UK Conservatives: Shadow chancellor proposes massive deregulation plan

The plan for your wallet

Conservative shadow chancellor Andrew Griffith is dropping a major economic strategy at the party’s conference in Birmingham, and it's giving major deregulation vibes. The goal? A massive overhaul designed to stimulate growth by slashing taxes, red tape, and the costs associated with building new homes. Real talk: they’re claiming these changes could save buyers up to £50,000 on new builds by ditching complex developer fees and environmental regs.

Infrastructure and the 'third runway'

Griffith is going highkey on infrastructure, explicitly backing the expansion of Heathrow Airport. He’s calling the current stall on the third runway a "national embarrassment" and wants to fast-track not just airports, but reactors and reservoirs too. He insists someone needs to get serious about national growth, framing the current Labour government’s approach as a "socialist fever dream of the 1970s."

The cleanup: What’s getting the axe?

The Conservatives are proposing to abolish Natural England and the Environment Agency, shifting their duties over to Defra. They also want to scrap the Extended Packaging Responsibility (EPR) scheme, hoping that removing this "burden" on businesses will eventually lower your grocery bill. While they are promising to keep the pensions triple lock, it's worth noting Griffith once called it "unfair" back in 2021.

Critics are not impressed

Other parties aren't buying the pitch. Reform UK is lowkey calling them out for copying their homework, while the Lib Dems are labeling the party "anti-growth." Meanwhile, Labour and the Green Party are slamming the plan as a gift to developers that sacrifices vital environmental protections and community infrastructure funding. The plot thickens as the Tories try to prove they’ve moved past their 2010–2024 record.

Why it matters

If the Tories regain power, this plan signals a massive pivot away from the environmental and community-focused regulations currently in place. For Gen Z, this could mean cheaper housing entry points, but it definitely sparks a debate about the long-term trade-offs between housing supply and environmental standards.