The government is chasing growth, with implications for law and regulation

Feature articles are supposed to lag the behind news. It is, then, a surprise how often a Gazette feature article coincides with relevant developments that derail the editing process. We have speculated as to whether this unintended prescience could be monetised.

It happened again with today’s feature on the London Stock Exchange. On Wednesday a checked and finalised feature on far reaching reforms to the LSE’s listing rules, expected in the second half of this year, had to be amended when chancellor Rachel Reeves (pictured), on her sixth day in office, put out an embargoed announcement that the biggest change for the exchange in more than 30 years would happen on 29 July. 

The reforms are predicated on the not-very-socialist assumption that the answer to commercial malaise, which the LSE has been afflicted by, is always deregulation.

But the new chancellor’s enthusiasm for this approach was not a surprise. Together with the new City minister, Tulip Siddiq MP, Reeves has made reassuring the City a priority. We can expect also that the last government’s notion that pension funds should be weaned off safe bonds to invest more in British business will see a policy outcome.

The left of the Labour party see this sort of City-friendly stuff as proof-positive that the party’s leadership has been captured by the vested interests that really own Britain.

That, I think, is a misreading.

The government desperately needs growth, and any policy or change in law and regulation that promises it might help stands a fair chance of being fast-tracked – especially if it does not require many or any public funds.

Hence, liberalisation of City rules. And the early priority for planning law reform.

Hence, also, Siddiq’s keen interest in where pension funds are invested. Iron fiscal discipline for government sits alongside the conviction that the private sector needs to be spendier.

This doesn’t bode well for the needs of the criminal justice system. Ethical investors will also have concerns, as will anyone concerned with the role of good governance in the economy. The unions are right to be vigilant around the government’s employment law promises.

And of course, we’ve been here before, to a degree. Post 1997, the creation of the Financial Services Authority was to a design whereby it claimed to carry a big stick but talk softly.

Up to the global financial crisis, the FSA’s light touch approach had a hand in ensuring the City played a part in a sustained period of strong economic growth. Around my bit of south London, that allowed schools to be rebuilt, and hospital wings to rise.

But the balance wasn’t right. The road to austerity was paved with the unchecked risks taken by Northern Rock, RBS and Lehman Brothers. Austerity was forged in the heat of regulatory failures, here and in the US.

For now, though, if claims they will support growth can be credibly attached to them, your favoured changes to law, regulation and policy will likely find an enthusiastic reception at the Treasury.