Connect with us

Published

on

This is starting to look a little… unnerving.

This morning the Bank of England tweaked its emergency intervention into the government bond (gilts) market for a second successive day.

The details are somewhat arcane: yesterday it doubled the amount it was offering to buy each day; today it said it would widen the stock of assets it is offering to buy. But what matters more is the big picture.

The government bond market is – in the UK and elsewhere – best thought of as the bedrock of the financial system.

The government borrows lots of money each year at very long durations and these bonds are bought by all sorts of investors to secure a low but (usually) reliable income over a long period of time.

Compared to other sorts of assets – such as the shares issued by companies or for that matter cryptocurrencies – government bonds are boring. Or at least, they’re supposed to be boring.

They don’t move all that much each day and the yield they offer – the interest rate implied by their prices – is typically much lower than most other asset classes.

More on Bank Of England

But recently the UK bond market (we call them gilts as a matter of tradition, short for gilt-edged securities, because in their earliest embodiment they were pieces of paper with golden edges) has been anything but boring.

In the wake of the mini-budget, the yield on gilts of various different durations leapt higher – much higher. The price of the gilts fell dramatically. That, ultimately, was what the Bank of England was originally responding to a couple of weeks ago.

But to understand what a tricky position it’s in, you need to zoom out even further. For while it’s tempting to blame everything on the government and its mini-budget, it’s fairer to see this as the straw that broke the market’s back. For there are three intersecting issues at play here.

The end of the low interest rate era

The first is that we are in the midst of a seismic economic moment.

For the past decade and a bit, we (here in the UK but also in the US, Eurozone and throughout most of the world) have become used to interest rates being incredibly low.

More than low, they were effectively negative, because in the wake of the financial crisis central banks around the world pumped trillions of dollars into the financial plumbing.

They mostly did so (in this case the method really matters) by buying up vast quantities of government debt. The Bank of England became the single biggest owner of UK gilts, at one point owning roughly a third of the UK’s national debt.

It was an emergency measure designed to prevent a catastrophic rerun of the Great Depression, but the medicine has proven incredibly difficult to wean ourselves off.

A few years ago, when the US Federal Reserve thought out loud about reversing quantitative easing (QE) – as the bond-buying programme is called – it triggered such a panic in bond markets that it immediately thought twice about it.

Since then, it and other central banks like the Bank of England have been as careful as possible not to frighten these markets. They have managed to end QE and, in the case of the Fed, have begun to reverse it. This is a very, very big deal.

Think about it for a moment.

All of a sudden, the world’s biggest buyers of arguably the world’s most important asset class have become big sellers of them.

In the UK, the Bank of England was due to begin its own reversal of QE round about now.

Tensions were, even before the government’s ham-fisted fiscal statement, about as high as they get in this normally-dull corner of financial markets.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Reliance on complex derivatives

The second issue (and this is something only a few financial analysts and residents of the bonds market fully appreciated up until a few weeks ago) is that the era of low interest rates had also driven investors into all sorts of strange strategies in an effort to make a return.

Most notably, some pension funds had begun to rely on complex derivatives to keep earning a decent return each year while complying with regulations.

These so-called Liability Driven Investment strategies were well-suited for the nine-times-out-of-ten when the gilts market was boring. But as interest rates began to rise this year – partly because inflation was rising and central banks were beginning to raise interest rates and reverse QE; partly because investors twigged that the next prime minister seemed quite keen on borrowing more – these strategies began to run into trouble.

They were feeling the strain even before Friday 23 September.

Hard to think of a worse moment for an uncosted fiscal plan

But that brings us to the third of the issues here: the mini-budget.

The government bond market was already, as we’ve established, in a sensitive position.

Markets were, as one adviser to the Truss team warned them, febrile. It is hard to think of many worse moments for a new, untried and untrusted government to introduce uncosted fiscal plans. Yet that is what Kwasi Kwarteng did in his mini-budget.

The problem wasn’t really any single specific policy, but the combination.

It wasn’t about the sums (or lack thereof) but a dramatic loss of credibility for the government.

All of a sudden, the UK, which is anyway very reliant on external funding from overseas investors, seemed to surrender the benefit of the doubt.

Traders began to pull money from the UK, pushing the pound lower and forcing interest rates in the bond market higher (after all, if people are reluctant to lend to you, you have to offer them a higher rate to persuade them).

The new Chancellor seems genuinely to have been completely taken unawares by the reaction to his plan.

Yet the reality is that it so happened (in fiscal terms at least) to be about the worst possible pitch at the worst possible time. And it pushed up interest rates on government debt dramatically.

Read more:
Renewed focus on pension fund investment strategy following Bank of England’s intervention in gilt market
How a pensions technicality threatened to undermine the entire financial system

istock bank of england

Wave of defaults could lead to a total breakdown of system

As I say, this was far from the only thing going on in markets.

On top of all the above, there were and are question marks about whether the Bank of England is acting fast enough to clamp down on inflation.

But these questions, and many others, were effectively swamped by the catastrophic surge in interest rates following the mini-budget.

Catastrophic because the increase in rates was so sharp it threatened the very functioning of the gilts market – this bedrock of the financial system.

And for those liability-driven investors in the pensions sector, it threatened to cause a wave of defaults which could, the Bank of England feared, lead to a total breakdown of the system within days or even hours.

This fear of what it called a “run dynamic” – a kind of wholesale equivalent to what we saw with Northern Rock, where a firesale of assets causes values to spiral ever downwards – sparked it into action.

It intervened the Wednesday after the mini-budget, offering to buy £65bn worth of the longer-dated gilts most affected. The intervention, it said, was taken to prevent the financial system from coming to harm.

But the method of intervention was quite significant.

After all, wasn’t buying bonds (with printed money) precisely what the Bank had been doing for the past decade or so through its QE programme?

Well in one sense… yes. The Bank insisted this was different: that this was not about injecting cash into the economy to get it moving but to deal forensically with a specific issue gumming up the markets. Financial stability, not monetary policy.

Even so, the paradox is still hard to escape. All of a sudden the Bank has gone from promising to sell a bucket load of bonds to promising to buy them.

Market reaction

The initial market reaction was overwhelmingly encouraging: the pound rose and interest rates on government bonds fell.

It was precisely what the Bank would have wanted – and most encouragingly it seemed to be driven not by the amount of cash the Bank was putting in (actually surprisingly few investors took up its offer to buy bonds), but sentiment.

The vicious circle precipitated by the mini-budget seemed to be turning around.

But in the past few days of trading, things have unravelled again.

The pound has fallen; the yields on bonds have risen, back more or less to where they were shortly before the Bank intervened a couple of weeks ago. It is unnerving.

And this brings us back to where we started. The Bank has bolstered its intervention a couple of times but it hasn’t brought yields down all that much – indeed, quite the contrary.

As of this lunchtime Tuesday the yields on long-dated UK government bonds were even higher than they were 24 hours earlier.

Why? One obvious issue is that the Bank’s intervention is strictly time-limited. It is due to expire at the end of this week. That raises a few other questions. First, will the pension funds reliant on those liability driven investments have untangled themselves by then? No-one is entirely sure. For a sense of how worried investors are about this, just look at what happened to the pound tonight after the Bank’s governor, Andrew Bailey, insisted the emergency programme will indeed end on Friday. It plummeted off a cliff-edge, instantly losing almost two cents against the dollar.

Second, will the government have become more credible in the market’s eyes by then? Almost certainly not. Aside from anything else, it isn’t due to present its plans for dealing with the public finances until the end of this month.

Third, what does all this mean for monetary policy and the end of QE? If we are to take them at their word, after ending this scheme the Bank will shortly begin the process of selling off bonds all over again.

So, one day they’re gearing up to be a massive seller; the next a massive buyer; the next a massive seller all over again.

Little matter that the stated reasons for the bond buying/selling are different. From the market’s perspective, no one is quite sure where they stand anymore.

In this final sense, the UK has unwittingly turned itself into a kind of laboratory for the epoch we’re in right now.

Everyone was expecting bumps in the road as the era of easy monetary policy came to an end.

It seems we are currently experiencing some of those bumps. And it just so happened that, thanks in large part to its new government, the UK found itself careering towards those bumps rather than braking before hitting them.

Continue Reading

Business

Ticket re-sales could be capped under crackdown on touts

Published

on

By

Ticket re-sales could be capped under crackdown on touts

The price of resale tickets could be capped under plans to stop the public being “fleeced” by professional touts, the government has announced.

The limit could range from the cost of the original ticket to a 30% uplift, with a consultation to be launched on the specifics of the measure.

Some in No 10 ‘a bit taken aback’ by response to Reeves’ policies

Restricting the number of tickets resellers can list to the maximum they are allowed to purchase on the primary market is another option being considered.

The proposed changes come after concert sales for artists including Taylor Swift were marred by professional touts reselling at heavily inflated prices.

Others have been caught out by a lack of transparency over the system of dynamic pricing, which left Oasis fans watching the cost of some standard tickets more than double from £148 to £355 as they waited in the queue.

Ministers have already promised a dynamic pricing review, with the latest measures aimed at stopping touts “hoarding tickets and reselling at heavily inflated prices”, the culture department said.

More on Music

There has long been concerns about rip-off ticket resales for events, with high-profile artists like Ed Sheeran pushing for more regulation.

According to analysis by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), typical mark-ups on tickets sold second hand are more than 50%, while investigations by Trading Standards have uncovered evidence of seats going for up to six times their original price.

Singer Ed Sheeran appears on NBC's "Today" show at Rockefeller Center in New York, U.S., June 6, 2023. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid
Image:
Ed Sheeran has campaigned for a crackdown on touts. Pic: Reuters

Last year, Virgin Media O2 estimated that ticket touts cost music fans an extra £145 million per year.

The proposals announced today will apply to music concerts, as well as live sport and other events, delivering on a Labour manifesto commitment to make the system fairer.

DJ Fatboy Slim said it was “great to see money being put back into fans pockets instead of resellers” and he is “fully behind” the proposals.

Dame Caroline Dinenage, the chair of the Culture, Media and Sport Committee, said the proposals “would go some way to help address the perverse incentives that are punishing music fans”.

Read More:
At least one UK grassroots music venues closing per week
Tcket sellers may have to tell fans maximum prices after Oasis ‘dynamic pricing’ backlash

However she urged ministers to go further and launch a fan-led review of music, to look at how the industry could better support struggling small venues and fledgling artists.

Other proposals under the ticket tout crackdown include new obligations so that resale platforms are legally responsible for the accuracy of what is advertised by third parties on their sites.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Dynamic pricing’: What can be done?

Professional sellers often advertise false information about their identity or key details of the ticket, especially for events where the organiser has imposed restrictions on re-sales, a report by the CMA in 2021 found.

The watchdog has also raised concern about “speculative selling” – when touts advertise seats they haven’t yet bought, cash in on the proceeds upfront and hope to secure a ticket later to fulfil the order.

The government also wants to bring in stronger fines and a new licensing regime for re-sale platforms to increase enforcement of protections for consumers.

Trading Standards can already issue fines of up to £5,000 for ticketing rule breaches and the consultation will look into whether this cap should be increased.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said: “The chance to see your favourite musicians or sports team live is something all of us enjoy and everyone deserves a fair shot at getting tickets – but for too long fans have had to endure the misery of touts hoovering up tickets for resale at vastly inflated prices.

“As part of our Plan for Change, we are taking action to strengthen consumer protections, stop fans getting ripped off and ensure money spent on tickets goes back into our incredible live events sector, instead of into the pockets of greedy touts.”

Continue Reading

Business

What’s going on in the markets and should we be worried?

Published

on

By

What's going on in the markets and should we be worried?

The chancellor is under pressure because financial market moves have pushed up the cost of government borrowing, putting Rachel Reeves’ economic plans in peril.

So what’s going on, and should we be worried?

What is a bond?

UK Treasury bonds, known as gilts because they used to literally have gold edges, are the mechanism by which the state borrows money from investors.

They pay a fixed annual return, known as a coupon, to the lender over a fixed period – five, 10 and 30 years are common durations – and are traded on international markets, which means their value changes even as the return remains fixed.

Money blog: Major mobile company increasing bills next month

That means their true interest rate is measured by the ‘yield’, which is calculated by dividing the annual return by the current price. So when bond prices fall, the yield – the effective interest rate – goes up.

More on Uk Economy

And for the last three months, markets have been selling off UK bonds, pushing borrowing costs higher. This week the yield on 30-year gilts reached its highest level since 1998 at 5.37%, and 10-year gilts briefly hit a level last seen after the financial crisis, sparking jitters in markets and in Westminster.

Why are investors selling UK bonds?

Bond markets are influenced by many factors but the primary domestic pressure is the prospect of persistent inflation, with interest rates staying high for longer as a consequence.

Higher inflation reduces the purchasing power of the coupon, and higher interest rates make the bond less competitive because investors can now buy bonds paying a higher rate. Both of which apply in the UK.

Inflation remains higher than the Bank of England‘s 2% target and many large companies are warning of further price rises as tax and wage rises bite in the spring.

As a result, the Bank is now expected to cut rates only twice this year, as opposed to the four reductions priced in by markets as recently as November.

Nor is there much optimism that the economic growth promised by the chancellor will save the day in the short term, with business groups warning investment will be tempered by taxes.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky News’ Ed Conway on the impact of increased long-term borrowing costs as they hit their highest level in the UK since 1998

Is the UK alone?

No. Bond markets are international and in recent months the primary influence has been rising borrowing costs in the US, triggered by Donald Trump’s re-election and the assumption that tariffs and other policies will be inflationary.

The UK is not immune from those forces, and other European nations including Germany and France, facing their own political gyrations, have seen costs rise too. (The US influence could yet increase if strong labour market figures on Friday reinforce the sense that rates will remain high).

But there are specific domestic factors, particularly the prospect of stagflation. The UK is also more reliant on overseas investors than other G7 nations, which means the markets really matter.

Why does it matter to Reeves?

The cost of borrowing affects not just the issuance of new debt but the price of maintaining existing loans, and it matters because these higher costs could erode the “headroom” Ms Reeves left herself in her budget.

Headroom is a measure of how much slack she has against her self-imposed fiscal rule, itself intended to reassure markets that the UK is a stable location for investment, to fund day-to-day spending entirely from tax revenue by 2029-30.

At the budget, she had just £9.9bn of headroom and some analysts estimate market pressure has eroded all but £1bn of that.

Read more:
Influential union leader announces retirement
Food prices will rise due to budget tax hikes, retail body warns

At the end of March the Office for Budget Responsibility will provide an update on the fiscal position and market conditions could change before then, but if they don’t then Ms Reeves may have to rewrite her plans.

The Treasury this week described the fiscal rules as “non-negotiable”, which leaves a choice between raising taxes or, more likely, cutting costs to make the numbers add up.

Why does it matter to the rest of us?

Persistently higher rates could push up consumer debt costs, increasing the burden of mortgages and other loans. Beyond that, the state of the economy matters to all of us.

The underlying challenges – persistent inflation, stagnant growth, worse productivity, ailing public services – are fundamental, and Labour has promised to address them.

Investment in infrastructure and new industries, spurred by planning and financial market reform, are all promised as medium-term solutions to the structural challenges. But politics, like financial markets, is a short-term business, and Ms Reeves could do with some relief, starting with helpful inflation and growth figures due next week.

Continue Reading

Business

RMT union boss Mick Lynch announces retirement

Published

on

By

RMT union boss Mick Lynch announces retirement

Mick Lynch, one of the UK’s most influential union leaders in recent history, has announced he is retiring.

Mr Lynch is stepping down from the helm of the RMT (Rail Maritime and Transport Workers) union aged 63.

He served as general secretary since 2021.

Money blog: Major mobile company increasing bills next month

Under his leadership, the union waged years of strike action over pay and conditions before accepting a deal with the new Labour government this summer.

The rail strikes by RMT members were part of the wave of industrial action that meant 2022 had the highest number of strike days since 1989.

Walkouts began in June 2022 and did not officially conclude until September 2024.

More on Rail

“It has been a privilege to serve this union for over 30 years in all capacities, but now it is time for change,” Mr Lynch said.

He will remain in post until a successor is appointed in May, the RMT said.

Why’s he retiring?

No reason was given for his departure but Mr Lynch said there was a need for change and new workers to fight.

“There has never been a more urgent need for a strong union for all transport and energy workers of all grades, but we can only maintain and build a robust organisation for these workers if there is renewal and change,” he said.

“RMT will always need a new generation of workers to take up the fight for its members and for a fairer society for all”.

A career of organising

Mr Lynch first joined the RMT in 1993 after he began working for Eurostar. Before being elected secretary general at the top of the organisation he worked as the assistant general secretary for two terms and as the union’s national executive committee executive, also for two terms.

As a qualified electrician, Mr Lynch helped set up the Electrical and Plumbing Industries Union (EPIU) in 1988, before working for Eurostar and joining the RMT.

He had worked in construction and was blacklisted for joining a union.

“This union has been through a lot of struggles in recent years, and I believe that it has only made it stronger despite all the odds,” Mr Lynch said.

Continue Reading

Trending