Chancellor’s Mansion House speech vows to rip up red tape – saying post-financial crash rules went ‘too far’ | Money News

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has criticised post-financial crash regulation, saying it has “gone too far” – setting a course for cutting red tape in her first speech to Britain’s most important gathering of financiers and business leaders.

Increased rules on lenders that followed the 2008 crisis have had “unintended consequences”, Ms Reeves said in her Mansion House address to industry and the City of London’s lord mayor.

“The UK has been regulating for risk, but not regulating for growth,” she said.

It cannot be taken for granted that the UK will remain a global financial centre, she added.

Money blog: Britain’s most affordable town revealed

Ms Reeves announced “growth-focused remits” for financial regulators and said next year the government will publish the first strategy for financial services growth and competitiveness.

Bank governor to point out ‘consequences’ of Brexit

Also at the Mansion House dinner the governor of the Bank of England Andrew Bailey said the UK economy is bigger than we think because we’re not measuring it properly.

A new measure to be used by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) – which will include the value of data – will probably be “worth a per cent or two on GDP”. GDP is a key way of tracking economic growth and counts the value of everything produced.

Brexit has reduced the level of goods coming into the UK, Mr Bailey also said, and the government must be alert to and welcome opportunities to rebuild relations.

Mr Bailey caveated he takes no position on “Brexit per se” but does have to point out its consequences.

In what appears to be a reference to the debate around UK immigration policy, Mr Bailey said the UK’s ageing population means there are fewer workers, which should be included in the discussion.

The greying labour force “makes the productivity and investment issue all the more important”.

“I will also say this: when we think about broad policy on labour supply, the economic arguments must feature in the debate,” he added.

The exact numbers of people at work are unknown in part due to fewer people answering the phone when the ONS call.

Mr Bailey described this as “a substantial problem”.

He said: “I do struggle to explain when my fellow [central bank] governors ask me why the British are particularly bad at this. The Bank, alongside other users, including the Treasury, continue to engage with the ONS on efforts to tackle these problems and improve the quality of UK labour market data.”