Tag: Business and Trade Committee

Ministers must “get off the fence and give leadership” on UK-EU future, says Westminster committee

10 years on from the Brexit vote and thirteen months after its first report into the UK’s “EU reset”, the Business and Trade Committee finds that the initial stakeholder welcome for the Reset’s ambition has been hit by concerns about delivery

Read the report

  • Of the most substantive agreements the UK has reached with the EU to date, on steel, fisheries and energy: the fisheries agreement was not universally welcomed and positive progress on steel tariffs risks being undermined without an agreement in talks ongoing since November last year.
  • The UK’s association to the Erasmus+ student exchange programme cost £570 million for the 2027/2028 academic year but the jury is out on its impact.
  • None of the three wider UK ambitions in the Common Understanding – help for touring artists, improved business mobility and an agreement on the mutual recognition of professional qualifications – have materially advanced.
  • It is unclear what the Security and Defence Partnership has delivered beyond political signalling.

The Committee has heard five key concerns about the Government’s current approach:

  1. The ‘rhetoric-reality gap’: Government ministers have not pulled their punches about the negative economic impact of Brexit, but delivery of the current Reset is expected to add just 0.5% to the UK’s GDP by 2040, even in an optimistic scenario.
  2. Limited progress in the critical area of defence and defence industrial policy, despite war raging on the European continent and the clear change of US approach to NATO.
  3. Late negotiations for a deal on electricity trading even as the UK battles the highest electricity prices in the G7.
  4. European partners still in the dark about the UK’s end goals with no clear strategy beyond the 2026 summit, and no clear strategic case for the Reset.
  5. Continued disagreement on “dynamic alignment” with EU regulations.

The Committee concludes it is “unlikely” that the Government’s approach in the current round of negotiations will address these concerns and sets out the basic models for deepening ties – alongside the trade-offs entailed. 

Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “Ministers have been frank about the economic damage Brexit has caused, but there is now a yawning gap between their rhetoric and the reality of what the Reset is actually delivering.

“Business cannot invest on political signalling alone. It needs clear rules, a clear destination and a credible vision. Ministers must now get off the fence, set out where they want Britain’s relationship with Europe to be by the end of this Parliament, and provide the roadmap to restore confidence, strengthen our security and deliver the growth the country needs.

“Crucially, we need to understand that ten years after the Brexit referendum, Europe is changing fast. Russia’s war against Ukraine continues, hybrid attacks are escalating across everywhere and the United States has made clear that European NATO allies must do more to provide for their own security. Yet our inquiry found limited progress on UK-EU defence cooperation.

“At a moment when Europe should be strengthening its industrial and security partnerships, it is especially disappointing that the UK has yet to secure participation in the EU’s SAFE defence procurement programme, never mind set out an ambitious strategy for defence and economic security alliance.”

The Scottish Government says Scotland’s future lies in the European Union.

Holyrood belives re-joining the European Union would benefit Scotland by:

• strengthening our economy by reducing barriers for Scottish businesses

• providing Scottish people more opportunities to live, learn and work across Europe

• giving Scotland a stronger voice among our European neighbours

brexit-10-years-reportDownload

MPs call for radical overhaul of Britain’s investment system to unlock up to £200 billion of growth a year

The Government will not achieve its ambition of delivering the highest growth in the G7 unless it undertakes sweeping reforms to Britain’s investment institutions, the Business and Trade Committee has warned.

In a major new report, the Committee concludes that Britain suffers from a deep investment paradox.

Read the report

The UK is home to one of the world’s leading financial centres, pension funds managing £3 trillion in assets, at least £264 billion of undeployed investment capital and world-class universities that have created more than 1,300 spin-out companies in the last twelve years – But an estimated 380,000 businesses that want finance cannot get it.

Decades of individually defensible policy decisions have collectively weakened the institutions that should connect British savings with British enterprise. And so Britain exports capital, sells promising scale-ups too early, and struggles to finance the growth companies that could power higher living standards.

The report concludes that Britain must mobilise an additional £180–200 billion of investment every year to match the investment performance of the strongest economies in the G7.

Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Business and Trade Committee, said: “Britain is not short of money. We are short of institutions capable of putting that money to work.

“We have £3 trillion in pension assets, £264 billion of undeployed investment capital, £610 billion sitting in cash savings accounts and one of the world’s great financial centres. Yet 380,000 businesses that want finance cannot get it.

“For too long we have exported our savings and sold our scale-ups and watched other countries capture the rewards.

“If Britain wants the highest growth rate in the G7, we need the best system in the G7 for turning savings into investment and ideas into world-leading companies.”

Committee alarmed by “climate of fear” around dominant firms in UK music industry

The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) should launch a full market investigation into the live music industry before the end of 2026, says the Commons Business and Trade Committee in new report.

The Committee concludes that for Live Nation, and possibly wider in the live music market, there are concerns against all three of the CMA factors for determining market dominance.

After a public outcry in 2024 over the way Oasis reunion concert tickets had been marketed, a CMA investigation found that Ticketmaster had misled consumers and used unclear ticketing practices.

Ticketmaster initially refused to subject themselves to public scrutiny by the Committee but ultimately appeared in Parliament in February 2025, returning with their parent company Live Nation in June 2025.

The Committee was left with serious concerns about the state of competition in the live music industry in the UK.  

Live Nation Executive President Phil Bowdery explained away the company’s large market share in arenas and stadia, saying “we are very good at what we do. Therefore, there is interest from the major artists to be with Live Nation.” But evidence submitted to this inquiry suggests an alternative explanation for Live Nation’s dominant position.

A call for written evidence elicited 45 submissions, with a significant proportion requesting to submit anonymously or confidentially for fear of reprisal: in itself this triggered alarm about whether Live Nation has a dominant and controlling market position, and the climate of fear this may have created in the industry.Concerns

Concerns raised in evidence include:

  • The scale and integrated nature of Live Nation’s business model make it difficult for artists and managers to operate independently of its ecosystem.
  • This can begin right at the point of artist entry into the industry from grassroots level, with concentration at arena, stadium and major festival level reduce opportunities for independent promoters and venues to access and scale artists through the wider touring circuit. 
  • The same problems are reported by smaller and independent festivals who find access to talent increasingly challenging.
  • The lack of uptake of an industry led levy on arena and stadium tickets to support the grassroots sector – as suggested in 2024 by the Culture, Media and Sport Committee and endorsed by Government – has been widely attributed to Live Nation not implementing the levy.
  • Live Nation uses long-term agreements with restrictive exclusivity terms that make access to its venues contingent on participation in its festivals (or vice versa), incentivising artists to consolidate touring arrangements with the company and reducing opportunities for competing promoters and events.
  • Independent promoters alleged that venues owned or controlled by Live Nation favour in-house promotion businesses and integrated ticketing arrangements impeding competition.    
  • In primary ticketing, Live Nation directly controlled 58% of the 23.1 million tickets on sale in 2025, increasing to 66% if sales controlled by its affiliate companies are included.     
  • In secondary ticketing, the Committee received evidence indicating the restriction of resale activity to Ticketmaster’s own resale platform.
  • This control of ticketing infrastructure – some evidence alleged that even where third-party ticket agents participate in sales, they are required to integrate their systems with Ticketmaster’s – allows the company to retain customer data even from competitors, which can then be leveraged across promotion, marketing and event operations.

Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “Britain’s live music scene is one of our great national success stories, from grassroots venues nurturing new talent to world-class arena and stadium tours that attract global audiences.

“But the evidence we received during this inquiry points to deep concerns about whether competition in the industry is now working fairly for fans, artists, venues and independent promoters.

“What particularly alarmed the Committee was not just the scale of Live Nation’s market position across promotion, venues and ticketing, but the climate of fear we encountered during this inquiry.

“A striking number of submissions requested anonymity because people were worried about the consequences of speaking openly. That alone raises profound questions about the health of competition in the market.

“The CMA should now launch a full market investigation, before the end of this year, so there can be proper scrutiny of whether consumers, artists and independent businesses are getting a fair deal.”

Ofcom is failing to drive fast enough improvements to national postal service, says Committee

In a report today the Commons’ Business and Trade Committee says Ofcom has failed to change Royal Mail’s “unacceptable” performance amid fears it is “not up to the job” of regulating a postal market that is growing in competition and complexity.

Despite incurring Ofcom fines every year since 2022, Royal Mail continues to fail to meet both the public’s expectations and its own regulated targets.

Overall letter volumes have dropped dramatically, and parcel competitors like Amazon are able to “hive off profits” using the universal postal service:  delivering parcels to harder to reach addresses without contributing to the cost of the Royal Mail infrastructure that serves them.

From April 2025 to January 2026, just 74.9% of First Class mail was delivered the next day (18.1 percentage points below the target).  The Committee estimates that this translates into approximately 126 million First Class letters arriving late over the year.

In 2025, 16 million people (29% of UK adults) experienced letter delays over Christmas, a 50% increase since 2024. 5.7 million people (10% of UK adults) missed vital letters, including those about health appointments, fines and benefit decisions.

Ofcom has failed to provide Parliament with the concrete numbers of letters being delivered late, saying Royal Mail refused them on the grounds of commercial confidentiality. The Committee says if such a prohibition actually exists, it should be changed.  

When asked to conduct a proper investigation into whether Royal Mail letter deliveries are being deprioritised in favour of more profitable parcels, Ofcom appears to have satisfied itself with obtaining copies of the relevant policy documents and meeting minutes.

The Committee says Ofcom must deliver better regulation of the postal market, including Access mail and services delivered by Royal Mail’s competitors.

If it fails to do so within six months of this Report, the Secretary of State should consult on statutory changes “to ensure it is fit for the 21st-century postal market”.

Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “Millions of people are paying the price for a postal service that is simply not delivering.

“Hospital appointments missed, benefit decision notices delayed, fines arriving too late to challenge: these are not minor inconveniences, and they are the consequences of a national service failing to meet the standards the public has every right to expect.

“Despite years of fines and missed targets, Royal Mail’s performance remains unacceptable and Ofcom has failed to drive the change that is needed at the pace that is needed. We were deeply concerned by the apparent lack of any serious investigation into whether letters are being deprioritised in favour of more profitable parcels.

“We recognise that the postal market has changed beyond recognition. Major logistics firms are effectively hiving off profits while relying on Royal Mail’s universal service network to reach harder-to-serve parts of the country.  

“The universal service remains one of Britain’s great civic guarantees. But confidence in it is ebbing away, and Ofcom now has six months to prove it has the power and drive to regulate the 21st-century postal market.”

Post Office Horizon IT scandal: “serious structural failings persist”

‘Fujitsu has yet to contribute a penny to the nearly £2 billion redress bill’

Classic old fashioned post office sign

One year on from Westminster’s Business and Trade Committee’s last report on the Post Office Horizon scandal, progress has been made delivering redress for victims of the Fujitsu-supplied Horizon IT scandal. More than 11,300 claimants have received payments with £1.44 billion distributed. 

But thousands of sub‑postmasters are still waiting for the redress they are owed, and in a report today the Committee says “serious structural failings persist” in the redress system. Many victims still face unacceptable delays, inadequate offers, and administrative processes that “re‑traumatise” those who have already been seriously wronged.

Fujitsu, with a central role in one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history, has contributed nothing to the bill for redress and is still expanding its public sector revenues. A few days after UK CEO Paul Patterson gave evidence in Parliament, Fujitsu announced that he would move this month to a non-executive role “managing the company’s response” to the public inquiry into the Horizon scandal.

There is a serious risk of an unknown number of unsafe convictions – potentially including wrongful imprisonment – that are yet to be uncovered or have any access to justice. The Committee found evidence that the MoJ is wrongly judging eligibility of sub postmasters who should have had their convictions quashed, and there is no route for appeal in these cases. 

And there is now emerging evidence that pre-Horizon IT systems, especially Capture, had similar flaws to the Horizon system that may have contributed to unsafe convictions. Incomplete records mean that the current confirmed number of Capture cases may represent just “the tip of another iceberg”, with the Committee calling for urgent legislation to quash Capture-related convictions.

The Horizon Shortfall Scheme (HSS), still managed by Post Office, routinely sees its offers overturned and significantly increased after a DBT-administered appeal. The stark disparities between initial offers and eventual awards reinforces that the HSS is no longer fit for purpose. Fully assessed claims continue to take far beyond target timelines with thousands of late claims still awaiting final offer.

The Horizon Convictions Redress Scheme (HCRS) is performing better, but claimants are still being forced to jump through administrative hoops to secure what is now effectively a guaranteed minimum £600k redress payment. That should simply be paid in full to all eligible claimants now.

Fujitsu has acknowledged its moral obligation to contribute to the cost of redress, yet it has made no interim payment and has agreed no figure. The total cost of redress payments now stands around £2 billion.  But despite its “self-imposed moratorium” on bidding for new public contracts, Fujitsu continues to benefit from substantial Government contracts. The failure to even offer an interim amount is “unacceptable”.

Rt Hon Liam Byrne MP, Chair of the Business and Trade Committee, said: “For hundreds of sub-postmasters, justice has come far too slowly. Many have waited years for the truth to be recognised and for the compensation they are owed. Yet today we find serious structural failings still blocking the road to justice.

“Thousands of victims are still waiting for fair redress, while the processes designed to help them are too often slow, bureaucratic and re-traumatising. That is simply unacceptable after one of the greatest miscarriages of justice in British history.

“Worse, Fujitsu has yet to contribute a penny to the nearly £2 billion redress bill, even as it continues to benefit from public contracts. That cannot continue. It is simply wrong that taxpayers are covering the costs for Fujitsu’s sins while Fujitsu is still profiting from taxpayers funded contracts.

“We were also concerned to hear new evidence that suggests unsafe convictions linked to earlier systems such as Capture may be only the tip of another iceberg. Parliament must act quickly to quash these convictions and ensure that every victim finally gets the justice they deserve.

“The victims of this scandal have shown extraordinary courage. The country owes them more than apologies — it owes them justice, accountability, and full and fair redress without further delay.”

Remove Post Office from Horizon scandal compensation schemes, urges Westminster committee

The cross-party Business and Trade Committee has today published its recommendations for delivering faster and fuller payments to Horizon scandal victims following an “abject failure” of delivering redress to date.

The report recommends ending the Post Office’s involvement in any redress programmes, labelling it as “not fit for purpose to administer any of the schemes required to make amends”. It cites both victims’ lack of confidence in the firm that “ruined the lives of innocent sub-postmasters” and its chaotic leadership.

The Committee calls on the Government to create a “properly resourced” independent intermediary that would offer legal and forensic accounting services to victims to ensure victims are equipped with all the facts and figures they need to secure fair redress and compensation.

Committee Chair Liam Byrne said: “Justice delayed is justice denied. And bluntly justice has been denied to our innocent sub postmasters for far too long. It’s high time for the circus of recent weeks to end and for cheques to start landing on the doormats of innocent victims. 

“We now know the Post Office knew of problems twenty years ago. Yet at best, only £1 in £5 of the budget for compensation has been issued. That is a national disgrace”.

The spectacle of the battle between the Post Office chief executive and its former chairman light up a simple truth; that the top of the Post Office is in utter disarray and not fit for purpose to run the payouts to former sub-postmasters.

It’s involvement in running Post Office redress schemes has to end and ministers must create a new, independent body set up that will genuinely help victims through their every stage of their compensation claims.”

Five years on from the landmark court case victory by former sub-postmasters led by Alan Bates over the Post Office, only 20% of funds set aside for redress have been spent. Many cases have been stalled by the Post Office’s sluggish disclosure mechanisms.

To stop “unacceptable delays”, the report says strict deadlines by which each stage of the redress process will be delivered for each case should be legally-binding. Fines for delays should be paid to claimants, it adds.

Mr Byrne added, “To guarantee this scandal drags on no longer, we have to enshrine into law an idea proposed by Mr Bates, of legally binding timetables for payouts. Any new Bill that the Government presents to parliament, must now pass the ‘Mr Bates Test’ of legally binding timeframes for settling justice.

“Finally, we have to make sure that fast compensation is fair compensation. Otherwise, we risk innocent sub-postmasters to face a new prison of poverty. We cannot and must not let that happen.”

Other measures recommended by the report include removing a cap on legal expenses for sub-postmasters and a standardised set of tariffs to help victims to better estimate what they are entitled to.