logo
Reeves' ‘communist' pension plans are a bad idea

Reeves' ‘communist' pension plans are a bad idea

Telegraph07-07-2025
A number of countries, such as Iceland and Taiwan, have requirements for pension funds to invest a portion of their total assets domestically. The UK currently has no such rule, though there is a voluntary so-called 'Mansion House' accord whereby major UK funds agree to invest at least 5 per cent of their assets in UK private markets. Since earlier this year, Chancellor Rachel Reeves has been trying to mobilise pension assets as a way to boost UK investment, thus helping with our weak growth and more recently there has been talk of extending the Mansion House accord to increase the UK share.
Do such schemes really make us wealthier, though? If UK pension funds feel they get the best risk-return ratio by investing in France or the UK or Korea, why would it make the UK any richer to force them to turn down those higher-yielding, less risky investments in exchange for less attractive UK alternatives? Doing so reduces the return on UK funds, making the UK citizens whose pensions those funds do or will pay worse off. Those worse off UK citizens will themselves consume and invest less.
Furthermore, by forcing those monies into UK assets, the pound is artificially strengthened, making UK exporters worse off, costing jobs and investment in those industries.
If UK investment projects are attractive, investors from all over the world are available to provide capital. We don't need to distort markets, harming UK pensioners and UK exporters, by forcing UK pension funds to invest in projects international capital markets have turned down. It isn't that the country is brimming with high-return, low-risk attractive investment projects but there simply isn't any money available to inject into them. Rather, the problem with the UK is that it isn't an attractive place to invest at present. Taxes are prohibitively high and going higher. Infrastructure is old and deteriorating. Planning processes are lengthy and expensive. Workers are abundant and still by European peer standards have limited unionisation and worker regulation but the politics is moving in a negative direction.
The Chief Executive of Lloyds Bank, Charlie Nunn, has compared the proposals to make pension funds invest directly in the UK to 'communist' Chinese rules. That's probably going to bit too far to get the message home, but we understand the point. Once you start down the road of capital controls it's a long way back, and with the rest of our politics turning into a 1970s chaotic stereotype, investors might well start to feat 1970s-style capital controls would be just around the corner and steer clear of the UK altogether.
Modern global capital markets are a source of huge wealth and opportunity. Let's not try to segment ourselves off from them.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns
Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns

The Independent

time29 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Imported dogs could carry disease or behaviour risk, RSPCA warns

An animal charity has called for stricter regulations on animal rescues importing dogs into the UK, citing concerns about disease risks and behavioural issues Government statistics reveal that in 2023, 320,000 pets were brought into the UK under travel pet schemes and 44,000 entered as commercial imports. RSPCA spokesman David Bowles likened the process to ' Deliveroo for dogs' and called on the Government to tighten regulations on animal rescues. He told the BBC: 'The RSPCA's major concern is these dogs are essentially ticking time bombs – coming over, not being health tested. 'Diseases are now coming in through these dogs. They're affecting not just the dogs that are being imported, they could also affect the dogs already in this country and their owners. 'They've almost set up a Deliveroo for dogs and that is a real problem.' There is no requirement for rescue organisations to be licensed in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. It comes weeks after a bill that aims to stop animal smuggling and cruelty cleared the Commons with cross-party support. Legislation put forward by Liberal Democrat MP Dr Danny Chambers will reduce the number of animals for non-commercial entry into the UK, ban the import of puppies and kittens under six months old or heavily pregnant dogs and cats, and introduce a halt on the import of dogs and cats who have been 'mutilated', including having their ears docked. The MP for Winchester's Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill was supported by the Government, and will now proceed to the House of Lords on its passage to becoming law. Dr Chambers said: 'As a vet, I've seen the devastating consequences of puppy smuggling. It's unimaginably cruel to separate puppies and kittens from their mothers at a very young age, and then bring them across borders in substandard conditions where they're then sold for maximum profit by unscrupulous traders who prioritise profit over welfare.' He added: 'Careful consideration has been given to setting these limits, balancing the need to disrupt illegal trade with minimising impact on genuine pet owners. To underpin this, only an owner, not an authorised person, will be permitted to sign and declare that the movement of a dog or cat is non-commercial. He criticised the influence of social media on the increased demand for dogs with docked ears, and a party colleague hit out at the platforms' role in publishing animal abuse. He said: 'One reason that there is such an interest in dogs with cropped ears is that a lot of influencers on Instagram and other social media platforms pose with these dogs or show they have these new dogs with cropped ears. Many people aren't aware that this is a mutilation. 'They think it's how the dogs' ears normally look, and it drives a demand for dogs that look like this.'

Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting
Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting

Times

time29 minutes ago

  • Times

Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting

The ousted head of the Financial Ombudsman Service received a pay-off of almost £230,000, it has been disclosed in the annual report. Abby Thomas, who left abruptly on 6 February, was paid £229,869 in severance payments on top of her normal salary. The payoff included £100,000 for loss of office, £107,692 in lieu of notice and £22,177 for a period of gardening leave that began on the day she left, the FOS said. MPs on the Treasury select committee have hit out at the manner of her departure and criticised the FOS chairwoman Baroness Manzoor for refusing to answer questions on why Thomas left and whether she was forced out. The FOS, which rules on complaints by consumers about financial services firms and can set compensation orders, is under pressure to reform. Rachel Reeves has pledged to curb its powers so it no longer acts like a regulator after complaints from the industry that it has increased the cost of 'mass redress events'. It has been dealing with a significant rise in claims, mainly related to car finance loans, but also because of concerns about other consumer loans and more people complaining about banks' handling of frauds. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Treasury committee, said this month: 'The handling of this situation by the senior leadership has been deeply disappointing.' Thomas, a former Virgin Media executive, served for less than three years. She has been replaced by James Dipple-Johnstone as chief ombudsman and Jenny Simmonds as interim chief executive. Manzoor is due to retire on August 1. The FOS received 450,000 new inquiries in the year to March, up from 330,000. The motor finance industry is braced for a judgment from the Supreme Court this Friday that could determine the scale of compensation payments for failing to disclose commissions paid to dealers.

Activist investor steps up pressure on Smith & Nephew
Activist investor steps up pressure on Smith & Nephew

Times

time42 minutes ago

  • Times

Activist investor steps up pressure on Smith & Nephew

The activist investor Cevian Capital has raised its shareholding in Smith & Nephew, increasing pressure on the FTSE 100 medical equipment maker before its half-year results. Filings show Cevian, one of Europe's biggest activist investors, has raised its stake to 8.5 per cent having first publicly emerged with a holding in July last year via a Jersey-based vehicle. Cevian, which had raised it to 7.5 per cent in February, is understood to be the largest shareholder. The stake building comes before half-year results from Smith & Nephew on August 5 where investors will look for signs of a turnaround in the performance of its orthopaedics division, the group's largest. The group remains committed to retaining the business, but following full-year results in February, John Rogers, Smith & Nephew's chief financial officer, outlined scenarios under which it could evaluate options.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store