Bank of England chief says ‘not sensible' to tear up ring-fencing rules
Ring-fencing was brought in after the 2008 financial crisis and requires banks to separate their retail services from their investment banking activities.
It aimed to protect UK consumers from the effects of any shocks felt by other parts of a bank and in the global financial markets.
But Government plans to reforms the rules, unveiled last week, are intended to make Britain more competitive globally and give banks more flexibility.
Mr Bailey told MPs on the Treasury Committee: 'I do think the ring-fencing regime is an important part of the structure of the banking system.
'It makes the resolution of banks if they're in trouble much easier, and it benefits, particularly in terms of the UK, consumers, business and households.
'I'm sure there are things that can be improved and we will work constructively to get through that process.'
He added: 'I think it has established itself as part of the system and to me it would not be sensible to take it away at this point.'
The ring-fencing shake-up formed part of Rachel Reeves's 'Leeds reforms' – a package of measures which she said are set to be the biggest changes to financial services for more than a decade.
Ms Reeves said regulation 'still acts as a boot on the neck of businesses' in many areas, and urged regulators to avoid 'excessive caution'.
Asked if he agreed with those comments, Bank of England chief Mr Bailey said: 'It's not a term I'd use.'
'I think there are areas that we clearly should look at it… we've announced a whole range of things we're doing, and that's a good thing,' he told the committee.
'But we can't compromise on basic financial stability and that would be my overall message.'
However, Mr Bailey added that, post-Brexit, the UK is in a better position to reshape the financial rule book to suit the sector, rather than relying on EU rules.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
42 minutes ago
- The National
A true just transition will save jobs and the planet
We have families here who have been working in oil and gas for generations. We have communities whose very fabric was built around that industry. We're in the middle of a major shift. The decline in oil and gas production isn't something in the distant future, it's already happening. And with it, the jobs are going – some reports have said we're facing Grangemouth-scale losses on a weekly basis across the North-east. I want to be really clear that I truly believe the Scottish Government is absolutely committed to a just transition. And I support that – I welcome it. And it's not just words, it has been backed by action. READ MORE: Sandie Peggie 'wanted to post bacon through mosque letterbox', tribunal told We've seen investment coming into the north-east through the Just Transition Fund, and recently we saw the launch of a new oil and gas transition training programme tailored specifically to our region. That's vital, because we're not talking about abstract change, we're talking about retraining real people for real jobs in sectors like renewables, offshore wind, hydrogen and carbon capture. I recently visited the St Fergus gas terminal in my constituency, a place that is central to the UK's energy supply, processing about a third of the gas the UK uses. It was eye-opening, and it gave me a deeper appreciation of just how skilled the workforce is, and how deeply embedded the oil and gas sector is in our local economy. And that's why I think we need to be really honest about what the transition means in practice. Because it's not just about switching energy sources, it's also about making sure that we don't leave entire communities behind as we move forward. Of course we must protect our climate and meet our climate obligations. I have grandchildren, and want to make sure the world we leave behind for them is sustainable. But we also must be honest about how we do that in a way that doesn't destroy jobs and decimate local economies in the process. A return to Thatcher and the treatment of the coal mines and their workers must be avoided at all costs. That's why the word 'just' really matters. We must make sure people whose work powered our country for decades aren't tossed aside now that we're changing direction. What I hear a lot from people is that if Scotland and the UK are still consuming oil and gas (which we are), and if we're not drilling for it ourselves here, then where is it coming from? Are we just importing it from elsewhere? And if so, are we not just offshoring our carbon footprint? It's a fair question. And I think it's one that we need to answer properly. Because when we talk about reducing emissions, are we measuring the carbon we produce in Scotland, or the carbon we use? Those are very different things. It would feel like smoke and mirrors if we claimed a reduction in emissions simply because we're not drilling here, while still burning the same amount of fuel that has been shipped in from abroad. The public deserves transparency on that. We can't pretend we're doing better for the planet if all we're doing is moving the problem offshore. From what I understand, most UK emissions accounting is based on what we produce territorially. But that doesn't reflect what we consume. And when you look at that difference, it raises big questions about how honest we're being with ourselves. This leads me to another question that I want to put to the public. If we are assuming we won't license new oil fields, if that is the direction of travel, then what are the consequences? Not just for emissions, but for jobs, for our energy security, and for local economies like ours? If we're not producing enough of our own energy, we're leaving ourselves vulnerable to the whims of global markets and political figures such as Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin. We need to add that into the equation when we're talking about what's realistic, responsible, and safe for Scotland's future. I'm not here to say 'drill baby drill', absolutely not. I firmly believe in our climate responsibilities. But I also believe we must think practically, not just ideologically. Is our current position realistic? Is it fair? Is it in line with what other countries are doing? That brings me to Norway, a country that often gets held up as the gold standard in balancing energy and climate goals. Norway is still drilling. It is investing in renewables, yes, but the country is also using the oil and gas sector to fund the green transition. Is that something we can learn from? Is there a model that supports jobs and meets climate targets? Public money alone won't be enough. To really shift our economy at the scale we need, we must have significant private investment too. That includes renewables, yes, but it can also come from oil and gas companies willing to invest in cleaner technologies. There's a huge opportunity here. We can align climate objectives with economic growth if we get this right. Right now, key powers over energy policy and licensing are still held by the UK Government. That limits what the [[Scottish Government]] can do, even when the will is there. So, I suppose what I'm calling for an honest conversation. We need to stop pretending it's one or the other, we either save the planet or save jobs. It's not enough to have big ambitions if we don't have the infrastructure, investment and workforce to get us there – without hurting the people who built this country's energy industry in the first place. And of course, the big question is: will it help secure our future as an independent nation, because if so, we need it on the balance sheet.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Scottish companies attract 5% of lending from UK scheme
The British Business Bank said that 69% of this lending has been delivered to businesses outside London and south-east England. It added that the scheme has supported a 'wide range of industry sectors' across the UK, declaring: 'This includes over £368m for manufacturing, over £366m to wholesale and retail, and over £234m to the construction sector.' The growth guarantee scheme is designed to support access to finance for UK smaller businesses as they look to invest and grow, the British Business Bank observed. It added that the scheme launched on July 1, 2024, 'with a wide range of products supported by a broad variety of accredited lenders, including term loans, overdrafts, asset finance, invoice finance and asset-based lending'. Read more The growth guarantee scheme can support facility sizes of up to £2m and provides the lender with a 70% government-backed guarantee. The borrower always remains 100% liable for the debt, the British Business Bank noted. Gareth Thomas, UK minister for small business, said: 'As part of our plan for change we are committed to breaking down the barriers SMEs (small and medium-sized enterprises) face when starting and scaling up, to create jobs and further boost the economy. 'This is an important milestone for the growth guarantee scheme, which plays a key role in helping us achieve this by providing vital access to finance for smaller businesses right across the UK.' Reinald de Monchy, chief banking officer at the British Business Bank, said: 'This milestone is a demonstration of the important work done by the 50-plus delivery partners who have signed up to the growth guarantee scheme since its launch in July 2024. In particular, it is fantastic to see how much lending has been provided to firms under five years old, and the diversity of sectors supported. 'The Government's recent Spending Review will provide the scheme with funding until March 2030, and we are excited to see the additional impact it can generate for smaller businesses across the UK.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Support for Scottish windfarms will increase energy bills
The offshore floating wind sector will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of reforms to the main scheme the UK Government operates to encourage firms to commit to the upfront investment required. In the latest round of the Contracts for Difference programme floating windfarm developers will be guaranteed £271 per megawatt hour (MWh) for their output regardless of what prices prevail in the market. The value of the revenue guarantee has increased by more than 10% since the latest allocation round was completed last year, when the strike price for floating windfarm output was set at £245/MWh. Mr Miliband is so anxious to ensure that the round is a success that he has also agreed to extend the standard term of CFD awards to 20 years from 15. READ MORE: Just transition fund farce deepens as Scottish firms fight over windfarm scraps The changes were announced weeks after Scottish Renewables said bold action was required from ministers to maintain the momentum behind the development of the emerging floating windfarm sector, which champions reckon can play a crucial role in the net zero drive. While only two floating windfarms have been developed off Scotland to date their performance has reinforced hopes that such schemes could offer big advantages compared with conventional facilities that have foundations on the seabed. Floating windfarms can be deployed in deeper waters allowing them to harness stronger winds that blow more consistently than those nearer to the shore. They could be placed far enough offshore to ease the concern of critics such as Mr Trump who complain about the impact of windfarms on views. Scotland is seen as being well placed to capitalise on the development of floating windfarms because of its geography and its oil and gas industry heritage. Around 90% of the waters off Scotland are deep. Dan Jackson, who is leading work on Cerulean Winds' plans for the Aspen floating windfarm off Aberdeenshire, has noted that wind strengths in the area it is targeting are more than double what they are in southern England. READ MORE: Investors eye Scottish floating windfarm bonanza The hope is that success in the floating market will help compensate for the disappointments that Scotland has suffered to date in terms of the economic impact of renewables activity. While firms have invested heavily in conventional developments on land and offshore, with CFD support, the benefits have gone mainly to companies based outside Scotland. The number of jobs created in Scotland has fallen well short of expectations. A report on the SNP Government's £500m Just Transition Fund released this month found that it helped create just 110 jobs in its first two years. Excitement about the potential value of floating wind activity in Scotland increased after US private equity investors agreed two years ago to provide £300m backing for a plan to turn the Port of Ardersier on the Cromarty Firth into a major low carbon energy support facility. But some people will be concerned that Scotland will benefit disproportionately from the support that will be provided for floating windfarm developments. Lots of firms have shown interest in Scotland. Crown Estate Scotland awarded leases covering acreage on which firms expect to deploy around 25 windfarms in rounds completed in the last three years. Successful applicants included Cerulean, Shell, SSE and ScottishPower. However, firms appear less enthusiastic about the waters off England. In June a licensing round covering acreage off South West England generated a disappointing response. READ MORE: SNP Government green jobs failure seen in English city's success The concern about Scotland's share of floating windfarm funding support will be heightened by the fact that the costs of the technology are much higher than those for established alternatives. In the allocation round that it is expected will be launched next month conventional offshore windfarms will be guaranteed £113/MWh for their output compared with £102/MWh last time. Onshore windfarms will be guaranteed £92/MWh against £89/MWh. Developers will get top up payments if market rates fall below the strike prices guaranteed under the CFD round. If rates rise above the strike price developers will have to pay over the difference. However, Governments have run the CFD scheme for years in the expectation that the amounts paid to developers will far exceed recoveries. Mr Miliband boasted that the budget for the allocation round that was completed last year would be increased by £500m to £1.5bn. The latest data collected by the regulator Ofgem indicates that wholesale prices averaged around £80/MWh in May. If rates remain around that level floating windfarm developers will be in line for big payments under the CFD contracts awarded in the forthcoming round. The costs will be added to the energy bills of householders across the UK irrespective of whether projects in the areas they live in will benefit. READ MORE: As Chevron closes Aberdeen office, what now for North Sea jobs? The proposals for the latest CFD round underline the fall in the price of solar energy schemes, which are more widespread south of the border. The strike price for solar will fall to £75/Mwh from £85/MWh. Scotland could also benefit from the increase in the strike price for larger hydropower schemes, to £168/MWh from £142/MWh. However, Scottish energy giant SSE has provided a reminder that the performance of hydropower and other renewable schemes depends on the weather. This month the energy giant revealed that its hydropower output slumped 40% in the latest quarter amid the sunshine the UK enjoyed. In a trading update issued at SSE's annual general meeting the Perth-based firm welcomed the increase in the length of new CFD contracts. The company also praised the Government's decision to retain a UK-wide electricity pricing system although critics claim this prevents householders in Scotland from benefiting from the abundance of renewable electricity in the country. SSE warned a shift to a system under which prices varied in different parts of the UK would lead to cuts in investment. As chief executive Alistair Phillips Davies retired after 12 years in post, the company made clear at the AGM that it remained keen to invest in renewables generation assets and the network improvements that will be required to make the most of them. However, SSE expects gas-fired power to remain a key part of the energy mix for years. READ MORE: Israeli-owned firm takes control of UK's biggest gas field It continues to cause the SNP Government discomfort by championing plans for a new gas-powered plant at Peterhead with related carbon capture facilities. First minister John Swinney would love to see Scotland secure the jobs the plant would create but is under intense pressure to oppose the development from the greens the [[SNP]] wants to keep onside.
