Author: admin

NEWS STORY : Ryan Edwards Ordered to Pay Compensation After Vandalising Memorial to Crash Victims

STORY

Ryan Edwards has been ordered to carry out 300 hours of unpaid work and pay compensation after vandalising flowers and tributes left for two teenagers who died in a crash in Hampshire. ITV News reported that Edwards, 18, of Fox Close in Warsash, was filmed kicking and trampling on memorial flowers placed at the scene in Corhampton where Mason Renhard, 17, and Damien Dean, 16, died in July 2025.

The memorial had been created after the two teenagers died when a grey Hyundai i20 collided with a tree on Corhampton Lane. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary said police were called at 2.47am on Sunday 13 July 2025 and that Damien, from Denmead, was the driver and Mason, from Eastleigh, was the passenger.

18/05/2026
Nick Timothy – 2026 Speech on Youth Justice

The speech made by Nick Timothy, the Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

It is obvious that we are now in the legacy-hunting stage of this Government. Less a range of exhausted volcanoes, more a row of trampled molehills, Ministers are desperate to be remembered for something. This morning a word cloud was published by the pollsters at More in Common. The public were asked for the Prime Minister’s greatest achievement, and emblazoned across the page, in huge capital letters, was the sad word “Nothing.”

Today’s announcement, however, is a fitting tribute to the Justice Secretary and his predecessor, the right hon. Member for Birmingham Ladywood (Shabana Mahmood). So desperate are they to find the causes of crime that they sometimes forget that their job is to prevent and punish crime itself. The truth is that Labour just does not have it in its DNA to be tough on crime. The Government have let 60,000 criminals out of jail early, they are abolishing short-term sentences—so that almost all shoplifters and the majority of knife criminals will no longer be sent to prison—and they are pretending that they are doing these things because they have to, but they are doing them because they want to.

The Prisons Minister says that only a third of prisoners should be locked up. The Minister for Sentencing, the hon. Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), says that a pretty big chunk of the overall population should not be in prison, and today’s announcement is more of the same. So I have some specific questions for the Justice Secretary. He wants to increase the age of criminal responsibility to reflect a

“modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development”.

From smoking bans to voting rights, this Government have a confused view of childhood, so what should be the age of criminal responsibility?

With a wave of sexual and violent crime committed by illegal immigrants, many of whom pretend to be children, can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those people will not escape justice a second time by giving a fake age to the police? The Government say they will review the function and purpose of criminal courts for child defendants, but the purpose of a criminal court is obvious: to try criminals. Can the Justice Secretary rule out abolishing criminal trials for under-18s?

The Government also say that they want to end lifelong disclosure requirements for the under-18s. Can the Justice Secretary guarantee that those requirements will still apply to people guilty of violent crimes and to prolific offenders?

The Government say they will slash custodial remand for young offenders by a quarter, but remand should be used in response to need, not arbitrary targets. What is the Justice Secretary’s alternative? Will he just send criminals home? Will he stick to that target regardless of the level of violent crime and repeat offending?

The Government want more parenting orders, but this morning the Justice Secretary said that they are not used much at the moment because all judges can do to enforce them is issue a fine. He was unclear on this question. So will Ministers—[Interruption.] The right hon. Gentleman was asked on the radio this morning whether parents who do not comply will face custodial sentences. He fudged that question, so I am asking him to answer it now.

The figures show that young repeat offenders often start with theft and move on to drug offences and violence, yet the Government’s big idea is to stop punishing swathes of crimes committed by under-18s. The gangs who swarm shops to steal goods in places like Oxford Street, Ilford and Clapham do not need to be put on a course; instead, they need clear punishment, which can include prison.

The results of soft-touch liberalism are visible in towns and cities up and down the country, yet the changes that the Justice Secretary is announcing today risk amounting to more of the same. This is a big call. If youth crime goes up as a result, it will be on this Government.

18/05/2026
David Lammy – 2026 Statement on Youth Justice

The statement made by David Lammy, the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Justice, in the House of Commons on 18 May 2026.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement on the youth justice system in England and Wales. I am today publishing a White Paper, with a once-in-a-generation set of reforms to build a youth justice system that intervenes early, responds more effectively and does more to turn young lives around, so that we can better protect the public. I am very grateful to the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley (Jake Richards), and, before him, my hon. Friend the Member for Scunthorpe (Sir Nicholas Dakin), for all their hard work in getting us to this point.

Over the past two decades, the number of children entering the youth justice system and being detained in custody has fallen dramatically. This progress is the result of real cross-party consensus, with a modern youth justice system that began under Tony Blair’s Government and was continued, during his time as Prime Minister, by Lord Cameron—he famously said he would “hug a hoodie”—who, with Lord Gove, asked me to carry out the Lammy review.

But this success has brought a new challenge. Our youth justice system is now working with significantly fewer young people, but they are significantly more vulnerable and at significantly higher risk. Most begin their journey into crime long before they come to the attention of the police, their lives shaped by instability, by trauma and often by neglect—the kind of childhood that most of us in this House could barely imagine. Some grow up surrounded by violence, addiction and abuse, while others are moved endlessly around children’s homes or foster care placements, never staying in one place long enough to have the stability needed to feel safe, let alone the love and care that would enable them to really thrive. All those factors make them more likely to end up in the justice system. When we fail to intervene early enough, the consequences can be devastating—for those children, of course, but also for victims and entire communities, because around 80% of prolific adult offenders first enter the justice system as children.

The risks that children face have also changed. Today’s children are navigating online harms, criminal grooming through social media and exposure to extremist content. Too often the system has struggled to keep pace: opportunities to intervene are missed, warning signs go unnoticed and agencies do not consistently share information. This means that children can slip through the cracks between services, which risks escalation, and responsibility between agencies becomes blurred. The lessons emerging from the Southport inquiry, following the tragic murders of three young children by Axel Rudakubana, a violent 17-year-old who was known to authorities, are a terrible reminder of what can happen when systems are not sufficiently co-ordinated and not sufficiently decisive in the face of escalating concerns.

We must learn those lessons but also strike the right balance. The system must recognise that they are still developing and that most have huge capacity to change. We should not over-criminalise but, at the same time, avoiding criminalisation must never mean overlooking risk or failing to act. Benign neglect, however well intentioned, is still neglect. Where behaviour causes harm, timely, proportionate and effective intervention is essential to protect the public and to support children to change course.

That principle is reflected throughout this White Paper. First, we will intervene earlier, investing an additional £46 million over the next three years in our turnaround programme, which is already showing promising results in diverting children from crime, and by strengthening the join-up with other programmes that support children on the cusp of offending. We will also strengthen and expand the use of parenting orders, which can compel parents to address their child’s behaviour, including attending counselling or guidance sessions. If they do not act, they will face penalties. We will deliver on our manifesto commitment to introduce an offence of child criminal exploitation, building on the work carried out by others, including Baroness May, and placing the focus where it belongs: on the adults who groom, the adults who coerce and the adults who profit from exploiting children. Through new youth diversion orders, we will tackle the increasing number of young people who commit terrorism offences, allowing agencies to intervene before that risk escalates.

Where offending does happen, we will ensure that children get the right response at the right time. Diversion must be firm, fair and effective. We will fundamentally reform the youth out-of-court resolution framework, to improve consistency and public confidence so that children receive interventions that genuinely address their behaviour and cut crime. We will also pilot problem-solving youth intervention courts, laser-focused on rehabilitation and prevention. They bring together judges, youth workers and specialist support to tackle the root causes of offending, whether mental ill health, school absence, addiction or exploitation, while still demanding accountability from young offenders.

Custody will always be necessary for the most dangerous offences, but for many children even a short spell inside can deepen their problems, exposing them to more violence and criminal influence. So we are setting an ambition to cut the number of children remanded in custody by 25% over this Parliament, alongside an intention to reduce the use of short custodial sentences, which so often are ineffective, with more than two thirds of children going on to reoffend. Instead, we will invest £5 million in intensive community placements and stronger bail support, protecting the public while giving children a genuine chance to change course.

We will also reform the childhood criminal records regime, because mistakes made at 13 should not become a life sentence of closed doors and lost chances, not least where this prevents young people from getting a job, which is a crucial factor in helping offenders turn their lives around. We will carefully consider the age of criminal responsibility in this country, which currently sits at just 10 years old, to ensure that it still reflects a modern understanding of childhood, vulnerability and development. We will also strengthen local youth justice services so that they are better equipped to meet the needs of today’s children.

We will soon set out detailed proposals for a new approach to youth justice service oversight, and funding arrangements so that children receive consistently high-quality support wherever they live. That includes reforming the Youth Justice Board, sharpening its focus on continuous improvement of local services and transferring some of its key functions to the Ministry of Justice, so that Ministers are fully accountable for how the system performs.

I have been clear that custody will, where appropriate, be necessary for public safety. However, we will take further action to improve safety and education across the youth estate, while setting a clear long-term direction of travel away from large, outdated institutions and towards smaller settings that can better rehabilitate children.

The White Paper is also about fairness. Not all children in our justice system are equal. Those in care are still far more likely to be drawn into the system. Black children remain vastly over-represented—22% of the youth custodial population, compared with 6% of 10 to 17-year-olds overall. Black children are also over-represented among victims, being around six times more likely to be victims of homicide. I warned about this disproportionality when David Cameron asked me to do the Lammy review, nearly a decade ago, and the fact it persists today should shame us all. These reforms will begin to address that, building a system that is fairer and more consistent.

It is not a choice between punishment and rehabilitation; it is about what works: protecting the public, cutting reoffending, and stopping vulnerable children—so often victims themselves—becoming tomorrow’s dangerous adult offenders. This Government will do whatever it takes to give more children the chance of a better future, and to keep the British public safe. I commend this statement to the House.

18/05/2026
PRESS RELEASE : Prime Minister to showcase how economic plan and trade deals deliver for working people [May 2026]
The press release issued by 10 Downing Street on 18 May 2026.

The Prime Minister is hosting a reception in Downing Street today (Monday 18 May), bringing together employers, workers and apprentices to demonstrate how strengthening Britain’s ties abroad is delivering for working people at home.
- PM welcomes businesses and workers to Downing Street to showcase how the Government’s action abroad is delivering for working people at home
- Reception highlights success stories of businesses expanding exports and growing as a result of stronger UK ties abroad
- Event underlines how the Government’s economic plan and trade deals are delivering growth and opportunity for working people
The Prime Minister is hosting a reception in Downing Street today (Monday 18 May), bringing together employers, workers and apprentices to demonstrate how strengthening Britain’s ties abroad is delivering for working people at home.

At a time of global uncertainty, the event will highlight how the government’s economic plan is providing the foundation for growth – backing British businesses, protecting working people, and making the UK more resilient to global shocks. That approach was borne out last week, with the UK delivering the fastest growth in the G7 ahead of the impact of the Middle East conflict.

The event will also showcase how trade deals and international engagement are creating jobs and driving growth across the UK. Guests will include apprentices, local representatives and employees from across the UK alongside business leaders, showcasing how the Government’s economic plan is translating into jobs, investment and growth on people’s doorsteps.

Representatives from the community engagement team involved in the new Universal Studios theme park in Bedford will also attend to showcase the local impact of a project secured after the PM met Universal executives in the UK and US. The project will support 20,000 construction jobs and 8,000 permanent roles, alongside a £50 billion boost for the UK economy and local businesses including hotels, restaurants, taxi firms and contractors.

The Prime Minister will meet attendees and tour a series of showcases highlighting success stories from across the UK – from Scotland’s world-leading whisky industry and cutting-edge medical technology in Cambridge, to fast-growing British food and drink brands exporting to global markets.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:

By strengthening Britain’s place on the global stage, we are delivering real benefits for working people at home.

Our trade deals are supporting jobs and driving growth across the UK by opening up opportunities for people at every stage of their career, from apprentices starting out to experienced workers building new skills, as businesses expand into new markets.

I’m determined that growth is felt by working people with better jobs, higher wages and more money in their pockets. That’s what our economic plan is about – taking action at home and abroad to deliver real change that people can see in their lives and their communities.

At the reception, the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) will showcase one of the UK’s most iconic exports, with new trade agreements expected to significantly boost exports and cut tariffs in key markets. The SWA has projected that the India deal has the potential to significantly grow Scotch whisky exports over the coming years once it has entered into force, with the industry set to also benefit from zero tariffs in the US and reduced tariffs in China.

Most recently, the US announced tariff-free access for whiskies produced across the UK, including Scotch Whisky for which the US is the industry’s largest market by value, worth almost £1bn.

Innovative food brands Creative Nature and Happy Inside will also highlight how Government support is helping them expand internationally, including launching into new markets and exporting products around the world. Creative Nature launched their company’s snacks and foods into Japan after a government trade mission and now export to 16 countries and are carried on 9 airlines. Happy Inside will be launching their drinks in Mexico after a Department for Business and Trade ‘Meet the Buyer’ event and now exports to 6 countries.

The reception will also celebrate the best of British produce and industries supported by improved access to global markets, with catering featuring cheese from Somerset, beef from Northern Ireland, sea salt from Wales and whisky from Scotland.

Also attending are employers Octopus Energy, Whittard of Chelsea, Rolls Royce SMR, and Holland & Barrett, as well as industry groups MakeUK and the Federation of Small Businesses, along with apprentices from BAE Systems and Scottish Power.

Business and Trade Secretary Peter Kyle said:

Trade deals aren’t abstract policy wins – they translate into real benefits for British families and businesses right across the country. Whether it’s a whisky distiller in Scotland accessing new markets in India or an automotive worker in the West Midlands with greater job security because of our deal with the US.

By securing ambitious trade agreements, we can back British businesses to do what they do best: innovate, export and grow. That means more jobs, better wages and stronger local economies – not just today, but for decades to come.

The Government has secured major trade deals with partners including the United States, India and South Korea, helping to cut red tape, unlock investment and open up new export opportunities. These agreements are already delivering tangible benefits for working people across the country.

The landmark economic deal with the US will save thousands of jobs, protect key British industries, and help drive economic growth. Most recently, the US announced tariff-free access for UK whisky.

Through this deal, the UK remains the only country to have agreed a 10% tariff for automotives within quota, a 25% tariff for core steel and aluminium exports and 0% tariffs for pharmaceuticals – saving hundreds of millions of pounds on UK exports annually and cementing our place as a world leader for life sciences investment. During last year’s historic US State visit, we announced a record breaking £150bn in investment commitments creating 7,600 jobs, alongside signing a world leading Tech Prosperity Deal.

The India deal is already driving growth, with the Prime Minister’s visit securing 6,900 jobs and the trade agreement estimated to boost wages by £2.2 billion a year in the long run.

The South Korea deal could boost the UK’s world leading services industry worth up to £400 million in exports a year while protecting 98% of tariff-free lines for UK goods, opening up new opportunities for exporters and strengthening key industries.

Mark Kent, Chief Executive of the SWA, said:

Positive trading relationships with established and emerging markets around the world are the bedrock of Scotch Whisky’s success, and over the past year the Free Trade Agreement with India, tariff reduction in China, and the announcement of zero tariff rate for the US, have been good news for producers looking to boost exports.

We are grateful for UK government support and hope to see swift implementation of the India and US deals, as well as securing new international opportunities.

Export success abroad should be underpinned by a domestic market that fosters business confidence and supports home-grown sectors like Scotch Whisky and their supply chains, and we look forward to working with the UK Government to ensure our industry is in the best position at home and abroad to support jobs, boost investment and generate growth.

Founder of Creative Nature Julianne Ponan MBE said:

It is a real honour to be at 10 Downing Street showcasing Creative Nature products alongside so many inspiring British businesses. The support from the Department for Business and Trade through trade missions, the Export Academy and Free Trade Agreements has helped us grow from a kitchen table startup into exporting to 18 countries, proving that UK SMEs can thrive internationally when given the right opportunities and support.”

Founder of Happy Inside Drinks Charlie Knockton said:

It is an immense honour to be at 10 Downing Street showcasing Happy Inside drinks alongside so many fantastic British businesses. The support from the Department for Business and Trade through Trade Missions, Meet the Buyer events and our International Trade Advisor has been invaluable – allowing us to scale production, become more competitive in the UK market, and expand into exciting markets including China, the UAE and soon Mexico. This shows that supporting British businesses abroad directly benefits the wider UK economy.

The Prime Minister is also deepening ties with other international partners and progressing new agreements to build a long-term pipeline of growth and investment:
- Commitments at the first UK-EU summit are estimated to deliver a package worth up to £9 billion by 2040. The European Partnership Bill will improve the UK’s trade and investment relationship with the EU – our largest trading market – by giving us the power to implement new deals agreed with the EU both now and in the future.
- The PM’s trade mission to China secured £2.2 billion in export deals, supporting jobs from Glasgow to the energy sector.
- Joining the CPTPP trade bloc is estimated to add £1 billion to real household wages every year compared to 2021 levels.
- Negotiations are also underway for a trade agreement with the Gulf Cooperation Council that could increase UK GDP by around £1.6 billion a year in the long run (when compared to 2035 projections).
This work is already being felt in communities across the UK, with trade and international engagement supporting jobs, boosting wages and opening up new opportunities for businesses in every part of the country.

The world today is more volatile and dangerous than at any point in recent history with a war on two fronts – in the Middle East and in Ukraine – threatening living standards. The government’s economic plan has put the UK in a better position to weather these storms.

Before the conflict of Iran, the UK economy was showing clear signs of strength, with strong growth, rising living standards and falling unemployment, underlining the importance of economic stability in protecting households and businesses.

The government is continuing to rebuild our economy to make us more resilient, and the King’s Speech will drive forward this progress through more protections for small businesses, reforms to regulation to drive innovation, and changes to give businesses the confidence to invest and grow.

By securing new partnerships abroad and delivering for working people at home, the Government is setting a clear course for long-term economic security and growth.
18/05/2026
NEWS STORY : Fallon Wilkinson Appointed to Committee on Fuel Poverty

STORY

Fallon Wilkinson has been appointed as a new member of the Committee on Fuel Poverty for a three-year term. The Committee said Wilkinson joined on 13 April 2026 and will serve alongside existing recent appointees Professor Richard Fitton and Ross Armstrong. The appointments follow the departure of Anu Singh and Liz Bissett at the end of their terms.

The Committee on Fuel Poverty is an expert advisory body which advises on the effectiveness of policies designed to reduce fuel poverty. It also encourages co-ordination between organisations working in the area and monitors the Government’s progress on its Fuel Poverty Strategy. Its current annual research project is focused on the lived experience of fuel poor homes which have a heat pump.

Wilkinson has worked in the water retail sector for more than a decade and currently leads regulation and compliance at Water Plus. She is also chair of the national Retailer Wholesaler Group and has previously worked on energy market reform, energy efficiency, housing and local government policy. The Committee said she also brings experience of work with vulnerable groups, including as a board adviser at I Have a Voice CIC.

18/05/2026
PRESS RELEASE : Ministry of Defence confirms the death of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan [May 2026]

The press release issued by the Ministry of Defence on 18 May 2026.

It is with great sadness that the Ministry of Defence confirms the death of Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan, who died on 15 May following a tragic incident at the Royal Windsor Horse Show.

Lance Bombardier Sullivan was born on 9 Dec 2001. She joined the Army in November 2020 attending the Army Training Centre in Pirbright before joining The King’s Troop Royal Horse Artillery in June 2021.

Lance Bombardier Sullivan loved horses and had a natural affinity for them. She had been involved in Ceremonial Operations since joining The Troop, taking part in multiple Royal Gun Salutes in Hyde Park and Green Park. She deployed on both Op BRIDGE, the state funeral of Her Majesty the Queen in 2022, and Op GOLDEN ORB for the Coronation of Their Majesties The King & Queen in 2023. She had recently qualified as an Advanced Regimental Riding Instructor and particularly enjoyed training the Military Working Horses and developing young horses, utilising her equine skill set. She also enjoyed delivering riding lessons to the Mounted Gunners within her Sub-Section and was frequently nominated to instruct the officers of The Troop. Additionally, Lance Bombardier Sullivan was routinely involved with delivering the Mounted Gunner Courses to qualify the next generation of King’s Troop soldiers for Ceremonial Operations. She was passionate about everything to do with The Troop and participated in every extra activity available including show jumping and The Troop Race.

Her Commanding Officer said:

Lance Bombardier (LBdr) Ciara Sullivan, ‘Sully’ to her friends, was to all who had the privilege of serving alongside her, a bright light in any room she entered. An immensely professional soldier and an exceptional jockey, she approached every day within The Troop with an infectious energy — the kind that lifted those around her without effort or intention — and was unfailingly present for her comrades in both the small moments and the hard ones.

An outstanding soldier and a role model to many she worked with. She was fearless and gifted horsewoman, having ridden since childhood and having competed in the showjumping ring before joining the Regiment; it was this natural courage that made her always the first to volunteer to ride the most demanding of horses.

Beyond her equestrian talent, she was a soldier of remarkable breadth. A skilled footballer, a dedicated presence in the gym who pushed herself and quietly brought others along with her, and someone who found cause to celebrate the smallest daily victories in those she served with.

A natural leader and instructor, she won the respect of all who had the privilege of working with her, and her patient coaching has helped many Mounted Gunners within the Unit fulfil their potential.

The King’s Troop Royal Horse Artillery has lost not only an accomplished soldier and horsewoman, but the kind of person who made the Regiment, and the world, a better place simply by being part of it.

The thoughts of every member of The Troop and The Gunners are with her family at this tragic time.

Lt Gen MR Elviss CB, MBE, COMARRC and Master Gunner St James Palace:

The shock of LBdr Ciara Sullivan’s loss is profound. A fine soldier, she died doing a job she loved surrounded by people who held her in the highest regard. A dedicated, committed and highly respected junior commander; she will be sorely missed.

The Royal Regiment of Artillery and the wider British Army is a lesser place without her. I could not be more sorry nor saddened by her loss and my thoughts, prayers and condolences are with her family and friends. Ubique.

Defence Secretary John Healey MP said:

Lance Bombardier Ciara Sullivan was a brilliant young soldier who served our nation with dedication. We’re all deeply shocked and saddened by her death.

My thoughts are with Ciara’s family, loved ones and colleagues at this devastating time.

18/05/2026
Keir Mather – 2026 Speech on the Third Runway at Heathrow Airport

The speech made by Keir Mather, the Minister for Transport, in the House of Commons on 14 May 2026.

I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this incredibly important debate, and I thank the Members in attendance, in particular the hon. Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney) for securing the debate. We have engaged on this topic before, and I would welcome any further engagement in the build-up to and following the publication of the draft amended ANPS.

Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)

I am very grateful for the Minister’s commitment to engagement. Right now, there is traffic chaos in the Egham and Pooley Green area. I am opposed to the third runway. It will make the transport situation in the north of my constituency worse, and it will cause problems of increased noise and air pollution. Will he engage with our local communities, so that he can hear from them how much we do not want it?

Keir Mather

I would be very pleased to engage with the hon. Member and, perhaps through him, with the community groups that he points to. It is important to say that the ANPS review will consider the elements of the existing ANPS that relate to surface access proposals. That includes mode share targets and measures to minimise and mitigate the effects of expansion on existing surface access arrangements. I would be happy to speak about that with him and his constituents.

Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)

The Minister is making a really important point about the importance of surface access. He will know, because I have pressed him on this before, how important I think it is that we get better rail access to Heathrow, regardless of whether there is a third runway. Heathrow has committed to looking at both a western rail link and, importantly for my constituents in Bracknell, a southern rail link. Would he like to see those plans go ahead? Will he press Heathrow to make sure that they are part of any proposals, and will he do everything he can to deliver better rail access for my constituents?

Keir Mather

As part of the ANPS process, we are going to consider the Government’s strategic objectives for surface access, including public transport mode share targets. Any expansion at Heathrow will be tested against the public transport mode share targets set out in the ANPS, and rail will form an important part of those considerations. I would be happy to have further conversations with my hon. Friend about how his constituents may be affected by any expansion and mitigations in that space, although I do not wish to pre-empt any of the outcomes of the ANPS review.

Heathrow expansion and, in turn, a third runway at Heathrow airport would have a transformative impact. It is essential, as hon. Members have outlined, that the Government get this process right, taking full account of all views and ensuring adequate and full scrutiny. The Government recognise that air connectivity plays a vital role in supporting economic growth across the country, with the air transport and aerospace sectors contributing £23 billion to our GDP and 240,000 jobs across the United Kingdom in 2023.

Dr Ben Spencer

Will the Minister give way?

Keir Mather

I will give way briefly, and then I will make some progress.

Dr Spencer

Notwithstanding my points about the third runway, the success of Heathrow is incredibly important to my constituents in providing jobs and economic activity locally. Will the Minister update us on the Government’s response to the concerns about kerosene supply, which impacts Heathrow and our economy?

Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)

I hesitate to even raise this, but in case the Minister is anxious about time, we can—fortunately or unfortunately—run to 5.30 pm.

Keir Mather

Fortunately, Madam Deputy Speaker—come on!

The hon. Member is right to say that the economic activity and jobs created by Heathrow airport are dependent on international supply chains, and I know his constituents will be looking with concern at what is happening in the middle east. The Department for Transport is engaging very closely with both our refineries and the aviation sector to ensure we have security of aviation fuel supply. That work is ongoing, and we are confident that, working closely with those stakeholders, we can ensure that the impacts of the crisis in the middle east are sufficiently mitigated. I know how important that will be to his constituents.

Capacity constraints are hindering further growth in our aviation sector. Heathrow airport, as the UK’s busiest airport and only hub airport, plays a critical role in enabling international connectivity for both passengers and freight: 73% of UK long-haul flights go from Heathrow and 72% of UK international air freight by value goes through the airport. The decision about a third runway at Heathrow has been ducked and delayed for decades, which has resulted in the capacity of the UK’s only hub airport being constrained. That has had a material impact on Heathrow, with the airport operating at over 95% capacity for most of the past two decades.

Our ambition, as set out by the Chancellor, is clear: it is to enable delivery of an operational third runway at Heathrow by 2035. Better connections and a third runway have the potential to boost the UK economy and support thousands of jobs. Businesses, and business groups such as the Federation of Small Businesses, the British Chambers of Commerce and regional chambers across the country, are clear in their support for Heathrow expansion, as are major trade unions. The Government have been clear that any Heathrow expansion proposal needs to demonstrate that it can contribute to economic growth, be delivered in line with the UK’s legally binding climate change commitments and meet strict environmental requirements on air quality and noise pollution.

As hon. Members will be aware, last October my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport announced that the ANPS, which is the Government’s policy framework for additional runway capacity at Heathrow airport, would be reviewed to reflect changes in legislation, policy and data, and to ensure that any proposed scheme meets the Government’s four tests—on economic growth, climate change, air quality and noise—for expansion at Heathrow. The ANPS provides the basis for decision making on granting development consent for a new runway. Any scheme must be delivered in line with the UK’s legal, climate and environmental obligations.

In November, the Government announced that the north-west runway scheme, put forward by Heathrow Airport Ltd, will be used to inform the review of the ANPS. However, once the Government have reviewed the ANPS, and depending on the outcome of the review, any applicant, also known as a promoter, can submit a proposal through the development consent order process.

It is for scheme promoters to decide when to submit any DCO application for a third runway scheme, and any promoter may submit a proposal for development consent. It is at that stage of the planning process when the precise impact of Heathrow would be considered. Any DCO application to build a third runway would go through a strict and independent process. It would be examined by the Planning Inspectorate. The Secretary of State for Transport would then make a final decision on whether to grant consent.

Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)

I am very grateful to the Minister for giving way. He is being very generous with his time—although, as Madam Deputy Speaker pointed out, we have quite a lot of it. The UK Government used to have a golden share in Heathrow airport. However, that was ruled illegal by the European Court of Justice in 2003. Given that the Government broadly want the same thing as any promoter might want, inasmuch as they want Heathrow expansion, that would suggest that the Government are at the point of maximum influence in this build-up phase. Post-Brexit, will the Minister consider making any progress with the third runway conditional on the British Government getting back their golden share, so that we can control a great deal more of what goes on at Heathrow at Government level?

Keir Mather

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention. If he does not mind my saying so, I think he may have a slightly over-inflated expectation of my powers as a junior Minister in the Department for Transport to compel a change in Heathrow airport’s ownership structure. What I am pleased to say is that there is broad support for the principle of expansion, irrespective of the fact that the Government have set this as a key priority to generate growth and prosperity in the United Kingdom. I will certainly take his suggestion on board, but I am pleased to say that I think the onus is there to ensure that the project is realised, irrespective of the ownership model that may exist.

To turn back briefly to the DCO process, the Government are working at pace to ensure that the ANPS constitutes a robust framework under which any successful promoter must meet the four tests and the requirements under the Planning Act 2008—a position we have consistently maintained since the Government’s initial announcement in support of expansion last year.

I would like to touch on some of the general points raised during the debate on the potential impact of Heathrow expansion, but two small points of detail were originally raised that I would like to address first. First, on the introduction of a civil aviation Bill, the Civil Aviation (Consumer Protection and Regulatory Reform) Bill is a Lords Bill and I am pleased to confirm that it was introduced today. Secondly, on the principle of night flights, the hon. Member for Richmond Park will know that the current night flight restrictions at Heathrow are in place until 2028, but we intend to consult next year on proposals for the period that follows.

Although the ANPS review is ongoing and limits what can be said in detail at this stage, I want to reassure the House that both Parliament and constituents will have the formal opportunity to engage when the amended draft ANPS is published for consultation and undergoes parliamentary scrutiny.

Heathrow expansion is a private sector project and the Government have been clear that it must be privately financed. Taxpayers will not bear the cost of expansion. The Government are working with the Civil Aviation Authority to ensure that flying out of Heathrow will be affordable and that any increases to fares during expansion are minimised. Protecting the interests of consumers is the CAA’s priority and keeping costs affordable will always be a part of the CAA’s considerations.

Munira Wilson

I am very grateful to the Minister for giving way. Just before he got on to the cost point, he confirmed that the ANPS will receive parliamentary scrutiny. Can he clarify for the House whether that means a debate and a vote on the Floor of the House?

Keir Mather

I thank the hon. Lady for her intervention. Once the ANPS is laid in Parliament, there is a 21 sitting day consideration period during which the House of Commons can resolve that a vote can be called on whether to approve the ANPS. There is also the important principle of Select Committee scrutiny. It is for the Liaison Committee, I believe, to determine which Committee is most appropriate to take forward Select Committee-level analysis of the implications of the ANPS, and to take oral evidence and so on. That process is all to come and will be folded into a robust process of parliamentary scrutiny that the Government fully support taking place through the Select Committee process.

It is our view that expansion could inject billions into our economy, support thousands of apprenticeships, and strengthen Heathrow’s status as a global passenger and airfreight hub. It should also deliver major benefits for passengers, including reduced delays and, ultimately, lower fares when compared with a world where Heathrow does not expand. The Government have been clear that any Heathrow expansion needs to demonstrate that it can contribute to economic growth, and as part of the ANPS review the Department is developing analysis on the economic impacts of Heathrow expansion, the outcome of which will be published for consultation alongside the outcome of the ANPS review.

On the matter of climate commitments, the Government are clear that Heathrow expansion must align with our climate obligations. That is something that the Government remain absolutely committed to. The increasing carbon emissions associated with Heathrow do not in themselves mean that airport expansion cannot take place; the important point is that the Government remain able to meet their carbon reduction targets in the round. Economy-wide net zero and carbon budgets mean that even if emissions rise in one area, such as aviation, they must be fully balanced by either further carbon savings or high-quality and permanent greenhouse gas removals elsewhere.

The Government published their plan for delivering carbon budgets 4 to 6 on 29 October 2025, including on aviation, and we will be legislating for the carbon budget 7 target shortly. The current ANPS sets expectations on measures to mitigate the carbon impact of expansion at Heathrow, and those mitigations are being considered as part of the ANPS review.

The hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) mentioned commitments around noise, which are incredibly important. We recognise the concern among communities that a new runway has the potential to cause an increase in noise. The current ANPS provides clear requirements on noise mitigation that any scheme should meet. That includes a scheduled night flight ban of 6.5 hours, between the hours of 11 pm and 7 am, a runway alternation scheme that provides affected communities with predictable periods of respite, and a noise envelope with clear noise performance targets that we will review as part of the ANPS.

On the two studies that the hon. Member for Twickenham referenced, I can confirm that they will be both be published shortly, and that hon. Members will be able to consider them fully alongside the ANPS process. There will be full transparency on the Government’s work to understand the impact of noise on both her constituents and people who live in proximity of airports across the country. We will consider those and other mitigations as part of the ANPS review.

On a separate note, Heathrow expansion could also make it easier for aircraft to land without extensive holding patterns, bringing some noise and carbon benefits. The review of the ANPS will consider whether any change is required to the noise impacts and mitigations set out in the original document.

The Government have consistently made it clear that air quality obligations must be met. The current ANPS sets out clear air quality requirements, and as part of the ongoing review of the ANPS we will consider whether any changes are required to the air quality impacts and mitigation measures contained within it.

Turning to the important reference that my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow) made to surface access, how people get to and from Heathrow airport is vitally important, and will be a key consideration as part of any plans for expansion. Plans must look to mitigate the impact on local and national transport networks. As part of the ANPS review we are considering the Government’s strategic objectives for surface access, including public transport mode share targets and measures to minimise and mitigate the effect of expansion on existing surface access arrangements.

Any promoter that wants to deliver expansion will need to model the impact of expansion on roads around the airport, including the M25, as part of their application, and consult with National Highways on their plans. As I previously mentioned, Heathrow expansion will be financed through private funding. That includes surface access improvements necessary for the expanded airport, including potential rail links.

To touch briefly on the matter of parliamentary scrutiny, it is imperative that we listen carefully to everyone’s views on this transformative and landmark piece of infrastructure. Its impact will be felt for decades to come, and it has the potential to unlock significant economic benefits that could be felt across the United Kingdom. However, we fully recognise that there will be communities who have understandable concerns about what this could mean for them, and that is why the Government are launching a formal consultation on the drafted ANPS by the summer.

Peter Swallow

I want to push the Minister on mitigations around surface access. This is an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns about existing surface access arrangements, but to massively improve those arrangements. He will be aware that across a large swathe of the south of England, there is effectively no way to get to the airport apart from driving. Through this process we have an opportunity not just to mitigate concerns, but to boost and upgrade public transport networks to get to Heathrow airport.

Keir Mather

My hon. Friend makes a fair challenge. He is right to say that the ANPS review and the consultation on it is an opportunity for us to look at some of these questions again and to consider how, with Heathrow continuing to offer its unique opportunity to the United Kingdom’s economy as our only international hub airport, we can facilitate better access for the communities surrounding it, both for the economic opportunities for employment and for people across the United Kingdom to fly and enjoy holidays with their families. He raises an important matter.

Dr Ben Spencer

I invite the Minister to Egham as part of his engagement on looking at surface access, where he will be able to see the carnage caused by the level crossings and the benefits of removing the level crossings and having a direct rail link from Egham to Heathrow. While he is there, he will probably also be able to hear the planes overhead and see the impact the noise is already having on that community.

Keir Mather

If the hon. Gentleman would like to write to me setting out the terms of his invitation, I would be very grateful and happy to consider them. It would be great to visit his constituency.

As His Majesty noted yesterday, the Government are bringing forward the civil aviation Bill, which will ensure that the UK’s aviation sector remains competitive, resilient and fair so that it can continue to drive economic growth while delivering better outcomes for passengers. The Bill will also strengthen consumer rights and protections, promote economic growth and infrastructure provision and enhance aviation safety, supporting our world-leading aviation sector to continue thriving for decades to come.

I thank all Members for their robust scrutiny, both of me and of the measures that underpin our review of the airports national policy statement and the principle of Heathrow expansion overall. On a serious note, I encourage them to engage with us further on these matters. I understand that they have a lot of questions to answer from concerned constituents who want an explanation of how best they can participate in the consultation process for the future of their local communities, so I encourage them to reach out to me. I would be happy to discuss this further to arrange it accordingly. I thank hon. Members for their contributions.

18/05/2026
Munira Wilson – 2026 Speech on the Third Runway at Heathrow Airport

The speech made by Munira Wilson, the Liberal Democrat MP for Twickenham, in the House of Commons on 14 May 2026.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park (Sarah Olney), who is my constituency neighbour, and congratulate her on securing this important debate, on her excellent speech and on giving me permission to make a speech. I also thank the Minister for allowing me to speak today.

My hon. Friend has clearly laid out the key questions that Ministers need to address in approving a third runway at Heathrow, which we have heard publicly today. I am also grateful to the Minister for having previously met my hon. Friend and I when we set out a number of those questions privately to him.

As my hon. Friend has already said, in the King’s Speech yesterday the Government set out that

“Legislation will be introduced to unlock the benefits of airport expansion”.

I and many people, not least my constituents, are asking, “What benefits?” The truth is, as my hon. Friend has eloquently set out, the Government have provided precious little evidence to support their far-reaching claims of the economic benefits of a third runway at Heathrow. Many of us can only see costs, be they financial, environmental or to health.

It is obvious that the Government’s expansion of Heathrow—not just Heathrow, but London City, Stansted, Gatwick and Luton—will have a significant impact on this country’s climate commitments. When I and other hon. Members have raised such concerns in the House, Ministers’ answers revert to sustainable aviation fuel every time. However, the reality is that SAF is not a silver bullet. As my hon. Friend has suggested, the Government’s expectation is for SAF to meet 22% of aviation fuel demand by 2040, while the Climate Change Committee’s prediction is just 17%. That will not be enough to make up for the 8 megatonnes to 9 megatonnes of carbon emissions as a result of expansion. The Environmental Audit Committee has warned that by putting all our eggs in this basket, the Government’s delivery on carbon budgets and net zero is “in serious jeopardy”.

We must not lose sight of the human cost at the heart of this debate. Some 2.2 million people would suffer from an increase in noise pollution by 2050. Working people will see air pollution increase from congestion on the roads as the M25 is diverted for years—not to mention the permanent increase in traffic to the airport—and from thousands more flights over a very densely populated area, all pumping noxious fumes into our environment. My hon. Friend the Member for Richmond Park has set out clearly the resulting health impacts.

Over the past 15 months, I, like my hon. Friend and a number of others, have asked this Minister, his predecessor, the Chancellor, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury and the Transport Secretary about the funding behind expansion. They all insist that taxpayers’ money will not be used to fund expansion of Heathrow, but frankly, that is hard to believe, given the unsustainable financial circumstances of Heathrow airport and the eye-watering, ever rising costs of a third runway. As we have heard, Heathrow itself has suggested that its expansion will cost £49 billion, but other estimates are much higher, and this country’s track record of delivering infrastructure on time and on budget is not exactly promising.

At the same time, Heathrow is beginning to resemble another financial omnishambles: Thames Water. Both have significant debt and are spending massive amounts of money on infrastructure while jacking up prices for bill payers—or, in this case, those taking flights—knowing that the Government are ultimately there to bail them out if it all goes wrong. Let us make no mistake: taxpayers will be expected to foot part of the bill, and hard-pressed families and businesses will be forced to pay more for holidays and business trips through higher fares to fund the higher landing charges, as even airlines have warned.

We deserve transparency and accountability from this Government, but at the moment we are getting neither. This Government are delaying publication of vital evidence, such as the aviation night noise effects and aviation noise attitude studies, when we know they have been sitting on the Minister’s desk for months. The Minister has been far from clear on whether this House will have the chance to scrutinise the ANPS properly, which means a debate and a vote. I very much hope he will address those questions head-on today.

Back in January 2025, the Chancellor staked her “growth credentials” on this huge project. This kind of infrastructure project needs both economic credibility and economic and political stability. We cannot have another HS2, where half the project gets cancelled a decade down the line—too much is at risk. With the week we have just had, I cannot see how this Chancellor and this Government can seriously be trusted to see through a project that could take a decade or more to build. The Minister must follow the evidence and put a stop to this expansion before it is too late, for the sake of taxpayers, for the sake of our local communities and for the sake of our environment.

18/05/2026
Sarah Olney – 2026 Speech on the Third Runway at Heathrow Airport

The speech made by Sarah Olney, the Liberal Democrat MP for Richmond Park, in the House of Commons on 14 May 2026.

The debate surrounding a third runway at Heathrow has stretched over the past three decades. The Liberal Democrats have long stood by communities who oppose a third runway, arguing that the economic benefits are overstated and the environmental consequences are unavoidable. Although I have always opposed a third runway at Heathrow, the current proposal could not have come at a worse time. The cost of expansion has doubled over the past 10 years, and the addition of nearly 300,000 more flights, which expansion implies, will make our net zero targets almost unachievable.

It is widely rumoured that even Heathrow Airport Ltd did not believe the timing of expansion to be practical. Despite that, on 29 January 2025, the Chancellor announced her support for a third runway to be built at Heathrow airport. This endorsement was the landmark announcement during her speech on growth; as such, it has a significant amount of political weight behind it. My plea to the Minister is that any decision taken on a third runway at Heathrow should be based on merit and unbiased data, not politics. The decision has an enormous impact on millions of lives, and it must be more than just a signal to investors to compensate for the Government’s economic mismanagement.

The Chancellor believes that expansion at Heathrow will produce economic growth. Nearly 18 months later, however, the Government have yet to produce their economic analysis to support that assertion, and the figures raised in the Chancellor’s speech on growth were drawn directly from an internal business case prepared for Heathrow airport and have not been independently verified.

The Department for Transport’s own updated appraisal report from 2017 shows that the net present value of a third runway ranges from just £3.3 billion to minus £2.2 billion. Now it has been admitted that even that figure is a generous estimate, as the DFT’s guidance suggests that international transfer passengers, who are estimated to make up 75% of a projected third runway’s capacity, do not contribute to the UK’s economy. When discounting those passengers, it is estimated that the net present value could be reduced by as much as a further £5.5 billion.

In addition, the New Economics Foundation asserts that twice as many people fly out of the UK than fly in, thus exporting more money out of our economy. An assessment of the impacts of inbound and outbound tourism flows is currently missing from the economic analysis of aviation’s contribution to the economy. Will the Minister provide reassurance that that research will be conducted and published with the airports national policy statement?

Heathrow Airport Ltd has cited that the cost of building a third runway will be an eyewatering £49 billion, before factoring in an estimated £100 billion in carbon abatement costs and at least £15 billion of investment on surface access upgrade improvements. Without that upgrade, there will be no way to deliver sufficient passengers to Heathrow to utilise the additional capacity and deliver the supposed economic benefits.

The Government have said that funding for a third runway at Heathrow will be privately financed. With Heathrow already drowning in over £15 billion-worth of debt, I am not convinced. I would therefore like to ask again, will the Minister provide reassurances that none of the costs associated with building a third runway at Heathrow will be pushed on to the taxpayer?

Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)

I thank the hon. Member for securing this important debate on an issue that matters to my constituents in Hillingdon, to her constituents and to many constituents across the west London area. As she rightly points out, there have been discussions about the third runway being privately financed, but as she has touched on, there are public sector burdens and costs too, including from the extra pressure on the Elizabeth line, because of the capacity that will be needed, and on the local road network. Does she agree that it is vital when looking at the economic case that possible public sector pressures are fully accounted for in the decision-making process? Does she agree that the Government’s four tests are absolutely vital, and that we need transparency about how those tests will be measured and assessed?

Sarah Olney

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that we need to see the economic case and to look at it in the round—not just the specific costs associated with building the runway, but all the additional costs associated with operating it at capacity and all the impacts that that will have on Heathrow, along with the whole of London and the south-east.

The economic argument simply does not stand up to scrutiny, while the social and environmental consequences of a third runway are unavoidable. Communities would be severely impacted by the additional flights that a third runway would bring. It is expected that nearly 325,000 more people will fall within the Department for Transport’s “significantly affected” decibel level measurement. That does not even reference the increased bombardment of noise that houses already impacted by Heathrow’s flights are likely to experience. Not only would that noise disturbance affect people’s everyday lives, whether their sleeping pattern or their ability to work from home, it would have serious physical and mental health repercussions for local residents.

People living in communities surrounding Heathrow have a 24% higher chance of stroke, a 21% higher chance of heart disease and a 14% higher chance of cardiovascular disease compared with people exposed to low levels of aircraft noise. Will the Minister confirm how many people will be exposed to noise at 45 decibels, the level that the World Health Organisation estimates that health impacts begin? Will the Government commit to setting a minimum acceptable level of noise by which any expansion proposal can be judged? Will the Government also commit to ensuring that there is no increase in night flights? People deserve a full night of undisrupted sleep, and I would be grateful if the Minister could confirm that the Government do not plan to approve anything that would mean more planes fly over households during night hours.

Yesterday, the Government outlined their plan to introduce the civil aviation Bill in this parliamentary Session. Will the Minister outline a timeline for the introduction of that Bill, and will he explain how the Government can provide communities with reassurances that a third runway will not bring new or extended disruptions when airspace changes are yet even to be drawn up?

On the environmental argument, it should almost go without saying that adding nearly 300,000 extra flights to our skies each year will have a profound impact on air pollution and climate change. This Government have used wishful thinking in their assertions that sustainable aviation fuel will mitigate the additional pollution from Heathrow expansion. They are yet to provide any evidence that shows how Heathrow can expand while complying with their legal air pollution limits.

International uncertainty over China’s introduction of their SAF mandate, which accounts for more than 90% of our imported SAF, and challenges to UK-US trade have meant that the UK’s SAF targets, which in themselves would not mitigate pollution from Heathrow expansion, are even more difficult to deliver. The challenges to the UK’s ability to produce and import SAF were underscored by the Climate Change Committee’s report last year, which estimated that only 17% of the UK’s aviation industry will use SAF by 2040. That is 5% lower than the Government’s mandated targets and 8% below the EU’s target. The estimate does not even take into account the additional flights that would come in and out of the UK as a result of the proposed airport expansion.

Heathrow is already the single biggest source of carbon emissions in the UK, and expansion will add an extra 8 megatonnes to 9 megatonnes of CO2 every year. The Climate Change Committee’s balanced pathway to net zero estimates that aviation will contribute 23 megatonnes of CO2 by 2050. A third runway at Heathrow would increase emissions at the airport alone to 20 megatonnes. Does the Minister still believe that the UK can be compliant with our net zero targets with the expansion of Heathrow airport?

This Government have repeated that they will honour and respect the Labour party’s four tests, as highlighted by the hon. Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip (Danny Beales). They are: growth across the country, noise issues to be addressed, air quality to be protected and our climate change objectives to be met. They must be passed before expansion can be approved. As I have just laid out, I do not believe that any of those tests can be passed, let alone all four, but I ask that the Government honour the principle of the tests and do not attempt to circumvent them by using biased data.

I hope I have underlined the importance of this decision for our economy, environment and local communities. Moreover, I hope that this speech has impressed on the Government that this decision cannot move ahead solely on the basis of political expediency.

18/05/2026
PRESS RELEASE : Banking reforms to boost investment by billions for British businesses [May 2026]
The press release issued by HM Treasury on 18 May 2026.

British businesses stand to benefit from billions in fresh financing being unlocked through reforms to the bank ring-fencing regime.
- Reforms to ring‑fencing to create a more agile and proportionate regime that reduces duplication within banks and removes barriers to lending and investment
- Proposed New Growth Allowance and wider product range could enable banks to provide up to £80 billion in additional support to businesses, channelling more financing into UK businesses, jobs and the economy
- Key protections remain unchanged – safeguarding depositors and ensuring the UK banking system stays resilient and secure
British businesses stand to benefit from billions in fresh financing being unlocked through reforms to the bank ring-fencing regime.

The reforms will create a more agile and proportionate framework for ring‑fencing that makes it easier for banks to operate efficiently without weakening protections for customers.

At the heart of the changes is a new Growth Allowance, which will let major banks use a limited portion of their balance sheets more flexibly, potentially unlocking up to £80 billion of additional financing for UK businesses – helping firms invest, expand and create jobs across the country.

The reforms will also give the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) more flexibility to update and tailor the rules over time. Instead of relying on rigid legislation, more of the detail will sit in regulatory rules, allowing the PRA to adjust them more quickly as the financial system evolves. This will mean the PRA will be able to remove outdated requirements or adapt rules to reflect wider banking reforms.

Boosting growth across the economy is a top priority of the reforms, with the Treasury seeking to modernise and streamline the regime while removing unnecessary barriers to lending and investment in the UK.

The package, designed in close collaboration with the Bank of England, will continue to provide strong protections for depositors and ensure stability of the UK’s banking system.

Set out in a new report – Safeguarding Stability, Enabling Growth – the reforms will be delivered through the forthcoming Enhancing Financial Services Bill and subsequent legislation and form a central plank of the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy.

At the heart of the changes is a clear objective for government: to ensure more financing can flow into UK businesses more easily and do so more easily: all while supporting innovation, expansion and higher living standards.

Economic Secretary to the Treasury and City Minister, Rachel Blake said:

Where financial systems are inefficient, we will change them. These reforms will ensure more financing flows into UK businesses, and we can support growth and create jobs across the country.

This will unlock finance for growth while keeping the UK banking system resilient, competitive and fit for the future.

Alex Depledge, Entrepreneurship Advisor to the Chancellor, said:

This is exactly the kind of pro‑growth reform the UK needs. Too often, our fastest‑growing firms hit a wall of unnecessary friction just as they start to scale. These changes will unlock more of the capital founders need to keep building in the UK, while maintaining the financial stability that underpins investor confidence.

This is about backing ambition, cutting friction, and ensuring our banks can power the next generation of great British businesses to start, scale and stay here.”

Ring‑fencing is a key part of the UK’s post‑financial crisis banking reforms, requiring the largest UK banks to separate their core retail services – such as retail and SME deposits and lending – from riskier investment and trading activities. This helps to protect depositors, maintain access to banking services, and support financial stability if shocks occur.

Through the reforms banks will also be able to offer a broader range of products and services to support firms as they grow, including better hedging tools and greater access to programmes delivered through public financial institutions such as the British Business Bank and National Wealth Fund.

Maintaining protections and stability for consumers is essential to the reforms – ring‑fenced banks will continue to operate independently from investment banking activities, protecting retail deposits from volatility in global financial markets. The government will consult on the detail of the reforms to ensure protections are maintained while maximising the benefits for growth.

The government will also ensure the regime remains proportionate over time, including regular reviews of key thresholds and reporting requirements.
18/05/2026