PolicyLens

Green - Finance

Create regional mutual banks

Use public capital to support regional mutual banks and local business lending.

Last updated: May 2026.

Read the policy-specific methodology note

Policy baseline

Green economic policy supports regional mutual banks and local finance. Fiscal risk depends on capitalisation, lending quality and default rates.

  • Targets SMEs and underserved regions.
  • Credit constraints may be real in some areas.
  • Bad lending creates taxpayer losses.

Core trade-offs

The direct beneficiaries are small firms and underserved regions. The costs fall mainly on taxpayers bearing credit risk. The main economic question is politicised lending can misallocate capital.

  • Small firms and underserved regions gain most directly.
  • Costs fall mainly on taxpayers bearing credit risk.
  • Key risk: politicised lending can misallocate capital.

Fiscal impact by 2028-29

+GBP 1.0bn to +GBP 8.0bn. Central estimate: +GBP 2.5bn.

  • Positive numbers mean net fiscal cost; negative numbers mean Exchequer savings.
  • Main channel is the scored tax, spending or delivery change.
  • Offsets depend on tax receipts, behaviour and pass-through.
  • Range reflects uncertain implementation and economic response.
  • This is not an official costing.

Economic impact by 2028-29

  • Jobs: Higher public employment or procurement demand; shortages may shift workers from private firms.
  • Wages: Direct gains for funded staff or suppliers; taxes fund the transfer.
  • Prices: Public prices rarely rise directly; private prices may rise if labour is scarce.
  • GDP / productivity: Potentially positive if capacity improves; negative if bottlenecks or crowd-out dominate.

Assessment

This is a real trade-off, not a free gain. Small firms and underserved regions benefit, while taxpayers bearing credit risk bear most costs. Overall output depends on behaviour, capacity and pass-through.

Confidence: Medium-low. Higher on the policy target and fiscal channel; lower on behaviour, pass-through and economy-wide effects.

Main risks

  • Delivery bottlenecks: Staffing, procurement and capital constraints may stop extra money becoming better services.
  • Crowding out: A tight labour market can shift workers from private firms rather than add capacity.
  • Permanent baseline: Temporary programmes can become recurring spending commitments.

Safeguards

  • Publish unit-cost benchmarks before rollout.
  • Tie funding to measurable service capacity.
  • Use staged delivery with independent audits.

Academic evidence

Banerjee and Duflo, Review of Economic Studies, 2014

Credit constraints

Some firms are credit constrained, so public finance can support investment when well targeted.

Relevant to development banks and business finance.

Do Firms Want to Borrow More? (2014)

UK government evidence

Green Party of England and Wales, 2024

Green manifesto

The manifesto defines the tax, spending, climate, housing and public-service proposals modelled here.

Used to define the scenario, not as an official costing.

Manifesto for a Fairer, Greener Country (2024)

HM Treasury, 2025

Spending Review baseline

Spending Review settlements define departmental baselines for new resource and capital commitments.

Used as the public-spending counterfactual.

Spending Review 2025 (2025)

Institute for Fiscal Studies, 2024

IFS Green reaction

IFS highlighted scale and deliverability risks in Green spending and tax plans.

Supports sceptical treatment of claimed fiscal space.

Green Party manifesto: a reaction (2024)

Sources

Other Green policies

PolicyLens estimates are illustrative and should not be treated as official costings.