Britain cannot grow without ‘fighting fit' finance sector, Rachel Reeves says
'Today, I have placed financial services at the heart of the Government's growth mission, recognising that Britain cannot succeed and meet its growth ambitions without a financial services sector that is fighting fit and thriving,' she told the attendees.
She said the Government was delivering on its pledge, made at last year's Mansion House speech, to 'regulate for growth and not just for risk'.
The Treasury announced a package of reforms on Tuesday aimed at attracting more investment to the UK, and among individual consumers, to help grow the economy.
Ms Reeves said this involves 'rolling back regulation that has gone too far in seeking to eliminate risk', with plans to cut red tape in the City and reform banking rules including the ring-fencing regime.
The UK is currently an outlier in forcing banks to separate their retail and investment banking activities, so reforms are hoped to make Britain more competitive globally.
Ms Reeves also highlighted efforts to boost retail investment which she said is currently presented 'in a negative light, quick to warn people of the risks without giving proper weight to the benefits'.
Plans include potentially changing the language of risk warnings on investment products to encourage more people, particularly women, to take the leap.
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
— Rachel Reeves (@RachelReevesMP) July 15, 2025
Furthermore, the Chancellor said new powers to mandate pension funds to invest in UK assets were 'sending a clear signal' that the Government and industry want to deliver higher returns for savers and more investment for the economy.
'But I am confident that I will not need to use that power because firms see the urgency and importance of this as clearly as I do,' she said.
The 'Leeds reforms', unveiled in the West Yorkshire city, are set to be the biggest set of reforms to financial services for more than a decade, according to the Government.
But the Chancellor concluded her speech by saying: 'As I look ahead, it is clear that we must do more.
'In too many areas, regulation still acts as a boot on the neck of businesses, choking off the enterprise and innovation that is the lifeblood of growth.
'Regulators in other sectors must take up the call I make this evening not to bend to the temptation of excessive caution but to boldly regulate for growth in the service of prosperity across our country.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
4 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Inflation is home-grown: Reeves has the right ambitions, but the wrong execution, says MAGGIE PAGANO
What planet is Rachel Reeves on? Just hours after the Chancellor assured her City audience at the Mansion House dinner that Labour is building a 'Britain that is better off', up pop inflation numbers showing that the country is markedly less well off than a year ago. As the latest figures from the Office of National Statistics show, the UK's inflation rate ticked up to 3.6 per cent in the year to June – nearly double the target rate – and up from 3.4 per cent in May. It's the steepest rise since January last year. Reeves can't have been doing much of her own food shopping recently, or had to handle household bills for her two homes. Otherwise she would have seen for herself that even the most basic of foods like butter and milk have been shooting up, as have energy costs, water bills and rents. As any regular shopper could have told her weeks ago, food prices have been creeping up again for some time. In June, they were 4.4 per cent higher, the third month in a row that prices have risen and the frothiest increase for 18 months. But the biggest driver behind the June price hikes compared to a year ago are rising housing costs – despite interest rate cuts – including rents which are up by 5.8 per cent. Energy costs were up by 6.8 per cent despite an overall fall in fuel prices while water bills shot up by a staggering 26 per cent. And the reason for inflation running hot again? This time energy and raw material costs can't be blamed solely on Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Donald Trump's tariffs or even the Middle East. This time businesses are being more honest – they are passing on higher costs to their customers because of the recent increase in employers' National Insurance (NI) and other tax rises. It's a home-grown problem. An own goal, if you like. In which case, you have to ask whether the Chancellor is either delusional or blind when making other equally extraordinary claims during her speech. Labour, she said, had 'restored Britain's reputation as a beacon of stability by putting the public finances back on a stable footing'. Really? Reeves is pulling our leg. Gilt yields are high, growth is risible if not grinding to a halt, demand is down, the welfare state continues to balloon and the public finances are in dire straits. Figures out today are likely to show a further shake-out in the jobs market triggered by the NI increases, confirming recent warnings by Andrew Bailey, the Bank of England Governor, that the jobs tax is leading to greater unemployment. That is why, despite the latest figures, interest rates are likely to be trimmed in August. When will the Chancellor learn that you can't deliver growth by parroting that you want it? Human endeavour doesn't work like that. If you want entrepreneurs and companies to risk their capital, they must feel confident about a brighter future – and potential rewards – rather than booking flights to Dubai. That's why her much-mooted Big Bang-style Leeds Reforms, aimed at making the 'country more active and more confident', are such a damp squib. Her ambition is the right one, but badly executed. More worryingly, these reforms may lead to another wave of dangerous light-touch regulation – just like we saw under the last Labour administration. She's right that the London Stock Exchange needs to be made more attractive for listings and that households should be encouraged to invest in equities. UK adults own the smallest amount of their wealth in investments of any G7 country at 8 per cent. But you can't order companies to list in London if they can get better valuations across the Atlantic. And you can't order savers to put their money into equities or invest in unquoted companies, however much Sid might tell you to, and certainly not order them to invest more in UK companies, without incentives. So it's not surprising that most City figures are decidedly underwhelmed by her Leeds Reforms, while the rest of us are simply bemused. It would have been much cleverer if Reeves had looked to Sweden where households invest 50 per cent of their assets in equities and investment funds, up from a third just two decades ago. And how was this achieved? First, the government abolished stamp duty on equities, then introduced investment savings accounts which attracted a small flat tax. No capital gains or dividend tax. Big, bold and simple. That's what we should do here instead of the usual fiddling around.
Telegraph
4 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer opens door to tax raid on savers
Sir Keir Starmer has opened the door to increasing taxes for savers. Pressed about possible tax increases in the autumn Budget, the Prime Minister suggested they would only rise for people with enough savings to 'buy their way out of problems'. Rachel Reeves is scrambling to fill a black hole of as much as £40bn in the public finances, following a series of policy about-turns and a slowdown in growth. Labour pledged in its manifesto not to hit working people with higher taxes but ministers have repeatedly been unable to agree on a definition of 'working people'. On Wednesday, the Prime Minister argued that they were the 'sort of people that work hard but haven't necessarily got the savings to buy their way out of problems', raising fears that savers could be next to be hit. During Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir failed to rule out a raid on pension contributions and the self-employed. The Treasury opened the door to a fresh raid on VAT after a minister said the Government would leave 'the headline rate' untouched. Ministers have promised not to put up taxes for those with 'modest incomes', but have not said where the axe will fall. Manifesto commitments Labour pledged in its manifesto not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT and promised working people would not pay more. The party attacked the Tories for raising taxes in office but they went up by £40bn in Rachel Reeves's first budget, which broke Labour's manifesto pledge not to raise national insurance by increasing employers' contributions. Rachel Reeves promised not to raise taxes again earlier this year but U-turns on welfare cuts and winter fuel are likely to force her to break this promise. Any VAT raid would fall short of Labour's manifesto pledge not to touch the tax at all, but the Chancellor could extend it in ways that could raise tens of billions of pounds. Options include removing VAT exemptions from some goods and services, or extending the tax to smaller businesses. The headline rate of VAT currently stands at 20 per cent but there are a range of exemptions and exceptions that could be adjusted. One option would be to apply the full rate of VAT to goods and services, which currently attract the tax at either 0 or 5 per cent. This has already been done for private school fees – fulfilling a separate manifesto pledge – in an attempt to raise as much as £1.7bn per year from those educated outside the state system. In 2012, George Osborne extended the levy to items including pasties, but was forced to U-turn following a backlash. Questioned on Wednesday by Kemi Badenoch about a series of potential taxes which could be increased, the Prime Minister said he would not 'write the Budget' months in advance. 'Modest income' The Conservative leader challenged Sir Keir to define what was meant by a 'modest income'. He replied: 'I think of the working people across this country who put in every day and don't get back what they deserve. 'And that's who we're working for. That's who we're fixing the country for: the sort of people that work hard but haven't necessarily got the savings to buy their way out of problems.' The Tory leader then quoted Darren Jones, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who said earlier this week that working people are 'people who don't get a pay slip'. 'Millions of self-employed people don't get a pay slip,' she said. 'So are the self-employed next in line for a Labour tax raid?' Sir Keir sidestepped the question, saying: 'The self-employed were the very people who suffered under their watch, repeatedly suffered under their watch.' Pension contributions targeted? Ms Badenoch then claimed the Government would consider levying a tax on pension contributions. 'We know the Chancellor is launching a review into pension contributions,' she said. 'It's as clear as day why this is – it is because the Government is considering taxing them. 'Does the Prime Minister agree with me that a tax on pension contributions is a tax on working people?' Sir Keir replied: 'We made absolutely clear manifesto commitments which she asked me about last week and we're keeping to. I'm not going to write the Budget months out.' A Conservative Party spokesman said: 'Labour won't rule out hitting the self-employed with new taxes. They won't rule out a tax raid on pensions. 'And the Prime Minister says 'modest incomes' refers to anyone without savings, raising the prospect of a tax on savings in the autumn. 'Labour are treating working people with contempt. Hiking taxes is not inevitable – it is a choice brought on by the Government's economic incompetence.'
Cambrian News
an hour ago
- Cambrian News
Call for transparency on how Wales is funded amid ‘discrepancy' over £200m transport claim
'Could the Secretary of State clarify whether she was referring to the Transport for City Regions funding which was announced on 4 June, for the Chief Secretary to the Treasury has stated in an answer to a written question that it is not possible to identify the specific Barnett consequential arising from that programme?'
