New Tory Leader

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

7 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

By her own admission, she didn't meet the governor of the BoE when she was PM . A meeting had been set up, but she was advised against it.

It's a very difficult task for the BoE to carry out its duty to make the PM and Chancellor aware of the risks when they didn't seem to be listening 

There's also the chancellor to consider. Was any warning given to him? Was there any communication from the BoE to government flagging risks? An email? Telephone call? It seems not.

Peston's right: Our model isn't based on politicians being experts in fine details. The civil servants are supposed to have the expertise with which they can offer advice towards policy to the elected representatives.

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[Herman 9,817]

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/08/tom-scholar-permanent-secretary-to-the-treasury-sacked-by-liz-truss

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

1 minute ago, Herman said:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/sep/08/tom-scholar-permanent-secretary-to-the-treasury-sacked-by-liz-truss

That was nearly two weeks before the mini budget and  the BoE employs more than one person. It wouldn't explain why the BoE failed to spot risks and/or flag them up to the treasury.

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,189]

23 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

There's also the chancellor to consider. Was any warning given to him? Was there any communication from the BoE to government flagging risks? An email? Telephone call? It seems not.

Peston's right: Our model isn't based on politicians being experts in fine details. The civil servants are supposed to have the expertise with which they can offer advice towards policy to the elected representatives.

If the elected representatives aren't listening, what can the civil service do?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

4 minutes ago, How I Wrote Elastic Man said:

If the elected representatives aren't listening, what can the civil service do?

Listening requires someone to say something in the first place; it wasn't said.

One can only speculate over whether they'd have paid attention if warned, because they weren't warned. That was a failure on the part of the BoE.

[A Load of Squit 5,201]

Interesting polling.

Won't go down well at CCHQ, the Daily Mail or the Torygraph.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/21/uk-voters-frustrated-with-politicians-desperate-culture-war-tactics-survey-finds

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

18 minutes ago, A Load of Squit said:

Interesting polling.

Won't go down well at CCHQ, the Daily Mail or the Torygraph.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/21/uk-voters-frustrated-with-politicians-desperate-culture-war-tactics-survey-finds

 

"For Labour, its base supporters responded well to a campaign message saying “we need to fight back against the racist government”, but the party opened itself up to a four percentage point increase in voters who are unlikely to back Starmer."

[A Load of Squit 5,201]

2 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

"For Labour, its base supporters responded well to a campaign message saying “we need to fight back against the racist government”, but the party opened itself up to a four percentage point increase in voters who are unlikely to back Starmer."

Yes, very thin gruel for you RWNJ's.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

Yes, very thin gruel for you RWNJ's.

Not so thin that you didn't feel the need to pretend it wasn't there.

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[Nuff Said 5,156]

3 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

There's also the chancellor to consider. Was any warning given to him? Was there any communication from the BoE to government flagging risks? An email? Telephone call? It seems not.

Peston's right: Our model isn't based on politicians being experts in fine details. The civil servants are supposed to have the expertise with which they can offer advice towards policy to the elected representatives.

You really do live in a parallel reality in your head. Her autobiography complains that government bodies like the BoE and the OBR were trying to conspire against her, probably the IMF and World Bank are in there too. Are you seriously suggesting they did this by *not* warning her that her policies were going to be suicidal? 

I mean, if they really were closet Labourites, it was a successful strategy with hindsight but at the time it would have been 1) extremely high risk, 2) very damaging and enormously problematic in the short-term and 3) only going to make things harder for Labour in the long-term. 
 

Occam’s razor would suggest she deliberately ignored any protests they did make.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

3 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

You really do live in a parallel reality in your head. Her autobiography complains that government bodies like the BoE and the OBR were trying to conspire against her, probably the IMF and World Bank are in there too. Are you seriously suggesting they did this by *not* warning her that her policies were going to be suicidal? 

I mean, if they really were closet Labourites, it was a successful strategy with hindsight but at the time it would have been 1) extremely high risk, 2) very damaging and enormously problematic in the short-term and 3) only going to make things harder for Labour in the long-term. 
 

Occam’s razor would suggest she deliberately ignored any protests they did make.

Have you actually listened to the Peston series? He was quite clear about it: There were no warnings.

 

Edited April 21 by littleyellowbirdie

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,189]

11 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Listening requires someone to say something in the first place; it wasn't said.

One can only speculate over whether they'd have paid attention if warned, because they weren't warned. That was a failure on the part of the BoE.

The PM and Chancellor were in charge. They were the ones making the decisions. It's their responsibility for ensuring that they get the advice they need 

If they felt that they needed feedback from the BoE or OBR, and that they weren't getting it, they should've reached out for it. Instead, they chose not to consult either of those 2 bodies. 

Liz and Kwasi own that failure, and attempts by Liz now to try to deflect the blame shows her up for what she is. A woman not capable of running a country or accepting the responsibility that goes with it

[Creative Midfielder 2,000]

8 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Have you actually listened to the Peston series? He was quite clear about it: There were no warnings.

 

Did he mention that she refused to let the OBR scrutinise the budget - they are the people who would have delivered the warnings officially and she deliberately broke the established procedure to avoid receiving their advice.

No matter what Peston says, the idea that she received no warnings is for the birds - even old Kwasi himself, who of course was  broadly in accord with her, warned her about some of the specifics and indeed the timing of some elements.

As for the civil servants I also find it almost impossible to believe that there was no pushback at all from the Treasury although it may be that the Tories have unintentionally created a rod for their own back - over the last 14 years, and especially the last five, they have heavily politicised the top levels of the civil service - no more 'speaking truth to power' if you want your career in the civil service to prosper/continue.

So some, such as the appalling Simon Case at No 10, just kept his head down and did what he was told by Johnson/Cummings but in the Treasury they had a bit more b*lls which is why several of their best economists have eirher been booted out or jumped ship because they weren't prepared to meekly follow the Tory Party line.

So maybe those that were left did just toe the party line rather than do the job they were supposed to do - very disappointing if that was the case but symptomatic of a country where nothing, including apparently the civil service, seems to work properly any more.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

1 hour ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Did he mention that she refused to let the OBR scrutinise the budget - they are the people who would have delivered the warnings officially and she deliberately broke the established procedure to avoid receiving their advice.

 

Yes he does mention the OBR in there. I've literally provided a link for you, which covers everything in fine detail from both the economic and political standing. Rather than asking me to exhaustively defend the reporting and opinion of a well-respected economic journalist, why don't you listen to it to find the answer to the question yourself?

The problem with you lot is news and current affairs is just stuff to pick stuff out of to suit your political arguments. If there's any suggestion it might not already suit your views you don't even bother to consider it.

The point is,as civil servants, this is their duty; it's what they're paid to do. If they say it and it's ignored then they've done their job and it's on the government; if they don't say it then they haven't. There are no excuses.

The other thing is that it wasn't only that the BoE didn't communicate; they'd actually failed to notice the LDI market risk was there.

If you want to find out more then have a listen; it's very interesting.

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[Creative Midfielder 2,000]

56 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Yes he does mention the OBR in there. I've literally provided a link for you, which covers everything in fine detail from both the economic and political standing. Rather than asking me to exhaustively defend the reporting and opinion of a well-respected economic journalist, why don't you listen to it to find the answer to the question yourself?

That's fine then, and the only reason I asked the question was because of your comment:

Have you actually listened to the Peston series? He was quite clear about it: There were no warnings.

which to me suggested you felt that Truss was not responsible/blameworthy because she had been let down the Treasury officials/BoE/OBR because there were no warnings from them - when in fact she had quite deliberately avoided receiving advice from therm, which is a totally different scenario to the one your 'there were no warnings' implies

As @How I Wrote Elastic Man has already pointed out, however you look at it Truss & Kwarteng were solely responsible for the utterly stupid decisions they made and Truss's delusional attempts to shift the blame are absolutely pathetic - by contrast Kwasi, despite being made the fall guy by Truss, has behaved with dignity and a certain amount of honesty - all of which seems totally beyond Truss.

[Yellow Fever 3,814]

As I recall the issue was that she bypassed / sidelined  the OBR BoE etc - didn't tell them her plans and hence didn't let them provide a forecast. That's then rather disingenuous to say they didn't give her advice when not asked!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/18/trussonomic-lessons-what-learned-former-pm-book-liz-truss#:~:text=be entirely true.-,Truss's own economic advisers warned her that markets could crash,were not handled with care.

Not asking for any advice, she then proceeded to crash & burn the economy.

The 'Moron' premium as city folk dubbed it.

That will will be her epitaph - the moron along with those that voted for or supported her.

 

As a matter of fact I could of agreed (or understood) her policies (increasing immigration among them) and said so on here but there was the missing other half - the massive benefit/pension/spending CUTS to go along with her tax cuts and balance the books. Of course that would of been a total vote looser but it's what the 'ERG' wanted. US style system.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

8 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

That's fine then, and the only reason I asked the question was because of your comment:

Have you actually listened to the Peston series? He was quite clear about it: There were no warnings.

which to me suggested you felt that Truss was not responsible/blameworthy because she had been let down the Treasury officials/BoE/OBR because there were no warnings from them - when in fact she had quite deliberately avoided receiving advice from therm, which is a totally different scenario to the one your 'there were no warnings' implies

As @How I Wrote Elastic Man has already pointed out, however you look at it Truss & Kwarteng were solely responsible for the utterly stupid decisions they made and Truss's delusional attempts to shift the blame are absolutely pathetic - by contrast Kwasi, despite being made the fall guy by Truss, has behaved with dignity and a certain amount of honesty - all of which seems totally beyond Truss.

Not at all. The point Peston was making us that there were immediate and abnormally high and identifiable risks that they could and should have made the government aware of before the mini budget. Peston acknowledges if she had been warned they may have carried on. The point is we don't know because the bank of England didn't do it's job, which means the reasons for its failure aren't addressed because everybody is happy just to leave all the blame at Liz Truss' door and let the bank of England do what it likes to unaccountably.

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

43 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

As I recall the issue was that she bypassed / sidelined  the OBR BoE etc - didn't tell them her plans and hence didn't let them provide a forecast. That's then rather disingenuous to say they didn't give her advice when not asked!

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/18/trussonomic-lessons-what-learned-former-pm-book-liz-truss#:~:text=be entirely true.-,Truss's own economic advisers warned her that markets could crash,were not handled with care.

Not asking for any advice, she then proceeded to crash & burn the economy.

The 'Moron' premium as city folk dubbed it.

That will will be her epitaph - the moron along with those that voted for or supported her.

 

As a matter of fact I could of agreed (or understood) her policies (increasing immigration among them) and said so on here but there was the missing other half - the massive benefit/pension/spending CUTS to go along with her tax cuts and balance the books. Of course that would of been a total vote looser but it's what the 'ERG' wanted. US style system.

So you're okay for the BoE to not properly identify immediate risks in markets it is officially responsible, not to have efficient contingency measures for such risks, and not to communicate those risks to government? I ask because those are the areas where the BoE failed according to Peston which you appear to wish to dismiss.

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[horsefly 4,310]

29 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Not at all. The point Peston was making us that there were immediate and abnormally high and identifiable risks that they could and should have made the government aware of before the mini budget. Peston acknowledges if she had been warned they may have carried on. The point is we don't know because the bank of England didn't do it's job, which means the reasons for its failure aren't addressed because everybody is happy just to leave all the blame at Liz Truss' door and let the bank of England do what it likes to unaccountably.

 

Truss made it very clear at the time that she would not listen to the OBR or the BOE. She has also subsequently reaffirmed  that attitude by calling for the abolition of the OBR and the sacking of the BOE head. She was the ultimate authority, and she made it clear that she didn't want to listen to what any other body had to say. Her astonishing arrogance was evident at the time, only to be surpassed by her utterly self-delusional account of her calamitous reign in her pi*ss-poor book.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

43 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Truss made it very clear at the time that she would not listen to the OBR or the BOE. She has also subsequently reaffirmed  that attitude by calling for the abolition of the OBR and the sacking of the BOE head. She was the ultimate authority, and she made it clear that she didn't want to listen to what any other body had to say. Her astonishing arrogance was evident at the time, only to be surpassed by her utterly self-delusional account of her calamitous reign in her pi*ss-poor book.

You're welcome to your opinion on how she might have reacted if she'd got the warnings that she should have had from the BoE if they were doing their job properly.

Do you or do you not think it was remiss of the BoE to have never engaged in any stress testing on the LDI market or to organise any contingency plans for unexpected risks in the LDI market even though the risks had been raised back in 2018?

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[horsefly 4,310]

45 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You're welcome to your opinion on how she might have reacted if she'd got the warnings that she should have had from the BoE if they were doing their job properly.

Do you or do you not think it was remiss of the BoE to have never engaged in any stress testing on the LDI market or to organise any contingency plans for unexpected risks in the LDI market even though the risks had been raised back in 2018?

LDI markets have been a source of concern and scandal for a long time (see the many articles in Private Eye). But I refuse to let that distract from the fact that Liz Truss is entirely to blame for pursuing her pig-headed, ideologically insane budget. Like Trump when he became president she rid herself of, or ignored, ANY advisor she considered would provide resistance to her objectives, and listened only to feeble-willed sycophants applauding her on. A perfect example of the moral of The Emperor's New Clothes.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

30 minutes ago, horsefly said:

LDI markets have been a source of concern and scandal for a long time (see the many articles in Private Eye). But I refuse to let that distract from the fact that Liz Truss is entirely to blame for pursuing her pig-headed, ideologically insane budget. Like Trump when he became president she rid herself of, or ignored, ANY advisor she considered would provide resistance to her objectives, and listened only to feeble-willed sycophants applauding her on. A perfect example of the moral of The Emperor's New Clothes.

And there we go: You, like others here, are intentionally glossing over and resisting acknowledging a genuine contributor and failure on the part of the BoE to the crisis because it doesn't suit your preferred political narrative of simply reducing it to 'it's all Liz Truss; incompetent Tories' instead of a truthful understanding of the whole crisis.

When the crisis triggered by the mini budget became clear, she removed Kwarteng and installed Hammond with carte blanche to do what it took and withdrew the mini budget in its entirety. Your assertion that she wouldn't have listened is only speculation; the BoE's failure over these elements is fact.

 

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,814]

I'm actually pretty sure Truss heard lots of informal advice from many quarters. 

As is plain to everybody she choose not to listen. As they say you can lead a nag to water but you can't make it drink!

What she didn't ask for (because she wouldn't listen anyway - her whole mantra afterall is/was ripping up economic orthodoxy - the 'blob') - and hence nor receive - was formal written advice on her proposed budget. I wonder what it would of said but I can imagine - something along the lines that she's hopelessly inept.

[A Load of Squit 5,201]

Truss only listened to Tufton St. She can blame who she wants but it's BS and only a stupid person would be sympathetic towards her.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

17 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

I'm actually pretty sure Truss heard lots of informal advice from many quarters. 

As is plain to everybody she choose not to listen. As they say you can lead a nag to water but you can't make it drink!

What she didn't ask for (because she wouldn't listen anyway - her whole mantra afterall is/was ripping up economic orthodoxy - the 'blob') - and hence nor receive - was formal written advice on her proposed budget. I wonder what it would of said but I can imagine - something along the lines that she's hopelessly inept.

What does informal advice have to do with whether or not the Bank of England was doing its job properly?

There are two major conclusions from what Peston had to say:

-Had the BoE invested time and effort into stress testing and contingencies over threats in the LDI market, the negative economic effects from the mini-budget would have been smaller due to the massive reduced delay in identifying the problem and taking steps to counteract it. As such, some of the blame for the overall damage is on them. After the whole crisis, the BoE has introduced changes to prevent something similar running out of control in the future further underlining that it was caught with its pants down.

-Had the BoE done that, they would have been in a position to explain the risks formally to the PM, face to face, in an email, whatever. If that had happened then we would know for sure whether Truss would have listened or not. As it is, we know there's a way the BoE could have possibly prevented it by doing what should be considered as their job.

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[Yellow Fever 3,814]

11 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

What does informal advice have to do with whether or not the Bank of England was doing its job properly?

There are two major conclusions from what Peston had to say:

-Had the BoE invested time and effort into stress testing and contingencies over threats in the LDI market, the negative economic effects from the mini-budget would have been much smaller. As such, some of the blame for the overall damage is on them. After the whole crisis, the BoE has introduced changes to prevent something similar running out of control in the future further underlining that it was caught with its pants down.

-Had the BoE done that, they would have been in a position to explain the risks formally to the PM, face to face, in an email, whatever. If that had happened then we would know for sure whether Truss would have listened or not. As it is, we know there's a way the BoE could have possibly prevented it by doing what should be considered as their job.

What ifs, What ifs...

Of course the BoE will of learnt from what happened. A majority of the country did too and will remember this May and in the autumn too it seems. Think the unthinkable incompetence.

A common phrase that I think sums up for the BoE and indeed the country's as a whole view of Truss - 

"You can't make something foolproof because fools (Truss) are so bloody ingenious"

It was what Truss foolishly and unexpectedly DID that caused the issues and no she wasn't taking any advice anyway!

Edited April 22 by Yellow Fever

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

10 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

What ifs, What ifs...

Of course the BoE will of learnt from what happened. A majority of the country did too and will remember this May and in the autumn too it seems. Think the unthinkable incompetence.

A common phrase that I think sums up for the BoE and indeed the country's as a whole view of Truss - 

"You can't make something foolproof because fools (Truss) are so bloody ingenious"

It was what Truss foolishly and unexpectedly DID that caused the issues and no she wasn't taking any advice anyway!

There's no 'of course' about it. The risks had already been established in 2018; the BoE did nothing to address them until there was a real problem.

It was the case here that the trigger was a government decision, but it need not have been; an external trigger could have caused an LDI crisis that the BoE would have been no better prepared for.

And furthermore, there has been no public scrutiny of what changes they've made or whether they're actually sufficient, because people like you want to avoid a true historical look at it to keep it nice and simple for your own political preferences.

Edited April 22 by littleyellowbirdie

[Well b back 3,259]

And there was me thinking the main player here was £45 billion pounds of tax cuts that were unfunded. The only criticism of the BOE from anybody outside of Truss and her buddies was that they increased interest rates the day before.

Clearly another person that doesn’t understand gilts and swaps as per another poster at the time. 

[Well b back 3,259]

From defence expert, to race relation expert and now a financial expert and never wrong, a Jack of all trades.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,570]

1 minute ago, Well b back said:

And there was me thinking the main player here was £45 billion pounds of tax cuts that were unfunded. The only criticism of the BOE from anybody outside of Truss and her buddies was that they increased interest rates the day before.

Clearly another person that doesn’t understand gilts and swaps as per another poster at the time. 

Yet another person commenting with what they think they already know rather than actually listening to the episodes I posted.