Latest news with #redtape
Times
9 hours ago
- Business
- Times
What the NatWest chief hopes to learn from his customers
Surrounded by about £10 million worth of high-grade metal stored in a warehouse on the outskirts of Leighton Buzzard, Paul Thwaite, the chief executive of NatWest, is a world away from London's Square Mile financial district. The boss of the FTSE 100 lender is visiting Dynamic Metals, a family-owned company in Bedfordshsire that supplies customers in defence, aerospace and Formula One and is one of the 1.5 million firms served by Britain's biggest business bank. Over the whine of industrial bandsaws, Alex Bailey, Dynamic's operations director, gives Thwaite, 53, a tour of the site, which has been extended using financing supplied by NatWest and is partly powered by roof-mounted solar panels funded by the bank's asset finance business. Trips like these are more than just a chance for Thwaite to see the lender's finance in action, however. They also give him a glimpse of business sentiment on the ground. Two hours earlier he attended a roundtable at the bank's Milton Keynes branch with 14 of its business customers, ranging from a professional services software company and IT security firm to a pipe coupling manufacturer and baby clothes maker. The overwhelming message from them was that despite all the talk from the government about prioritising economic growth, very little seemed to have changed in practice, and that red tape was stifling. 'I'm going to have to have a compliance department,' Seth Woodmansterne, the managing director of a greetings card supplier, told Thwaite, to laughter from the others. 'We're talking about greeting cards!' For Thwaite, who tries to meet customers at least every week, events like these are 'very valuable' and are a 'much better way of getting insight' than the reams of reports from consultancies that he reads. 'Hearing it direct is better than through others,' he told The Times in an interview afterwards. It's typical of the down-to-earth Liverpudlian, who previously ran the NatWest division that looks after its business customers and was suddenly thrust into the top job two years ago after Dame Alison Rose was pushed out by the previous government over the Nigel Farage account closure scandal. Ministers were able to intervene because the state at the time still owned 39 per cent of NatWest, a stake that was a legacy of the bank's £45.5 billion taxpayer bailout during the 2008 financial crisis. • Pay boost for NatWest chief from shareholders In a watershed moment for the lender, however, the government finally sold its remaining shares in NatWest last month, returning it to full private ownership after years of painful restructuring. The state's exit, which cemented a £10.5 billion loss for taxpayers, is 'a new chapter' for the group and its employees, thousands of whom, like Thwaite, were working at the lender during the bailout. Now that NatWest is out of the government's grasp, there is speculation in the City about what Thwaite does next. He has already put growth firmly on the agenda, having last year acquired both a £2.5 billion portfolio of residential mortgages from Metro Bank and most of Sainsbury's banking operations. This has spurred speculation in the City that further deals may be in the offing. It emerged this year that NatWest had made an unsuccessful approach for Santander's UK business. Last week Benjamin Toms, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets, a stockbroker, also tipped NatWest as the most logical suitor for TSB. Sabadell, the Spanish owner of TSB, has confirmed that it had 'received preliminary non-binding expressions of interest' in its British high street business, one of which is believed to have come from Santander. Toms reckoned TSB could be worth £2.6 billion, which NatWest could pay without needing to raise capital, and that buying it would boost NatWest's market share in UK mortgages 'where the bank is underpenetrated' by about two percentage points. Yet Thwaite, who would not comment specifically on TSB, signalled that NatWest was not interested in a bid, insisting there was a 'very high bar' for any dealmaking 'financially and operationally and culturally' and that management were confident in their ability to grow the business organically. 'My responsibility to the company and the shareholders is to do things that make compelling sense for shareholders,' he said. 'Adding a couple of percentage points to market share is not an existential issue.' Thwaite has spent his entire career in banking. After studying management science and chemistry at the University of Manchester, he joined the Santander graduate scheme before quickly switching to NatWest in 1997. He has stayed ever since, rising through the ranks in a variety of roles before taking charge during the reputational crisis caused by the Farage debacle in July 2023. The chaotic departure of Rose was announced in the middle of the night and Thwaite received a call late in the evening from Sir Howard Davies, NatWest's then chairman, asking him to step up and become chief executive. 'It's a crucible moment because you suddenly find yourself in a position which you maybe hadn't anticipated two days before.' Even so, Thwaite said he 'wasn't fazed by it' and 'jumped straight in'. Since then, as well as having struck the Sainsbury's and Metro deals, he is at the forefront of industry lobbying efforts aimed at encouraging the government to scrap the ring-fencing regime, a central plank of Britain's reforms to make banks safer following the 2008 crisis by forcing them to legally separate their retail divisions from riskier operations. • Banks' ring-fencing rules under scrutiny by City watchdog The industry claims the rules are inefficient and have been supplanted by other regulatory changes, although critics would argue that axing the regime will make banks less safe. Thwaite insisted that 'NatWest will not forget the lessons of the financial crisis' and that he is simply posing the question, 'is it the right time to review' the rules? The government is likely to be receptive to the idea. Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has put deregulation across industries at the centre of her drive to boost growth and is under pressure to show progress, with the latest official figures showing the UK economy contracted by a bigger-than-expected 0.3 per cent in April. The small businesses at the roundtable hosted by NatWest in Milton Keynes certainly felt they were getting little help from either central or local government, with Woodmansterne, the greetings cards boss, telling Thwaite 'I have no engagement whatsoever, despite trying, from MPs or council'. The NatWest boss said that 'there is no doubt from what I see in my interactions [with government] that they are determined to find a way to grow' and that 'you could argue it's still relatively early days'. 'What you've heard from the businesses today is they want, people want, to see the tangible benefits. I think we're approaching the moment of truth.' The boss of NatWest has retreated from the 'purpose-led' strategy of his predecessor that came under attack during the scandal over its decision to close the Coutts account of Nigel Farage. NatWest, which owns the Coutts private bank, became embroiled in the culture wars two years ago when Farage, who leads Reform UK, obtained Coutts internal documents about its decision. These showed that its reputational risk committee believed his public views 'were at odds with our position as an inclusive organisation'. This stoked a row over freedom of speech and the affair ultimately cost Dame Alison Rose her job as NatWest chief executive, with Paul Thwaite promoted to replace her. It also led to close scrutiny of Rose's interest in diversity and inclusivity in business, which she had championed. Since then, there has been a shift in stance at the group. In the last annual report published under Rose there were 262 instances of the word 'purpose'. This compares with 125 in the most recent report under Thwaite, where there was no mention at all of the lender being 'purpose-led'. In an interview with The Times, Thwaite, who said he abhors corporate jargon, asked: 'Could you name the purpose?' He said the strategy now was 'about what we're doing with our customers, not what the bank's doing about particular issues' such as the energy transition and social mobility. 'I think a lot of the communication about the bank, both external and internal, talked to those topics, and it could have drawn the link more clearly between how those topics are in service of our customers.' However, he insisted that NatWest had not pulled back from environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies, even though there has been a broader shift away from these areas in the wider corporate world recently. 'We're still one of the biggest banks for sustainable finance. We have brilliant ESG teams, we're following our customers.'
Forbes
09-06-2025
- Business
- Forbes
The GOP Falls In Love With Red Tape To Force People Off Federal Programs
Government red tape and American flag as a metaphor for political and administration inefficiency. Deregulation has been a cornerstone of the Republican brand for decades. And the Trump Administration vows to cut government red tape wherever it finds it. Yet, House Republicans would use their just-passed budget bill to create reams of paperwork explicitly intended to block low- and moderate income households or immigrants from government assistance to which they are legally entitled. Just as progressives have used environmental regulation to halt development they don't like, President Trump and his allies on Capitol Hill are creating new bureaucratic hurdles to prevent families from tapping government benefits. And they are doing it just when Democrats are rethinking their historic love of paperwork. The House budget, which its sponsors call the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, would use piles of red tape to block legally entitled people from receiving health insurance through Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, cash benefits through the Earned Income Tax Credit, and food assistance through the SNAP (food stamp) program. Not only would the changes force applicants to fill out more forms, they would require more government workers to read all that paper. This directly conflicts with the efforts by Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to fire hundreds of thousands of federal workers. Hill Republicans don't have the votes to repeal these programs, but they can cut millions of people from their rolls by choking them with paperwork. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that more than 500,000 people would lose ACA marketplace health insurance because of this added red tape. Another 1.3 million would lose food stamps in any given month. 700,000, including many family caregivers, would lose Medicaid because they'd have to prove their eligibility twice a year instead of annually. Reversing a Biden-era rule to simplify the Medicaid application process would leave another 600,000 uninsured. Supporters say all this extra paperwork will prevent waste, fraud and abuse. But this mostly is a canard. In Medicaid, for example, nearly all 'waste' is due to improper payments to providers and insurance companies, according to an analysis by the research organization KFF. Separately, Georgetown University estimates the improper payment rate at about 5 percent. Beneficiary fraud, where people intentionally claim they are eligible for Medicaid or a specific benefit when they know they are not, is just a small fraction of the overall improper payment rate. While the extra paperwork may prevent some beneficiary fraud, much of the price will be paid by families who lose benefits only because they failed to file a government form on time. For example, after years of trying and failing to repeal the ACA, House Republicans found a different way to hamstring the program: use paperwork to make it harder to apply for the insurance. They'd narrow the ACA's annual enrollment period from 90 days to 45 days. And they'd require people to go through the entire enrollment process every year, in contrast to employer-sponsored insurance that automatically renews. Instead enrolling online with a few clicks, consumers would now have to manually add information. And to receive premium subsidies or reductions in cost sharing, they'd have to verify their income, immigration status, health coverage status, and place of residence with documentation. Currently, most of this information is automatically matched with existing government data. For example, the IRS can use its records to confirm an applicant is eligible to claim premium subsidies, which are structured as tax credits. Yet, the House would require applicants to produce more paperwork. A similar burden would be imposed for other tax breaks. For the first time, families would have to 'pre-certify' children are eligible for the EITC. More than 17 million families would have to file paperwork on more than 29 million children. While the paperwork may uncover some who are ineligible for the credit, the added requirement inevitably will discourage many qualified families from claiming the assistance and delay credits for others while their paperwork being reviewed by IRS staff. That's what happened when this was tried two decades ago. Then there are the work requirements, which the bill would expand for SNAP, or food stamps, and mandate for Medicaid. About 80 percent of the adults subject to work requirements do, in fact, work. But many do so irregularly and frequently change jobs, and collecting and filing the needed paperwork won't be easy. Many who technically qualify still will be kicked off the rolls simply for failing to manage the red tape. The requirement could be an even bigger challenge for those claiming an exemption because they are family caregivers. How will they prove that? John Arnold, co-CEO of the foundation Arnold Ventures, puts it this way: 'The policy of work requirements is really a policy of work reporting requirements. This is nuanced distinction but very important. Inevitably, people who are engaged in work will lose healthcare coverage because they failed to properly document or report that activity.' Curiously, just as Republicans are falling in love with regulation and red tape to achieve their policy goals, Democrats increasingly are attracted to a deregulation movement that's been labelled the Abundance agenda. Supporters argue that Democrats and progressives have choked the economy through overregulation. A favorite example is how rules in cities such as San Franscisco make it difficult to build housing, leading to shortages for low- and moderate-income people. It is a fascinating role reversal. While some Democrats are looking to lighten the bureaucratic load, Trump and his congressional allies see it as an effective way to achieve their goal of barring low- and middle-income households from accessing government assistance.
ABC News
06-06-2025
- Politics
- ABC News
Housing Minister Clare O'Neil takes aim at Australia's regulation red tape
It's rare to hear a Labor minister rail against red tape — traditionally the domain of the conservative side of politics — but Housing Minister Clare O'Neil feels the weight of the country's housing crisis on her shoulders. She knows that if Labor isn't able to deliver on its housing promises, a generation of Australians will not only feel let down, they will have a right to feel angry that the system is stacked against them. Anger about housing wasn't a manufactured crisis at the last election — it was real and visceral but ultimately the opposition was never able to turn that anger into votes, particularly among younger voters where feelings on this are so intense. Anthony Albanese's thumping majority doesn't make the issue go away — and hardheads in Labor know that delivery will be key now. In a frank interview with the ABC she has declared that Australia has made it "uneconomic" to build homes and vowed to use the Commonwealth's leverage to push for the overhaul of regulation to turbocharge housing. Regulation for planning and construction has increased and is largely managed by the states and territories and local government. "It's just too hard to build a house in this country," O'Neil says. "And it's become uneconomic to build the kind of housing that our country needs most: affordable housing, especially for first home buyers." O'Neil says the housing crisis is, in part, the result of "40 years of unceasing new regulation" across three levels of government. "On their own, each piece makes sense. But when you put it together, builders face a ridiculous thicket of red tape that is preventing them building the homes we need. And if we're going to tackle the fundamental problem — that Australia needs to build more homes, more quickly — we need to make a change." "Our focus is on delivering our election commitment — five per cent deposits and 100k homes for first buyers. And, tackling our drive towards building 1.2 million homes around the country by focusing on stagnant construction productivity." Left-leaning thinkers around the world have been rethinking the progressive side of politics' obsession with rules and regulations. Ezra Klein, a prominent progressive journalist and commentator in the United States, has expressed concerns about excessive regulation and its impact on progress, particularly affordable housing, infrastructure, and even climate change. In his book Abundance, Klein argues that over-regulation hinders genuine progress by prioritising process over outcome. It is a similar argument being mounted by O'Neil as she seeks to make her mark on an area where there is increasing scrutiny on the federal government to step in. In the US, some on the left are angry at the argument being mounted — but there is a growing consensus on a need to change the way we do business. A quiet revolution is going on in housing as O'Neil seeks to turn around Australia's crisis. The government has brought all of the housing work into Treasury — moving building out of the Industry Department. O'Neil said she was looking closely at the Productivity Commission's work to help inform what the government does to improve construction productivity. A Productivity Commission report into the productivity growth in Australia's housing construction sector found the total number of houses built per hour worked has more than halved over the past 30 years. On the issue of labour productivity, it found productivity had fallen by 12 per cent in that period. The issue of housing dogged Labor's first term with both the opposition and the Greens painting Labor as falling short on its target of providing 1.2m new well-located homes in the five years to mid-2029. An average of 240,000 dwellings would need to be completed each year to make that target and many believe it won't be reached. "It's a bold ambitious target and it is designed that way," O'Neil says. "To people saying 'wave the white flag' — I think that's highly defeatist. "We must innovate faster. We are building housing the same way as we were doing 40 years ago. It has to change." Labor's battle on housing will continue into this next term. Already Liberal housing spokesperson Andrew Bragg has pivoted, admitting that focusing exclusively on urban fringes is "very misguided" and his party should talk more about supply than first homebuyer support. Senator Bragg also suggested using a mix of "carrot and stick" to make sure state governments hit their housing targets and said Labor's proposal to fund housing construction itself was "crazy". Labor believes that without getting more involved it will not shift the dial on an issue that has already become a crisis of epic proportions. Patricia Karvelas is presenter of ABC TV's Q+A, host of ABC News Afternoon Briefing at 4pm weekdays on ABC News Channel, co-host of the weekly Party Room podcast with Fran Kelly and host of politics and news podcast Politics Now.
CTV News
02-06-2025
- Business
- CTV News
P.E.I. and Ontario partner to reduce trade barriers
Ontario Premier Doug Ford and P.E.I. Premier Rob Lantz to sign a Memorandum of Understanding that strengthens both provinces' commitment to eliminating barriers to interprovincial trade. (Source: Government of P.E.I.) Prince Edward Island Premier Rob Lantz and Ontario Premier Doug Ford will sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to reduce internal trade barriers. The agreement was signed at the First Ministers Meeting in Saskatoon and builds P.E.I.'s Interprovincial Trade and Mobility Act and Ontario's Protect Ontario Through Free Trade Within Canada. The MOU will reduce red tape, recognize equivalent standards, improve mobility for workers and create opportunities for economic growth in both provinces, a news release from the government of P.E.I. said. 'Prince Edward Island may be Canada's smallest province, but we are punching well above our weight,' Lantz said. 'With our reciprocal Interprovincial Trade and Mobility Act, we're not just keeping pace – we are setting the standard and securing our future. Together, we're proving that when provinces work together, the whole country moves forward.' Ford said the MOU comes at a critical time to improve interprovincial trade. 'With President Trump threatening our economy, there's never been a more important time to boost internal trade and cooperation between provinces,' said Ford. 'By signing these agreements and working together, we're helping Canada unlock up to $200 billion in economic potential and standing shoulder to shoulder to protect the future of Canadian workers across the country, not just in Ontario.' The agreement signals a commitment to continue building the relationship between the two provinces and enhance collaboration across the country, the news release said. The annual value of trade in goods and services between Ontario and P.E.I. is over $1.5 billion. For more P.E.I. news, visit our dedicated provincial page.
