British Chambers of Commerce has called for policymakers to apply a new “growth delivery test” before announcing major economic measures, arguing that UK growth depends on whether companies are prompted to make different investment, hiring, training, technology, trade, and scaling decisions.
The proposal is set out in a new report co-authored by Andy Haldane, the former Bank of England chief economist and now BCC president. The report argues that Britain’s growth problem is not a lack of potential, but a failure to convert that potential into day-to-day business activity.
Research from the BCC Insights Unit identifies five practical levers for growth: skills, technology adoption, trade, finance, and business scaling. In a survey of 875 companies in April, 67% said better access to skills would directly support growth in their business, 60% cited increased use of AI, 56% pointed to simpler processes and lower costs for global trade, 46% cited easier access to finance, and 35% said simpler processes to restructure, list, or exit would help.
Haldane said: “The UK does not lack growth potential; it lacks the ability to turn that potential into delivery.” He said too many companies now believe the risks of growth outweigh the rewards after years of rising costs, skills shortages, regulatory pressure, and economic uncertainty.
The proposed test would ask whether a major economic measure will prompt companies to do something they would not otherwise have done. That brings policy back to practical decisions inside organisations: whether managers hire, buy equipment, train staff, adopt AI, enter export markets, raise finance, or expand capacity.
The BCC argues that the largest opportunity sits within what it calls the UK’s “movable middle”: established companies across the nations and regions that already have customers, products, and ambition, but need conditions that make the next step commercially rational.
The argument follows a period of renewed scrutiny over Britain’s investment record. MPs have warned that the UK’s investment gap threatens growth, citing weak scale-up finance, low business investment, and fragmented institutions. The BCC report approaches the same problem from inside the company, where leaders weigh risk, cost, access to people, and the likelihood of a return before committing capital.
The findings arrive as growth remains the central test of economic policy. That ambition has collided with a cautious business climate shaped by higher borrowing costs, tax pressure, wage inflation, energy volatility, and regulatory change. Many companies have preserved cash rather than expanded, not because they lack ambition, but because the expected return on growth often looks too uncertain.
Skills remain the most widely cited constraint in the survey. That points to a persistent weakness in the UK economy: companies can identify demand, but cannot always find the labour, management capacity, technical capability, or training infrastructure needed to meet it. AI may help address some productivity problems, yet adoption depends on capability, clarity, and confidence rather than access to tools alone.
Trade is another practical lever. Companies that could export more often face administrative costs, customs complexity, regulatory divergence, market entry risk, and patchy support. Simpler processes would not automatically create demand, but they could reduce the friction that stops smaller and mid-sized companies from testing overseas markets.
Access to finance remains central, particularly for businesses outside the early-stage venture capital ecosystem. Scale-up companies often need working capital, asset finance, export finance, patient equity, or debt structures that match investment cycles. Finance that arrives only after a company has already reduced most of the risk may arrive too late to change decisions.
The BCC’s proposal reflects frustration with strategy-heavy policymaking. Industrial strategy, infrastructure plans, skills systems, export support, and AI adoption programmes can all support growth, but only when they alter incentives at company level. A policy that looks ambitious in Whitehall may have limited economic effect if it does not change the calculation in finance departments, boardrooms, and management teams.
A growth delivery test would put implementation and business response closer to the centre of economic policy. It would also create a more demanding standard for government: not whether a measure sounds pro-growth, but whether it changes behaviour in the real economy.
Britain’s productivity problem has persisted through many strategies, reviews, and ministerial resets. The BCC is pressing for a more practical question. Will a policy make a company invest, hire, train, export, adopt technology, or scale when it otherwise would not?
You must be logged in to post a comment.