swap, twist or spin?

I often drive past a huge advert on the M4 near the North Circular off-ramp which says something like 'Been mis-sold SWAPS? Phone this number'. It's been there for quite a while and another sign of the times.

Wide boys in the city create ostensibly fixed rate business loans but then embed derivatives to hedge their position. It's another round of sharp practice and some big name banks have been implicated.

And I'm expecting the next few months to be full of politico mis-selling as we hit the election on-ramp.

According to Parliament.uk, I see the UK national debt is up at around £1.48 trillion, with £48.1bn in interest per year. That’s without adding in the extra bit for the part government owned banks.

This debt is about 80% of GDP, or about £25k per person.

Now between, say, the mid 80s and around 2009 the debt was in the 40%-50% range, but since 2009-ish it has risen steeply every year and looks set to continue at least until 2016/17. Not my figures, they are from the Office of National Statistics and the Office for Budget Responsibility.


So despite any pandering give-backs before the election, it's highly likely we’ll see another taxation rise after the election. Nothing new there, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, each of the last six new elected governments have announced net tax rises, which average £7.5 bn per annum.

That's unless we go back to printing money, I suppose, like the £375bn that the Bank of England electronically issued during UK quantitative since 2009. Instead of channelling the money into public schemes like, say the NHS and schools, it shunted the money directly into gilts, consequently driving bonds and equities.

And guess what?

The richest few percentage of share owners own 40% of all the shares and saw them rise 20%. They liked this and invested even more in upwardly mobile shares. Not in trickle-down spending. Okay, maybe some champagne and caviar. The banks could use their quantitively eased books to create more twisted financial instruments aimed towards those from whom they could make quick bonuses.

As for where the gap gets hidden. As gilt yields fall, so do pension annuity prospects. No biggie for the ever decreasing number of people still on final salary pensions, but for those in pension pots or whatever follows in April, it's a another devaluation.

So, most of the quantitive easing money didn't make it to the 'real' economy. That's the economy where a mere £1bn will rebuild more than 500 schools and £10bn will build 200,000 starter homes. The real workers that would be deployed could spend their sovereign money on stuff, which boosts other parts of the economy.

Oh no. This would never make a Westminster Village scheme, would it?

Even with my profligate spending above of £11,000,000,000, there's still the other £364,000,000,000 of the quantitive easing scheme to consider. That's still more than half a year's total UK government spending.

There's still arguments being trotted out around future austerity - sometimes that's also a code for punish the poorest. Another argument is about how low growth deepens debt so the private sector cuts spending - not what they said when the money was being printed. All of it seems like broken logic after the 2009-14 performances.

The political classes need fresh thoughts as we enter the last 90 days. I suspect it will all be trite polemics whilst the meaningful graphs remain hidden.

results rumour of second UK election on 25 November 2010?

If the Parliamentary timetable for the Queen's speech is to be believed, then Parliament should reconvene on Tuesday 18th May and the Speech would be on Tuesday 25th May.

I wonder if this will be possible given the current blip in continuity, whilst some post election introspection takes place? What's the shortest time between elections? Someone will know. I'll hazard a guess at six months, so maybe 25th November would be a round six months from the speech making and could see a new Parliament up and running for 2011?

That's enough time for parties to re-organise and perhaps a more balanced set of voting practices to be devised.

All the politicians are pointedly saying they are working for the "National Interest" now, rather than their own agendas, so perhaps anything related to improving the representation of the people could be on their minds, rather than their own self-promotion?

(Approximate votes per seat: Labour = 33k ; Tory 35k; LibDem 120k)

wash-up or spin cycle?

The usually hidden turbo button on the Parliamentary system has been revealed. It looks as if the remaining bills under consideration are all to be processed within the next 2-3 days before Parliament is dissolved.

Harriet Harman can preside over this last minute spin cycle as part of the so-called wash-up process. The bills make an interesting laundry list, with the bribery bill, financial services bill, developing countries debt relief bill and the equality bill for starters.

There's plenty of others too, and it raises all sorts of questions about the time these normally take, the number of ostensibly significant bills that have not been processed and what happens when they all get bundled through in a couple of days.

The one drawing a lot of internet attention has been the digital economy bill, which has had almost a whole day to itself and is being rushed through despite extensive lobbying requesting delays for various reviews.

I can't help wondering whether this bundling of bills will really engage MPs, because of the imminent dissolution and electioneering.

Quite a laundering operation.

more UK election 11 July 2009 rumours started

If the Queen has quietly asked Gordon Brown to dissolve Parliament, then we need to work out the timetable. There's usually at least 30 days from dissolution to an election, which rules out most of June.

July has only been used once since 1918 and August and September have never been used because of the summer holidays and the way it would weird out the results.

So theoretically, the most likely month is October, which has been used the most times since 1918; six times in October, followed by five in May and four in June.

Now, if the level of upset was maximum and pitchforks marched upon Westminster, then a July date is still possible, but would require rather a lot of gearing up in a short time. I'm also wondering if a Speaker is needed during the dissolution process, because even that role seems a trifle fragile at the moment.

Technically, Gordon still has another year, with the last valid date of the current Parliament being 10 May 2010. Because of dissolution procedures, the election wouldn't need to be until Thursday 3 June 2010.

So will we get another year of Gordon and Co, or is there election fever in the wind?

We have the Euro elections and a few by-elections in a few days. I'm guessing Brown, Cameron, Clegg and the others are getting into huddles to think about timings and campaigning. In July, it would need to be 4th (oops - sensitive?), 11th or 18th.

And what if the Monarchy did call for the end of the current Parliament instead of it being Gordon's dice roll?

time to repaint the H on the helipad

I see there's a few more allegations about political mishaps involving inaccurate expense claim submissions.

I can't help wondering whether we've all got this wrong though.

The process seems to be that some modest claims up to around £32,000 can be made within a year for politicians as part of general upkeep. Kit Kats, bath plugs, a few hotel movies, moat plumbing renewal, the odd extra house mortgage or two and redecoration of the half timbered dwellings on the estate all seem to be within the permissible claims.

So why not extend the process to the rest of us?

We pay into the tax system, so a few gentle claims for day to day running couldn't be too much of a problem. There could be a limit like the one the MPs get. Why, I'd even settle for that same amount as long as it was tax free and available annually.

But please don't misunderstand me. Here at rashbre central we've been economising too.

Take the helipad. We added a tennis court to the top surface so that it could be used at other times for relaxation, and even invite the neighbours around for a game of doubles. But the difference between us and some of the MPs is that we've had to pay for this ourselves, instead of being able to claim it at as necessary expense of doing business. I ask you, how else could we get from the rather distant redesignated primary residence back to place of business if we didn't have this essential facility?

coin operated boys

When I've worked in Italy there's a sometimes delays on paper work associated with so called 'bribeville' anti-Mafia legislation.

No comparison with the the British Upper House and recent denials of improprieties by its august members. It's so unfair to call it Erminegate, when the poor unpaid Lords and Ladies are slaving to move new laws of the land into being.

Today we heard there is no connection between fees received and actions affecting the passage of new legislation. I'm sure the posh dining clubbiness of the House is used appropriately, and that its exclusivity wouldn't be used to turn heads or procure inappropriate advantage, let alone to do so for reward.

A shame this pops up just after the Lower House abandoned its attempt to scrap accounting for its expenses. We now have both groups of politicians dealing with their remuneration whilst the country struggles to make ends meet. But its not misconduct in a public office. We've been told.