Lucy Rigby MP: speeches

Speeches

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I think that these suggestions are being made with the best of intentions, but with the deepest respect to the hon. Member, this is all motherhood and apple pie. If we want to do these nice things, we have to be able to say where the money will come from.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  The package of sanctions in place today is stronger than the package of sanctions that was in place last week. We have a world-leading sanctions regime in this country: at the moment, we have more than 3,300 sanctions on Russian entities, businesses, individuals and ships—the list goes on and on. Why does it go on and on? It is because of our steadfast support for Ukraine.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I will not commit to that, no.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  Okay. One of two things is true: either the Leader of the Opposition said that she would have taken us into the conflict and she did not mean it, in which case she is really confused, frankly; or she said it and she meant it, which is demonstrative of catastrophic judgment. Neither of those things—catastrophically bad judgment or deep confusion—is an ideal quality for someone who wants to run the country.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend raises the important issue of hauliers and the road haulage sector. What we are discussing today is so critical to the costs that hauliers are paying, including vehicle excise duty, which of course is on top of the changes we are making to fuel duty to save hauliers money. This is one of the ways in which we are recognising the critical role that hauliers play in setting costs, including of consumer goods. All these things fit together, and I recognise how important the sector is to my hon. Friend’s constituency.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  The best way to get to energy security is by doing exactly what the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero is doing at the moment with the push towards renewables. New licences in the North sea would not bring new oil and gas on stream for another 10 years, so they really are the wrong solution.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the decision on licences in the sanctions regime. These licences are specific, targeted and will be reviewed on a very regular basis. Given that he understands the flows of oil so well, he will know that licences are a very common part of the sanctions regime. The reason these licences are being put in place is to stage the impact on the economy. Indeed, the European Union is going to achieve a full ban by the end of 2026—it, too, is staging the impact. This is a sensible measure when it comes to our economy. What is totally beyond doubt is our steadfast support for Ukraine and the pressure that we continue to put, with our international allies, on Vladimir Putin.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member for her question, but if it would have been so mad to deal with fuel duty in that way, why was it her party’s intention to do exactly that? On oil and gas, we have been very clear that they will play a part in our fuel mix for years and years to come.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to the hon. Member. I might ask that our meeting—when indeed we do meet, as I am happy to do so—is fully focused on the matters at hand.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. It is because of the fiscally responsible choices that the Chancellor has made that growth and real wages have gone up, and inflation and interest rates have come down. [ Interruption. ] These things do not happen by accident; they are because of the fiscally responsible way that the Chancellor is managing our economy. That is fiscal responsibility for a purpose, that purpose being to support working people across this country.

• 21 May 2026 · Costs for Motorists · Hansard source

  More

  Alongside this key step, the Government’s priority will continue to be helping families with the cost of living, including through protecting the public finances. The Government are taking action to bear down on prices at the pump, and in November we extended the 5p per litre cut in fuel duty for a further five months. Right now, petrol and diesel are 11p per litre cheaper than they would have been under the plans we inherited from the previous Government. Some fuels have been more impacted than others by the conflict, and we recognise that. The Government also recognise the pressures being faced by drivers and other fuel users. That is why we are introducing a package worth over £400 million that combines broad support for motorists with targeted support for the sectors most exposed to and affected by higher fuel prices. Yesterday the Prime Minister made it clear that we will not increase fuel duty this year. The temporary 5p cut will be extended until the end of the year. Taken together, the Government’s decisions will save the average motorist over £120 this year, compared with the plans we inherited from the previous Government. We also recognise that farmers face substantially increased costs for fertiliser and fuel. That is why we are going further and cutting the duty rate on red diesel by over a third per litre, to the lowest rate in over 20 years. That will help other users of red diesel too. The road haulage sector is vital for transporting goods across the country. Recognising the sector’s key role and the increased costs that it is facing, we are introducing a 12-month holiday from vehicle excise duty for the majority of heavy goods vehicles. This will save a typical HGV over £600—up to £912 for some vehicles—on top of the savings that I have just described for fuel duty. To conclude, this change is one part of our support for households and businesses. It combines universal support for motorists with targeted support for those most affected by higher fuel prices. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor will update the House later today on further support measures for households and businesses.

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman’s wife, and potentially he himself, will be pleased to know that those two things are entirely compatible. We will have to cancel absolutely nothing at all. The key point is that where it is in our national interest to align with EU regulation, the Bill will enable us to do so. I want to address some specific points that were raised about Northern Ireland. The Government have worked closely with devolved Governments to design the Bill. The application of the agreements we are making alongside the Windsor framework will sweep away the majority of regulatory barriers for businesses moving agrifood goods.

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  As I said, the Government have worked closely with devolved Governments in the design of the Bill and we will continue to do that. To conclude, the pro-growth legislation set out in the Gracious Speech will drive this country forwards. The Conservatives had 14 years to deliver their legacy, which left our economy weaker, left people poorer and, most of all, left our country smaller in stature. This Government are undoing that legacy and our pro-growth legislation will allow us to accelerate the change that the country deserves to see. Our approach of a productive, active, agile state will ensure that we generate growth and lift living standards for people right across this country, not just for a few people and postcodes, but everywhere, because we value the contribution of the whole of Britain. The Bills in the King’s Speech are the path to a stronger and fairer future, and I commend the King’s Speech to the House. Ordered, That the debate be now adjourned .—(Jake Richards.) Debate to be resumed tomorrow.

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  Interest rate reductions.

• 18 May 2026 · Backing Business to Create Economic Growth · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to close today’s King’s Speech debate on behalf of the Government. I am grateful to Members for their contributions, including the Business Secretary for his excellent opening speech and the shadow Business Minister, the hon. Member for West Worcestershire (Dame Harriett Baldwin), for her kind words—although I note that I did not qualify as a “beam of light”, nor others on the Government side. I speak on behalf of the whole House when I say that whichever part of that £5 million charitable donation the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick)—he is not here, unfortunately —spent on his amateur dramatics course, he ought to ask for his money back. Two years ago, the Chancellor stood at this Dispatch Box following the first King’s Speech of this Labour Government. She committed to rejecting the failed economic approach of the 14 years prior and to charting a different economic course, reinvigorating our economy after years of chronic under-investment, austerity and poor productivity, and the only Parliament in recorded history when living standards actually got worse. The Chancellor committed to charting a different course so that our economy delivers for people right across this country. As a result of that approach, interest rates have been cut six times since the general election. In March, the spring forecast showed inflation coming down, as the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) was good enough to highlight, and real wages continuing to rise. Last week, ONS data showed borrowing falling by around £20 billion compared with the year before. Importantly, economic growth accelerated sharply in the first quarter of this year, rising to 0.6%, despite the Iran war. Of course, today we have had the IMF upgrade to growth this year as well. I am afraid I have to correct the shadow Chancellor, the right hon. Member for Central Devon (Sir Mel Stride), and the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Alicia Kearns), because GDP per capita is up too. These things are the result of the fiscally responsible choices that this Government have made, and it is responsibility for a clear purpose. That same purpose will always be at the heart of who we are as a Labour party: improving the lives of working people right across the country. We increased the national living wage and the national minimum wage. We have frozen prescription costs, and we have frozen rail fares for the first time in 30 years. We have scrapped the two-child benefit cap, lifting 450,000 children out of poverty. We are helping parents to save up to £8,000 a year with our expansion of Government-funded childcare, free breakfast clubs, and the new school uniform cap on branded items. Those things are helping millions of families across the country. The conflict in the middle east is putting pressure on energy markets and creating renewed fragility in trade and supply chains. The Conservative party and Reform would have raced into that costly war—the Leader of the Opposition was clear about that at the time—with damaging consequences for both our national security and our economy. [ Interruption. ] Conservative Members are shaking their heads and saying it is not true, but one of two things must be true: either the Leader of the Opposition said that she wanted to take us into the conflict and she meant it, in which case she has catastrophically poor judgment, or she said that she wanted to take us into the conflict but did not mean it, in which case she is deeply confused and Conservative Members have more things to worry about than catastrophically poor judgment. By contrast, the Prime Minister made the right decision to keep us out of that conflict. Because of his decision, and because of the action we have taken to stabilise the economy over the past two years, Britain today is in a stronger position to withstand the uncertainty and insecurity in the global economy. As well as immediate support with the cost of living, we must also create the conditions for shared prosperity. That means more jobs, businesses expanding and investing, and people in every community and part of our country having greater security and more of their own money to spend. That is what a Labour growth agenda means. The Chancellor has been clear that she wants to ensure that that growth is stable and resilient. Why? Because that means people secure in their jobs and households secure in their finances and, in our increasingly uncertain world, it means that families the length and breadth of Britain will be more confident and hopeful about what the future holds. All that is the basis on which the pro-growth legislation set out in the Gracious Speech is being delivered. That begins with legislation to reform and modernise regulation, to ensure that rules are proportionate to risk, and that businesses are able to expand and grow to the benefit of our economy as a whole. I am grateful to the right hon. Member for Salisbury (John Glen) for his constructive comments about our enhancing financial services Bill. I confirm that the Bill will maintain the UK’s competitive edge by enabling the sector to support businesses of all sizes to invest and grow, including credit unions, with reforms to the common bond. We will ensure that regulation ensures more lending to small businesses, and we will give Government the power to take action on in-person banking services. As many Members highlighted, the small business protections (late payments) Bill will tackle the scourge of late payments which, as my hon. Friend the Member for North West Leicestershire (Amanda Hack) wrote in her dissertation some years ago, cost the UK economy £11 billion each year and lead to the closure of 38 UK businesses every day. We must also build resilience to protect our critical infrastructure. Steel is strategically important to our economy, which is why we acted last year to avoid a sudden halt to production at Scunthorpe, protecting workers and the community that depends on the site. It is why we are now bringing forward legislation to give us options to protect Britain’s steelmaking capability. We have already announced major energy investments, including for the UK’s first ever small modular reactor in Anglesey and the next generation of nuclear submarines in Inverclyde. Our nuclear regulation Bill will modernise the way new nuclear projects are regulated so that we can deliver safe, secure and affordable nuclear power and infrastructure sooner, while maintaining strong environmental protections. Unlike a number of the Opposition parties, including the Greens and the SNP, this Government recognise the importance of new nuclear for our energy security, our climate security and our economic security. My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy) asked about the voluntary carbon consultation. The Government have published a summary of responses and a formal Government response will be published over the summer. As Members have noted, we must improve connectivity and boost trade to unlock growth. Labour has been saying for years that far too many parts of Britain lack basic and reliable transport connections, and all the many positive economic benefits that flow from that. Some of these points were echoed by Members, including the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan). Northern Powerhouse Rail will help to build a northern economy that reaches its full potential. Backed by up to £45 billion of Government support, the new route will drive jobs and investment across a single, well-connected northern growth corridor. We are also taking steps to protect and grow the freight industry. On the points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) and by the hon. Member for St Albans (Daisy Cooper) about the overnight visitor levy, the levy is a key means by which we are delivering our manifesto commitment to devolve new revenue-raising powers. Revenues from the levy will support local economic growth and mayors will make decisions, informed by local consultation, about how revenues should best be invested in their region. Britain will work closely with those who share our values and interests, which means a closer and more constructive relationship with Europe. That is why we are bringing forward the European partnership Bill.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  This Labour Government are committed to enabling more people to realise the dream of home ownership. Mortgages have become more affordable under this Government, thanks to increased economic stability and six interest rate cuts. Bills Presented Newhaven West Beach (Public Access) Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57) James MacCleary presented a Bill to provide for a right of public access on foot to Newhaven West Beach; to impose duties on the harbour authority in respect of that right, including requirements to open and maintain specified access routes; to provide for exemptions from those duties for reasons of safety or in connection with harbour operations; and for connected purposes. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 8 May, and to be printed (Bill 436). Defence Bonds (Proposals) Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57) James MacCleary presented a Bill to require the Secretary of State to publish proposals for the issuing of defence bonds, including for purchase by members of the public; and for connected purposes. Bill read the F irst time; to be read a S econd time on Friday 8 May , and to be printed (Bill 437).

• 28 Apr 2026 · Topical Questions · Hansard source

  More

  The Government are committed to making the aspiration of home ownership a reality for as many people as possible, and we recognise that the LISA is not working for everyone. That is exactly why we have launched a short consultation on the implementation of a new ISA product that will support more first-time buyers. [ Official Report , 13 May 2026; Vol. 786, c. 4WC.] (Correction) That new product will include the Government bonus being paid at the point the individual makes a withdrawal for a home purchase, therefore removing the need for a withdrawal charge.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Global Trade: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  This Government are backing our brilliant British businesses to trade globally, including through our new trade strategy that expands UK Export Finance’s capacity to £80 billion. This Government have secured new trade deals with India, South Korea, the EU and the US to back British businesses globally, delivering improved access to key markets and protecting British jobs.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Global Trade: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  I warmly congratulate Pete, Amanda and the wider team—and the goats—on their success. In inviting me to do so, my hon. Friend shows that he is indeed a true champion for the businesses in his constituency. The support that this Government are giving to businesses will enable more of our fantastic British companies to export globally and to emulate Cosy Direct’s success.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Global Trade: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  I believe the right hon. Member mentioned the British industrial competitiveness scheme. That is being expanded. He will also be aware of the British industry supercharger package, which provides additional price relief from April 2026 as well.

• 28 Apr 2026 · Global Trade: Support for Businesses · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to pre-empt anything that may or may not be announced in the King’s Speech. What I will tell him, though, as he already knows, is that this Government are backing our financial services sector to the hilt to ensure that it continues to be the world-leading success that it is.

• 22 Apr 2026 · Car Insurance Industry: Fraud · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell. I am grateful to the hon. Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) for securing the debate and highlighting the impact that fraud can have and the devious tactics that fraudsters use. She also spoke about the interplay between those issues and the legal profession. I will address the people who run such platforms later on. I also want to thank other Members who contributed to this thoughtful and important debate, including my hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell (Peter Swallow), the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters), as well as the shadow Economic Secretary to the Treasury, the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier), and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord). Car insurance is not a luxury; it is a legal requirement. For many businesses and families, it is essential to daily life, whether taking children to school, getting to work or caring for relatives. As has been said, fraud undermines confidence in the motor insurance market. It causes direct harm to consumers and drives up costs across the system. Those costs are ultimately paid by people who do the right thing by driving with insurance, as the hon. Member for Strangford rightly highlighted. My hon. Friend the Member for Bracknell pointed out that some drivers—far too many, in fact—do not get insurance, but drive regardless, which is a criminal offence. I regret to say that between 2019 and 2024, the cost of claims involving uninsured drivers increased by a huge 37%. As my hon. Friend said, that increases premiums for everyone else. The Government are considering how, in the light of its seriousness, the penalties should be strengthened for that offence. I hope that he can take from what I have just said that the Government take fraud extremely seriously. Fraud is the largest crime type in the UK. It harms individuals and businesses, as well as costing our economy billions of pounds each year. It is increasingly driven by organised crime and enabled by technology, as hon. Members have highlighted. That is why fraud is a national security priority for this Government, and we will do what we must to protect the public. In honouring our manifesto commitment, the Government published the new and expanded fraud strategy in March, as we have heard. The central focus of the strategy is disruption: denying criminals the ability to commit fraud in the first place by targeting the tools and methods they use to reach victims. That means acting across the system of Government, law enforcement, regulators, financial institutions, technology companies and telecoms providers, because no single organisation can tackle fraud alone. As part of the strategy, we are investing £31 million in a new online crime centre that will bring together the Government, law enforcement, GCHQ and industry to identify and address the technological enablers of fraud and deliver high-impact interventions. In practice, that means better data and real-time analysis so that we can identify patterns earlier and take faster action. That could mean taking down fraudulent websites, disrupting malicious advertising networks or supporting the freezing of accounts linked to fraud. Alongside that, we have launched a call for evidence on economic crime information sharing. We want to remove barriers that can prevent firms and agencies from acting on intelligence earlier so that suspected scam activity can be identified and stopped before more people are harmed. Let me turn to paid ad spoofing and fraudulent advertising, which was raised by the hon. Member for North Shropshire. The Government recognise that paid-for advertising is being exploited by criminals to reach potential victims at scale. Spoofed ads are designed to look like they come from trusted brands, insurers, brokers, comparison sites and even public bodies. Those are particularly pernicious examples. As the hon. Member noted, they can be highly convincing. Indeed, to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer, they look too good to be true. They can appear at the top of search results and be targeted at people precisely when they are looking for help, as the shadow Economic Secretary explained. My hon. Friend the Member for York Outer talked about ghost broking. My statistics might well be worse than the ones that he read out, because my understanding is that the Insurance Fraud Bureau thinks that ghost broking increased by 50% in the last two years. Whatever the exact statistic, there is a serious increase in the crime. My hon. Friend also highlighted a troubling example of identity theft and pointed to the links between ghost broking and follow-on activities. The story that he told was hard to hear. All these things are not just consumer issues, but significant questions of responsibility and liability in the online ecosystem. If criminals can buy their way into prominence through paid advertising, we must ensure that the systems that place and profit from those adverts do not turn a blind eye. That is exactly why the Online Safety Act 2023 places duties on the largest social media platforms to tackle fraudulent adverts on their services. Ofcom is due to consult on those measures later this year. Once implemented, Ofcom will have the power to take robust enforcement action when it finds non-compliance, including fines of up to £18 million or 10% of qualifying worldwide revenue, whichever is greater. The Government have also launched a new partnership between the Home Office, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and industry: the online advertising taskforce. The purpose is to strengthen and maximise the adoption of transparency standards across the wider programmatic ecosystem so that bad actors can be identified, disrupted and, when appropriate, prosecuted. That work will report back in early 2027, and the Government have been clear that we will take legislative action within this Parliament if there are not sufficient improvements. The hon. Member for North Shropshire and the shadow EST referred to claims management companies and legal professionals who associate themselves with such companies, and the links between them and car insurance fraud. The Ministry of Justice leads on elements of that agenda but, in some areas, the Financial Conduct Authority has responsibility. I hope the hon. Member will be reassured by the fact that there is ongoing dialogue on the issue between His Majesty’s Treasury and the MOJ to determine what might be done in this area. I hope she will agree that that addresses some of her important points. I want to address specifically the link between online fraud and car insurance. Insurance fraud is a serious issue for all the reasons that I have noted, and it has been well covered in this debate. However, it has an interaction with online criminality. The spoofed ads that are used to harvest personal data, misdirect consumers to fake brokers and facilitate scams ultimately feed wider fraud, particularly serious forms of money laundering. The Government are working closely with the industry, regulators and consumer groups to close the gaps that criminals exploit. I should add that the FCA is alive to the issue of ghost broking and is looking into it specifically. In October 2024, the Home Office launched the insurance fraud charter with key insurance firms to reduce insurance fraud. The charter supports stronger collaboration and shared action to prevent, detect and disrupt fraud, because the more effectively we tackle fraud at source, the more we protect consumers and the integrity of the market. More broadly, the Government’s motor insurance taskforce, which published its final report in 2025, included actions for regulators, industry and the Government to tackle fraud, given the unfortunate role that fraudulent activity plays in increasing claim costs and, in turn, premiums for all consumers. It is also important to be clear about the wider framework that supports this work. Financial institutions are required to maintain robust systems and controls to detect and prevent financial crime under the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017. Banks must report certain suspicious activity to the National Crime Agency under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, and they may also freeze and block accounts if suspicious activity is detected. We have also recently introduced new rules allowing banks to delay and investigate suspicious payments for up to 72 hours, which supports the interception of suspicious payments, giving firms more time to prevent funds from reaching fraudsters in complex cases and helping to break the spell that fraudsters have over victims. As we have set out in the fraud strategy, we are reinforcing the system-wide response through the Online Crime Centre and improved information sharing so that suspected scam accounts can be spotted sooner and action taken more quickly. I do not pretend that tackling fraud is simple. Fraudsters adapt quickly, and technology, including some of the technology that we have been talking about today, moves very fast, but the direction of travel is very clear. We are shifting from a reactive model, picking up the pieces after harm occurs, to a disruption model that targets the infrastructure that criminals rely on, including the online advertising routes they use to reach victims. Through our fraud strategy, the Online Crime Centre, strong action on fraudulent advertising via the Online Safety Act, and further work through the online advertising taskforce, backed by a clear commitment to legislate if necessary, we are taking decisive action to protect the public and disrupt the criminals behind these crimes. I thank the hon. Member for North Shropshire again for raising these important issues. I reiterate that the Government recognise the importance of car insurance to people’s lives and livelihoods, and we are determined to tackle the fraud that drives up costs for honest motorists.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Draft Capital Requirements Regulation (Market Risk Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026 Draft Credit Institutions and Investment Firms (Miscellaneous Definitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  Both statutory instruments are made under FSMA, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023. Together, the two instruments will help to deliver a more agile and responsive capital framework for UK banks and investment firms. Following the EU exit, the UK retained a body of financial services legislation known as assimilated law, which includes the capital requirements regulation, which sets the detailed and often technical capital rules. As hon. Members know, the UK follows the FSMA model of regulation, which involves regulatory standards being set by expert independent regulators that work within a policy framework set by Government and Parliament. The Government are now applying the FSMA model to the CRR by revoking the CRR, so that the Prudential Regulation Authority can replace requirements in legislation with requirements in PRA rules, resulting in a more user-friendly, single-source book of prudential rules for firms. Where important elements of the CRR need to stay in legislation to provide the policy framework within which the PRA must operate, those elements are restated, using powers provided under FSMA 2023. The first SI that I will discuss is the Credit Institutions and Investment Firms (Miscellaneous Definitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026, which simply restate important definitions from the CRR that need to stay on the statute book. For example, the definition of what constitutes an investment firm is being restated in legislation, rather than being defined by the PRA rule book. That is necessary for the continuity of existing legislation and to ensure that the Government and Parliament remain in control of which regulatory activities should be regulated. The instrument does not introduce new regulatory requirements, and it does not make any substantive change to the scope or effect of the definitions being restated. Its purpose is simply to maintain legal continuity and to ensure that the prudential framework continues to operate as intended as we complete the move to the FSMA model. The second SI that I will discuss is the draft Capital Requirements Regulation (Market Risk Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026. The UK remains committed to the full and consistent adoption of the Basel reforms, and the PRA intends to implement most of the new Basel 3.1 rules from 1 January 2027. That will help to ensure that the banking system is well capitalised, while giving domestic-focused firms the regulatory certainty that they need to plan for the future and to invest in the real economy, including small businesses and infrastructure projects. We recognise, however, that the timing of implementation in other major jurisdictions remains unclear, in particular for certain market risk requirements affecting banks that use internal models. That is particularly relevant for the internationally active firms with cross-border trading activity. Implementing those specific requirements in the UK ahead of clarity elsewhere risks unnecessary operational complexity for internationally active firms and potentially misaligned implementation, which is exactly why the Government, in conjunction with the PRA, decided to build in flexibility to the UK’s approach. For the new internal model market-risk requirements, the element of Basel 3.1 that will most affect the ability of UK banks to compete in international markets, implementation will be delayed until 1 January 2028. The draft instrument gives effect to that approach by disapplying the updated internal market risk rules during the transitional period from 1 January 2027 to 31 December 2027 and, during that period, firms will continue to apply the existing requirements. This limited delay will allow the UK to flex the new internal model requirements for market risk, should that prove necessary, to ensure that the UK remains competitive with other major jurisdictions. The draft regulations also provide the Treasury with the ability to extend the transitional period by making further regulations. Any such extension would be time limited, subject to parliamentary approval and used only if necessary to respond to material international developments. In summary, the draft regulations bring near to completion the work to deliver a more agile and responsive prudential regime for banks and investment firms, and I commend them to the Committee.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Draft Capital Requirements Regulation (Market Risk Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026 Draft Credit Institutions and Investment Firms (Miscellaneous Definitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this Committee has considered the draft Capital Requirements Regulation (Market Risk Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026.

• 21 Apr 2026 · Draft Capital Requirements Regulation (Market Risk Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026 Draft Credit Institutions and Investment Firms (Miscellaneous Definitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source

  More

  I am very grateful to the shadow Economic Secretary to the Treasury and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for their input on the draft regulations. Their questions are very apt and go straight to the nub of this issue. What is happening in other jurisdictions is really important, and that is why we are seeking to include a degree of flexibility in the draft regulations. As I said in my opening remarks, we are postponing a certain element until 1 January 2028 for internationally active banks, and I set out why doing so is really important. However, there is potential for further flexibility, exactly as I said, subject to what goes on in other jurisdictions. As I am sure the shadow EST knows, the US recently put out some revised proposals in March. Without getting into all the nitty-gritty detail, the upshot is that the revised US proposals remain broadly aligned with international standards and the UK’s rules. Briefly, I also want to touch on the EU, because that is also very important. Again, there is broad alignment, although there has been some commentary in the press that the EU banking union is thinking about going out to an even longer date—they were talking about 2030. I think I am right in saying that we are yet to have that fully confirmed. If anything, that comes back to the importance of building in flexibility. We, particularly the PRA, need to have a sufficient degree of agility and nimbleness built into what we can do, which is the approach that we are taking. Should international circumstances change, we and the PRA need to remain alert to those positions. For all the reasons I have set out, which I will not repeat, the draft regulations are designed to ensure that, for our internationally active banks, we do not create an undue, unnecessary and problematic degree of inconsistency between all those very important jurisdictions. As I made clear, the draft regulations allow the Treasury the power to extend the transitional period that we are putting in place, if necessary, which would then be subject to the negative procedure. Question put and agreed to. DRAFT CREDIT INSTITUTIONS AND INVESTMENT FIRMS (MISCELLANEOUS DEFINITIONS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2026 Resolved, That the Committee has considered the draft Credit Institutions and Investment Firms (Miscellaneous Definitions) (Amendment) Regulations 2026. —(Lucy Rigby.)