Workers could see £6,000 boost to pension pots under Government plans
This could result in an investment of £50 billion in infrastructure projects, which the Treasury hopes will boost the economy and drive up higher returns for savers.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said: 'We're making pensions work for Britain. These reforms mean better returns for workers and billions more invested in clean energy and high-growth businesses – the plan for change in action.'
The schemes are expected to save £1 billion a year through economies of scale and improved investment strategies, the Treasury said.
Under the reforms, the local government pension scheme will be consolidated, reducing the current 86 administering authorities into six pools.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said: 'The untapped potential of the £392 billion local government pension scheme is enormous.
'Through these reforms we will make sure it drives growth and opportunities in communities across the country for years to come – delivering on our plan for change.'
Sir Steve Webb, a former Liberal Democrat pensions minister who is now a partner at consultants LCP (Lane Clark & Peacock), described it as a 'truly a red letter day for pension schemes, their members and the companies who stand behind them'.
He said: 'The Government has clearly been bold in this area and this opens up the potential for this surplus money to be used more productively to benefit scheme members, firms and the wider economy.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Finextra
an hour ago
- Finextra
Is the UK 'overestimating the risk and underestimating the opportunity' of stablecoins?
0 This content is contributed or sourced from third parties but has been subject to Finextra editorial review. I remember writing about the introduction of the Financial Services and Markets Bill in July 2022 and reflecting how the (then) Chancellor's Mansion House speech had claimed 'it reinforces the UK's position as a leading centre for technology as we safely adopt crypto assets' stressing a 'vision to make the UK one of the most dynamic financial centres in the world.' Fast forward three years, the Financial Services and Markets Act has been in force for two years and Rachel Reeves has just made another Mansion House Speech in which she emphasised growth, international competitiveness and asserted she 'will drive forward developments in blockchain technology… including tokenised securities and stablecoins…' Is this another example of the enthusiastic language that is as much a part of the UK Chancellor's annual speech as the ornate setting, or does it accurately signal the UK's global leadership in digital finance? What's been happening in the rest of the world while we talk about our vision? Stablecoin legislation was introduced in Japan in 2022, in Singapore and the EU in 2023, and Abu Dhabi in 2024. Most recently, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act is set to pave the way for US banks to issue stablecoins and has led to real excitement about what it will mean for US growth, the FS industry and consumers. The Act includes a formal definition of a (fiat-pegged) 'payment stablecoin' and addresses much of the ambiguity and confusion that has characterised the years in which regulation in the US has been led by SEC enforcement. Albeit with varying degrees of success, these examples demonstrate that regulatory reform connected to digital finance can offer clarity and certainty that protects consumers and encourages innovation. In many ways, it is extraordinary to hear a Labour government adopting the myth of regulation as a barrier to innovation and growth, something I have long argued against. The government and regulators are faced with the challenge of balancing innovation and stability while safeguarding consumers and the wider financial system, but that is an argument for effective regulation, not for less regulation. Further clarity is required on stablecoin assets One issue banks are asking the FCA for clarity on currently, is at what point a stablecoin becomes 'systemic' as that is when oversight shifts to the Bank of England. UK Finance's response to the FCA's crypto prudential rules consultation emphasises the need for more detail on how the two regulatory regimes interact and sufficient time to implement the BoE's yet-to-be-published framework. There are also calls for guidance on anti-money laundering (AML) responsibilities, especially for custodians of stablecoin backing assets. Criticism that UK regulation 'overestimates the risk and underestimates the opportunity' of stablecoins may have something to do with the Chancellor's push for regulators to consider growth and competitiveness rather than 'excessive caution'. In her speech the Chancellor referenced the 'remit letters' she had written to the FCA and the PRA last year and extended the call: 'Regulators in other sectors must take up the call I make this evening… …not to bend to the temptation of excessive caution… …but to boldly regulate for growth… …in the service of prosperity for our whole country'. Regulation that balances risk and encourages innovation is possible but it must be agile and principles-based. We have excellent examples here of good, pro-innovation regulation, not least regulatory sandboxes and the CMA9 order, now replicated in jurisdictions around the world. The Electronic Trade Documents Act is another sensible initiative I was closely involved with, legislation that does not mention blockchain technology but made key changes to the definition and capabilities of trade documents (such as bills of lading) that were possessive in nature. The legal change is based on a UN template and allows the digitalisation of trade documents using what is described in the Statute as a 'reliable system'. Blockchain is one of the technologies that makes it possible to meet the criteria required to be a reliable system in that it can be distinguished from any copies, protected against unauthorised alteration, allowing no more than one person to exercise control of the document at any one time. Getting this into statute at the pace we did was a significant UK achievement. That was just the start. Much more action is required to encourage adoption and the attendant economic, environmental and social benefits to be realised. What does the Mansion House speech mean for the future of stablecoin in the UK? Back to the action set out in the Chancellor's speech and her specific references to fintech and blockchain initiatives: 'And for fintech – where almost half of Europe's Fintech's are already based here in the UK…the PRA and FCA are launching a scale-up unit to support innovative firms to grow in the UK, including in our world-leading payments system. The scale-up unit is a new initiative to help high-growth fintech firms transition from early-stage (often supported by regulatory sandboxes) to full-scale operations. This is especially important for payments firms, which face complex regulatory hurdles as they grow. The goal is clearly to retain and grow fintechs in the UK. I find myself echoing the questions I asked 'in these pages' last year in response to the government's National Payments Vision, regarding the implications for growth and whether the measures set out will create competition that drives both innovation and security and benefits for us all? The Chancellor also, of course, mentioned blockchain, tokenised securities and stablecoins, '…and an ambitious design for a new digital gilt instrument…so that UK financial services can be at the forefront of digital asset innovation.' Can we assume the Chancellor is backing blockchain as a foundational technology for the future of finance? Will we get the regulatory clarity around tokenised securities (traditional financial assets such as bonds or shares represented digitally on a blockchain) and stablecoins (digital currencies pegged to stable assets like the pound or dollar) that will boost confidence in the same way GENIUS has in the US? The reference to digital gilts also signals a move to innovate and modernise government debt issuance and settlement but again we are, so far, lacking in the detail. I welcome the rhetoric and appreciate the importance of messaging but wonder how far it has really shifted perception, are we still a place that 'overestimates risk and underestimates opportunity'? Is there the understanding that right sized regulation plots the path we must take, to end forever the false and tediously recurring dichotomy that you can have innovation or regulation, never both.
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Nationwide rule change warning for thousands of customers during August
Nationwide has issued a warning to customers over the changes to terms and conditions for the Reward Saver account - with a message set to appear in the coming weeks Nationwide, the UK's largest building society and the world's biggest mutual, has issued a warning about a pop-up that customers may encounter due to an impending policy change. The changes are related to the terms and conditions of the Reward Saver account. Currently, Nationwide sends out statements for these accounts via post, but this could soon change. Nationwide stated: "Whilst you can't currently opt for paperless statements for the Reward Saver account, if you use our banking app, in the coming weeks you should be able to change the paperless settings for this account. This comes after news that UK homes are taking steps not seen for two years amid Rachel Reeves tax rise fears. The bank added: "You'll see a pop-up when this is available to you". To hold an account, you must be at least 16 years old and cannot have more than £5 million in your account. This limit does not include any interest calculated on your account balance and added to your account. You can only be named on one Reward Saver account at any time. Your account can be in sole or joint names, with a maximum of two joint account holders, reports Birmingham Live. Eligible categories for account holders: NSA Police Fire Service Ambulance Service Teachers HM Armed Forces/Reserved Armed Forces Pharmacy Optometry Dental Practice MOD Police Home Office HM Prison and Probation Service Highway Traffic Officers Search and Rescue Red Cross RNLI Independent Lifeboats HM Coastguard Environment Agency Animal and Plant Health Service Blood Bikes According to Nationwide's TandCs: "We'll pay interest into your account on the anniversary of your account opening. If you opened your account on 29 February, we'll pay your interest on 28 February". "We'll also pay interest when you close your account. The interest rate we pay on your account is variable, meaning it can go up or down," they added, warning that "from time to time, your account may have tiered interest rates based on how much money you have in your account". "The interest rate we pay on each tier will be variable. When your balance changes and takes your account to a different tier, we'll automatically apply the interest rate for the new tier." Nationwide concluded, saying: "You can pay money into your account in any of the ways set out in 'Our Saving s Terms and Conditions'. If you try to pay in an amount that would take you over the maximum balance, the whole of the payment will be rejected. Any rejected electronic transfers will be returned to the account the payment was made from".
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
George Osborne is right – Britain can't afford to ignore the new cryptocurrencies
When it comes to cryptocurrencies, Britain's on the slow train to nowhere. That, at least, is the view of former chancellor George Osborne, and despite being a moderate crypto sceptic myself, I'm beginning to think he might have a point. Writing in the FT, Osborne tells the story of how he used Britain's first crypto ATM, handing the 'coin' he withdrew to the Treasury. All right and proper. But financially, not so smart. The Bitcoin he withdrew is now worth 200 times what it was then. All of his successors have subsequently made the same promises he made: to put Britain at the centre of the financial revolution that was then just getting underway. But their bombastic talk of making the nation 'a leader' wasn't backed by any meaningful action. In the absence of political direction, regulators got scared, putting up restrictions designed to protect – for which read nanny – retail investors, while stymieing the wholesale market's development. Now phase two is upon us – stablecoins – and it looks like Britain is again going to miss the boat. Stablecoins are much more interesting to me than Bitcoin and its chums, because their value is linked to an underlying asset. Take a guess what that asset is in the vast majority of cases. If you said 'the dollar', give yourself a gold star. Or a gold stablecoin. America's openness to this stuff – which Donald Trump put into overdrive – has put it at the head of the pack. Warren Buffett, the legendary 'Sage of Omaha' who has forgotten more about investment than most asset managers will ever learn, once said: 'If you told me you own all of the Bitcoin in the world and you offered it to me for $25, I wouldn't take it – because what would I do with it? I'd have to sell it back to you one way or another. It isn't going to do anything.' However, what sustains crypto is the power of the idea underpinning it during an epoch in which ideas have unusual power. Unless every holder loses faith all at once – and they won't – it will continue to have value as a tradable commodity. Even Berkshire Hathaway has taken a sip of what Buffett likened to 'rat poison' by investing in Nu Holdings, a Brazilian digital banking company with its own crypto platform. In Britain, however, regulators have wrinkled their noses, grabbed our hands and dragged us off. ' Rachel Reeves rightly says we've all become too risk-averse,' Osborne writes. 'We became the world's financial centre because we weren't afraid of change. On crypto and stablecoins, as on too many other things, the hard truth is this: we're being completely left behind. It's time to catch up.' The Treasury's response can best be summarised as 'but, but, but, we're doing stuff', while looking all hurt at Osborne's criticism. But he's right. If you live in New York or Nebraska, you can buy an exchange-traded fund (a type of collective investment vehicle) issued by, say, BlackRock, a giant asset manager. If you live in Newcastle, you can't. Consumer 'protection' rules mean you have a 24-hour wait before being allowed to buy Bitcoin; in the US, you're good to go. British crypto bros can still get in – but only after they and their mates run the regulatory gamut first. No wonder they take their business overseas. Here's the thing: crypto is going to cause a scandal. You can see it coming a mile off. It's new(ish), it's volatile, and the crypto kids have a habit of getting over-excited while forgetting what they were taught about Newtonian physics in school. What goes up must come down. Tick, tick, tick: boom. The end result will be messy and people are going to lose a lot of money. They're going to cry about it. The BBC will trot out interviewers who will look all concerned and sympathetic while the losers moan and demand that someone pay compo. This helps to explain why people like Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England – who won't even countenance a digital pound – want to stay out of the water when the rest of the world is jumping into online pools of digital cash. This means any chance of shaping this emerging market will be lost, and London will continue to decline as a financial centre in the process – becoming more and more irrelevant as time goes on. Scandals happen. They're endemic to the City, to Wall Street and the rest. When they do, you pick yourself up, sort out the mess, try to learn the right lessons, and move on. It's the cost of doing business. Osborne's views are obviously informed by his sitting on the global advisory council for Coinbase, a crypto platform. But that doesn't make him wrong. To the contrary. I've many differences with the former chancellor, but the government really does need to grasp this nettle – even if it stings a bit. It's slightly bizarre that many of the reforms that protected consumers and brought some sanity to the banking industry after it nearly broke the world economy are being jettisoned – and yet crypto is viewed as too toxic to touch. The former chancellor says it is 'lame' to blame regulators like Bailey for the problem. He's right about that too. Rachel Reeves is the boss and Parliament is sovereign. She should get to work. There is – if she can but see it – a potential win for her here. It's risky, to be sure. But so is getting out of bed in the morning.
