Time is Money: How Regulators Can Support Growth (Industry and Regulators Committee Report)

Viscount Chandos Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd November 2026 Grand Committee

[Viscount Chandos (Lab)]

I am very grateful to my noble friend Lady Hayter of Kentish Town for her incisive introduction to today’s debate and for her leadership of the Industry and Regulators Committee, which has produced this excellent report. As she said, I was a member of the committee for the first few weeks of its inquiry and much regret not overlapping with my noble friend, who has brought a lifetime of focus on consumer interests to her new role. I declare my interests as disclosed in the register, as the director of RSMB, the Theseus Agency and Digbeth Loc. Studios, and as an adviser to the family office, WFO Services.

I welcome and endorse the analysis and conclusions of the report, which shines a light into what it correctly describes as the “mixed picture” of regulators’ roles in encouraging and stimulating economic growth. Successive recent Governments have placed great emphasis on regulators ensuring that they take proper account of growth as an objective. At the risk of being pedantic, I do not think it is right for regulators baldly to “prioritise growth”, which risks a mistaken direction of the industry or the products and services concerned, as well as raising unrealistic expectations for what the regulator can achieve. Language matters.

I wholeheartedly support a direction to regulators to seek, particularly in the light of the rapid innovation which the noble Lord, Lord Willetts, oversees, a better balance between consumer protection and the promotion of growth on the part of the producers of the goods and services being regulated, and hence of the economy as a whole. But that is very different from the rhetoric of prioritising growth. The report accurately identifies the complexity of this issue and the need to make trade-offs between fostering growth and other factors, such as consumer protection and environmental standards. I am not convinced by the Government’s response, shortly before the change of Prime Minister, that the proposed regulating for growth Bill will bring the strategic clarity that is needed to enable widely differing regulators to balance the conflicting objectives that they are having to juggle. I join my noble friend Lady Hayter in asking my noble friend the Minister to indicate the timing of the Bill’s introduction and her current thinking about how to define the judgments and trade-offs that are needed.

The challenges in each regulated industry or sector vary significantly: in financial services, overseen by the Industry and Regulators Committee’s sister committee, there is clear evidence of clumsy and onerous regulation holding back growth in this vital and world-leading service sector without commensurate improvement in consumer protection. In the water industry, under the Conservative Government, short-term and politically influenced focus on holding down consumer prices and lax supervision of corporate behaviour led to serious detriment to the long-term interest of consumers, as well as the undermining of the industry’s financial resilience. The legal services industry is undergoing fundamental changes in ownership and operation as outside capital is introduced through private equity in the stock market, akin to the “big bang” in financial services 40 years ago. The regulation of legal services is currently diffuse, incestuous—dare I say it—and questionably fit for purpose, as these developments change the motivation and behaviour of firms. Can my noble friend the Minister say whether she believes that the regulation of legal services provision strikes the right balance between independence, growth and consumer protection?

The report makes only passing reference to generative AI and AGI, as the committee’s remit was very much focused on existing regulators, but this area poses the starkest challenge in balancing growth and consumer— and, indeed, human—protection at a time when leading companies in this field acknowledge in their initial public offering documentation the non-trivial possibility of devastating systemic harm to mankind. Can my noble friend provide any update on the Government’s intentions for the overarching regulation of AI?

I will end by unashamedly asserting the primacy of consumer protection in regulation, reflecting the asymmetry in power in most cases between consumers and producers and providers. As the report argues, stable, fair consumer protection is a necessary condition for producers and providers’ growth anyway. The most efficient and streamlined application of well-designed regulation is a complementary factor in stimulating that growth. This report gives a compelling summary of the challenges facing the Government in achieving this balance and therefore deserves the closest possible attention and action.