of the regulators altogether, which I think most Members of this House would be opposed to. I have heard of the concept of caveat emptor, and I am suitably patronised by him.
Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)
One of the first visits I undertook after the election was to my local branch of Nationwide, which for generations has been providing good financial advice and advice to first-time buyers in my seat, as have many other mutuals. In one of the previous periods of financial deregulation by the Conservative party, we saw a movement that led to the demutualisation of the building society movement, creating uncertainty for thousands upon thousands of potential homeowners and people looking for financial support. Can the Minister reassure the House today that the co-operative and mutual sector will remain absolutely essential to the everyday financial services that working people need?
Emma Reynolds
Absolutely. This is something that the Chancellor and I—and indeed the Business Secretary and the Business Minister—are passionate about, and we are making sure that we deliver on our manifesto commitment to double the size of the sector. We have asked the financial services regulators to report by the end of the year on what more they can do to support the growth of the sector. We are supporting the industry-led Mutual and Co-operatives Business Council, which is chaired by the chair of Nationwide, Kevin Parry, and we have recently concluded a call for evidence on the credit union common bond, which is another form of mutual. We will be setting out our response on that issue in due course.
Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
Given the news on inflation today, along with the ongoing increases in unemployment and the downgrading of growth forecasts, it is quite right that this Government are looking for other ways to stimulate growth. One of the reasons being put forward for these reforms is the poor rates of return on ordinary bank accounts and savings accounts, but what my constituents want are just decent rates of return on ordinary savings accounts. Martin Lewis and others have pointed out that that market remains stubbornly resistant to passing on interest rate savings and offering competitive rates. I understand why the Government want to encourage people to invest in other types of savings, but what plans do they have to tackle the poor rates of return that people are getting from their ordinary savings and bank accounts?
Emma Reynolds
I am engaging with Martin Lewis, who is a doughty champion of consumers across the country. I say to the hon. Member that, due to the consumer duty, banks and other providers have a duty to ensure that they deliver the best outcomes for their consumers, but I note what he has said.
James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for her statement, and I note especially the new concierge service within the Office for Investment that will both court international development and act as a one-stop shop to promote the UK. What regional dimension might be considered within that for places such as the east midlands—the region for which I am an MP—where there is significant potential for jobs and investment?
Emma Reynolds
I can reassure my hon. Friend that the concierge service will be working across the country. This is about ensuring that the UK has a single shop window for international firms looking to either set up or invest further in the UK. As we set out in the Leeds reforms, the benefits of that investment and of unleashing the potential of the financial services industry should be felt across the country, in the east midlands and beyond.
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
The grim truth is that people’s living standards in Wales have still not recovered from the 2008 crash, which resulted in a Labour Prime Minister bailing out the banks and the Tory austerity experiment, so why are the Government risking a repeat of the mistakes of the past when all the evidence shows—this is important—that growth will not trickle down from poorly regulated bankers?
Emma Reynolds
I gently say to the right hon. Member that we are not talking about going back to 2007—we have come a long way since then. Of course, after the crash, financial services regulations and a new system of financial services regulation in terms of the twin peaks of the FCA and the PRA—conduct and prudential—were introduced. We are not talking about going back to then. We are not bringing back 125% mortgages, as I have repeatedly said. We are simply saying that we need to reassess where we are and that the pendulum has swung too far the other way. We need to rebalance the system so that both consumers and firms can take informed risks to drive growth across the country. That will make people better off and give them the opportunity to secure better returns on their savings. I encourage her to look at the detail of this. We are looking to rebalance the system, not go back to where we were.
Samantha Niblett (South Derbyshire) (Lab)
As the co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group on financial technology and a mother to a 17-year-old daughter who turns 18 this year and is considering how she can best save for and secure her future, I welcome this news with real joy as we try to bring more wealth to more people. I suspect this joy is shared by Ayesha Ofori, the founder of Propelle, a platform that encourages women into retail investing, which can start with some very small sums indeed; Nina Mohanty, who founded Bloom Money, which supports people from ethnic minority communities to build generational wealth through group savings and budgets; and Georgia Stewart, founder of Tumelo, which has a mission to bring shareholder democracy to the digital age, giving everybody a seat at the table, whether that is an institution managing billions or everyday savers. Does the Minister agree that this Government’s approach of encouraging investing should in turn give confidence to those who are considering investing in these female-founded fintech companies, so they can scale and reach more people to help them become wealthier and more secure?
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend, who is a fantastic champion of fintech. We already have a thriving fintech sector, which is the second largest in the world—second only to the US—and we are determined to ensure that those companies access the capital and the authorisations and licences that they need from the regulators. Obviously, that is a decision for the regulators, but it should be done at pace so that these companies can get off the ground and start to scale, providing the opportunities for retail investment and, critically, providing innovative products for consumers across the country.
Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Minister for her statement. The No. 1 thing that my constituents raise with me is the soaring cost of the private rented sector. Does she agree that these reforms will help first-time buyers in Harlow get on the housing ladder? Working alongside the £39 billion of investment in social housing, that can only be good for my residents.
Emma Reynolds
I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We want to ensure that the dream of home ownership is expanded across the country, including to his constituency of Harlow. Because of the reforms we are taking forward, and there will be more to come, the estimate is that 36,000 new first-time buyers will be able to buy their homes in the first year of this reform being in place.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
In her statement, the Economic Secretary was right when she alluded to the FTSE being at a record high yesterday, though many international indices, whether in the US, the far east or Europe, are also at record highs since the April low. She also alluded to the cash ISA problem. What will be done to instil confidence among the wider public who hold money and cash assets but are reluctant and fearful of investing, even in lower-risk collective investments that, over the longer term, would produce much better returns than cash ISAs, which are subject, as she rightly says, to inflation?
Emma Reynolds
I thank the hon. Member for his thoughtful question. We are doing a number of things. First, we are working at pace with the FCA to ensure that targeted support is in place by the end of the tax year and in time for the new ISA season in April next year. We are looking at the risk warnings and at the industry-led campaign on advertising the opportunities of investing. We are doing all that we can. It is good that hon. Members on different sides of the House are supporting us.
Obviously, different people will be at different stages in their journey through life. People who are retired may not want to invest in the stock market. I can understand that, from their perspective, they need more readily available cash, but if people who are younger or middle aged—I do not know where I fall in those categories—[Interruption.] Thank you. If people can even put a small amount away, they can invest in their future. It concerned me recently when a report suggested that many people did not know that their pensions were invested in the stock market and that that is how they get better returns in their retirement. We need to run a huge campaign with the private sector to educate people about the opportunities and to give people the confidence to invest. At the end of the day, it will obviously be down to people about how they choose to invest.
Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)
I welcome the Leeds reforms today. Like many of the best things, they started in West Yorkshire—[Interruption.] I see Conservative Members are still chuntering from a sedentary position. The reforms underline the important point that financial services are not just the preserve of the City of London, but of communities around the country, including many of my Calder Valley constituents who work for Lloyds Bank. Does the Minister agree that one of the most important things we can do to grow the economy is to focus on things that this country does well, including our financial services?
Emma Reynolds
That is absolutely right. We were at Lloyds Banking Group yesterday in Leeds, and Lloyds employs thousands of people in Leeds and the wider region. There are some great opportunities in not only the establishment firms, but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) said, some of these new firms outside of London that are growing and providing innovative products. I was recently in Scotland talking to a group of fintechs about the support they are getting to work closely with some of the banks in Scotland to drive further investment into fintechs. That collaboration between the more established players and new players is positive to see.
Chris Bloore (Redditch) (Lab)
I commend the Minister for her statement. Listening to my neighbour on the Front Bench, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier), as charismatic as he is, he did not convince me that 11% inflation, a £200 increase in my mortgage payments and a revolving door of Prime Ministers and Chancellors is a record to be particularly proud of.
My question is about the 29 million people in this country who have deposits in low-yielding current accounts, while people who invested in the stock exchange over the last 10 years saw yields of 9%. How do we convince and educate those customers to give them the confidence to be able to reveal much better outcomes from their investments?
Emma Reynolds
That is similar to what the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) asked. There has been lots of different research, but AJ Bell recently found that if people had put £100 a year into ISAs for the past 25 years, they would be better off if they invested in a stocks and shares ISA than a cash ISA, so it is perhaps about showing people that sort of evidence. Obviously, the stock market ebbs and flows and can fluctuate, but if people are saving for the longer term, they should certainly consider investing. The industry-led campaign will look at how we can advertise the benefits. Of course, there still will be risk warnings, but we need to ensure that we get the balance right between telling people that there are risks and telling them that there are great benefits of investing, too.
Oral Answers to Questions
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Max Wilkinson (Cheltenham) (LD)
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
Kick-starting economic growth in every region and nation is the No. 1 mission of our Government. As part of our new infrastructure strategy, we have allocated £725 billion to building and rebuilding bridges, roads, schools and hospitals across the country. Also, the £2.3 billion for local government transport will benefit places such as Eastleigh and Gloucestershire. In Wales, key rail routes will benefit from £445 million of investment.
Liz Jarvis
Small to medium-sized businesses are the backbone of the local economy in Eastleigh, creating jobs and driving innovation. However, local businesses, including the precision manufacturing firm G. W. Martin, have told me that the increased costs as a result of the changes to employer national insurance contributions have left them with no choice but to pass those costs on to customers, making UK manufacturing less competitive globally. What concrete steps will the Government take to help businesses in Eastleigh?
Emma Reynolds
Half of small businesses will not be affected by the employer national insurance increase, as the hon. Member will know. We will also be setting out a small business strategy in the Government’s plan to support those businesses across the UK later this year.
Catherine Fookes
As the Minister knows, I am delighted with the spending review’s investment in Welsh rail of £445 million. It shows the power of two Labour Governments working together and corrects years of underfunding from the Tories. This investment in Welsh communities and Welsh business is extremely welcome and it will be a brilliant driver of our Government’s mission for economic growth. Will she outline what steps she is taking with other Departments to ensure that rural economies and market towns such as Monmouth, Abergavenny, Caldicot and Chepstow, and small businesses across Monmouthshire, can be helped to thrive and contribute to that growth mission?
Emma Reynolds
I welcome what my hon. Friend said. The Government are supporting the rural economy with over £2.7 billion a year for sustainable farming and nature recovery. We are investing £1.9 billion to improve digital connectivity, which will be important to the small businesses and others that she mentioned. As I said to the previous question, we will set out a small business strategy later this year.
Cameron Thomas
North Gloucestershire is ready to jump-start economic growth, with its existing advanced engineering and defence industries ready to drive the UK toward economic and defence objectives. Babcock, GE Aerospace, Moog and Safran are already developing world-leading technologies, and the Garden Town project includes a further 100 hectares of employment area. Will the Minister join me in Gloucestershire so we can demonstrate this expertise and the potential for growth on the ground?
Emma Reynolds
Defence companies are an incredibly important part of the economy, and the hon. Member will know that we are increasing defence spending to up to 2.6% by the end of this Parliament. It has only ever reached those levels before under a Labour Government.
Max Wilkinson
The industrial strategy was right to highlight the potential for the National Cyber Innovation Centre in my constituency. If we are going to deliver that, we will need to make sure that junction 10 of the M5 is also done to enable the traffic to get around that development. This is a development of national importance. The strategic sites accelerator has also been cited by the Government. Can the Minister advise me on how areas like Liberal Democrat-run Cheltenham and Gloucestershire can access that fund?
Emma Reynolds
I will ensure that the hon. Member gets a meeting with the relevant Transport Minister, but I hope that he is as excited as I am about the £1 billion that we are investing in the state-of-the-art Golden Valley development, which will create 12,000 high-skilled jobs and 3,700 new homes, and is close to the GCHQ headquarters in Cheltenham. I am sure that that is something he will welcome.
Jo White (Bassetlaw) (Lab)
Does the Minister agree that the new Green Book with its proposals on place-based analysis will mean that left-behind places like mine will start to get the infrastructure investment that they so desperately need?
Emma Reynolds
We pledged to reform the Green Book, and we are doing precisely that, alongside the spending review. We recognise the strategic importance of investment in every part of the country. We want to realise the growth potential of places like the one my hon. Friend represents—she is a doughty champion for her constituency.
Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)
After years of unfunded and undelivered promises from the Conservatives on levelling up, places like Rochdale are finally getting the fairer share of money that they really deserve. The Minister expanded a little on the Green Book, but could she outline how its place-based approach will help places like mine and advanced manufacturing in the Atom Valley?
Emma Reynolds
As my hon. Friend will know, we launched funding of £15.6 billion for transport for city regions in his constituency. I am pleased that this Government recognise the potential of places like the one he represents. We are going to unlock that regional growth across the north and in other parts of the country.
Mr Speaker
I will just make the point again that we are a long way from Eastleigh; I do not understand how the questions are grouped in this way. Other people listed on the Order Paper are being left behind and are missing out as a result.
Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
The Government have committed £2.7 billion per year to support sustainable farming and nature recovery, supporting the rural economy. We have also confirmed investment of £1.9 billion over four years into digital connectivity as well as £2.3 billion of local government transport funding for smaller cities, towns and rural areas.
Rachel Gilmour
While I welcome the Government’s rural growth plans, I am concerned about the persistent poverty in many rural areas. The additional costs of living in these communities—known as the rural premium—exacerbate hardship. What specific steps will the Chancellor take to support those in, or near, poverty in rural areas, and will the Treasury commit to revising the indices of multiple deprivation to more accurately reflect deprivation in rural and coastal communities, such as west Somerset and mid Devon?
Emma Reynolds
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government will be coming forward with further details of funding for the 350 most deprived communities across the country, including rural areas.
Jayne Kirkham (Truro and Falmouth) (Lab/Co-op)
As one of the most deprived regions of northern Europe, Cornwall benefited from objective 1 structural and sustained prosperity fund funding. Can the Minister confirm that, under this Government, Cornwall will not lose out on funding for economic growth and the investment that our communities deserve?
Emma Reynolds
We are supporting growth across the country, and we will publish further details of how we will do that in the coming weeks.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
We understand the importance of in-person banking, in my hon. Friend’s constituency and elsewhere, which is why we secured a commitment from the industry to roll out 350 banking hubs across the United Kingdom. I am leading the work on a financial inclusion strategy, which we will publish later in the year and which emphasises the importance of access to banking, and I am always happy to meet my hon. Friend.
Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)
The Economic Secretary is reviewing the work of the Financial Ombudsman Service. We on the Treasury Committee recognise that there have been challenges with the service, but how will she make sure that the consumer voice is central to her review?
Emma Reynolds
I have had meetings with Which? and other consumer representatives. I reassure my hon. Friend that we are reviewing FOS. We want to make sure that it is a simple, impartial dispute resolution service that quickly and effectively deals with complainants so that consumers can get a fair deal, but that financial services firms are not subject to a quasi-regulator in the way they are at the moment.
Susan Murray (Mid Dunbartonshire) (LD)
Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)
As people are living longer, they face more complex financial choices. The new, simplified advice regime announced by the Government and the Financial Conduct Authority yesterday is hugely welcome and will help more people make better informed investment decisions. Will the Minister provide more detail on the steps the Government will be taking to help firms deliver better advice at scale, especially to young people and the self-employed?
Emma Reynolds
We are really excited about targeted support, because it means that firms will be able to make suggestions to consumers with similarities, so that they have the confidence to invest in the long term and can get better support—not advice—on their pensions.
John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)
Further to that answer, will the Minister confirm that one of the regulatory barriers in that area are privacy and electronic communications regulations, which prevent firms from proactively reaching out to customers to offer targeted support? As part of the review, will she ensure that that specific regulatory change is made, so that that can happen?
Emma Reynolds
I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we are looking at that. We will make sure that firms can take advantage of suggesting targeted support to their consumers so that they are better off, can make more of their money and get a better pension, too.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Some 58% of investors think it is important that stocks and shares ISAs are invested in UK companies. Currently, it is estimated that £100 billion is held in the cash ISAs of people who do not have stocks and shares ISAs. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to encourage further investment in UK stocks and shares, and investment in UK companies?
Emma Reynolds
As we set out at the spring statement, we are looking at the balance between investments in cash and investments in stocks and shares in ISAs. We want to get that balance right. We understand the importance of a rainy day buffer in cash, but we need to give people the confidence to invest. That is a win-win: it is a win for them and a win for British companies listed on our stock exchange.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
Jackie from Street suffers with Crohn’s disease, fibromyalgia and mental health issues. She worked for most of her life until ill health made it impossible. Under the reforms, she will lose her entitlement to personal independence payment and employment and support allowance, plunging her into poverty. Can the Chancellor give Jackie the reassurance she needs that she will not be left in poverty?
Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)
Last week, ahead of the launch of its ethnicity code, the Lending Standards Board announced it would be closing, following the withdrawal of support from major high street banks. This was going to be a groundbreaking step towards tackling the barriers that ethnic minority business owners face in accessing finance. What steps will the Government take to ensure that the ethnicity code is implemented, supported and scaled, so that its principles are embedded across the financial sector?
Emma Reynolds
I am aware of the situation. I reassure the hon. Lady that the Government are committed to ensuring that firms continue to deliver good customer outcomes, now and in the future, with proportionate regulation and oversight. I am happy to engage with her in more detail on the subject she mentions.
Access to Banking Hubs: Hertfordshire
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
It is a great pleasure to serve under your excellent chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I congratulate the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire (Mr Mohindra); this may be his first Westminster Hall debate, but I am sure it will be the first of many. Can I just say how much I enjoy the debates in Westminster Hall? We often get a bit more time to express opinions, and the Government can give a greater degree of detail than I certainly could in the Backbench Business debate on the Floor of the House a few weeks ago.
I thank all the hon. Members present, who have come from beyond Hertfordshire, if my geography is good. I know the beautiful rural areas of Shropshire extremely well because I have family there. When the hon. Member for South Shropshire (Stuart Anderson) was talking, I could not suppress a smile at his description of the beautiful hills of Shropshire, which is where I spend many of my recesses with my children. My parents live in his constituency, in the beautiful town of Ludlow. I could go on, but I had better stop there.
From Shropshire to Strangford and beyond, we have heard perspectives from different parts of the country. I have met many hon. Members who have championed their constituencies and campaigned for banking hubs. It was good to hear from the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Lewis Cocking), who is a doughty champion. We have had a number of discussions in private and in the House, as well as in written questions. I know he has real concerns, and is campaigning, particularly, for the banking hub in Cheshunt. It was good to hear from the hon. Member for Mid Dunbartonshire (Susan Murray), who stressed the importance of rural areas, which I will come back to. The hon. Member for South Shropshire also mentioned that, referring to his 700 miles of beautiful countryside. He also asked about the criteria for the Link assessment, as did other hon. Members.
It is always a pleasure to hear from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). He often asks difficult questions on a variety of subjects. The way in which he is able to range across different subjects in the House is really quite impressive. He talked about digital inclusion and exclusion, as did other hon. Members, and I will come back to that. I thank the hon. Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper); I met her constituent Derek French, who is a doughty campaigner for access to cash and banking. I pay tribute to his work.
Daisy Cooper
Derek French is a constituent in my neighbouring constituency of Harpenden and Berkhamsted —I just want to put that on the record. Harpenden very proudly defends its independence from St Albans and I do not want anybody to be inadvertently offended by my trying to secure some recognition from the Minister in the House, but I thank her for her congratulations.
Emma Reynolds
I am grateful for the correction. I would not like to get in trouble with the hon. Members that represent different parts of Hertfordshire, not least our Parliamentary Private Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern), who also represents a constituency there. I have better knowledge of Buckinghamshire, which is nearby, but I thank her for that correction to the record. I do not want to get in trouble with the hon. Lady’s colleague, the hon. Member for Harpenden and Berkhamsted (Victoria Collins), who was very active in our previous debate on this issue.
I thank the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier), for his speech. I will come back to the points that he made in a moment. I also thank, for their interventions, my hon. Friends the Members for Hexham (Joe Morris) and for Reading Central (Matt Rodda), the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes), and the hon. Members for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) and for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (John Lamont). I have met some of them separately to this debate.
I thank again the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire—I was going to call him my hon. Friend; the debate feels very friendly. I have looked in detail at his constituency, thanks to his calling this debate, which is always a benefit of having such Westminster Hall debates, as he will attest to. I have had a look at Abbots Langley and Rickmansworth. I often go through his constituency on the way home, particularly the Rickmansworth area. They are very different parts of the constituency, from what I can see, in terms of the scale of the population and the number of shops in those areas. In Abbots Langley, I am told—he can correct me if this is not true—that there has been no community access request, as of our information. So if he does want to campaign for a banking hub there, it is open to him and his colleagues on the council he mentioned to request such a thing. Equally, I know he has an enhanced post office in Rickmansworth. Again, it is open to him or others in the community to make the application so that Link would assess the criteria.
Mr Mohindra
I thank the Minister for her summing up. In terms of Abbots Langley, she is correct that the post office has not yet put in an application. It was first establishing the criteria and trying to learn lessons from others. The postmaster is now in a position to actively pursue that, and part of my local campaign is to support that. I hope the Minister will give her blessing and potentially a letter of support, if that is within reason, to ensure that Link and others think that is practical. In terms of the Rickmansworth one, she is correct. It is an enhanced banking hub rather than a full banking hub, as the debate suggests.
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Gentleman will have to excuse me; I cannot offer letters of support. If I were to do that, there would be a number of letters that I would be writing. The Link assessment is independent and is what the previous Government set up and legislated for, in terms of access to cash. I will come on to that in a moment, if that is okay, and give him some more clarification on that.
We need to recognise that the landscape for retail banking has changed significantly in recent years, turbo-charged by the pandemic. For example, last year we had 93% of people with current accounts access their bank online or via a mobile app. That obviously does not include the nan of the hon. Member for Broxbourne, who I have heard about on numerous occasions, but there are lots of people who access their banking in that manner. There has also been a shift among older customers, with 83% of those aged over 75 now using online or mobile banking, compared with just 27% in 2017. That is a marked shift.
We know, however, that there are vulnerable groups, such as the elderly and people with disabilities, who very much appreciate and value in-person banking. Branches can act as anchors in a local community and are very important to small businesses, as several hon. Members mentioned, not least the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire. When a high street branch closes, particularly the last branch on the high street, it can be a real blow to an area, especially where the alternatives are limited.
That is why the Government, when we were in opposition and formulating our manifesto, secured the industry’s commitment to roll out 350 banking hubs—that is in totality. I say to the hon. Member for St Albans that that is not a limit, and actually, we are quite far along that journey. We have 230 that have already been agreed, and more than 170 are open. That includes 108 that have been open since the general election, and we are not even a year into our Government. We promised 350 by the end of the Parliament, but we are running much more quickly than that. I hope that we will surpass 350 by the end of the Parliament.
Robbie Moore
I would like to put on record my thanks to the Minister for her interaction with me in my endeavours to get a banking hub in Ilkley. Could I ask the Minister about the assessment criteria that Link and Cash Access UK are using? Is it the right course to get to the point where we are relying on the final bank to close before we start looking at applications? Secondly, does the Minister not feel it is right that when we do manage to secure a banking hub, an ATM could be located on the outside of that banking hub so that people could access cash out of hours?
Emma Reynolds
The hon. Gentleman brings me to the meat of my speech, which I must move on to, as I do not have very long left. I always get lulled into a false sense of security in Westminster Hall, where I think I have quite a long time to speak. I made the position very clear on the Floor of the House a couple of weeks ago, when we had a similar debate. The hon. Gentleman will know that under the previous Government’s Financial Services and Markets Act 2023, Parliament legislated to protect reasonable access to cash. Specifically, Parliament gave the Financial Conduct Authority new powers to ensure that communities could both withdraw and deposit cash, but that governs only access to cash; it did not include access to in-person banking.
The hon. Member asked about the Link criteria, an issue that has been raised in previous debates. The Government do not have the power to amend the assessment criteria. Any decisions on changes to Link’s criteria for access to banking services are an independent matter for Link. As he will know, the set-up of banking hubs is a voluntary initiative by the banks. I visited a very good banking hub in Buckingham that has different community bankers coming in every day of the week, which works extremely well.
The hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire and others asked whether we are minded to change this situation. We continue to monitor it, and we have heard lots of concerns expressed today. I continue to meet hon. Members, and I have another session next week for those who, if they have not met with me, would like to. Currently, however, the Government are not minded to change the legislation. I am soon to meet John Howells, the chief executive of Link, and I have listened to the concerns of hon. Members, particularly those with rural constituencies, including the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk. I think that Link should take into account his point about the different rules for what is rural and what is urban.
I am running very low on time, and I am conscious that the hon. Member for South West Hertfordshire should be allowed a brief wind-up. I promise to respond in writing to some of the questions asked about the Post Office in the debate.
London Coalition on Sustainable Sovereign Debt
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 2 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
Today marks the launch of the London Coalition on Sustainable Sovereign Debt. The coalition, convened by the Sustainable Sovereign Debt Hub and funded by the Children’s investment Fund Foundation, will bring together private sector stakeholders and Government to find pragmatic solutions to more sustainable sovereign debt financing in developing economies. This will include progressing work on debt contract innovations for bonds and loans to promote transparency, orderly restructurings and more resilient borrowing. Jose Vinals and I will be co-chairs for the coalition. Jose, who will serve in his personal capacity, will be able to draw on his vast experience in both the public and private sectors, most recently as chairperson of Standard Chartered.
The coalition seeks to provide a more formal avenue to engage with private lenders on issues affecting both bonded and non-bonded lending, in order to develop and implement solutions that will ensure that developing economies can access steady, long-term investment from the private sector.
Recognising that the various industry bodies that represent private lenders are not mandated by their memberships to take forward many issues that arise on the global policy agenda, the London coalition seeks to bring together new collaborations among high-ambition private sector market participants to achieve its mission. It has been pleasing to see such interest from our private sector colleagues thus far.
The coalition’s main priorities include making debt contracts clearer and more transparent, improving the way loan terms respond to natural disasters, and addressing problems with group lending practices. In bringing together a wide range of private sector stakeholders, the coalition will tackle broader co-ordination challenges that often arise when restructuring non-bonded debt, with the aim of delivering better outcomes for both borrowers and lenders.
Encouraging fair and open debt restructuring, alongside more resilient borrowing practices, will enable emerging economies to make meaningful progress towards their climate and development goals. The coalition leverages the UK’s strengths in financial services, helping to reinforce its status as a global hub for development finance and supporting economic activity and investment across the country. Direct investment in emerging markets can also drive UK growth by opening new opportunities for British businesses—particularly in financial services—and strengthening trade relationships with rapidly expanding economies in an increasingly uncertain global landscape.
Tackling international sovereign debt challenges is aligned with the UK Government’s plan for change, driving global financial stability while fuelling economic growth and safeguarding national security. By supporting developing countries in managing their debts more sustainably, the UK helps unlock new opportunities for trade, innovation and investment—benefiting British businesses. This leadership not only opens doors to new markets, but helps prevent the kinds of crises that threaten peace and prosperity worldwide, reinforcing the UK’s standing as a champion of responsible finance and a trusted partner.
Looking ahead, the coalition will continue to work collaboratively to develop practical solutions and drive meaningful reform in how countries manage their debts. To achieve this, it will engage closely with a wide range of stakeholders across the official sector, the private sector and the third sector, ensuring that diverse perspectives are represented.
Through ongoing dialogue and partnership, the coalition aims to deliver tangible progress on sustainable sovereign debt financing and support the broader development and climate ambitions of emerging economies.
[HCWS728]
Public Sector Pensions: McCloud Remedy
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Edinburgh West (Christine Jardine) on securing this debate. I am grateful for her speech, and agree that the people we are talking about keep us safe and well, and show true dedication to public service. I absolutely understand the point that she is making.
I will talk a little bit about the background to McCloud, before talking about the progress that has been made to date and what further steps the scheme managers still need to take, as the hon. Lady outlined. The McCloud remedy is, by its nature, a complex undertaking, as I am sure she will appreciate. It applies to 20 public service pension schemes in the UK, and the scheme managers for those schemes are responsible for ensuring that the remedy is administered properly and in accordance with their statutory provisions.
This issue, as the hon. Lady said, arises out of the introduction of new pension schemes for public sector workers in 2014-15. When introducing those pension schemes, the Government at the time gave what is called a transitional protection to older workers, but as she set out, in 2018 the Court of Appeal found that those protections gave rise to unlawful discrimination on the grounds of age, race and sex. In 2019, the Government announced that they would address that discrimination through the McCloud remedy.
There are two main elements to the remedy. The ongoing difference in treatment between older and younger workers was removed by closing the older pre-2015 pension schemes and moving all active members into the new pension schemes in relation to employment after 31 March 2022. However, addressing the discrimination that occurred between 2014 and 2022 is considerably more complex, as hon. Members will appreciate, because whether individual members are better off under the older legacy schemes or newer reform schemes will depend on their individual employment histories and circumstances, and in some cases will not be certain until they retire. The remedy therefore gives a choice over legacy or reform scheme benefits, which is given at the point of retirement for active and deferred members, and is in the process of being rolled out for members who have already retired.
Delivering the remedy to more than 3 million affected scheme members is also an intensive administrative challenge. There are many different elements to it, but the most crucial is that all those affected must be provided with individualised information about their pension entitlements during the 2015 to 2022 remedy period, through what is known as a remediable service statement or RSS.
In addition, a smaller group of members, whose tax position during the remedy period may have changed, need to be provided with a remediable pension savings statement—an RPSS. Given the complexity of the McCloud remedy, schemes are also providing significant levels of guidance and online resources to help members understand the information they receive and the decision they need to make. That information is often very complex, as hon. Members know because many have been in the position of receiving it. There is also a dedicated HMRC digital service to allow members receiving an RPSS to understand their tax position. There are processes in place to allow members to pay additional tax or, as will be the case for the majority of members, to claim either a tax refund or compensation from the scheme where a refund is not possible.
Providing these statements to members, together with the other aspects of implementing the remedy, is the responsibility, as the hon. Lady will know, of pension scheme managers. For the largest public service schemes, including the NHS scheme in England and Wales, the teachers’ scheme in England and Wales, and the civil service scheme across the UK, the scheme manager is the relevant Secretary of State. The local government, police and fire schemes are administered locally, which means each responsible authority, force or brigade has its own scheme manager, who is responsible for the operation of the scheme in that area.
The devolved Administrations—this is pertinent to the concerns raised by the hon. Lady, the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and my hon. Friend the Member for Dunfermline and Dollar (Graeme Downie)—have responsibility for administering their schemes. The Scottish Government, through the Scottish Public Pensions Agency, have responsibility for the police, fire, NHS and teachers’ schemes in Scotland. The Welsh Government are responsible for the firefighters’ scheme in Wales. Pension schemes in Northern Ireland are established under a separate legal framework and are the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Government.
This means that the picture on implementing the remedy across the different schemes is complex and may be subject to particular factors that affect one scheme but not necessarily another. The remedy itself varies across the schemes, reflecting the fact that the schemes themselves are specific to each workforce and have different benefit designs. This can be seen in the differing levels of progress that schemes have so far made.
I am aware that across the police scheme in England and Wales, around 90% of the total number of RSSs have so far been issued, and I understand that the picture is similar in the police scheme in Scotland, with 97% of deferred choice and over three quarters of immediate choice RSSs already issued. Although that is not yet matched by other schemes, significant progress is being made elsewhere. For example, the civil service scheme in England and Wales has issued around 45% of immediate choice RSSs and the teachers’ scheme around 47%.
It was always anticipated that providing RSSs to members would be challenging, and that is specifically recognised in the legislation governing the remedy. In particular, the Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Act 2022 sets out that for the provision of RSSs, there is a deadline of 31 March 2025, or—here comes the qualification—
“such later day as the scheme manager considers reasonable in all the circumstances in the case of a particular member or a particular class of member”.
Given that I was asked about delays, I think it is worth reflecting that hon. Members have raised concerns about their constituents who are experiencing delays in receiving the remedy. I am standing in for the Pensions Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West (Torsten Bell), but I used to be the Pensions Minister myself, so I have some knowledge of the issue, and I encourage scheme managers to take every step possible to resolve those cases as quickly as possible and to prioritise cases where individuals may be in particular need. The hon. Member for Edinburgh West reflected on a number of such cases in her excellent contribution.
I assure anybody in this position that where there is an uplift in interest on pension payments, interest will be paid on arrears, so they will not lose out financially as a result of the delays, but I do understand that the delays are frustrating. As the hon. Lady will be aware, the overarching principle of the McCloud remedy is to put people back in the situation they would have been in if the discrimination had not occurred. In order to do that, it is necessary to apply interest where payments should have been made at an earlier date, whether by the scheme or the member. In this debate, we have heard more about the delays of the scheme towards the member. Interest is applied at 8% when the scheme owes money to the member. Where the member owes money to the scheme, interest is applied at the NS&I direct saver rate, which is currently 3.5%. I hope that reassures the hon. Lady to a certain extent.
We think it is right that these decisions are made by scheme managers, as they are the only ones with full possession of all the relevant information. As I have said, with that information and the variety of different factors, the situation is complex. Having said that, the Government are committed to ensuring that all affected members are provided with the remedy they deserve as quickly as possible, including ensuring that members already in receipt of pension benefits or approaching their retirement are prioritised.
Where scheme managers have exercised their statutory discretion to extend the deadline for providing some members with an RSS, it is therefore important that appropriate new deadlines are set out and that robust plans are in place to ensure the new deadlines are met. Scheme managers must ensure that the plans are properly communicated to pension scheme members to provide them with certainty. The Pensions Regulator must also be kept informed of plans and progress, and I know that schemes have been having these discussions with the regulator.
Similarly, there have been delays in other aspects of the remedy, such as the provision of the RPSSs to those who need them. As I set out earlier, that affects a smaller number of people. However, it is difficult for those people if they are kept waiting. It is important that schemes keep members informed and provide them with appropriate resources and support. Although I am pleased to say that the process of sending out RPSSs in England and Wales is 90% complete and that some schemes have sent them to all affected members, I know that there are issues in other parts of the country. As I said, this is a very complex area. If I have not answered all of the hon. Lady’s questions, I am happy to write to her.
Given the importance of delivering the McCloud remedy effectively, the Pensions Minister has recently written to responsible Departments, requesting details of their plans to issue remaining RSSs and RPSSs to all affected members. All those affected by the McCloud remedy can be assured that a robust and complete statutory remedy has been put in place and that schemes are working to ensure that members receive the information and support they need. I do, though, note the points that the hon. Lady has made about the impact of the delays on her constituents. They will have the opportunity to decide whether to receive legacy or reform scheme benefits in relation to their service. I again thank the hon. Lady for bringing this matter to the House.
Question put and agreed to.
Wholesale Cash Firms: Oversight Regime
Emma Reynolds Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Emma Reynolds)
Wholesale cash distribution is the mechanism that supplies physical cash—specifically banknotes and coins—to retail banks, cash machines and the wider retail market. This is a vital mechanism for ensuring the sustainable provision of and reliable public access to cash.
Under part 5A of the Banking Act 2009, the Bank of England is responsible for managing risks to the effectiveness, resilience, and sustainability of the WCD system. Specifically, the Act gives the Bank of England powers to “oversee” firms recognised by the Treasury in wholesale cash oversight orders as performing relevant WCD activities and as being market significant. The Bank of England can give directions, issue codes of practice, and supervise firms’ compliance. Further detail on the Bank of England’s supervisory approach can be found in its statement of policy. 1
His Majesty’s Treasury’s decision on recognition
Today I am announcing which firms the Treasury has specified as recognised persons in wholesale cash oversight orders. As required under the Act, in making this decision the Treasury has: notified firms it considered for recognition; sought and considered any representations from these firms; and consulted relevant regulators, including the Bank of England.
Following this extensive process, I am announcing today that HM Treasury has made wholesale cash oversight orders to the following firms:
Barclays Bank UK PLC;
Barclays Bank PLC;
G4S Cash Centres (UK) Limited;
HSBC UK Bank PLC;
HSBC Bank PLC;
Lloyds Bank PLC;
Bank of Scotland PLC;
National Westminster Bank Public Limited Company;
The Royal Bank of Scotland Public Limited Company;
Post Office Limited;
Santander UK PLC;
Vaultex UK Limited.
These wholesale cash oversight orders have been made on 5 June 2025 and will come into force today, 12 June 2025.
In making these orders I have considered the requirements under section 28 of the Small Business, Enterprise, and Employment Act 2015. This requires Minsters to include in certain secondary legislation that regulates businesses and other bodies a provision for review or a statement as to why this is not appropriate.
I consider a provision for review inappropriate as it would be disproportionate relative to the economic impact. The impact on business is expected to be de minimis with annual fees that the Bank of England can charge recognised firms effectively capped by the Treasury, detailed in the Banking Act 2009 (Wholesale Cash Oversight Fees) Regulations 2024. The Bank of England can charge a maximum of £400,000 per firm per year for supervision fees and £150,000 for “special projects”. The current aggregate impact of making these orders is de minimis as defined in the better regulation framework.
Further, including a provision for review would be undesirable for particular policy reasons. The legislation contains provisions which necessitate ongoing review, meaning further provisions would be duplicative. Under section 206J of the Banking Act 2009, HM Treasury must revoke an order if it is no longer satisfied that the firm meets the relevant criteria. Section 206Z2 also requires the Bank of England to produce an annual report on the discharge of its functions and the extent to which risks in the WCD system have been managed. That report will subsequently be laid in Parliament. HM Treasury also plans routine engagement with the Bank of England that will monitor the implementation and impact of the regime.
1 https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/paper/2023/sop/sop-on-the-banks-supervisory-approach-to-market-oversight-for-wholesale-cash-distribution
[HCWS698]