Seven questions for the Chancellor to help revive business - article

This article by Carl Richardson was first published in the London Standard on 18th November, 2026.

“The Budget I have presented today is a hard one for all of us in Britain. It is dictated by the harsh reality of the world we live in. A severe Budget is a necessary element in any strategy for improving the overall performance of our economy.”

No, this is not a leaked excerpt of Rachel Reeves’s forthcoming budget speech. They are the words of Denis Healey, the last Chancellor to raise the basic rate of income tax, 50 years ago.

Just as Healey did in 1975, Reeves faces a set of tough choices to balance the books, and it looks almost inevitable now that she will need to raise taxes and curb spending to avoid breaking her fiscal rules.

While this year’s budget will no doubt raise taxes it also provides an opportunity – perhaps the final one for this Government – to take radical and urgent steps to unleash the potential of British business.

As a family firm originally from the West Midlands that has been investing in British businesses for almost eighty years, we have seen many changes in the UK economy. What we have learned is that it does well when entrepreneurs, innovators and investors are given the environment and support to do what they do best – in domestic and export markets.

This should be the central theme of the forthcoming budget with clear policies to underpin it that help to get Britain growing again.

In fairness, the Government has already initiated some welcome measures, not least on loosening restrictive planning rules, easing the constraints on financial services and identifying key high-growth areas of the economy to power economic revival.

It has also signed trade deals with the US, the EU and India.

The opportunity now is for Ministers to ensure these agreements deliver tangible wealth creating outcomes for British businesses and put energy into securing new deals in other markets, particularly in South East Asia and Africa too.

Yet, in our opinion the Government needs to do much more if we are to boost investment, skills and productivity, and break out from a decade and more of anaemic growth.

Business doesn’t want or need a handout from Government. What it would benefit from is less interference, however well-meaning that may be.

In that context, here are seven questions that the Chancellor might want to ask as she puts the finishing touches to her second budget:

1.      Would it make sense to fast-track widely understood critical infrastructure projects, expand tax breaks on businesses investing in capital goods and lower crippling energy costs?

2.      Ought the government boost investment in skills, go further in liberalising the planning system and support rapid adoption of AI?

3.      Might now also be a sensible time to delay the proposed package of measures to enhance the rights of employees? The plans are well intentioned, though the critical economic situation suggests that these are now put on hold at least until companies can afford the additional costs it will impose, not least after last year’s increase in National Insurance contributions.

4.      Could the Government take more action to support areas most crying out for economic development? In the 1980s, my father and his twin brother – both critical to the success of our business – took advantage of an Enterprise Zone in the West Midlands to turn the derelict Round Oak Steel Works site into the Merry Hill shopping centre, creating more than 10,000 local jobs and generating over £950m in tax revenue to the Treasury.

Please take note: Those 1980s versions of Enterprise Zones had real teeth, with 100% Industrial Building Allowance and zero planning rules, making them far more effective than the zones that have existed more recently, sharing the Enterprise name but without the benefits.

5.      Do we need to confront some hard truths about our society and its cost to the economy? The recent report by Sir Charlie Mayfield on worklessness, for example, was truly shocking.

It found that 7% of the UK’s GDP was lost due to Britons being unable to work because of ill-health. That is £85 billion a year in lost output with an additional cost of £47 billion a year on welfare payments and the NHS.

According to Sir Charlie, there are 800,000 more people out of work now than five years ago due to health problems. Without action, projections show another 600,000 could be added by 2030.

6.      In a world of competing priorities, perhaps we also need to consider whether we as a country can afford the pensions triple lock any longer? It has cost the Government an estimated extra £10 billion a year compared to pensions rising by average earnings alone and this is set to rise even further.

Of course, we should do more to help pensioners in greatest need, although in an ageing society can we afford the additional costs this incurs at this time?

7.      Finally, and  written from the perspective of a multi-generational family business, should the highly controversial proposed changes to business property relief, due to take effect in April, be put on ice for good?

These plans have caused much consternation within family businesses, which remain the backbone of the UK economy, by fundamentally removing the ability to transfer businesses from one generation to another without paying inheritance tax.

While the Treasury may estimate that the change will generate £1.5billion for their coffers, it is to be hoped that they have also asked at what cost will this come?

If businesses cannot be passed down without individuals facing significant tax bills, which are based on business value rather than available cash, then the viability of many of these firms will dissipate. This will threaten hundreds of thousands of jobs across the country as well as the wider stabilising benefit to the communities they serve.

There are approximately 5 million family businesses in the UK, representing 85% of the private sector. Should even a small proportion cease to operate as a result of the planned changes then £1.5 billion will look like a drop in the ocean in comparison to the total tax revenue lost as a result. Surely this is neither a desired consequence, or a pro-growth message to send out to business owners?  

Few of these are easy issues for politicians who find themselves in an unenviable position; still, this is not time for half-hearted changes. It feels that the entire wealth-creating sector, fundamental for paying for our hospitals, schools and warships, needs bold and urgent action. What would more clearly demonstrate that generating economic growth is the single most important task of this government?

UK PLC has previously, and surely can again, risen to the challenges ahead, at home and abroad, to bring increased prosperity and wellbeing to British people. What it needs is the full and unwavering support of government to do so. The budget is the chance to get that right.

Link here to the original article in the London Standard - Seven questions for Rachel Reeves if she wants to help revive business | The Standard