Banking hub for North Walsham after Santander announces closure
A banking hub has been planned for a rural town which is set to lose its last High Street bank.Santander's branch on Market Place, North Walsham, Norfolk, is expected to close later this year.North Norfolk's Liberal Democrat MP, Steff Aquarone, said he was told the branch would remain open until a banking hub was established by the company Link.Banking hubs are spaces shared by high street banks, where staff work on a rotating basis throughout the week.
On Wednesday, Santander announced it was to close 95 of its branches across the UK - including in North Walsham - putting 750 jobs at risk."I am alarmed and distraught for the team at Santander in North Walsham who are set to lose their jobs when the bank closes," Aquarone said."I have been campaigning for banking hubs for three years, launching petitions and speaking on the topic in Parliament to highlight the importance of efficient local banking services for local people."I am pleased that I have now secured a second banking hub, this time in North Walsham – it is a busy town with bustling businesses, and I know that residents here need regular access to cash and services."
Banking hubs already exist in Watton, Downham Market, Holt and Harleston.Two further hubs are planned for Thetford and Wymondham.North Walsham's banking hub will be delivered by Cash Access UK.Santander said the changes were due to a "a rapid movement of customers choosing to do their banking digitally".A company spokesperson added: "Closing a branch is always a very difficult decision and we spend a great deal of time assessing where and when we do this and how to minimise the impact it may have on our customers."It remains unknown exactly when Santander will close in North Walsham.However, the company said it would begin closing UK branches from June.The number of bank branches in the UK fell from 13,345 in 2012 to 7,400 in 2023, according to the Office for National Statistics.
Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
British firms are being stifled by excessive regulation and bureaucracy
The all-party House of Lords Financial Services Regulation Committee which I chair has just completed a year-long inquiry into how effective the regulators are at fulfilling their duties to boost competitiveness and growth. It's a sad tale of a deeply entrenched culture of risk aversion, of disproportionately high costs of compliance, and of a complex regulatory landscape driven by expansion and overlap in the regulators' remits and by the volume and scope of regulatory activity. There is no doubt that operational inefficiencies and suffocating bureaucracy are damaging growth and place the UK at a competitive international disadvantage. Despite the regulators' growth mandate, the firms which gave evidence to the year-long inquiry say the system is slow and inflexible. Firms complain of being buried under regulatory paperwork and of facing a never-ending barrage of information requests from both the FCA and PRA. The CEO of Nationwide told the inquiry she received 4,519 pieces of direct correspondence in 12 months. Santander responded to more than 300 regulatory requests and managed 400 regular regulatory reports equating to over 2,500 submissions a year. One firm told us it employed 78 compliance officers for its UK operations compared with a total of 73 to cover the other 40 countries it operated in. We were dismayed by the evidence we received which highlighted long-standing issues that limit investment and the ability of financial firms to grow, innovate and compete. The lack of proportionality in the regulators' approach was evident in the FCA's failure to distinguish between wholesale and retail markets and the PRAs approach to capital requirements. The vagueness surrounding the Consumer Duty and the Financial Ombudsman's evolution into a quasi-regulator has created uncertainty and a worrying perception of a regulatory penalty for investment in UK businesses. It is essential for the FCA and FOS to be aligned on redress and interpretation. The FCA and the PRA alone employ around 6,500 staff at a cost of £1.1 billion. This results in an ever-rolling stream of consultation documents, regulatory changes and compliance advice which firms are expected to follow, communicated sometimes informally through speeches by senior regulators and letters to CEOs. My committee receives notice of these every week and it is frankly overwhelming. The regulators lack clear focus and appear to be still haunted by the 2008 financial crisis. This leads to excessive caution, sluggish approvals, high compliance costs and endless red tape. There is an urgent need for the FCA and PRA senior leadership to drive cultural change. This change should emphasise a more tailored and proportional approach to the risks posed by regulated firms, a culture of continual operational improvement and innovation, and a more transparent and trusting relationship with the businesses they regulate. An approach is needed which embraces technology and streamlines compliance for fintech and AI-driven firms. The skills and quality of staff are vitally important and that means addressing remuneration. A revolving door sees regulators losing some of their most talented people, recruited to advise the companies they once regulated at substantially higher salaries. We were surprised by the difference in candour between the evidence we received from the industry in public and the views expressed to us privately. We were obliged to take evidence in private in order to get many firms to share their concerns. At one meeting I attended, a CEO read out his brief from his compliance department which said that if Lord Forsyth invited him to give evidence to his committee under no circumstances should he agree to do so. This is not a healthy situation and there needs to be a much more open and trusting relationship between the regulators and the firms they regulate. In a competitive market, speed matters. Yet firms say UK regulators are lagging behind international rivals when it comes to authorising new products, people and operations. While official stats suggest improvements, they take too long and many say those numbers are misleading: they exclude the time regulators 'stop the clock' to request more data. If launching a new fintech product takes six months longer in London than in Singapore, investors and innovators will simply go elsewhere. We heard many positive reports of the success of the concierge approach of the Singapore regulator, which involved helping firms to grow and comply with regulatory provisions. Our regulators have much to learn from this approach. The Chancellor has placed a great deal of faith in the regulators stimulating economic growth. Our report makes one thing clear: the regulators can't do this alone. The Government must step up. That means clearer economic goals, better use of statutory guidance and more robust performance tracking. Right now, metrics are focused on operational inputs, not outcomes. Without stronger leadership from HM Treasury and without aligning regulators, industry and Parliament, the growth and competitiveness objectives will be little more than political window dressing.
Powys County Times
20 hours ago
- Powys County Times
Powys County Council's budget black hole value queried
HOW big a funding gap Powys County Council is expected to fill with cuts and savings over the next four to fove years varies by over £20 million – a councllor has pointed out. Calls were made to clarify the figures that the council is using to explain their predicted financial black hole during a joint meeting of all of the council's scrutiny committee's on Wednesday, June 11. At the meeting, councillors looked at the council's draft Corporate and Equalities Strategic Plan which has been updated from the version that was agreed earlier this year. The plan sets out the council's well-being objectives, and what action they need to take to deliver them up the next local election in 2027. All the departmental strategies, action and business plans are linked by a 'golden thread' into this document which encompasses them all. This plan is supposed to keep track of how the council is performing against the three objectives of the Liberal Democrat/Labour cabinet's Stronger Fairer, Greener agenda. Cllr Gareth E Jones (Powys Independents) highlighted the problem and said: 'If you go to the leader and deputy leader's introduction (to the document) there's a statement there that the funding gap is £60 million but on the MTFS (Medium Term Financial Strategy) the funding gap on those assumptions is shown as £39.1 million. 'I think they two figures need to be the same for consistency.' Director of corporate services and section 151 officer, Jane Thomas replied: 'We can and will amend that to the latest figure, it should reflect what was approved in council back in February. 'We will see the gap change quite often now as we go through the years and we develop our five year plans.' Making sure that the figure changes forms one of the recommendations made by councillors at the meeting – which will be added to the report when it goes before cabinet at a later date. Another recommendation by councillors is that members of the Liberal Democrat/Labour cabinet should attend the joint scrutiny meeting to explain and if needed defend the council's performance. Cllr Jones said: 'It was very disappointing about the number of cabinet members that were present today, we should have a recommendation at future meetings that they have more presence. 'This is the council's performance document ,officers develop the plan but cabinet member sign it off.' Learning and skills committee chairman who chaired the joint-scrutiny meeting, Cllr Gwynfor Thomas (Conservative) said: 'I'm happy to do that as they (cabinet members) are the line holders and are responsible for the different measures and things.'
New Statesman
2 days ago
- New Statesman
AI regulation does not stifle innovation
Photo credit: Claudenakagawa / Shutterstocl Ever since co-founding the All-Party Parliamentary Group on AI nine years ago, still ably administered by the Big Innovation Centre, I've been deeply involved in debating and advising on the implications of artificial intelligence. My optimism about AI's potential remains strong – from helping identify new Parkinson's treatments to DeepMind's protein structure predictions that could transform drug discovery and personalised medicine. Yet this technology is unlike anything we've seen before. It's potentially more autonomous, with greater impact on human creativity and employment, and more opaque in its decision-making processes. The conventional wisdom that regulation stifles innovation needs turning on its head. As AI becomes more powerful and pervasive, appropriate regulation isn't just about restricting harmful practices – it's key to driving widespread adoption and sustainable growth. Many potential AI adopters are hesitating not due to technological limitations but Tim Clement-Jones Liberal Democrat peer and spokesperson for the digital economy uncertainties about liability, ethical boundaries and public acceptance. Clear regulatory frameworks addressing algorithmic bias, data privacy and decision transparency can actually accelerate adoption by providing clarity and confidence. Different jurisdictions are adopting varied approaches. The European Union's AI Act, with its risk-based framework, started coming into effect this year. Singapore has established comprehensive AI governance through its model AI governance framework. Even China regulates public-facing generative AI models with fairly heavy inspection regimes. The UK's approach has been more cautious. The previous government held the AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park and established the AI Safety Institute (now inexplicably renamed the AI Security Institute), but with no regulatory teeth. The current government has committed to binding regulation for companies developing the most powerful AI models, though progress remains slower than hoped. Notably, 60 countries – including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, but not Britain or the US – signed the Paris AI Action Summit declaration in February this year, committing to ensuring AI is 'open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy'. Several critical issues demand urgent attention. Intellectual property: the use of copyrighted material for training large language models without licensing has sparked substantial litigation and, in the UK, unprecedented parliamentary debate. Governments need to act decisively to ensure creative works aren't ingested into generative AI models without return to rights-holders, with transparency duties on developers. Digital citizenship: we must equip citizens for the AI age, ensuring they understand how their data is used and AI's ethical implications. Beyond the UAE, Finland and Estonia, few governments are taking this seriously enough. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe International convergence: despite differing regulatory regimes, we need developers to collaborate and commercialise innovations globally while ensuring consumer trust in common international ethical and safety standards. Well-designed regulation can be a catalyst for AI adoption and innovation. Just as environmental regulations spurred cleaner technologies, AI regulations focusing on explainability and fairness could push developers toward more sophisticated, responsible systems. The goal isn't whether to regulate AI, but how to regulate it promoting both innovation and responsibility. We need principles-based rather than overly prescriptive regulation, assessing risk and emphasising transparency and accountability without stifling creativity. Achieving the balance between human potential and machine innovation isn't just possible – it's necessary as we step into an increasingly AI-driven world. That's what we must make a reality. This article first appeared in our Spotlight on Technology supplement, of 13 June 2025. Related
