Barclays boss indicates that he accepts bank taxes will rise in budget, suggests that’s ‘bearable’, and backs Healey
Kalyeena Makortoff
Kalyeena Makortoff is the Guardian’s banking correspondent.
CS Venkatakrishnan, CEO at Barclays, seems to have admitted defeat over bank tax hikes, which are expected to be a headline measure in Healey’s budget next week.
When asked whether the bank might consider tilting assets or investment out of the UK and to the US – where it also has operations – as a result of higher taxes, Venkatakrishnan gave his full backing to the chancellor.
He told reporters:
I recognise that the chancellor and the government has been entrusted with an important duty by the public and the people. And they have to balance a host of considerations. He [Healey] is the man in the arena, and I deeply respect the responsibility he bears on his shoulders and wish him well.
His long term goal is the same as our long term goal, which is to get growth.
Second, we are already a bank, which makes, effectively, half of our money elsewhere [outside] the UK. And so this is not a question of a financial hit to us. It’s bearable. It is a question of proportion and it’s a question of market signaling. But as I said, I deeply respect the responsibility that the chancellor has and he has our full support and backing.
Bank bosses have been lobbying intensively against bank tax rises since narrowly escaping higher levies during last year’s budget.
That includes JP Morgan boss Jamie Dimon, who said earlier this year he could scrap plans for a new £3bn London headquarters if the UK government became hostile to banks. News of the tower – which will house more than half of its 23,000 UK staff – was unveiled just days after former Labour chancellor Rachel Reeves spared the sector of further tax rises in her 2025 autumn budget.
Key events
Badenoch criticises government for not sending minister to speak at Police Federation conference
Kemi Badenoch has criticised the government for not sending a minister to address the Police Federation’s conference.
Addressing the federation this morning, she said she was “not scared to wade in” and not scared to “back the police”.
She told the audience:
Too often these days, we fail to recognise sacrifice and service. Whether it’s hounding brave and elderly veterans through the courts, hounding police officers who try to do the right thing, or even ordinary members of the public who step in to help only to find that they’re in trouble themselves.
It’s no wonder the people in this country are becoming too scared to wade in, too scared to do the right thing. Well, I am different. I am not scared to wade in, and I am not scared to back the police.
I think it is telling that for two years in a row, the Labour government has not sent anyone to address this conference – not the policing minister, not the home secretary.
But Badenoch also said she would not promise police officers a big pay rise.
Now, I know that you would also like a massive pay rise as well.
I’m sorry that I can’t promise that just yet – at least not on day one.
I am not going to stand here and promise something without a plan to pay for it.
Too many politicians have done that, and it only leads to disappointment.
Criminals who refuse to attend sentencing face losing prison privileges under new rules
Offenders who refuse to face their victims’ families in court for sentencing could be stripped of privileges or kept in cells for weeks under government changes granting wider powers to judges in England and Wales, Geneva Abdul reports.
Barclays boss indicates that he accepts bank taxes will rise in budget, suggests that’s ‘bearable’, and backs Healey
Kalyeena Makortoff
Kalyeena Makortoff is the Guardian’s banking correspondent.
CS Venkatakrishnan, CEO at Barclays, seems to have admitted defeat over bank tax hikes, which are expected to be a headline measure in Healey’s budget next week.
When asked whether the bank might consider tilting assets or investment out of the UK and to the US – where it also has operations – as a result of higher taxes, Venkatakrishnan gave his full backing to the chancellor.
He told reporters:
I recognise that the chancellor and the government has been entrusted with an important duty by the public and the people. And they have to balance a host of considerations. He [Healey] is the man in the arena, and I deeply respect the responsibility he bears on his shoulders and wish him well.
His long term goal is the same as our long term goal, which is to get growth.
Second, we are already a bank, which makes, effectively, half of our money elsewhere [outside] the UK. And so this is not a question of a financial hit to us. It’s bearable. It is a question of proportion and it’s a question of market signaling. But as I said, I deeply respect the responsibility that the chancellor has and he has our full support and backing.
Bank bosses have been lobbying intensively against bank tax rises since narrowly escaping higher levies during last year’s budget.
That includes JP Morgan boss Jamie Dimon, who said earlier this year he could scrap plans for a new £3bn London headquarters if the UK government became hostile to banks. News of the tower – which will house more than half of its 23,000 UK staff – was unveiled just days after former Labour chancellor Rachel Reeves spared the sector of further tax rises in her 2025 autumn budget.
Healey argues his budget will refute Andy Haldane’s claims about Tory policies being better for growth than Labour’s
Here are some more lines from Patrick Maguire’s interview with John Healey in the Times. This passage sums up the overall picture very well. Maguire writes:
So what is the chancellor now concentrating on? One could be forgiven for thinking him utterly unreconstructed: a party man and proud of it. There is no such thing as Healeyism, he says when the conversation turns to Anthony Crosland’s evangelism for the mixed economy: “I’m just Labour.”
“Just Labour” is exactly what the bond markets fear — and, indeed, it is what gives Kemi Badenoch hope of pulling off a comeback to rank alongside Lazarus and Bobby Ewing for utter implausibility.
As explained earlier, while not going into specifics, Healey was keen to present himself as someone reducing the burdens facing businesses – especially smaller businesses. (See 9am.) But here are some other lines.
-
Healey argued that his budget next week would refute the claim made by Andy Haldane, the former Bank of England chief economist, about Labour not having the right policies to promote growth. In an article for the Financial Times, Haldane said Conservative policies were better for the economy, partly because they were more likely to support “cuts to business and employment taxes and regulation to unleash animal spirits”. In his write-up, Maguire says:
It was Haldane who also said, memorably and mercilessly, that the markets had concluded that this was a “traditional tax-and-spend socialist government with better TikTok videos”. At Westminster, this sort of criticism is at risk of curdling into thick and immovable consensus. What does Healey say to that? “I’d say to Andy Haldane,” he growls, fixing me with a cold stare, “speak to me next Thursday.” And, for the record, he speaks explicitly of “making an argument for how you bring welfare costs down” — albeit not via the “crude cuts” that were Starmer’s undoing.
[Healey] is “acutely conscious”, too, of the “trade off” between an ever-increasing minimum wage — particularly for the youngest workers — and levels of employment.
He knows the many businesses who “want to employ young people” sometimes cite that upward ratchet as a reason they cannot.
-
Healey defended the part he played in bringing down Keir Starmer. Healey resigned from Starmer’s government over defence spending, and this contributed to the loss of support for Starmer in the parliamentary party that led to him standing down. Referring to this period, Healey said:
The country was ready for a change … Wherever you stood on the spectrum of the [parliamentary Labour party], there was a recognition that we needed a change.
He also argued that changing leader had been good for the party.
We have a very rare moment now. We’re in the middle of a parliament, the second half of a parliament, and we’ve got a chance of a new hearing. People are at least willing to listen again … the Labour party is actually quite determined and disciplined, and in any party, the second half of a parliament starts concentrating minds.
Robbery up 10%, while overall crime rates generally going down, ONS figures show
The Office for National Statistics’ latest report on crime figures is out. It covers crime in England and Wales in the year ending June 2026 and it starts:
Crime against individuals and households has generally decreased over the last 10 years with some notable exceptions, such as fraud.
This chart shows some of the key figures. The crime survey figures are based on what people tell researchers about the crimes they have experienced; the other figures related to the crimes reported to the police.
At this stage of the budget process, John Healey has almost certainly made all his key decisions. But, just in case he hasn’t, he could try our budget interactive. It allows you to make a decision on some of the options facing the chancellor, and then it will tell you what the impact would be on budget headroom, and how the markets and the polls might react.
Healey accepts Labour has put a ‘lot of pressure’ on business and says helping entrepreneurs will be a budget priority
Good morning. A week today John Healey, the chancellor, will be doing a media round defending the budget he is presenting on Wednesday next week. Ahead of that, he has given an interview to Patrick Maguire from the Times. As you would expect, there is no real detail in it about the measures he will be presenting to MPs. But the big picture message is very clear – and quite surprising, coming from a chancellor serving a PM who in some respects is steering left compared to his predecessor. Healey says that he wants to be on the side of bloody-minded entrepreneurs who make a profit, he acknowledges that government has made their life harder over the past two years, and he suggests that cutting the ‘cost of living’ for business is just as important as cutting the real cost of living for families.
In the quote that gives the Times its splash headline, Healey says:
I want to be a chancellor who backs business in Britain making a profit, and those entrepreneurs who, in the end, are the ones who challenge the status quo, come up with innovative ideas and are trying, some of them through sheer bloody-mindedness, to keep going through these sorts of pressures …
If you’re not making a profit, you’ve got nothing to put back into the business. And for the people who start up these businesses, the ones who really thrive and grow, they have to make a profit — and they will be much more inclined to put it back into their own business. But we want it to grow here and stay here.
And this is what he says about the government has recently been putting “a lot of pressure” on business.
If you talk to any of the businesses that have come in and have either had one-to-ones or round tables with me, I have recognised that in recent times there’s been a lot of pressure: employment law, regulation, tax, input costs, supply chains.
And so when I talk about the cost of business, and recognising that in the same way as we’re recognising the cost of living pressures, I’m conscious of that as I go into the budget for both businesses and households.
All chancellors – including all Labour chancellors – say they want to help businesses make a profit. But many people in the business community suspect that, when they face fiscal pressure, Labour government will usually default to treating business as a cash machine.
Healey’s comments about wanting to be seen as “a chancellor who backs business” and about how tax rises and the Employment Rights Act have increased costs sound like an implicit rebuke to Rachel Reeves, his predecessor. In his interview Healey defends her decision to increase employer national insurance, saying she had to deal with the “dereliction of duty” of the last Tory government on the economy. But Healey still gives the impression of wanting to be seen as markedly more pro-business than Reeves.
In his interview Healey does not give details of how he will cut costs for business next week. But, in his write-up, Maguire says:
[Healey] is expected to use the budget to make significant cuts to regulation on businesses that one senior Treasury source described as “the sludge choking firms”. Reporting requirements are likely to be abolished for many smaller enterprises, The Times understands.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: The ONS publishes crime figures for England and Wales and – separately – annual gender pay gap figures.
10am: Ofgem chief executive Tim Jarvis and Department for Energy and Net Zero permanent secretary Jonathan Brearley give evidence to the Commons public accounts committee about achieving clean power by 2030.
10.15am: Kemi Badenoch gives a speech at the Police Federation’s annual conference.
Morning: Andy Burnham is in Manchester where he is getting a flu jab, and also holding a meeting with mayors at No 10 North about mayors retaining revenue from business rates.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
Lunchtime: Miatta Fahnbulleh, the energy secretary, speaks at a lunch at the Commons hosted by lobby journalists.
I’m afraid we are no longer able to have comments open below the line every day on this blog. If you want to contact me, please email politics.live@theguardian.com. You can use this email to flag up corrections, comments for publication, questions or complaints.
