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.
Four people have been arrested by police investigating cyber attacks targeting M&S, Co-op and Harrods.
A 20-year-old woman and two males, both aged 19, and a male aged 17, were detained in London and the West Midlands this morning as part of a National Crime Agency (NCA) operation.
They were arrested at their homes on suspicion of Computer Misuse Act offences, blackmail, money laundering and participating in the activities of an organised crime group.
Money blog: Cost of renting over owning home is a lot
Electronic devices were seized from the suspects and are currently being analysed by forensic experts.
M&S halted online orders, and shelves were empty in shops after the cyber attack on the retailer earlier this year.
The initial hack into the retailer’s systems took place in April through “sophisticated impersonation” involving a third party.
Disruption is expected to continue at the retailer until the end of this month.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Mickey Carroll in May answered why M&S cyber attack was so bad.
The Co-op and Harrods were also subsequently targeted by hackers.
Paul Foster, head of the NCA’s National cybercrime unit described the arrests as a “significant step” in their investigation, which remains “one of the Agency’s highest priorities”.
He added: “…our work continues, alongside partners in the UK and overseas, to ensure those responsible are identified and brought to justice.”
The National Crime Agency is keen to “signal” to “future victims” the “importance of seeking support and engaging with law enforcement”, stating that “the NCA and policing are here to help”.
The NCA has also thanked M&S, Co-op and Harrods for their support in their investigations.
The arrests, which took place early on Thursday morning, were supported by officers from the West Midlands Regional Organised Crime Unit and the East Midlands Special Operations Unit.
Earlier this week, the chairman of M&S told MPs that the hack had been “traumatic” and like an “out-of-body experience”.
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Archie Norman, however, refused to be drawn on whether the retailer had paid any ransom.
“We are not discussing any of the details of our interaction with the threat actor, including this subject, but that subject is fully shared with the NCA,” he said.
It is estimated that the cyber attack will cost M&S up to £300m this year.
Read more:
South West Water agrees to pay £24m for wastewater failures
Royal Mail to scrap second-class post on Saturdays and some weekdays
Days after M&S was attacked, the Co-op was targeted and forced to shut down some internal systems.
Harrods was then hacked, and also had to shut some systems despite its website and shops continuing to operate.
Of those arrested, a 17-year-old British male and a 19-year-old Latvian male were from the West Midlands.
A 19-year-old man was from London and a 20-year-old woman from Staffordshire.
Royal Mail is to be allowed to scrap Saturday second-class stamp deliveries, under a series of reforms proposed by the communications regulator.
From 28 July, Royal Mail will also be allowed to deliver second-class letters on alternate weekdays, Ofcom said.
The post will still be delivered within three working days of collection from Monday to Friday.
Money blog: Top chef reveals thing he hates about customers
The proposals had already been raised by Ofcom after a consultation was announced in 2024, and the scale back was proposed early this year.
Royal Mail had repeatedly failed to meet the so-called universal service obligation to deliver post within set periods of time.
Those delivery targets are now being revised downwards.
Rather than having to have 93% of first-class mail delivered the next day, 90% will be legally allowed.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The sale of Royal Mail was approved in December
The target for second-class mail deliveries will be lowered from 98.5% to arrive within three working days to 95%.
A review of stamp prices has also been announced by Ofcom amid concerns over affordability, with a consultation set to be launched next year.
It’s good news for Royal Mail and its new owner, the Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky. Ofcom estimates the changes will bring savings of between £250m and £425m.
A welcome change?
Unsurprisingly, the company welcomed the announcement.
“It is good news for customers across the UK as it supports the delivery of a reliable, efficient and financially sustainable universal service,” said Martin Seidenberg, the group chief executive of Royal Mail’s parent company, International Distribution Services.
“It follows extensive consultation with thousands of people and businesses to ensure that the postal service better reflects their needs and the realities of how customers send and receive mail today.”
Citizens Advice, however, doubted whether services would improve as a result of the changes.
“Today, Ofcom missed a major opportunity to bring about meaningful change,” said Tom MacInnes, the director of policy at Citizens Advice.
“Pushing ahead with plans to slash services and relax delivery targets in the name of savings won’t automatically make letter deliveries more reliable or improve standards.”
Acknowledging long delays “where letters have taken weeks to arrive”, Ofcom said it set Royal Mail new enforceable targets so 99% of mail has to be delivered no more than two days late.
Changing habits
Less than a third of letters are sent now than 20 years ago, and it is forecast to fall to about a fifth of the letters previously sent.
According to Ofcom research, people want reliability and affordability more than speedy delivery.
Royal Mail has been loss-making in recent years as revenues fell.
Read more from Sky News:
Greater risk to UK economy from Trump tariffs, BoE warns
What is a wealth tax and how would it work?
In response to Ofcom’s changes, a government spokesperson said: “The public expects a well-run postal service, with letters arriving on time across the country without it costing the earth. With the way people use postal services having changed, it’s right the regulator has looked at this.
“We now need Royal Mail to work with unions and posties to deliver a service that people expect, and this includes maintaining the principle of one price to send a letter anywhere in the UK”.
Ofcom said it has told Royal Mail to hold regular meetings with consumer bodies and industry groups to hear their experiences implementing the changes.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike