Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether current public sector pay determination processes, particularly through the independent pay review bodies, sufficiently take account of productivity metrics.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government is firmly committed to improving public sector productivity and efficiency, as set out in its plans for a more productive and agile state at the Spending Review. At Budget 2024 the Government set a 2% productivity, efficiencies, and savings target for government Departments. The Office for Value for Money and its Chair have worked closely with all departments to agree bespoke and stretching efficiency targets, supported by robust delivery plans. Altogether, the Government will deliver technical efficiencies worth nearly £14 billion a year by 2028–29.
The Pay Review Body (PRB) process is used to set the pay for many public sector workforces. This process is independent from Government and PRBs will consider a range of evidence when forming recommendations on pay. This can include productivity factors, amongst other considerations such as the need to recruit, retain and motivate suitably qualified people.
Pay awards will need to be funded within departmental settlements set out at Spending Review 2025. If the PRBs recommend pay increases above the level departments have budgeted for, departments will need to carefully consider the justification for these awards and determine whether these additional costs can be borne either through offsetting savings or through further productivity gains.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether any formal mechanism exists to directly link public sector pay settlements to measurable improvements in productivity at either departmental or workforce level.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government is firmly committed to improving public sector productivity and efficiency, as set out in its plans for a more productive and agile state at the Spending Review. At Budget 2024 the Government set a 2% productivity, efficiencies, and savings target for government Departments. The Office for Value for Money and its Chair have worked closely with all departments to agree bespoke and stretching efficiency targets, supported by robust delivery plans. Altogether, the Government will deliver technical efficiencies worth nearly £14 billion a year by 2028–29.
The Pay Review Body (PRB) process is used to set the pay for many public sector workforces. This process is independent from Government and PRBs will consider a range of evidence when forming recommendations on pay. This can include productivity factors, amongst other considerations such as the need to recruit, retain and motivate suitably qualified people.
Pay awards will need to be funded within departmental settlements set out at Spending Review 2025. If the PRBs recommend pay increases above the level departments have budgeted for, departments will need to carefully consider the justification for these awards and determine whether these additional costs can be borne either through offsetting savings or through further productivity gains.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to extend the temporary duty suspension for cold-rolled aluminium alloy coils beyond 2027.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
Stakeholders were invited to apply for new business suspensions between 8 May and 3 July 2024. As part of this process a suspension was applied to CN76061211 – cold-rolled aluminium alloys coils.
The suspension will be in place until 30 June 2027, with a review on possible extension occurring before this date.
There will be further opportunities to apply for tariff suspensions in due course. Further information, including dates of the application window, guidance, and methods to apply, will be announced on GOV.UK.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the Smarter Regulatory Framework, in particular the impact of the repeal of retained EU law under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023, on promoting sustainable economic growth and the international competitiveness of the UK’s financial services sector.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
As of the most recent update in July 2025, HM Treasury has repealed, amended, or replaced 51% of assimilated law it is responsible for, as set out in the Retained EU law and Assimilated Law Dashboard. The great majority of this is financial services legislation.
In the last 12 months, HM Treasury has made SIs to replace the EU’s Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation, and the EU’s Short Selling Regulation.
Sustainable economic growth is a priority of the government. That is why the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, published on 15 July 2025, sets out the government’s approach to delivering a regulatory environment for financial services that is proportionate, predictable, and internationally competitive.
The government has sought to deliver this approach in a way that minimises disruption and produces the most streamlined and accessible framework for firms and creates an agile, workable and coherent regime. For example, through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Designated Activities) (Supervision and Enforcement) Regulations 2025, which make it easier for the FCA to consistently supervise activities and enforce rules that replace key parts of EU law.
The financial services regulators already have significant rule-making powers, and the government worked closely with them in determining its approach to replacing retained EU law, to ensure that regulators are ready to take on additional responsibilities. It is for regulators like the Prudential Regulation Authority, the Financial Policy Committee, as well as the Financial Conduct Authority, to determine their approach to these new responsibilities They are funded via a levy on financial services firms, and it is their responsibility to set their own funding requirements each year, following consultation, to ensure that they are able to carry out their functions.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of transferring detailed responsibilities from retained EU law to the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Policy Committee; and how they intend to ensure coherence and consistency across the UK’s financial regulatory framework.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
As of the most recent update in July 2025, HM Treasury has repealed, amended, or replaced 51% of assimilated law it is responsible for, as set out in the Retained EU law and Assimilated Law Dashboard. The great majority of this is financial services legislation.
In the last 12 months, HM Treasury has made SIs to replace the EU’s Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation, and the EU’s Short Selling Regulation.
Sustainable economic growth is a priority of the government. That is why the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, published on 15 July 2025, sets out the government’s approach to delivering a regulatory environment for financial services that is proportionate, predictable, and internationally competitive.
The government has sought to deliver this approach in a way that minimises disruption and produces the most streamlined and accessible framework for firms and creates an agile, workable and coherent regime. For example, through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Designated Activities) (Supervision and Enforcement) Regulations 2025, which make it easier for the FCA to consistently supervise activities and enforce rules that replace key parts of EU law.
The financial services regulators already have significant rule-making powers, and the government worked closely with them in determining its approach to replacing retained EU law, to ensure that regulators are ready to take on additional responsibilities. It is for regulators like the Prudential Regulation Authority, the Financial Policy Committee, as well as the Financial Conduct Authority, to determine their approach to these new responsibilities They are funded via a levy on financial services firms, and it is their responsibility to set their own funding requirements each year, following consultation, to ensure that they are able to carry out their functions.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the capacity and resources available to the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Policy Committee to carry out the additional responsibilities transferred to them under the Smarter Regulatory Framework.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
As of the most recent update in July 2025, HM Treasury has repealed, amended, or replaced 51% of assimilated law it is responsible for, as set out in the Retained EU law and Assimilated Law Dashboard. The great majority of this is financial services legislation.
In the last 12 months, HM Treasury has made SIs to replace the EU’s Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation, and the EU’s Short Selling Regulation.
Sustainable economic growth is a priority of the government. That is why the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, published on 15 July 2025, sets out the government’s approach to delivering a regulatory environment for financial services that is proportionate, predictable, and internationally competitive.
The government has sought to deliver this approach in a way that minimises disruption and produces the most streamlined and accessible framework for firms and creates an agile, workable and coherent regime. For example, through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Designated Activities) (Supervision and Enforcement) Regulations 2025, which make it easier for the FCA to consistently supervise activities and enforce rules that replace key parts of EU law.
The financial services regulators already have significant rule-making powers, and the government worked closely with them in determining its approach to replacing retained EU law, to ensure that regulators are ready to take on additional responsibilities. It is for regulators like the Prudential Regulation Authority, the Financial Policy Committee, as well as the Financial Conduct Authority, to determine their approach to these new responsibilities They are funded via a levy on financial services firms, and it is their responsibility to set their own funding requirements each year, following consultation, to ensure that they are able to carry out their functions.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what progress they have made in bringing forward statutory instruments under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 to replace retained EU law as part of the Smarter Regulatory Framework; and what is the expected timetable for completion of this process.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
As of the most recent update in July 2025, HM Treasury has repealed, amended, or replaced 51% of assimilated law it is responsible for, as set out in the Retained EU law and Assimilated Law Dashboard. The great majority of this is financial services legislation.
In the last 12 months, HM Treasury has made SIs to replace the EU’s Packaged Retail and Insurance-based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation, and the EU’s Short Selling Regulation.
Sustainable economic growth is a priority of the government. That is why the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy, published on 15 July 2025, sets out the government’s approach to delivering a regulatory environment for financial services that is proportionate, predictable, and internationally competitive.
The government has sought to deliver this approach in a way that minimises disruption and produces the most streamlined and accessible framework for firms and creates an agile, workable and coherent regime. For example, through the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Designated Activities) (Supervision and Enforcement) Regulations 2025, which make it easier for the FCA to consistently supervise activities and enforce rules that replace key parts of EU law.
The financial services regulators already have significant rule-making powers, and the government worked closely with them in determining its approach to replacing retained EU law, to ensure that regulators are ready to take on additional responsibilities. It is for regulators like the Prudential Regulation Authority, the Financial Policy Committee, as well as the Financial Conduct Authority, to determine their approach to these new responsibilities They are funded via a levy on financial services firms, and it is their responsibility to set their own funding requirements each year, following consultation, to ensure that they are able to carry out their functions.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of paragraph 2.75 of the OBR's Fiscal Risks and Sustainability Report, published on 8 July, which states that the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pensions increases fiscal risk as gilt holdings fall; and the finding that this will lead to an in increase in debt interest spending of £22 billion in today's terms.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
We have seen gradual changes to the structure of the pension market as a result of the shift from Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution schemes. Overall demand for gilts has, however, remained resilient throughout these periods of changing investor patterns and, as the OBR notes, these changes are widely known.
The government deliberately maintains a varied gilt issuance strategy to promote a well-diversified investor base, so that it is not overly reliant on demand from just one type of investor. Continuing to do so means that we expect that overall demand will remain robust in the future, even if there are changes in the demand patterns of particular investor groups.
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effect of the increase in employer National Insurance contributions and of the tax changes in the Autumn Budget 2024 on private sector investment.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
Forecasting the economy, including the impact of Government policy decisions, is the responsibility of the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR).
The OBR does not routinely publish estimates of the impact of individual policy measures on private sector investment. The October 2024 Economic and Fiscal Outlook – in particular paragraphs 3.67 to 3.73 – discuss the impact of the Budget package as a whole on the economy. [1]
[1] You can access the link to the October 2024 Economic and Fiscal Outlook here: https://obr.uk/efo/economic-and-fiscal-outlook-october-2024/
Asked by: Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the ratio of dependents, young and old, to the working age population (dependency ratio); and the risk to the long-term economic sustainability of the public finances posed by an ageing population and a declining birth rate.
Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) is the Government's official forecaster responsible for assessing the UK economic and fiscal outlook. Its annual publication the Fiscal Risks and Sustainability (FRS) report incorporates biennial long-term projections and analysis of major potential fiscal risks.
In their July 2025 FRS report, the OBR identified that the ageing of the UK population and the associated decline in average health as risks to the UK’s fiscal outlook. Both are expected to increase health spending pressures over the longer-term, with the projected rise in spending on the state pension being the second-largest increase in non-interest spending after health in the OBR’s long-term projections. These are underpinned by OBR judgements on old-age and young-age dependency ratios.
In the last Autumn Budget, the government set out a clear fiscal strategy to stabilise the public finances and underpin growth. This involved introducing new fiscal rules which provide stability, put the public finances on a sustainable path and ensure our public services are sustainably funded.