Chancellor's Leeds Reforms to put money in people's pockets
Changes include reforming the bank ring-fencing regime and reducing red tape in the City in order to reintroduce 'informed risk-taking' into the financial system, the Government said.
The Chancellor said the 'Leeds reforms', unveiled in the West Yorkshire city, 'represent the widest set of reforms to financial services for more than a decade'.
New measures are intended to help drive increased levels of investment among both financial firms and individuals.
The Treasury said the ring-fencing regime – which was brought in after the 2008 financial crisis to separate banks' retail and investment banking activities – will be reformed.
Economic Secretary Emma Reynolds will lead a review into how changes can strike the right balance between growth and stability, including protecting consumers' deposits, it said.
Britain is a global outlier in enforcing ring-fencing, and major banks have been divided over whether the system is necessary to protect savers or is overly burdensome.
The Treasury said it was backing regulatory reforms for mid-sized banks to free up money for lending and investment.
Furthermore, the plans include cutting layers of red tape for businesses in the City.
This will see the UK's Financial Ombudsman Service – which settles complaints between consumers and businesses – modernised and simplified to help create a more predictable system and prevent consumer compensation being delayed.
It will also speed up changes to the senior managers regime, which was also brought in after the 2008 crisis to vet individuals before they are appointed and hold them accountable for problems and risk-taking.
The Government said it will radically streamline the current regime and cut the burden on firms in half.
The Leeds Reforms - named after one of our financial services' hubs and a city I'm proud to represent - will deliver the biggest package of reforms to financial services regulation in a decade.
Kickstarting economic growth and putting more pounds in people's pockets. pic.twitter.com/efN8YEHLPZ
Cuts to City red tape sit alongside efforts to boost the level of investment among individuals.
This includes rolling out 'targeted support' from April next year, whereby banks can alert customers with cash sitting in low-return current accounts about investment opportunities.
Major banks and financial firms including Barclays, Lloyds, Vanguard and Hargreaves Lansdown are backing a new advertising campaign highlighting the benefits of investing.
Risk warnings on investment products could also potentially be watered down as part of a review into possible barriers to investing.
The Government also said it will continue to consider reforms to ISAs and savings to strike the right balance between cash savings and investment.
Ms Reeves was widely expected to leave cash ISAs untouched in the measures announced on Tuesday (July 15), following speculation that she was planning to cut the annual tax-free allowance in a bid to spark more investment instead.
'We are fundamentally reforming the regulatory system, freeing up firms to take risks and to drive growth,' Ms Reeves told finance chiefs when setting out the reforms in Leeds.
Recommended reading:
HMRC urging parents to claim £2,000 tax-free childcare
HMRC Child Benefit changes with opt-in campaign for parents
More than half a million more savers to benefit from HMRC cash - apply today
Adam French, consumer expert at Moneyfactscompare.co.uk, says: 'It is encouraging to see steps being taken to make retail investing a less daunting proposition by plugging the advice gap and empowering firms to give more targeted support while maintaining appropriate safeguards. But it is only part of the puzzle.
'It is also essential that we avoid a return to the low interest rates of the past decade which had a significant and often overlooked side effect: skewing investment priorities by driving capital into property instead of more productive areas of the economy. For the Leeds Reforms to work it must be the case that backing the next generation of British businesses looks safer and more rewarding than property speculation.'
Brian Byrnes, head of personal finance at Moneybox, adds: "It is encouraging to see steps being taken to support first-time buyers. Enabling people to borrow more is not a silver bullet. What first-time buyers truly need is not just the ability to take on more debt, but meaningful, long-term support to help them start saving and investing earlier in life so they can build up that all-important deposit."
Sarah Coles, head of personal finance for Hargreaves Lansdown, also comments: 'It's incredibly positive to see Rachel Reeves take some key steps towards closing the UK's yawning retail investment gap.
'There will be a new era of investment with the advent of new rules allowing companies to offer targeted support to their clients, alongside changes to risk warnings so they actively help retail investors understand their options rather than standing in their way of harnessing the incredible power of investment.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
18 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves warned by City grandees not to weaken banking safeguards
Rachel Reeves has been warned by City grandees that her plan to slash financial red tape could have little benefit for British households while increasing risks in the banking industry. The chancellor used a speech to City bosses attending the annual Mansion House dinner on Tuesday to argue that in too many areas regulation was acting as a 'boot on the neck of business', as she pledged sweeping changes to help revive the economy. However, leading figures in involved in Britain's post-2008 drive to prevent a repeat of the financial crisis warned Labour against unpicking bank ringfencing – a key measure introduced after the collapse. Sir John Vickers, the architect of the UK's ringfencing rules, deployed after the financial crisis to separate high street banking from riskier investment banking, said a wholesale retreat from the reform would be a 'very bad idea'. Lord Turner, who took over as chair of the Financial Services Authority during the 2008 crash and played a leading role in the post-crisis redesign of the banking system, also warned the chancellor to proceed with caution. He said: 'The costs of getting it wrong far outweigh the gains from loosening the requirements and allowing riskier activity by banks.' Lord Tyrie, who chaired the post-crisis parliamentary commission on banking standards, said it would be 'imprudent' to scrap ringfencing after banks had invested huge sums in separating retail banking from their riskier activities. Now a Conservative peer, he warned in 2012 that the ringfence needed 'electrification' to discourage banks from lobbying future governments. He said: 'As the banking commission, which I chaired, strongly argued, it needs to be kept under constant review and where necessary adapted. From the Mansion House speech we have very little information about what is intended so far. Succumbing to lobbying in the misplaced belief that watering it down would somehow release the economy to a higher growth path would be a serious misjudgment.' Reeves on Tuesday committed to 'meaningful reform' of the safeguards, with the government saying it would review the rules in an effort to strike a balance between ensuring financial stability and supporting economic growth. However, Vickers said: 'Nothing is perfect, I am sure that its [ringfencing] implementation is capable of improvement. But a radical rowing back on it would be a very bad idea. 'It would remove a layer of protection, for the everyday banking that firms and households depend on, from global shocks. Look what happened last time. I am not saying ringfencing would have prevented 2008-09, which was a global event. But the damage to the UK, including to UK growth prospects, would have been much lower if we had such a regime in place.' As recently as last month the Bank of England governor, Andrew Bailey, warned ministers against watering-down the rules, arguing that it led major banks to funnel more cash to their global investment arms at the expense of British businesses and households. Earlier this year, the bosses of four of the UK's biggest banks – HSBC, Lloyds Banking Group, NatWest and Santander UK – wrote to Reeves to lobby for the removal of the ringfencing rules, arguing that it was a drag on lending to the British economy. However, Bailey wrote in a letter to the Commons Treasury committee that ringfenced banks faced 'no restrictions on lending' to UK firms. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion He said: 'Removing the ringfence would most likely have a negative effect on UK lending, both in terms of cost and quantities, with banks directing funding from retail deposits away from UK households and SMEs [small and medium-sized enterprises] and towards investment banking activities or activities outside the UK.' Vickers said it would be ironic if Reeves rolled back ringfencing in the name of supporting British firms and households. 'It doesn't help the UK growth objective. It would increase risk for no benefit.' Turner said it was important to review City rules, but cautioned: 'The fundamentals of the reforms we put in place – the ringfencing of retail activities and the capital requirements on systemically important banks – need to remain the bedrock of UK regulation.' The Treasury said it would work with the Bank of England's Prudential Regulation Authority to consider if ringfenced banks could provide more products and services to UK businesses, if inefficiencies could be tackled, and if banks should be allowed to share resources and services more flexibly across the ringfence. Led by the Treasury minister, Emma Reynolds, the review would report by early 2026. It said: 'The government is committed to upholding the ringfencing regime to protect financial stability and safeguard depositors. However, the government also intends to take forward meaningful reforms to the regime to support its growth agenda.'
The National
22 minutes ago
- The National
Keir Starmer suspends four 'rebel' Labour MPs – see the full list
Three of the MPs have lost the whip after just a year in post, while another has been an MP since 2015. Here are more details about who they are: Brian Leishman Grangemouth MP Leishman has been a vocal critic of the UK Government ever since he was elected last year. He is said to have been kicked out of the parliamentary Labour Party over voting against the Government and criticism of its policies in the media. At the end of last month, Leishman admitted he was "not proud" of Starmer's first year in power as he spoke about his opposition to welfare reforms. (Image: Brian Leishman) He has been especially critical of the Government over the closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery. In a fiery speech to Ed Miliband in April he said: "Scotland once again is a victim of industrial vandalism and devastation, and I don't want anyone in this chamber to dare mention a 'just transition', because we all know that the Conservatives were in power and the SNP currently in Holyrood did nothing to avert this catastrophic decision happening. 'I put it to the Secretary of State, the Labour leadership in the General Election campaign said they would step in and save the jobs at the refinery. 'What has changed? And why have we not done the sensible thing for Scotland's energy security?' Chris Hinchliff (Image: UK Parliament) The North East Herefordshire MP told reporters in June that he was willing to lose the whip over his opposition to the welfare reforms. Aged 31, he has been involved with party for at least a decade having assisted in Daniel Zeichner's successful campaign in the 2015 General Election. He told the Local Democracy Reporting Service his first year as an MP had been 'challenging' and said he had "frustrations with the government". In a piece for Left Foot Forward this week, Hinchliff said Labour needed to take on vested interests and put people before profit. He led a rebellion against ministers' planning bill over environmental concerns. Neil Duncan-Jordan The MP for Poole in Dorset described the welfare bill as "dog's breakfast that isn't really worth the paper it's written on'. After voting against the bill, he told the Bournemouth Echo in an interview that the bill was "handled badly" and he would always vote for 'what was best' for his constituents. (Image: NQ) In response to his suspension, Duncan-Jordan said: "Since being elected I have consistently spoken up for my constituents on a range of issues, including most recently on cuts to disability benefits. I understood this could come at a cost, but I couldn't support making disabled people poorer. "Although I've been suspended from the Parliamentary Labour Party today, I've been part of the Labour and trade union movement for 40 years and remain as committed as ever to its values. To my constituents: it's business as usual. I remain your hardworking local MP." He has previously raised concerns about the Government's changes to the winter fuel allowance Rachael Maskell Maskell, the MP for York Central since 2015, was shadow environment secretary from 2016 to 2017 and shadow employment secretary in 2020. More recently, she led on the second welfare bill rebellion amendment which forced sweeping changes to the legislation. In May, she insisted the UK Government "must change course" following sweeping gains for Reform UK in England's local elections. She said policies introduced by the Government which had not been in its manifesto had forced voters "to look elsewhere". Maskell described the welfare cuts as "Dickensian" and "from another era". She has also voiced support for a wealth tax to be brought in to meet the £5 billion cost of the U-turn on welfare.
North Wales Chronicle
36 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Embassies should see cars clamped for congestion charge debts
Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb said the Government had 'far too much patience' with indebted foreign governments, while Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesman Lord Purvis of Tweed called for ministers to discuss outstanding fees with US President Donald Trump during his September visit. Responding, Foreign Office minister Baroness Chapman of Darlington described diplomacy as 'an art'. She said the fee for driving in inner London was a 'charge' rather than a tax, which embassies should pay. According to Transport for London, the US embassy based south of the River in Nine Elms owes almost £15.5 million in congestion charge debts. The Japanese mission faces debts of more than £10.6 million, while the Chinese embassy racked up a £10.3 million debt between 2003 and March 31 2025. Lord Purvis referred to a diplomatic reception held at the Foreign Office in central London and asked: 'Should we not start instituting a drop-off and collection fee at King Charles Street just as long as we get our money back?' The Liberal Democrat also said Mr Trump 'would certainly not want a reputation of not paying fines' and said: 'When he comes for the state visit, can we ensure that this is part of the agenda so that there's no congestion in the city of London from the American delegation and they pay us what they owe?' Baroness Chapman replied that there was a 'whole range of measures' open to the Government, and that she would 'take on board' the one which Lord Purvis suggested. 'Others include encouraging the use perhaps of public transport or cycling or walking around our wonderful city, but he suggests that we raise these matters directly with our counterparts, and I can assure him that we do just that,' the minister added. Former London Assembly Labour leader Lord Harris of Haringey asked: 'Would it, for example, be possible to clamp the cars that have done this, because I suspect that might concentrate the minds?' Following him, the Green Party's Baroness Jones said: 'This has been going on ever since the congestion charge first came in. 'They've racked up these debts and I love Lord Harris's idea – we should clamp them all. 'We have a record of which cars have infringed the congestion charge. We clamp them all.' Baroness Chapman told peers: 'All I would say is that diplomacy is an art and it comes more naturally to some than to others perhaps.' She added: 'I think it's right that we don't escalate this issue above some of our very real concerns around security and defence and trade that we seek to work very closely with our counterparts on.' Their exchanges were triggered by a question from Labour peer Lord Faulkner of Worcester, who asked about Government efforts to claw back unpaid business rates, parking fines and London congestion charges in April and May. Baroness Chapman said that the Government had received 31 responses to the exercise earlier this year. 'Some agreed to settle debts, other disputed charges, and some refused to pay the London congestion charge claiming exemption under the Vienna Convention,' the minister said. 'FCDO (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) action since April 3 2025 has helped reduce national non-domestic rates debt by £287,142, car parking fines debt by £7,035 and London congestion charge debt by £7,430.' To laughter, Conservative shadow foreign office minister Lord Callanan said: 'I think there is unity across the House on this one. 'I think we're all amused by the prospect of some poor parking warden having to put a ticket on President Trump's limousine and what might happen to him from the actions of the secret service. 'But it is of course that conduct of diplomatic staff is a reflection of important values, respect, dignity and mutual recognition between nations, so following on from the reply that she gave to the Liberal Democrats, will (Baroness Chapman) consider linking future privileges or engagement opportunities to the good standing of diplomatic missions in their civic responsibilities, so as to encourage greater accountability?' The minister said she would keep the situation 'under close consideration'.
