Category: Economy

  • Pat McFadden – 2021 Comments on Government’s Business Support Package

    Pat McFadden – 2021 Comments on Government’s Business Support Package

    The comments made by Pat McFadden, the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 21 December 2021.

    This is a holding package from a Government caught in a holding position. The Prime Minister is a prisoner of divisions inside his party and within the Cabinet about whether any further measures are needed and whether they will get past Tory backbenchers. That is not the way that crucial public health decisions should be taken.

    Labour has been calling for an economic support plan for businesses affected by a wave of pre-Christmas cancellations. Support is welcome to see but we will be going through the details of this announcement to see which business and workers are included and excluded.

    Business support should have been announced when the Plan B changes were voted on last week but it has only happened after the Chancellor was dragged back from California to focus on the plight facing businesses and workers here in the UK.

    The real question after yesterday’s indecisive Cabinet meeting is what will happen next, when will the country be informed of that, and will support for businesses and workers be placed alongside any further public health measures that might be announced.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on Funding to Devolved Administrations for Handling Covid

    Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on Funding to Devolved Administrations for Handling Covid

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 20 December 2021.

    Following discussions with the Devolved Administrations, we are now doubling the additional funding available.

    We will continue to listen to and work with the Devolved Administrations in the face of this serious health crisis to ensure we’re getting the booster to people all over the UK and that people in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are supported.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Higher Statutory Sick Pay

    Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Higher Statutory Sick Pay

    The comments made by Rachel Reeves, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 18 December 2021.

    We’ve seen throughout this pandemic how especially hard it has been for many people on low wages, insecure work or are self-employed when they are sick or need to self-isolate. It is unacceptable that in 21st Century Britain anyone should feel they can’t afford to get sick, yet that is the reality for many.

    Labour would improve the level of statutory sick pay and increase its coverage to reflect the modern world of work, while valuing the many employers who do provide decent sick pay for their workforce.

    The sorry state of sick pay in Britain was an issue before the pandemic but the Chancellor’s inaction has made people poorer and tragically will have led to an increase in the spread of the virus.

  • John Glen – 2021 Statement on the Overseas Framework Consultation

    John Glen – 2021 Statement on the Overseas Framework Consultation

    The statement made by John Glen, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury, in the House of Commons on 15 December 2021.

    The Chancellor’s Mansion House speech and accompanying document—”A new chapter for financial services”—set out the Government’s vision for an open, green and technologically advanced financial services sector that is globally competitive and acts in the interests of communities and citizens, creating jobs, supporting businesses and powering growth across all of the UK.

    In December 2020, HM Treasury published a call for evidence on the UK’s overseas framework, and the regimes within it, to ensure that they continue to work effectively and support the UK’s consumers, firms and markets. The Government issued a response to that call for evidence and set out next steps for this review in July 2021.

    In doing so, the Government stated that they remain committed to maintaining a safe, open and globally integrated financial system, enabling international financial services business by reducing barriers and frictions, where safe and practicable. Our overseas framework, including regimes such as the overseas persons exclusion, has been a fundamental part of the success of the UK as a global financial centre.

    In responding to the call for evidence, the Government said that there were four principal areas that they wanted to look at in more detail:

    The overseas persons exclusion (OPE);

    Investment services equivalence under Title VIII of the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR);

    Recognised overseas investment exchanges (ROIEs);

    The Financial Promotion Order (FPO) in general, and specifically in relation to the distribution of certain overseas long-term insurance products in the UK.

    The Government’s response to the call for evidence noted that there are still information gaps about how firms use the OPE, how they might do so in future, and what the implications are for UK financial markets, including their resilience and safety. We have been working closely with the Financial Conduct Authority, the Bank of England and the Prudential Regulation Authority to gather further information in preparation for an upcoming consultation on the UK’s regime for overseas firms and activities. This involves considering whether the access for overseas firms remains appropriate following the UK’s exit from the EU and given technological developments that are changing how firms can serve their clients.

    The Government are committed to maintaining an overseas access regime that ensures firms based in the UK can connect with counterparties and customers globally, while continuing to ensure that those with significant UK business lines continue to maintain the appropriate operations, regulatory permissions and authorisations in the UK; and are able to be supervised effectively. We want to ensure the UK remains a world-class environment to do business and maintain the ability of UK and global firms to benefit from the UK’s deep wholesale markets, which has been key to the UK’s leading global role in financial services.

    The Government have noted the feedback from respondents to the call for evidence that the current overseas framework is complicated, difficult to navigate and that the implications of any changes to the framework should be carefully considered. As such, the Government intend to assess how the current framework is being used and consider the implications of any reforms in careful detail before bringing forward proposals on potential changes to the UK’s regime for overseas firms and activities. The consultation will also consider changes to the UK’s overseas framework which will make it more coherent and easier to navigate, reinforcing the Government’s commitment to maintaining an open financial centre.

    In considering how best to move forward, the Government want to be fully informed about the views of stakeholders. We would emphasise the importance of further evidence being provided on how these regimes are used, and how market participants navigate them, so we can ensure they continue to support the principles that guide our approach to cross-border financial services.

  • Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Interest Rates Rise

    Rachel Reeves – 2021 Comments on Interest Rates Rise

    The comments made by Rachel Reeves, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 16 December 2021.

    Prices have been soaring and many are feeling the pinch, so families will be concerned about additional pressures on their finances from higher mortgage payments and other debt.

    The Chancellor should get on a plane back from California and get to work on a plan for growth, and crucially a plan to tackle the cost of living crisis.

    That must start immediately by scrapping VAT on household gas and electricity bills to ease some of the burden this winter.

  • Pat McFadden – 2021 Comments on Inflation Figures

    Pat McFadden – 2021 Comments on Inflation Figures

    The comments made by Pat McFadden, the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, on 15 December 2021.

    These figures are a stark illustration of the cost of living crisis facing families this Christmas. From the energy price cap going up, soaring food costs and fuel prices hitting another record high – the list of price crunches as inflation continues to rise goes on and on.

    Instead of taking action, the Government are looking the other way, blaming ‘global problems’ while they trap us in a high tax, low growth cycle.

    Unlike the Conservatives, Labour wouldn’t be hitting working people with a tax hike, and as heating bills rise, we’d cut VAT on domestic energy bills now for the winter months, to help ease the burden on households.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on the G7

    Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on the G7

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 13 December 2021.

    Thank you to my G7 colleagues for their tireless work this year – together we covered a huge amount in the most difficult of circumstances, including striking an historic agreement on global tax reform to create a fairer tax system fit for the 21st century.

    I look forward to the German presidency and working together to address challenges we face next year.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on Levelling Up

    Rishi Sunak – 2021 Comments on Levelling Up

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, at Shildon Railway Museum on 9 December 2021.

    We are absolutely committed to levelling up opportunities across the whole of the UK so people have good jobs and greater opportunities.

    It’s fantastic to see how our £20 million investment will enhance this popular tourist attraction. This will boost access for rural communities so they can enjoy the area’s rich railway heritage and connect people to key transport links nearby.

  • Owen Paterson – 2010 Statement on Funding for Northern Ireland

    Owen Paterson – 2010 Statement on Funding for Northern Ireland

    The statement made by Owen Paterson, the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, on 21 October 2010.

    It has been alleged that the government has broken its word on committing to Northern Ireland ‘s £18 billion investment strategy as set out by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer in May 2007. This is completely untrue.

    In fact I can confirm again today that we believe sufficient funding has been made available for Northern Ireland to meet the £18 billion investment commitment in the time frame set out by the previous administration and on exactly the same basis.

    Critics of the government have exclusively focused on the reduction of 37% over four years in capital spending announced by George Osborne yesterday. I acknowledge this will not be easy but it is worth remembering that the previous government was actually committed to cuts of 50 per cent.

    Yet the key point is that current capital spending was only ever one part of the Investment Strategy agreed by Gordon Brown. As the Northern Ireland Executive’s own Investment Strategy makes clear, it always consisted of a number of elements, including loans under the Reform and Reinvestment Initiative.

    In confirming that we are on course to meet the £18 billion commitment, the Treasury has included the same elements as it did in 2007.

    The reality is that under this government, Northern Ireland will still be able to invest considerable sums in capital projects, if the Executive chooses to do so, over the next number of years.

    The Executive has flexibility over how it manages its budget, including the ability to use current spending (DEL) for capital projects.

    We also remain committed to the package for the devolution of policing and justice. We will ensure its terms are observed.

    In any event under the spending review we have given more favourable treatment to the Executive over carrying forward unspent money at the end of this financial year than any Whitehall department will have.

    Northern Ireland has a much better settlement than most Whitehall Departments. It is of course going to be tough. We have inherited the largest deficit in the G20 and the whole of the United Kingdom has to play its part in tackling it.

  • David Cameron – 2006 Speech on the New Global Economy

    David Cameron – 2006 Speech on the New Global Economy

    The speech made by David Cameron, the then Leader of the Opposition, to the Euromoney Conference on 22 June 2006.

    I’m grateful for the opportunity to be with you today.

    This is an exceptionally well-informed audience.

    It sounds like you’ve enjoyed two days of very detailed discussion and debate.

    As people who are involved at the sharp end of the financial markets and the global economy, I’m sure you won’t hesitate to challenge me and I’m looking forward to that.

    Today I want to talk about the new global economy…

    .. and the great challenges and opportunities presented by the changes that we’re seeing.

    Above all I want to set out how I believe politicians can prepare their countries to compete in tomorrow’s world…

    Why do we have a new global economy?

    Globalisation isn’t new – we had free trade pre-1914.

    Writing about that period, Keynes said:

    “The inhabitant of London could order by telephone, sipping his morning tea in bed, the various products of the whole earth, in such quantity as he might see fit, and reasonably expect their early delivery upon his doorstep; he could adventure his wealth in the natural resources and new enterprises of any quarter of the world”

    What is new, and unique to our time, is the extent and speed and sheer size of the new global economy.

    Over the past decade, a combination of events has led to a rapid rise in world trade, and rapid growth in prosperity in some of the poorest areas of the world.

    The end of cold war. The victory of capitalism, privatisation and liberalisation within countries. The opening up of trade between countries. And of course, the ICT revolution.

    These events have driven change.

    World economic growth is at its highest level in thirty years – and on some measures the highest ever.

    This is largely driven by a rapid growth in world trade – up by 10% in 2005.

    And the level of world trade is at its highest ever.

    The result is that two billion more people – a third of the world’s population – have left subsistence poverty and are now engaged in the world economy.

    Not only has this changed the volume of trade but it’s also impacted on the way we trade.

    You can see the change clearly in the rapid increase in the global capacity for manufacturing.

    Because the world can now more easily turn raw materials into goods, the price of manufactured goods has fallen compared to the price of raw materials.

    There are many winners in this process.

    In the West, consumers enjoy lower prices for things we import like TVs and shoes.

    In poorer countries there are rapid increases in incomes.

    In nations with natural resources – especially oil – GDP is growing.

    And in this global economy, the new winners – across Asia and among oil exporters – are lending much of their gains back to the developed world, driving a further round of growth.

    But there are losers too.

    Manufacturing firms in the west struggle in the face of this competition.

    Many nations are suffering environmental damage and social instability.

    Nevertheless, I believe that the overall impact is hugely positive.

    In the UK, the price of our imports has fallen relative to the price of our exports, making everyone better off, even if your income is fixed.

    You don’t need me to tell you that.

    Take a walk up any high street.

    The price of a pair of jeans is the same – or lower – than twenty years ago.

    There are real benefits here.

    Recently I visited a large supermarket and talked to its retail director.

    “People ask what our anti-poverty strategy is” he said. “And I show them this.” It was a smart school uniform, on sale for just £13.

    The new global economy is a great challenge

    The great changes taking place pose many challenges.

    We are losing not just low-paid, low value added jobs, but some high value added jobs too.

    The pace of change will accelerate.

    There are more people in China studying English than there are people in England.

    India, China and other countries are investing enormously in education.

    India alone has 1300 engineering colleges.

    Unless we can compete in the knowledge-based new global economy we will lose out in the economy of the future.

    Demand for resources is intensifying.

    China is now the world’s second largest user of oil, after the United States, absorbing 6.6 million barrels per day.

    A quarter of this comes from Africa, where China is investing heavily.

    All of this impacts on us in the developed world.

    At a micro level it has an impact on businesses and patterns of employment.

    And at a macro level rapid change brings uncertainty: we simply can’t guarantee that the beneficial effects of globalisation will continue automatically.

    We can’t guarantee that the price of imports will continue to fall.

    We can’t be sure that the ICT revolution will be sustained at the same pace.

    As Donald Rumsfeld would put it, there are simply too many ‘unknown unknowns’.

    Mervyn King talked last week about the ‘bumpy ride’ ahead as the world manages a transition to higher global interest rates, after a period of low rates around the world.

    Opportunities

    But as well as these challenges, the new global economy also offers great opportunities.

    Those two billion new workers are rapidly becoming two billion new customers too – and you know what, western brands are in high demand.

    But the UK is failing to make the most of those opportunities.

    Our level of new investment in China is sixth in Europe – after Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, France and Sweden.

    Our trade with China is third in Europe

    When President Chirac went to China last year, he took 1000 businessmen with him, and opened doors for them.

    Politicians seeking to understand China shouldn’t think ‘sweatshop’ – they should think ‘silicon’.

    And they should remember how significant Japanese inward investment was to our economies in the 1980s because – as the head of Kingfisher pointed out to me recently – Chinese inward investment in Europe could be much bigger in the future.

    What are the UK’s greatest advantages in the new global economy?

    I am convinced that the UK has many great advantages in the new global economy.

    There are few places anywhere that are as profoundly stable as Britain.

    Our system of government is tried and tested.

    The rule of law is entrenched in a tradition reaching back centuries.

    We have a highly educated workforce with a diverse talent base and, of course, a natural command of the English language.

    We are, by and large, welcoming to foreigners – especially in that most cosmopolitan and tolerant of cities, London.

    But, having said all that, we are eroding our advantages.

    In recent years we have seen more regulation and higher tax.

    Our transport infrastructure and skills base have both been criticised by the OECD.

    Crime – especially violent crime and anti-social behaviour – is a blight on too many communities.

    Any responsible government must fully acknowledge these shortcomings and come up with a credible plan to tackle them.

    The City is a great example of using our advantages

    The City of London is a great UK success story.

    It’s the biggest international financial centre on earth.

    The London foreign exchange market is the largest in the world, with an average daily turnover of $504 billion. That’s more than New York and Tokyo combined.

    There are more than 550 international banks and 170 global securities houses in London.

    By contrast Frankfurt has around 280, Paris, 270 and New York 250.

    The growth of the modern City as we know it was shaped by three critical Conservative decisions.

    First, because of our attractive tax regime, in the 1970s, US bonds were traded in London – the so-called ‘euro-bond’ market.

    Then the big bang of the 1980s removed a huge swathe of regulation that allowed the City to expand and removed restrictive practices.

    And by being open to competition from banks from anywhere in the world, we injected an enterprising spirit into the City.

    The success of the City helps to drive the UK economy and provides huge benefits for our wider society.

    Over a million people are employed in financial services, who last year generated net exports for the country of £19 billion.

    Far from being based on the old school tie, it is supremely meritocratic.

    It is also highly innovative.

    You cannot simply set in stone a tax or regulatory regime for the City as it is today because it’s always changing, adapting and mutating.

    But, again, we must not be complacent.

    London has no God-given right to be the financial Capital of the world.

    If we want to remain ahead, not just of Frankfurt or Paris but of Shanghai and New Delhi in the next 20 years we need to continue to make Britain the best place in the world to do businesses – whether it’s in the financial sector or any other part of the UK economy.

    The lessons from the City are clear. Low tax. Low regulation. Meritocracy. Openness. Innovation. These are the keys to success.

    What do political and economic leaders need to do to compete in the future?

    So what will our political and economic leaders need to do in order to compete in the future?

    There are, I suppose, two responses to the challenges of the new global economy.

    One option is to shut out the threats, close down borders and retreat into protectionism.

    But isolation means closing the door on the opportunities too.

    I reject that path.

    The alternative is to build a flexible economy with low tax , light regulation and open markets.

    To embrace the new global economy and prepare for the inevitable changes that are taking place.

    I welcome the fact that there is now a broad consensus between both major parties in the UK on many fundamentals.

    But we should recognise our differences.

    As Chancellor, Gordon Brown has given us the highest tax burden in Britain’s history…

    Whereas I believe that a low tax regime is a vital part of economic prosperity.

    The government is wedded to the impulse to over-regulate…

    While I see a much greater role for exhortation and leadership.

    Many on the left-of-centre still seek to solve problems through more taxes, more laws and more regulations…

    But we, on the centre-right, prefer to step out of the way of business.

    One of the greatest services that government can give to the economy is to know when to stand clear.

    Clint Eastwood, in his guise as Dirty Harry, says “A good man knows his limitations.”

    I believe that a good government knows its limitations too.

    But that should never mean we are limited in our aspirations of what we can all do together.

    Successful economies also need good infrastructure – not just physically in terms of transport and energy but stable legal systems too…

    And, increasingly, a highly-skilled workforce.

    There’s another factor that is emerging.

    I believe it will grow in importance in the years ahead.

    The companies and key workers of the future will ask of a country: is it an attractive place to do business? Is it a nice place to live?

    There’s a developing quality of life agenda that only the short sighted can ignore.

    Instead of just measuring GDP, we need to think about GWB – general well being.

    People who dismiss this as woolly nonsense are economically short sighted.

    Increasingly, the most creative, productive and innovative people are insisting on working in an environment where they’re not just paid well but where they can stroll down a street in safety and educate their children in a good school.

    Conclusion – the choice

    Understanding the profound forces shaping change.

    Identifying the right response to globalisation.

    Recognising the broader aspirations that people have for a better quality of life in the 21st century.

    These are the keys to our future success.

    This Government doesn’t seem to understand the world of today and tomorrow.

    So it can’t work out the best way forward.

    Just compare the approach of our government to these challenges to the approach taken by our best businesses.

    Look at taxes. While businesses are cutting prices, government is getting more expensive.

    Look at IT. While businesses are decentralising, government still seeks centralised solutions.

    Look at management and openness. While businesses are flatter and more transparent, government is clings to hierarchies and secrecy.

    While businesses are moving towards flexible labour practices, government imposes more employment regulations.

    As I said a fortnight ago, there are things that the private sector can learn from the public sector.

    The strength of vocation. Passion for the job. A belief in the value of service.

    The tragedy of this government is that it is mismanaging the public sector and undermining its ethos through relentless target driven centralisation, while failing to learn lessons from the private sector about the right way to respond to the modern world – all at the same time.

    The challenge – of responding to globalisation with an agenda that combines competitiveness with quality of life – is passing to a new generation.

    As I watch a government that is too top down, too centralised, that doesn’t trust people enough or share responsibility widely enough, I am determined to find a better way.

    It will take hard work, a profound understanding of the changes taking place around us and tough decisions to put our country in the best possible position for success.

    But it is a challenge that I am determined to meet.