How worried should Rachel Reeves be about the fact that the interest rates on government bonds have leapt to the highest level in more than a quarter of a century?
More to the point, how worried should the rest of us be about it?
After all, the interest rate on 30-year government bonds (gilts, as they are known) hit 5.37% today—the highest level since 1998. The interest rate on the benchmark 10-year government bond is also up to the highest level since 2008.
Higher government borrowing rates mean, rather obviously, that the cost of all that investment Keir Starmer has promised in the coming years will go up. And since these rates reflect longer-term expectations for borrowing costs, in practice it means everything else in this economy will gradually get more expensive.
There are short-term and long-term consequences to all of this. In the short run, it means it will be harder for Ms Reeves to meet those fiscal rules she set herself. Back at the budget, she left herself a (in fiscal terms) paper-thin margin of £9.9bn not to overshoot on borrowing vs her new rules.
According to Capital Economics, based on recent market moves, that margin might now have been eroded down to around £1bn.
More on Rachel Reeves
Related Topics:
And, given that’s before the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has even decided on changes to its forecasts, it’s now touch and go as to whether Ms Reeves will meet her fiscal rules. As my colleague Sam Coates reported this week, the upshot is the Treasury is poised to pare back its spending plans in the coming years – a depressing prospect given the chancellor only just set them. But that won’t be clear until the OBR’s updated forecasts are published in March.
However, fiscal rules and political embarrassments are one thing – the bigger picture is another. And that bigger picture is that the UK is being charged higher interest rates by international investors to compensate them for their concerns about our economic future – about rising debt levels, about the threat of higher inflation and about fears of sub-par growth in the years to come.
How does this compare to the Liz Truss mini-budget?
But perhaps the biggest question of all is whether, what with long-term bond yields higher now (over 5.2%) than the highs they hit in October 2022, after the infamous mini-budget (4.8%), does that mean the economy is in even more of a crisis than it was under Liz Truss?
The short answer is no. This is nothing like the post mini-budget aftermath. Investors are concerned about UK debt levels – yes. They are repricing our debt accordingly. There was even a moment for a few days after the budget last autumn when the yields on UK bonds were behaving in an erratic, worrying way, rising more than most of our counterparts.
But – and this is the critical bit – we saw nothing like the levels of panic and concern in markets that we saw after the mini-budget. But don’t just take it from me. Consider two data-based metrics that are pretty useful in this case.
The first is to consider the fact that back in October 2022 it wasn’t just that the interest rates on government bonds were rising. It was that the pound was plummeting at the same time. That’s a toxic cocktail – a signal that investors are simply pulling their money out of the country. This time around, the pound is pretty steady, and is far stronger than it was in late 2022, when it hit the lowest level (against a basket of currencies) in modern history.
Is this just a UK problem?
The second test is to ask a question: is the UK an outlier? Are investors looking at this country and treating it differently to other countries?
And here, the answer is again somewhat reassuring for Ms Reeves. While it’s certainly true that UK government bond yields are up sharply in recent weeks, precisely the same thing is true of US government bond yields. Even German yields are up in recent weeks – albeit not as high as the US or UK.
In other words, the movements in bond yields don’t appear to be UK-specific. They’re part of a bigger movement across assets worldwide as investors face up to the new future – with governments (including the UK and the US under Donald Trump) willing to borrow more and spend more in the future. As I say, that’s somewhat reassuring for Ms Reeves, but I’m not sure it’s entirely reassuring for the rest of us.
One way of looking at this is by measuring how much the UK’s bond yields deviated from those American and German cousin rates in recent months. And while there was a point, a few days after Ms Reeves’ Halloween budget, when UK bond yields were more of an outlier than they historically have been after fiscal events, in the following weeks the UK stopped being much of an outlier. Yes, it was being charged more by investors, but then given the budget involved large spending and borrowing increases, that’s hardly surprising.
Now compare that with what happened after the mini-budget, when the UK’s bond yields deviated from their counterparts in the US and Germany more than after any other fiscal event in modern history – a terrifying rise which only ended after Kwasi Kwarteng stood down. Only when Ms Truss resigned were they back in what you might consider “normal” territory.
Now, it’s hard to compare different historical moments. The mini-budget was happening at a tense moment in financial markets, with the Bank of England poised to reverse its quantitative easing. Not all of the roller coaster can be attributed to Ms Truss. Even so, comparing that period to today is night and day.
Investors are not exactly delighted with the UK’s economic prospects right now. They’re letting this be known via financial markets. But they’re certainly not horrified in the way they were after the mini-budget of 2022.
It’s a threat that will send a shiver down the spine of Downing Street and shake the City of London to its core.
Even the notion that AstraZeneca (AZ) – the UK’s most valuable listed company – is thinking of upping sticks and switching its stock market listing to America is a frightening prospect on many levels.
After all, if your biggest firm departs for Wall Street, what message does it send to an already bruised London stock market that has struggled to find its way since the UK’s vote to leave the European Union?
The timing of the report in The Times that Pascal Soriot, the pharmaceutical company’s long-standing chief executive, is considering his own Brexit for the company, will not be lost on anyone.
The Treasury is under severe strain and the Starmer government, apparently focused on compromise given its welfare reform U-turns, bruised.
Ministers have been scrambling to get the support of business back, after a budget tax raid that has added to the cost of employing people in the UK, by launching a series of strategies to demonstrate a growth-led focus.
More from Money
Mr Soriot’s reported shift is the culmination of years of frustration over UK tax rates and support for business – though it could also remove a focus on his own remuneration as the highest-paid director of a UK-listed firm.
Image: Pascal Soriot has run AZ since 2012
AZ has its own gripes with Labour.
In January, the company cancelled a planned £450m investment in a vaccine factory on Merseyside, accusing the government of reneging on the previous Conservative administration’s offer of financial aid.
At the same time, it has been rebuilding its presence in the United States.
That speaks to not only a home market snub but also the election of a US president intent on protecting, as he sees it, America-based companies and jobs.
Donald Trump is threatening 25% tariffs on all pharma imports.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:43
How Trump’s tariffs are biting
AZ has already promised a $3.5bn (£2.6bn) investment in US manufacturing by the end of 2026.
It has also rejoined the leading US drug lobby group, bolstering its voice in Washington DC.
There are sound reasons for bolstering its US footprint; more than 40% of AZ’s revenues are made in the world’s largest economy. Greater US production would also shield it from any duties imposed by Mr Trump and any MAGA successor.
Since Brexit, complaints among UK stock market constituents have been of low valuations compared to peers (with a weak pound also leaving them vulnerable to takeovers), weaker access to capital and poor appetite for new listings.
Wise, the money transfer firm, became the latest UK name to say that it intends to move its primary listing to the US just last month.
Image: Shein had been exploring a London flotation until it was blocked. Pic: Europa Press via AP
If followed through, it would tread in the footsteps of Flutter Entertainment and the building equipment suppler CRH – just two big names to have already left.
London was snubbed for a listing by its former chip-designing resident ARM back in 2023.
An initial public offering by Shein, the controversial fast fashion firm, had offered the prospect of the biggest flotation for the UK in many years but that was blocked by the Chinese authorities.
Efforts to bolster the City’s appeal, such as through the Financial Conduct Authority’s overhaul of listing rules and the creation of pension megafunds to aid access to capital, have also been boosted in recent months by investors in US companies taking a second look at comparatively low valuations in Europe.
Market analysts have charted a cash spread away from the US as a hedge against an erratic White House.
The Times report suggested that Mr Soriot’s plans were likely to face some opposition from members of the board, in addition to the UK government.
Image: The City of London has faced a series of challenges since Brexit Pic: iStock
AstraZeneca has not commented on the story. Crucially, it did not deny it.
But a government spokesperson said: “Through our forthcoming Life Sciences Sector Plan, we are launching a 10-year mission to harness the life sciences sector to drive long-term economic growth and build a stronger, prevention-focused NHS.
“We have already started delivering on key actions, from investing up to £600m in the Health Data Research Service alongside Wellcome, through to committing over £650m in Genomics England and up to £354m in Our Future Health.
“This is clear evidence of our commitment and confidence in life sciences as a driver of both economic growth and better health outcomes.”
Governments don’t comment on stories such as these, but you can bet your bottom dollar that the departure of your biggest firm by market value is not the message a government laser-focused on growth can afford to allow.
A power outage that shut Heathrow Airport earlier this year, causing travel chaos for more than 270,000 passengers, was caused by a “catastrophic failure” of equipment in a nearby substation, according to a new report.
Experts say the fire at the North Hyde Substation, which supplies electricity to Heathrow, started following the failure of a high-voltage electrical insulator known as a bushing, before spreading.
The failure was “most likely” caused by moisture entering the equipment, according to the report.
Image: The fire at Hayes electrical substation, which led to Heathrow Airport shutting down in March. Pic: @JoselynEMuirhe1/PA
National Grid, which owns the substation, missed two opportunities to prevent the failure, experts found, the first in 2018 when a higher-than-expected level of moisture was found in oil samples.
Such a reading meant “an imminent fault and that the bushing should be replaced”, according to guidance by the National Grid Electricity Transmission.
However, the report by National Energy System Operator (NESO) said the appropriate responses to such a serious issue were “not actioned”, including in 2022 when basic maintenance was postponed.
“The issue therefore went unaddressed,” the report added.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:21
Moment Heathrow substation ignites
The design and configuration of the airport’s internal power network meant the loss of just one of its three supply points would “result in the loss of power to operationally critical systems, leading to a suspension of operations for a significant period”, the report added.
Heathrow – which is Europe’s biggest airport – closed for around 16 hours on 21 March following thefire, before reopening at about 6pm.
Image: The North Hyde electrical substation which caught fire. File pic: PA
Tens of millions of pounds were lost, thousands of passengers were stranded, and questions were raised about the resilience of the UK’s infrastructure.
More than 71,000 domestic and commercial customers lost power as a result of the fire and the resulting power outage, the report said.
NESO chief executive, Fintan Slye, said there “wasn’t the control within their [National Grid’s] asset management systems that identified that this [elevated moisture levels] got missed.
“They identified a fault, [but] for some reason the transformer didn’t immediately get pulled out of service and get repaired.
Image: Smoke rises following the fire
“There was no control within the system that looked back and said ‘oh, hang on a second, you forgot to do this thing over here’.”
Sky’s science and technology editor, Tom Clarke, pointed to the age of the substation’s equipment, saying “some of these things are getting really very old now, coming to the end of their natural lives, and this is an illustration of what can happen if they are not really well maintained”.
The report also highlights a lack of joined-up thinking, he said, as “grid operators don’t know who’s critical national infrastructure on the network, and they don’t have priority”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:49
Heathrow bosses were ‘warned about substation’
Responding to the report’s findings, a Heathrow spokesperson said: “A combination of outdated regulation, inadequate safety mechanisms, and National Grid’s failure to maintain its infrastructure led to this catastrophic power outage.
“We expect National Grid to be carefully considering what steps they can take to ensure this isn’t repeated.
“Our own Review, led by former Cabinet Minister Ruth Kelly, identified key areas for improvement and work is already underway to implement all 28 recommendations.”
In May, Ms Kelly’s investigation revealed that the airport’s chief executive couldn’t be contacted as the crisis unfolded because his phone was on silent.
Image: Stranded passengers at Heathrow Terminal 5 following the fire
Pic: PA
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, who commissioned the NESO report, called it “deeply concerning”, because “known risks were not addressed by the National Grid Electricity Transmission”.
Mr Miliband said energy regulator Ofgem, which opened an investigation on Wednesday after the report was published, is investigating “possible licence breaches relating to the development and maintenance of its electricity system at North Hyde.
“There are wider lessons to be learned from this incident. My department, working across government, will urgently consider the findings and recommendations set out by NESO and publish a response to the report in due course.”
National Grid said in a statement it has “a comprehensive asset inspection and maintenance programme in place” and said it has “taken further action since the fire”.
This includes “an end-to-end review” of its oil sampling process and results, further enhancement of fire risk assessments at all operational sites, and “re-testing the resilience of substations that serve strategic infrastructure”.
A spokesperson said: “We fully support the recommendations in the report and are committed to working with NESO and others to implement them. We will also cooperate closely with Ofgem’s investigation.
“There are important lessons to be learnt about cross sector resilience and the need for increased coordination, and we look forward to working with government, regulators and industry partners to take these recommendations forward.”
The UK’s YouTubers, TikTok creators and Instagram influencers have been surveyed on mass for the first time ever, and are demanding formal recognition from the government.
The creator economy in the UK is thought to employ around 45,000 people and contribute over £2bn to the country in one year alone, according to the new research by YouTube and Public First.
But, despite all that value, its workers say they feel underappreciated by the authorities.
Image: Max Klyemenko, famous for his Career Ladder videos, wants the government to take creators like himself more seriously. Pic: Youtube
“If you look at the viewership, our channel is not too different from a big media company,” said Max Klymenko, a content creator with more than 10 million subscribers and half a billion monthly views on average.
“If you look at the relevancy, especially among young audiences, I will say that we are more relevant. That said, we don’t really get the same treatment,” he told Sky News.
Fifty-six per cent of the more than 10,000 creators surveyed said they do not think UK creators have a “voice in shaping government policies” that affect them.
Only 7% think they get enough support to access finance, while just 17% think there is enough training and skills development here in the UK.
More on Social Media
Related Topics:
Nearly half think their value is not recognised by the broader creative industry.
The creative industries minister, Sir Chris Bryant, said the government “firmly recognises the integral role that creators play” in the UK’s creative industries and the fact that they help “to drive billions into the economy” and support more than 45,000 jobs.
“We understand more can be done to help creators reach their full potential, which is why we are backing them through our new Creative Industries Sector Plan,” he said.
Image: Ben Woods said the government needs to “broaden its lens” to include creators
“The UK has got a fantastic history of supporting the creative industries,” said Ben Woods, a creator economy analyst, Midia Research who was not involved in the report.
“Whether you look at the film side, lots of blockbuster films are being shot here, or television, which is making waves on the global stage.
“But perhaps the government needs to broaden that lens a little bit to look at just what’s going on within the creator economy as well, because it is highly valuable, it’s where younger audiences are spending a lot of their time and [the UK is] really good at it.”
According to YouTube, formal recognition would mean creators are factored into official economic impact data reporting, are represented on government creative bodies, and receive creator-specific guidance from HMRC on taxes and finances.
For some, financial guidance and clarity would be invaluable; the ‘creator’ job title seems to cause problems when applying for mortgages or bank loans.
Image: Podcaster David Brown owns a recording studio for creators
“It’s really difficult as a freelancer to get things like mortgages and bank accounts and credit and those types of things,” said podcaster David Brown, who owns a recording studio for creators.
“A lot of people make very good money doing it,” he told Sky News.
“They’re very well supported. They have a lot of cash flow, and they are successful at doing that job. It’s just the way society and banking and everything is set up. It makes it really difficult.”
The creative industries minister said he is committed to appointing a creative freelance champion and increasing support from the British Business Bank in order to “help creators thrive and drive even more growth in the sector”.
The government has already pledged to boost the UK’s creative industries, launching a plan to make the UK the number one destination for creative investment and promising an extra £14bn to the sector by 2035.
These influencers want to make sure they are recognised as part of that.