Having sealed her chancellor’s fate, the markets could seal the prime minister’s fate
So farewell, then, Trussonomics.
The demise of the country’s second shortest-lived chancellor also brings with it the demise of the country’s shortest-lived economic movement.
Liz Truss came into office promising to boost the country’s growth rate through a forensic combination of tax cuts, reforms to the country’s supply side (for which read: things like planning reform) and spending restraint. This was, if you squint a little bit, not dissimilar to the kinds of policies espoused by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.
Tory MPs turn on Truss as PM scrambles to save job after sacking chancellor – latest updates
It always looked risky – especially at such a fragile point for the global economy. We are coming to the end of a 12-year period of cheap money, something which is causing a near-nervous breakdown in financial markets. Central banks are in the process of raising interest rates and trying to feed the glut of bonds they bought during the financial crisis back in the market.
As if that weren’t enough, Europe is facing one of its bleakest economic winters in modern memory, with a war raging in Ukraine and energy prices touching historic highs. It is hard to think of many less auspicious periods to attempt an untested new economic manifesto.
Yet Ms Truss and her former chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng pushed on all the same. And unlike Thatcher, whose first few budgets were grisly austerity packages which no one much enjoyed, Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng aimed to turn Thatcherism on its head. Instead of fixing the public finances first and then cutting taxes second, they opted to spend the fruits of economic growth before that growth had even been achieved.
The mini-budget of 23 September was a small document with extraordinarily large consequences. Ironically, the more expensive the measures were, the less controversial they turned out to be. The scheme to cap household energy unit costs will potentially cost hundreds of billions of pounds, yet (and we know this because it was pre-announced long before the mini-budget) investors barely batted an eyelid. They carried on lending to this country at more or less the same or equivalent rates.
The same was not the case for the rest of the mini-budget’s policies. Shortly after they were announced – everything from the abolition of the 45p rate (actually quite cheap in fiscal terms) to the cancellation of Rishi Sunak’s corporation tax rise – markets began to lurch in what was, for Ms Truss, and most UK households, the wrong direction. The pound sank, the yields on government debt, which determine the interest rates across most of the economy, began to climb.
That was bad enough. When Mr Kwarteng announced gleefully a couple of days later on television that he had more tax cuts up his sleeve, the trot out of the country became a stampede. The pound fell, briefly, to the lowest level against the dollar in the history of, well, the dollar.
Even more worryingly, those interest rates on government bonds rose at an unprecedented rate, causing all sorts of malfunctions throughout the money markets.
The most obvious – and the one that perhaps will have the longest legacy – is the rise in mortgage rates. But the unexpected consequences were even more worrying, among them a crisis in funds used by pension schemes. That sparked a “run dynamic” which compelled the Bank of England to step in with an emergency support scheme.
Even at this point, we were into unprecedented territory. Never before had the Bank been forced to intervene quite like this. Never before had it had to do so as a result of a government’s Budget.
The intervention, however, had some success, bringing down the relevant interest rates and bringing markets back from the edge. But there was a sting in the tail: a deadline. Today, 14 October.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Analysis: PM’s new tax U-turn
In hindsight perhaps it’s obvious that this, then, would always have been the day when the government might face another existential crisis. Investors were always going to be nervous ahead of the Bank’s withdrawal from this neck of the bond market. And that is precisely what happened: after the governor reiterated, on a panel in Washington, that he was indeed serious, all eyes then turned to the chancellor. Could he say something to reassure markets?
In the event, the answer was: no. But something else changed matters: growing rumours of a U-turn. That brings us to this morning. The chancellor, pulled back from Washington early, was dismissed. The U-turn began. The corporation tax freeze is to be abandoned. The coming medium-term fiscal plan will involve austerity and a big dose of fiscal pain. The upshot is that Trussonomics, which was hinged clearly on tax cuts like these, is dead in the water.
However, the bigger question concerns what happens next. Those markets, which Ms Truss said explicitly were the reason for her U-turn, are still pretty frantic. No one knows how they’ll fare on Monday, but, whether right or wrong, another grisly day will almost certainly be seen as a sign of the government’s failure. And, having sealed the fate of her chancellor, the markets could well seal the fate of the prime minister.
But that’s a few days away – a long time in both politics and markets.
Liz Truss appoints Jeremy Hunt as chancellor. Pic: Andrew Parsons / No 10 Downing Street
In the meantime, here is something to dwell on: an alternative version of history. In a parallel universe, Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng did things slightly less hastily. They decided their emergency Budget would simply deal with the energy price shock coming this winter. They promised an OBR statement and hatched plans for a growth-generating budget in a few months’ time.
In that parallel universe, interest rates probably wouldn’t have risen so high. The rises would, anyway, have been blamed on the Bank of England, not the government. The government would have enjoyed some kudos for having prevented energy-related penury this winter and made merry in their honeymoon. Things could have been oh-so different.
Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts
Now, all of this is of course imponderable. But it does rather underline an important point: none of this was inevitable. This wasn’t a crisis like 1992 – where the UK faced monetary pressures suffered by nearly every other nation in Europe. It was simply a succession of very unfortunate decisions at precisely the wrong moment.
At a time of market turmoil and war in Europe, Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng chose to take a gamble. It did not pay off.
:: The new chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, will talk to Sky News tomorrow morning. Tune in from 7am on Saturday.
Water company United Utilities has reported hundreds of millions in profit as it seeks to further increase customer bills.
The utility serving seven million customers in the northwest of England recorded £335.7m in underlying operating profits for the first half of this year, up nearly 23% from £271.1m a year ago.
It comes as the firm has requested bills rise 32% to make them among the most expensive in England and Wales.
Money blog: The massive winter fuel payment ‘cut’ no one talks about
The proposed average annual bill would increase to £584 by 2030 from the £443 typical yearly charge in the 2023/2024 financial year. Since April 2023 bills have been upped 6.4% and then 7.9%.
Bills hikes were behind the rise in revenue to more than £1.08bn from £975.4m in 2023.
Other ways of assessing profit were lower than the underlying operating sum. Profit before tax reached £140.6m while after tax profit topped £103.1m for the six months to the end of September 2024, both lower than a year earlier.
Boss’s pay
Bonus and benefits payments worth £1.416m were paid to two executives on top of £1.128m in base pay, according to analysis of company filings done by the Liberal Democrats.
It’s down compared with 2022/2023 when three executives were given £1.6m in base pay and £2.456m in bonuses and benefits.
Read more:
Water giant United Utilities strikes £1.8bn pension deal
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The environment
In a year of record sewage outflows into waterways the company was one of just three firms that met the Environment Agency’s top four-star performance ranking.
United Utilities in July came under investigation by water regulator Ofwat for not meeting its obligation to minimise pollution.
In response the company said at the time: “We understand and share people’s concerns about the health of the environment and the operation of wastewater systems, including combined sewer overflows.”
Pension “mega funds” will be created under government plans to increase infrastructure investment.
Reforms could “unlock £80 billion” of investment, according to Treasury plans, which say fewer but larger funds can get greater returns.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves wants to imitate the way large Canadian and Australian pension schemes work.
She said it marks “the biggest set of reforms to the pensions market in decades” ahead of providing more details in a speech at Mansion House on Thursday evening.
Politics latest: Farage mocked over ‘rare’ PMQs appearance
Almost 90 local government pension pots will be grouped together, with defined contribution schemes merged and assets pooled together.
This is part of the government’s plan to increase economic growth through investing in infrastructure.
Pension schemes get greater returns when they reach around £20bn to £50bn as they are “better placed to invest in a wider range of assets”, according to the government.
This is backed up by evidence from Canada and Australia, the government argues – with Canada’s schemes investing four times more in infrastructure, and Australia three times more than the UK’s defined contribution schemes.
Rachel Reeves wants to reform pensions. Pic: PA
Pensions minister Emma Reynolds told Sky News larger pension schemes are able to invest “in a more diverse range of assets, including private equity, which are higher risk, but over time give a higher return”.
She said the government will not tell pension fund managers they must invest more in private equity but due to the larger scale they will be able to invest in a “broader range of assets, and that’s what we see in Canada and Australia”.
Ms Reynolds added that a Canadian teacher or an Australian professor is currently more likely to be invested in British infrastructure or British high-growth companies than a British saver, which she said is “wrong”.
The chancellor has said the changes would “unlock tens of billions of pounds of investment in business and infrastructure, boost people’s savings in retirement and drive economic growth so we can make every part of Britain better off”.
However, Tom Selby, the director of public policy at financial company AJ Bell, said: “There needs to be some caution in this push to use other people’s money to drive economic growth. It needs to be made very clear to members what is happening with their money.”
The government says the funds will be regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and will need to “meet rigorous standards to ensure they deliver for savers”.
Read more:
Reeves to unveil plans for radical payments shake-up
Chancellor eyes Canada-style pension reform
Reeves to woo Canadian pension funds amid ‘Big Bang’ push
Local government pensions v defined contributions
The Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales will manage assets worth around £500bn by 2030.
These assets are currently split across 86 different administering authorities, with local government officials and councillors managing each fund.
Under the government plans, the management of local government pensions and what they invest in will be moved from councillors and local officials to “professional fund managers”.
This will allow them to invest more in assets such as infrastructure, supporting economic growth and local investment on behalf of the 6.7 million public servants, the government said.
Defined contribution pension schemes are set to manage £800bn worth of assets by the end of the decade.
There are around 60 different multi-employer schemes, each investing savers’ money into one or more funds. The government will consult on setting a minimum size requirement for these funds.
👉Listen to Politics At Jack And Sam’s on your podcast app👈
Businesses cautious – but pensions sector backs plans
Businesses will need to be reassured that the government’s plans are watertight following the fallout from the budget, according to the trade group the Confederation of British Industry (CBI).
The CBI’s chief economist Louise Hellem said: “While the chancellor is right to concentrate on mobilising investment, putting pension reform to work for the government’s growth mission, unlocking investment also needs competitive and profitable businesses.
“With the budget piling additional costs on firms and squeezing their headroom to invest, the government needs to work hard to regain the confidence in the UK as a place businesses and communities can succeed.
“Pension schemes will want to operate within a UK economy that is prospering.”
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
But key parts of the pensions sector gave their backing to the government’s plans, including Standard Life, Royal London, Local Pensions Partnership Investments and the Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association.
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said: “This is about harnessing the untapped potential of the pensions belonging to millions of people, and using it as a force for good in boosting our economy.”
Consumer rights group Which? is suing Apple for £3bn over the way it deploys the iCloud.
If the lawsuit succeeds, around 40 million Apple customers in the UK could be entitled to a payout.
The lawsuit claims Apple, which controls iOS operating systems, has breached UK competition law by giving its iCloud storage preferential treatment, effectively “trapping” customers with Apple devices into using it.
It also claims the company overcharged those customers by stifling competition.
The rights group alleges Apple encouraged users to sign up to iCloud for storage of photos, videos and other data while simultaneously making it difficult to use alternative providers.
Which? says Apple doesn’t allow customers to store or back-up all of their phone’s data with a third-party provider, arguing this violates competition law.
The consumer rights group says once iOS users have signed up to iCloud, they then have to pay for the service once their photos, notes, messages and other data go over the free 5GB limit.
“By bringing this claim, Which? is showing big corporations like Apple that they cannot rip off UK consumers without facing repercussions,” said Which?’s chief executive Anabel Hoult.
“Taking this legal action means we can help consumers to get the redress that they are owed, deter similar behaviour in the future and create a better, more competitive market.”
Apple ‘rejects’ claims and will defend itself
Apple “rejects” the idea its customers are tied to using iCloud and told Sky News it would “vigorously” defend itself.
“Apple believes in providing our customers with choices,” a spokesperson said.
“Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible – whether it’s to iCloud or another service.
“We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anti-competitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”
It also said nearly half of its customers don’t use iCloud and its pricing is inline with other cloud storage providers.
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
How much could UK Apple customers receive if lawsuit succeeds?
The lawsuit will represent all UK Apple customers that have used iCloud services since 1 October 2015 – any that don’t want to be included will need to opt out.
However, if consumers live abroad but are otherwise eligible – for example because they lived in UK and used the iCloud but then moved away – they can also opt in.
The consumer rights group estimates that individual consumers could be owed an average of £70, depending on how long they have been paying for the services during that period.
Apple is facing a similar lawsuit in the US, where the US Department of Justice is accusing the company of locking down its iPhone ecosystem to build a monopoly.
Apple said the lawsuit is “wrong on the facts and the law” and that it will vigorously defend against it.
Read more from climate, science and tech:
The almighty row over climate cash that’s about to boil over
Oil state Azerbaijan is ‘perfectly suited’ to hosting a climate summit, says Azerbaijan
Big tech’s battles
This is the latest in a line of challenges big tech companies like Apple, Google and Samsung have faced around anti-competitive practices.
Most notably, a landmark case in the US earlier this year saw a judge rule that Google holds an illegal monopoly over the internet search market.
The company is now facing a second antitrust lawsuit, and may be forced to break up parts of its business.
Read more: Google faces threat of being broken up
File pic: Reuters
And in December last year, a judge declared Google’s Android app store a monopoly in a case brought by a private gaming company.
“Now that five companies control the whole of the internet economy, there’s a real need for people to fight back and to really put pressure on the government,” William Fitzgerald, from tech campaigning organisation The Worker Agency, told Sky News.
William Fitzgerald at Lisbon’s Web Summit, where he spoke to Sky News
“That’s why we have governments; to hold corporations accountable, to actually enforce laws.”
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports7 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Environment1 year agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway