Are London house prices set for more falls?

This morning has brought news on the state of play concerning UK house prices although I think the Guardian has tripped over its own feet a little in an attempt to slay several dragons at once.

House prices in parts of London that were once at the epicentre of the UK property boom have fallen as much as 15% over the past year in fresh evidence of the impact of the EU referendum.

Actually if you then read the article no evidence of it being caused by the EU referendum is given but in the article linked to by it from December we are pointed towards one rather likely cause as Russell Galley of the Halifax tells us this.

“As a result of the rapid price growth in the capital, house prices in relation to average earnings are still very high in London; at 8.8 times annual average earnings they are close to the historical high of 9.”

I do like the “additionally” in the sentence below, what could it be about the house price to earnings ratio that causes this?

Additionally, mortgage affordability in London is worse than its long-run average, the only region in the UK where this is so.

As we progress on we discover that the peak or nadir of the falls depending on your perspective is rather close to home for me.

Figures from Your Move, one of the UK’s biggest estate agency chains, reveal that the average home in Wandsworth – which includes much of Clapham, Balham and Putney – fell by more than £100,000 in value over the last 12 months………..Homes in the London borough of Wandsworth were fetching an average of £805,000 in January 2017 but this has now fallen to £685,000.

There have been falls elsewhere too.

Other London boroughs are also showing steep price falls. In Southwark, south London, the average price has dropped from £666,000 to £585,000 in 12 months, while prices have pegged back in Islington, north London, from £750,000 to £684,000.

At this point with Wandsworth and Southwark on the list I am starting to feel a little surrounded although a common denominator is beginning to appear.

Wandsworth and Southwark are home to huge speculative property developments facing on to the River Thames – including the Battersea Power Station development – but the market for £1m-plus one-bed properties has shrivelled in recent years.

The scale of this was explained in the Times just under a fortnight ago.

The new neighbourhood — Europe’s biggest regeneration zone, with 39 development sites across 561 acres — will contain 20,000 homes as well as cultural, retail and business facilities. It is set to be completed by 2022. A £1.2 billion Northern Line Tube extension will create two new stations, Nine Elms and Battersea Power Station, to open in 2020.

Or if you prefer in in picture form, here is a part of it which is yet to come.

If you cycle through it as you now can you get an idea of the scale that somehow cycling past does not quite give, If we return to the economic consequences of this we see that the existing lack of affordability in central London combined with the surge in supply is something that can explain the recent price falls. It was always going to require quite an influx of wealthy people to populate the area and of course that would be in addition to the many who have arrived in recent times. A sort of “overshooting” I think in assuming that a trend would not end. If we wish to help the Guardian out we could suggest that the EU Referendum has probably deterred some although it does not actually make that case and curiously I have seen one or two bits of evidence that more in fact have arrived ahead of possible changes. So something along the lines of what happened with Hong Kong a couple of decades ago.

Looking wider

If we do we get something much more sober. Here is LSL Acadata which produced the report.

Prices in London fell again in January, down £4,662 or 0.8%, leaving average prices in the capital at £593,396. That’s down 2.6% annually, the biggest decline since August 2009.

So we have gone from the 15% click bait to a reality more like 2.6%, However as we have often discussed this is significant as the UK establishment pretty much lifted heaven and earth to stop a significant house price fall post credit crunch. I remember prices falling in my locale and wondering of those selling were making a wise decision and that buyers would regret it? Instead of course we got the UK establishment house price put option as interest-rates were cut to 0.5% where they remain, QE and when they were not enough more QE the Funding for Lending Scheme and then more QE as well as the Term Funding Scheme. The latter has now finished albeit a stock of £127 billion remains as we await the next move.

Before we move on there was another hint in the data that affordability is the main player here.

The cheaper boroughs have fared better. More than half have seen price rises over the year, led by 4.5% growth in Bexley, which, with an average price of £363,082, still has the cheapest property in the capital outside Barking and Dagenham (£300,627).

Up up and away

We get reminded that the UK is in fact a collection of different house markets which are connected but sometimes weakly.

That’s now led by 4.6% annual growth in the North West, one of four regions to see new peak prices in January (along with the East Midlands, the South West and Wales).
Just eight months ago, the region was trailing every other region bar one. Now, it’s seeing strong growth in every part of the market: at the bottom, Blackburn with Darwen has seen the biggest increase in prices in the country, up 16.4% annually. At the top, Warrington is also seeing double digit growth, with prices up 10.3%.


We find on today’s journey that the trends for UK house prices remain in place as we see substantial falls in the new developments in central London and helping make the average price fall there too. This means that the UK picture is according to LSL Acadata as shown below.

Including this February, we are now in the ninth month where the annual rate of house price growth has continued to slow. It now stands at 0.6% when including London and the South East, or at 2.5% when excluding these two regions.

This represents quite a change from the 9% of February 2016 and the change has mostly been seen in London. This particular series makes a lot of effort to be comprehensive but like all efforts has its challenges and estimations.

We have subsequently recalculated all our various house price series on the basis of the new weightings, which has had the effect of decreasing the average house price in December 2017 by £6,340.

So did the average house price from this series go above £300,000 or not? I will let you decide.

One consequence of the new weightings is that the average price of a home in England & Wales has fallen below the £300,000 threshold, which we reported as having been breached during 2017.

As we mull what is or is not Fake News there was this in the Evening Standard?

Millennials, criticised by baby boomers for buying avocado on toast instead of houses….

Meanwhile eyes turn to the Bank of England as we wonder how it will respond as house prices in London fall? Perhaps its Governor Mark Carney is already thinking that June 2019 cannot come fast enough.







The Bank of England is continuing its Forward Guidance crisis

Yesterday brought Bank of England policy into focus. Firstly there was something rather familiar as its Governor Mark Carney took his seat at the Treasury Select Committee. Yet again he spent quite some time trying to tell us that his August 2016 Bank Rate cut and £60 billion of QE in August 2016 was a success. Yet tucked away in it was this confession of forecasting failure.

Activity has, however, proved stronger than anticipated in August 2016.

Regular readers will recall that back in August 2016 I was pointing out that this was not only predictable but likely. From August 5th 2016.

On Wednesday I wrote that I would have voted for no further stimulus on two main grounds. Firstly the fall in the UK Pound £ at that point was broadly equivalent to a 2% reduction in Bank Rate. Secondly I feel that moves which are badged as stimulus have such side effects that the can easily turn out to be both deflationary for demand and inflationary for prices for the economy.

How might the fall in the UK Pound £ have boosted the UK economy? Well let us return to the Governors written evidence.

Whereas it usually drags on growth, net trade is currently
contributing substantially.

Governor Carney tries to cover this up but as you see only by confessing the Bank of England got the world economy wrong as well!

In part, that reflects a stronger global economy. The global economy began picking up, ultimately quite robustly. Global growth is now stronger, broader and healthier than it has been for some time.

Returning to August 5th 2016 there was this.

Also if we move to the Bank of England press conference there was one glaring bit as Bank of England Deputy Governor Broadbent told us that they were looking at sentiment measures and downgraded “hard data” such as GDP.

The sentiment measures ( Markit PMI) have seldom been so completely wrong and the Bank of England changed its reaction function at just the wrong time.

But my point is that the Bank of England is now “cherry-picking ” the data to confirm its pre-existing view.

It did this and got it wrong and confirmed my point about how easing policy could make things worse with this.

Overall, real wages are 3½% lower and consumption around 2% weaker than projected immediately before the referendum, in the May 2016 Report. ( Governor Carney )

By easing policy and contributing to an even lower Pound £ real wages were pushed lower. They would have fallen anyway but not by as much as expectations that are easy to forget now – and the Bank of England certainly will not be reminding us – that it was also promising even more easing in November 2016 including a rather bizarre 0.15% Bank Rate cut.  This was why the UK Pound £ fell below US $1.20 and fed inflation and the fall in real wages. Once some actual hard evidence on the UK economy emerged and revealed the scale of the Bank of England’s error the November policy easing became part of something of a handbrake turn and disappeared in a puff of smoke.

Oh and remember when the UK economy was going to be sucked lower by a fall in investment?

Business investment has been stronger than projected in August.

Perhaps if the Governor entered the real world a little more often as this does not seem much for an 18 month period.

I have made eight visits around the United Kingdom to hear from business leaders from a range of sectors on their perspectives on the economic outlook.

However as someone who has emailed him this week on the subject of inflation measurement I was pleased to read this bit.

In total the Bank has received and responded to almost 1000 letters to the Bank about monetary policy
from members of the public.


At first the Bank of England was in tune with the Governor’s written evidence. From the Guardian with Chief Economist Andy Haldane thinking he was on message.

A combination of the weaker pound, and a stronger global economy, has worked its magic.

That has meant that net trade has been a significant contributor, and expect those effects to continue over the next two or three years.

Depreciations work, and that’s how they work.

But then the Governor performed another U-Turn.

Depreciations don’t work. The have an economic effect, but they’re not a good economic strategy.

They may be an outcome of various things… but it’s how you make yourself poorer.

That was a fascinating intervention from a man who has regularly talked the UK Pound £ lower especially during the late summer of 2016 but sadly he does not get challenged or called out on this.

As for Chief Economist Haldane I do wonder what will happen next as already he keeps being sent to children;s schools and indeed has recently returned from the Orkneys? None of this coincides with his campaign to be the next Governor as the only place he could be sent to that are further away are Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands.

Bank Rate Rhetoric

We got something rather familiar.

Mark Carney said the U.K. is headed for higher interest rates, but policy makers are reluctant to give clearer guidance on the timing of any future increase. ( Bloomberg)

The reason he does not want to give clearer guidance is because of this from June 2014 when he pretty much guaranteed a Bank Rate rise.

could happen sooner than markets expect’

This was translated immediately by markets that a Bank Rate rise was on its way as any inspection of price changes shows. Central bank governors speak in a coded language and in that the message was clear. Sadly those who took the Governor at face value lost their dough and of course his next move was a cut not a raise. Those who had followed his record in Canada or indeed the shambles over trying to use the unemployment rate as an indicator – 6.5% anyone? – would have been more sanguine and cautious.


It might be time to pension off ( RPI indexed of course) the absent-minded professor.

BoE’s Broadbent: I Do Not See UK Asset Prices As Pumped Up By QE

A casual observer – say our Martian economist – might turn his/her mind from why we have put an electric car into orbit to how you can buy £435 billion of assets without changing the price? Especially if he/she reads Bank of England research.

Increasing asset prices, providing a ‘wealth effect’ to firms
and consumers as their assets increase in value, potentially
leading them to spend more.

Or more recently this signed off amongst others by Ben himself when he was voting for more of it in August 2016.

. It is also likely to trigger portfolio
rebalancing into riskier assets by current holders of government bonds,


There is much to consider right now as the Bank of England faces external and internal pressure. The external pressure was provided by the US Federal Reserve again last night. It seems set to continue its policy of doing what Governor Carney keeps promising which is gradual increases in the official interest-rate whilst he only cries wolf.

On the other side of the coin is the UK economy where the chance to reduce the inflation overshoot was not only missed but in fact the overshoot was exacerbated as I have explained above. Now there is the issue of UK growth which has been as suggested by Julian Jessop as pretty much steady as she goes.

After today’s revisions. UK growth in the six quarters since the EU referendum has averaged 0.45% q/q, compared to 0.5% in the six quarters before.

Ironically this takes us back to the Mansion House speech where if he thought this was overheating then he should have kept his word. Meanwhile those with doubts about his commitment to interest-rate rises might note this.

Capital & Counties Properties Plc lowered the value of a major west London housing project by about 12 percent as prices fell across the capital and the development faces political protests. It had written down the value of the Earls Court project by 20 percent a year earlier.

Although Bloomberg has an interesting view on Earl’s Court, does the journalist live there?

Land values in one of London’s swankiest districts are crashing.







Some in the UK have experienced higher and not lower interest-rates

Today has brought more news on a long running theme of this website. This is the way that ever easier monetary policy has made home ownership increasingly unaffordable for the young. Here is the Institute for Fiscal Studies on the subject and the emphasis is theirs.

Today’s young adults are significantly less likely to own a home at a given age than those born only five or ten years earlier. At the age of 27, those born in the late 1980s had a homeownership rate of 25%, compared with 33% for those born five years earlier (in the early 1980s) and 43% for those born ten years earlier (in the late 1970s).

So in generational terms this has gone 43%, 33% and now 25% with about as clear a trend as you could see. The driving force of this will be very familiar to regular readers but it seems that more than a few elsewhere need to be reminded of it.

The key reason for the decline is the sharp rise in house prices relative to incomes. Mean house prices were 152% higher in 2015–16 than in 1995–96 after adjusting for inflation. By contrast, the real net family incomes of those aged 25–34 grew by only 22% over the same twenty years. As a result, the average (median) ratio between the average house price in the region where a young adult lives and their annual net family income doubled from 4 to 8, with all of the increase occurring by 2007–08.

That is an odd ending to the paragraph because we know house price growth began again in the UK in 2013 and yet real wage growth has been to say the least thin on the ground. But we can at least agree with the broad sweep that compared to income the affordability of houses has halved.  It is also interesting to note that over the twenty year period looked at real family income growth was only 1% per annum. The IFS then goes on to give us more of a breakdown of its analysis.

This increase in house prices relative to family incomes fully explains the fall in homeownership for young adults. The likelihood of a young adult owning their own home given how their income compares with house prices in their region is little changed from twenty years ago. But in 2015–16 almost 90% of 25- to 34-year-olds faced average regional house prices of at least four times their income , compared with less than half twenty years earlier. At the same time, 38% faced a house-price-to-income ratio of over 10, compared with just 9% twenty years ago.

If we step back for a moment this is merely the other side of the coin from the “wealth effects”  otherwise known as higher house prices that the Bank of England has been so keen on. We have had Bank Rate cut to 0.5% and even 0.25% for a while, some £435 billion of Quantitative Easing and of course the Funding for Lending Scheme which the Bank of England felt cut mortgage rates by around 2%. So if we take away the spin the problems with house price affordability were a deliberate policy move by the Bank of England and I do sometimes wonder why millennials are not picketing Threadneedle Street.


I have some thoughts for you on the report by the Resolution Foundation on the scale of the problem here.

Standing at nearly £1.9 trillion, UK household debt remains a big issue.

We get quite a bit of analysis that tells us much of this is fine but a lot of care is needed here as you see that is a line straight out of the Bank of England which has an enormous vested interest here. This phrase gets us ready for another “surprise” at a later date.

appears to have been associated with borrowing by higher income households,

Also does anyone really believe this line?

And many of the credit market fundamentals look much improved relative to the pre-crisis period, with tighter lending criteria and closer monitoring of potentially unwelcome developments.

We are always told it is better until they can tell us that no more. But even such analysis cannot avoid this.

 Increases in the base rate will inevitably increase costs for many indebted households and have the potential to further increase the debt ‘distress’ faced by some.

We then get much more Bank of England inspired spin.

The base rate is expected to rise only gradually, and to remain well below past norms.

It has been telling us that such 2014 whereas Bank Rate is still 0.5% as they of course cut it after promising increases and then put it back. But you see the position is more complex than that as whilst some borrowing got cheaper for example the mortgage rates I was looking at above and some personal loans other bits of borrowing got more expensive. These days we have a proliferation of payday lenders and the like who are on our television screens plugging loans with annual interest rates of 50% or 60% at best and in some cases far higher. What difference would a Bank Rate of say 1.5% make here?

I noted some analysis on the United States which pointed out that for consumer debt Americans were paying higher interest-rates for a given official one which raised a wry smile as that was one of my earliest themes and may even be the first one albeit I was referring mostly to the UK. Let me explain what I mean as the UK average credit card interest rate was 15.67% on the first of January 2017 pre credit crunch ( Bank of England data). So after all the Bank Rate cuts and QE it has fallen to 17.95%. Oh! The overdraft rate has responded to all the official easing by going from 17.16% to 19.71%. Oh times two!

Putting it another way for the around 4% cut in official interest-rates up is yet again the new down as the borrowers above see a rise of around 2% in what they are paying. Is this yet another bank subsidy?

Also the Bank Rate cut and £60 billion QE about which Governor Carney frequently likes to boast reduced the credit card interest-rate by 0.03% briefly and raised the overdraft rate by 0.03%. I doubt anyone noticed.


One of the features of the credit crunch era is the way that we have been broken down into different groups. For example those with a mortgage have in general seen lower interest-rates as have personal loans but those with overdrafts or ongoing credit card debt have not and even worse have seen rises. Of course some with credit card debt have been able to take advantage of 0% deals but I notice that these seem to come with fees these days. So lots of different impacts on different groups which brings me to the impact of Bank of England policy. This is yet another example of where it has benefited some groups at the expense of others as some gain but others lose. There is also a more general point that is true everywhere I look is that “the precious” otherwise know as the banks have been able to raise their margins whilst the authorities look away.

If we shift to the asset side of the equation the Bank of England has benefitted those with them by the way it has boosted house prices. But the other side of the coin is seen by the falling levels of home ownership amongst the young as they ( and others) face inflation as they see higher house prices. Next in the equation comes that some will be helped by the “bank of mum and dad” be that by cash or inheritance. How much more of a mixed soup could this be? Yet the central planners continue to meddle and these days are so confused themselves that they come out with rubbish like there will be more interest rate rises than the ones we have promised but not delivered for the last four years.


What can we expect from the Bank of England in 2018?

Today we find out the results of the latest Bank of England policy meeting which seems set to be along the lines of Merry Christmas and see you in the new year. One area of possible change is to its status as the Old Lady  of Threadneedle Street a 200 year plus tradition. From City AM.

The Bank will use further consultations to remove “all gendered language” from rulebooks and forms used throughout the finance sector, a spokesperson said.

Perhaps it will divert attention from the problems keeping women in senior positions at the Bank as we have seen several cases of “woman overboard” in recent times some for incompetence ( a criteria that could be spread to my sex) but not so in the case of Kristin Forbes. There does seem to be an aversion to appointing British female economists as opposed to what might be called “internationalists” in the style of Governor Carney.

Moving onto interest-rates there is an area where the heat is indeed on at least in relative terms. From the US Federal Reserve last night.

In view of realized and expected labor market conditions and inflation, the Committee decided to raise the target range for the federal funds rate to 1-1/4 to 1‑1/2 percent. The stance of monetary policy remains accommodative

The crucial part is the last bit with its clear hint of more to come which was reinforced by Janet Yellen at the press conference. From the Wall Street Journal.

Even with today’s rate increase, she said the federal-funds rate remains somewhat below its neutral level. That neutral level is low but expected to rise and so more gradual rate hikes are likely going forward, she said.

The WSJ put the expectation like this.

At the same time, they expect inflation to hold steady, and they maintained their expectation of three interest-rate increases in 2018.

Actually if financial markets are any guide that may be it as the US Treasury Bond market looks as though it is looking for US short-term interest-rates rising to around 2%. For example the yield on the five-year Treasury Note is 2.14% and the ten-year is 2.38%.

But the underlying theme here is that the US is leaving the UK behind and if we look back in time we see that such a situation is unusual as we generally move if not in unison along the same path. What was particularly unusual was the August 2016 UK Bank Rate cut.

Inflation Targeting

What is especially unusual is that the Fed and the Bank of England are taking completely different views on inflation trends and indeed targeting. From the Fed.

 Inflation on a 12‑month basis is expected to remain somewhat below 2 percent in the near term but to stabilize around the Committee’s 2 percent objective over the medium term. Near-term risks to the economic outlook appear roughly balanced, but the Committee is monitoring inflation developments closely.

In spite of the fact that consumer inflation is below target they are raising interest-rates based on an expectation ( incorrect so far) that it will rise to their target and in truth because of the improved employment and economic growth situation. A bit of old fashioned taking away the punch bowl monetary policy if you like.

The Bank of England faces a different inflation scenario as we learnt on Tuesday. From Bloomberg.

The latest data mean Carney has to write to Chancellor of the Exchequer Philip Hammond explaining why inflation is more than 1 percentage point away from the official 2 percent target. The letter will be published alongside the BOE’s policy decision in February, rather than this week, as the Monetary Policy Committee has already started its meetings for its Dec. 14 announcement.

If you were a Martian who found a text book on monetary policy floating around you might reasonably expect the Bank of England to be in the middle of a series of interest-rates. Our gender neutral Martian would therefore be confused to note that as inflation expectations rose in the summer of 2016 it cut rather than raised Bank Rate. This was based on a different strategy highlighted by a Twitter exchange I had with former Bank of England policymaker David ( Danny) Blanchflower who assured me there was a “collapse in confidence”. To my point that in reality the economy carried on as before ( in fact the second part of 2016 was better than the first) he seemed to be claiming that the Bank Rate cut was both the fastest acting and most effective 0.25% interest-rate reduction in history. If only the previous 4% +  of Bank Rate cuts had been like that…….


Even Norway gets in on the act

For Norges bank earlier today.

On the whole, the changes in the outlook and the balance of risks imply a somewhat earlier increase in the key policy rate than projected in the September Report.

China is on the move as well as this from its central bank indicates.

On December 14, the People’s Bank of China launched the reverse repo and MLF operation rates slightly up 5 basis points.

I am slightly bemused that anyone thinks that a 0.05% change in official interest-rates will have any effect apart from imposing costs and signalling. Supposedly it is a response to the move from the US but it is some 0.2% short.

The UK economic situation

This continues to what we might call bumble along. In fact if the NIESR is any guide ( and it has been in good form) then we may see a nudge forwards.

Our monthly estimates of GDP suggest that output expanded by 0.5 per cent in the three months to November, similar to our estimate from last month.

The international outlook looks solid which should help too. This morning’s retail sales data suggested that the many reports of the demise of the UK consumer continue to be premature,

When compared with October 2017, the quantity bought in November 2017 increased by 1.1%, with household goods stores showing strong growth at 2.9%……..The year-on-year growth rate shows the quantity bought increased by 1.6%.

As ever care is needed especially as Black Friday was included in the November series but Cyber Monday was not. Although I note that there was yet another signal of the Bank of England’s inflation problem.

Total average store prices increased by 3.1% in November 2017 when compared with the same period last year, with price increases across all store types, in particular food stores had the largest price increase of 3.6% since September 2013.


The Bank of England finds itself in a similar position to the US Federal Reserve in one respect which is that it had two dissenters to its last interest-rate increase. The clear difference is that the Fed is in the middle of a series of rises whereas the Bank of England has so far not convinced on this front in spite of saying things like this. From the Daily Telegraph.

“We’ve said, given all the things we assume in our forecast, many of which will be misses – there are always unknown things and unpredictable things happening – but given our outlook currently, we anticipate we will need maybe a couple more rate rises, to get inflation back on track, while at the same time supporting the economy,” Ben Broadbent told the BBC’s Today programme.

I wonder if he even convinced himself. Also it is disappointing that we will not get the formal letter explaining the rise in inflation until February as it is not as if Governor Carney has been short of time.

So it seems we will only see action from the Bank of England next year if its hand is forced and on that basis I am pleased to see that Governor Carney plans to get about.

Me on Core Finance

Why does the Bank of England lack credibility these days?

As it is open season at the Bank of England in terms of media appearances and speeches even the absent-minded professor has been spotted. Actually these days he seems to be performing the role of Governor Carney’s messenger boy and as you can see below this was in evidence yesterday,

The effects of Brexit on inflation, and ultimately on the appropriate level of interest rates, are altogether more
uncertain and more complex. They’re certainly too complex to justify the simple assertion that Brexit necessarily implies low interest rates.

I am not sure what world Ben Broadbent lives in as of all the things Brexit might effect I would imagine low interest-rates was a long way down most people’s lists. Also as to the direction of travel well we were told before the referendum by Governor Carney that interest-rates were likely to rise should the vote be to leave.  Of course he then cut them!

But if we continue with what was supposed to be the theme of yesterday’s speech there was also this.

The MPC explained over a year ago that
there were “limits to the extent to which above-target inflation [could] be tolerated” and that those limits
depended on the degree of spare capacity in the economy. In March, eight months ago, it said in its
Monetary Policy Summary that, if demand growth remained resilient, “monetary policy may need to be
tightened sooner” than the market expected. Similar points were made in the intervening months.
Yet, even as inflation rose, and the rate of unemployment fell further, interest-rate markets continued to
under-weight the possibility that Bank Rate might actually go up this year.

This bit is significant because interest-rate markets are again saying “we don’t believe you” to the Bank of England. The clearest example of that is the two-year Gilt yield which at 0.48% is below the current Bank Rate let alone any possible increases. Even the five-year Gilt yield at 0.75% is only pricing in maybe one increase. Thus the message that further Bank Rate increases are on the cards has not convinced.

Mixed Messages

The problem with sending out an absent-minded professor to deliver a message is that they are likely to be, well, absent-minded!

I’m certainly not going to argue here that interest rates will inevitably rise as Brexit proceeds.

If we skip his apparent Brexit obsession that rather contradicts the message he was sent out to put over and later there was more.

However, my main point is that, given all the moving parts, even the marginal impact of EU withdrawal on the
appropriate level of UK interest rates is ambiguous

And more.

These pull in different directions: holding fixed the other two, weaker demand tends to
depress inflation and interest rates, declines in productivity and the exchange rate do the opposite. There
are feasible combinations of the three that might require looser policy, others that lead to tighter policy.

This is classic two handed economics as in one the one hand interest-rates might rise but on the other they might fall.

And more.

Predicting others’ predictions isn’t easy, and I don’t think the balance of risks to inflationary pressure, and
therefore future interest rates, is obvious.

The essential problem faced here is back to the credibility issue that Sir Jon Cunliffe was boasting about in his speech on Tuesday. You see markets have problems but are usually not stupid and they will see through this.

It won’t have escaped your attention that the MPC raised interest rates earlier this month. It did so, in part,
because of the referendum-related decline in sterling’s exchange rate. That has pushed up CPI inflation and
will continue to do for some time yet, as the rise in import costs is passed through to retail prices.

When the Bank of England raised Bank Rate the effective or trade-weighted index for the UK Pound £ was 78 but it had cut Bank Rate in August 2016 when it was 79! So if it raised Bank Rate in response to a one point fall why did it cut it in the face of the 9 point fall that has followed the EU leave vote? Best to leave our absent-minded professor in his land of confusion I think. The statement also ignores that fact that to defeat an inflationary push you need to get ahead of events not be some form of tail end charlie chasing them.

Back in August 2016 Ben Broadbent and his colleagues gambled and we lost.

The MPC eased policy in August 2016 not because of the referendum result but because of the steep fall in measures of business and consumer confidence that followed it.

So in terms of credibility I would say that in modern language they are in fact uncredible.

Retail Sales

These numbers remind us of why Ben Broadbent is so uncredible. You see after the EU Leave vote he decided to ignore signals that the Bank of England previously used and concentrate on business surveys. Markit reported this in July.

UK economy contracts at steepest pace since early-2009

Both they and Ben are probably desperately hoping that people will be absent minded about this as of course the UK economy in fact continued to grow. In particular we saw this happen towards the end of the year as we focus in on Retail Sales.

In October 2016, the quantity of goods bought (volume) in the retail industry was estimated to have increased by 7.4% compared with October 2015; all store types showed growth with the largest contribution coming from non-store retailing. This is the highest rate of growth since April 2002.

That is one of the biggest booms we have ever had and thank you ladies as it your enthusiasm for clothes and shoes shopping that helped give the numbers a push.

That perspective brings us to today’s numbers which reflected the boom last year.

The longer-term picture as shown by the year-on-year growth rate shows the quantity bought fell by 0.3% in comparison with a strong October 2016;

At this point a cursory glance might make you think that the numbers are badly and are in line with some of the surveys we have seen. Except if we look closer maybe not.

The underlying pattern in the retail industry in October 2017, as suggested by the three-month on three-month measure is one of growth, with the quantity bought increasing by 0.9%………The quantity bought in October 2017 increased by 0.3% compared with September 2017;

If you look at the series it was in fact September which was the weak month as was the opening of 2017 and October was a little better. Also we saw another possible confirmation of my argument that higher inflation leads to weaker volumes.

The main contribution to the overall year-on-year decrease of 0.3% in the quantity bought in retail sales came from food stores, providing a negative contribution of 0.9 percentage points;

The inflation data on Tuesday signalled higher food inflation ( 4.2%) and it may well be more than a coincidence that we are seeing lower volumes. Rather curiously the strong point in October was this.

in particular second-hand goods stores (charity shops, auction houses, antiques and fine art dealers) provided the largest contribution to this growth.


A theme of my work over the past year and a half or so is to be sanguine about the impact of an EU Leave vote. Yes there are impacts due to higher inflation reducing real wage growth but the economy has in fact grown fairly steadily albeit at no great pace. Regular readers will recall that I pointed out that UK economic history showed that a lower Pound £ has a powerful impact. Ironically that is only partly shown by the trade figures where you might expect to see it first but we do seem to have seen it elsewhere. As to the statistics we receive well they can be solved by a stroke of the pen apparently.

Having carried out an assessment on the additional information, ONS has determined that if the
proposed regulations come into force as proposed then local authority and central government influence
in combination with the existence of nomination agreements would not constitute public sector control,
and English PRPs would be reclassified as Private Non-Financial Corporations (S.11002).

About £60 billion I think and it looks a little like a merry-go-round as they put the national debt up and then change their minds.

Meanwhile I expect the speeches from the Bank of England to get ever more complex so that they paper over the issue that they have got the basic wrong. Let me add one more problem to the list by pointing out something it tries to look away from, here are some wealth effects from what is a fair bit of the QE era.



How the Bank of England eased monetary policy yesterday

Yesterday something happened which is rather rare a bit like finding a native red squirrel in the UK. What took place was that part of the Forward Guidance of the Bank of England came true.

At its meeting ending on 1 November 2017, the
MPC voted by a majority of 7-2 to increase Bank Rate by 0.25 percentage points, to 0.5%.

Not really the “sooner than markets expect” of June 2014 was it? Also of course it was only taking Bank Rate back to the 0.5% of them. Or as it was rather amusingly put in the comments section yesterday the Bank of England moved from a “panic” level of interest-rates to a mere “emergency” one!


It was not that two Monetary Policy Committee members voted against the rise that was a problem because as I pointed out on Wednesday they had signalled that. It was instead this.

All members agree that any future increases in Bank Rate would be expected to be at a gradual pace and to a limited extent.

In itself it is fairly standard central bank speak but what was missing was an additional bit saying something along the lines of “interest-rates may rise more than markets expect”. Actually it would have been an easy and cheap thing to say as expectations were so low. This immediately unsettled markets as everyone waited the 30 minutes until the Inflation Report press conference began. Then Governor Carney dropped this bombshell.

Current market yields, which are used to condition our forecasts, incorporate two further 25 basis point increases over the next three years. That gently rising path is consistent with inflation falling back over the next year and approaching the target by the end of the forecast

This was a disappointment to those who had expected a series of interest-rate rises along the lines of those from the US Federal Reserve. Some may have wondered how a man who plans to depart in June 2019 could be making promises out to 2021! Was this in reality “one and done”?

Added to this was the concentration on Brexit.

Brexit remains the biggest determinant of that outlook. The decision to leave the European Union is already having a noticeable impact.

The latter sentence is true with respect to inflation for example but like when he incorrectly predicted a possible recession should the UK vote leave the Governor seems unable to split his own personal views from his professional  role. This gets particularly uncomfortable here.

And Brexit-related constraints on investment and labour supply appear to be reinforcing the marked slowdown that has been evident in recent years in the rate at which the economy can grow without generating inflationary pressures.

The new “speed limit” for the UK economy of 1.5% per annum GDP growth comes from exactly the same Ivory Tower which told us a 7% unemployment rate was significant which speaks for itself! Or that wage increases are just around the corner every year. In a way the fact that the equilibrium unemployment rate is now 4.5% shows how wrong they have been.

The UK Pound

The exchange-rate of the UK Pound £ had been slipping before the announcement. As to whether this was an “early wire” from the long delay between the vote and the announcement or just profit-taking is hard to say. What we can say is that the Pound £ dropped like a stone immediately after the announcement to just over US $1.31 and towards 1.12 versus the Euro. Later after receiving further confirmation from the Inflation Report press conference it fell to below US $1.306 and to below Euro 1.12.

If we switch to the trade-weighted or effective index we see that it fell from the previous days fixing of 77.76 to 76.44. If we use the old Bank of England rule of thumb that is equivalent to a Bank Rate reduction of around 1/3 rd of a percent.

UK Gilt yields

You might think that these would rise in response to a Bank Rate change but this turned out not to be so. The cause was the same as the falling Pound £ which was that markets had begun to price in a series of increases and were now retreating from that. Let us start with the benchmark ten-year yield which fell from 1.36% to 1.26% and is now 1.24%. Next we need to look at the five-year yield because that is often a signal for fixed-rate mortgages, It fell from 0.83% to 0.71% on the news.

The latter development raised a smile as I wondered if someone might cut their fixed-rate mortgages?! This would be awkward for a media presenting mortgage holders as losers. This applies to those on variable rates but for newer mortgages the clear trend has been towards fixed-rates.

But again the conclusion is that post the decision the fall in UK Gilt yields eased monetary policy which is especially curious when you note how low they were in the first place.

This morning

Deputy Governor Broadbent was sent out on the Today programme on BBC Radio 4 to try to undo some of the damage.

BoE’s Broadbent: Anticipate We May Need A Couple More Rate Rises To Get Inflation Back On Track – BBC Radio 4 ( h/t @LiveSquawk )

The trouble is that if you send out someone who not only looks like but behaves like an absent-minded professor the message can get confused. From Reuters.

The Bank of England’s signal that it may need to raise interest rates two more times to get inflation back toward the central bank’s target is not a promise, Bank of England Deputy Governor Ben Broadbent said on Friday.

Then matters deteriorated further as “absent-minded” Ben claimed that Governor Carney had not said that a Brexit vote could lead to a recession before the vote and was corrected by the presenter Mishal Husain. I do not want to personalise on Ben but as there have been loads of issues to say the least about Deputy Governors in the recent era from misrepresentations to incompetence what can one reasonably expect for a remuneration package of around £360,000 per annum these days?

Here is a thought for the Bank of England to help it with its “woman overboard” problems. The questioning of Mishal Husain was intelligent and she seemed to be aware of economic developments which puts her ahead of many who have been appointed……


There is a lot to consider here as we see that the Bank Rate rise fitted oddly at best with the downbeat pessimism of Governor Carney and the Bank of England. Actually in many ways  the pessimism fitted oddly with the previous stated claim that a Bank Rate rise was justified because the economy had shown signs of improvement. On that road the monetary score is +0.25% for the Bank Rate rise then -0.33% for the currency impact and an extra minus bit for the lower Gilt yields leaving us on the day with easier monetary policy than when the day began.

Today saw another problem for the Bank of England as some good news for the UK economy emerged from the Markit ( PMI) business surveys.

The data point to the economy growing at a
quarterly rate of 0.5%, representing an
encouragingly solid start to the fourth quarter.

How about simply saying the economy has shown strengthening signs recently and inflation is above target so we raised interest-rates? Then you keep mostly quiet about your personal views on the EU leave vote on whichever side they take and avoid predictions about future interest-rates like the Bank of England used to do. Indeed if you have an Ivory Tower which has been incredibly error prone you would tell it to keep its latest view in what in modern terms would be called beta until it has some backing.

Oh and as to the claimed evidence that private-sector wages are picking up well the official August data at 2.4% does not say that and here is a song from Earth Wind and Fire which covers the Bank of England’s record in this area.

Take a ride in the sky
On our ship, fantasize
All your dreams will come true right away

What will the Bank of England be considering today?

Later on today the Bank of England will be considering and voting on something it has not done for more than a decade. Let me take you back to July 2007 when it told us this.

The Governor invited the Committee to vote on the proposition that Bank Rate should be increased by 25 basis points to 5.75%. Six members of the Committee (the Governor, John Gieve, Kate Barker, Tim Besley, Andrew Sentance and Paul Tucker) voted in favour of the proposition. Rachel Lomax, Charles Bean and David Blanchflower voted against, preferring to maintain Bank Rate at 5.5%.

The idea of interest-rates being at 5.5% let alone 5.75% seems from a universe “far,far away” doesn’t it? Also if the public pronouncements of the current Monetary Policy Committee or MPC are any guide there is likely to be a split vote this time around. It is not that MPC members have not individually voted for rises as for example Ian McCafferty has had two phases of it before the current one it is the lack of company they have received. Perhaps most telling in the recent era is that the current Governor Mark Carney has yet to cast a single vote for a Bank Rate rise in spite of 2 clear periods before now ( in 2014 and 2015/16) when he has clearly hinted at delivering one.

Some are completely convinced as this from Reuters suggests.

Britain’s National Institute of Economic and Social Research said it expects the Bank of England to start a sustained rate-tightening cycle on Thursday, which will lead to interest rates peaking at 2 percent in 2021.


There is something of a myth that the Bank of England simply targets 2% per annum inflation when this days it is not that simple. There has been some meddling in its remit particularly by the previous Chancellor George Osborne such that it now considers it to be this.

The Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) sets monetary policy to meet the 2% inflation target,
and in a way that helps to sustain growth and employment.

The “and” is misleading as the two objectives can be contradictory. That was seen as recently as August 2016 when the Bank of England cut Bank Rate to 0.25% and undertook its Sledgehammer of QE. This was supposed to boost the economy but anticipation of it ( as it was well leaked) meant that the UK Pound fell further than otherwise raising imported inflation. So the current inflation issue where the official measure is at 3% is awkward to say the least because it is a consequence of past Bank of England action. A nudge higher to 3.1% would be even more awkward as Governor Carney would have to write a letter to the Chancellor explaining how he was going to reduce something he had helped push up!

Also current inflation is not really something the MPC can do much about now as it takes time for any policy move to have an impact and this usually takes between 18 months and two years to fully work. If we look ahead then the MPC itself thinks that domestically generated inflation is not a big problem or at least it did in August.

Wage Inflation

This deserves a heading of its own as it comes part of domestic inflation ( via labour costs) but is also a target variable itself. Back in August the Bank of England picked out wage inflation as something it expected to rise. However like all its other Forward Guidance on this issue it has been wrong so far as wages have progressed on a pretty similar trajectory and not as it suggested.

We have a relatively tight job market and we do think that wages are going to begin to firm. We’re seeing, and one doesn’t want to over-interpret, but certainly on a survey
basis and some very recent data, some elements of that firming.

Imported Inflation

If we look for the level of the Pound £ last August we see that it has not changed much against the US Dollar although care is needed as it fell after the Bank of England meeting as some felt it had hinted at an interest-rate rise then. One different factor is the price of crude oil as depending on its exact level when you read this it is a bit over nine US Dollars higher than then. So a little push higher in the inflationary chain although the effect of the 2016 fall in the Pound will begin to wash out in a few months.

So the two main issues are whether you think the price of oil can go much higher? Party time for the producers and the shale oil wildcatters if it can. Also what you think about the UK Pound’s prospects after its 2016 drop?


This is another of the target areas these days but whilst it has been a happy record for UK workers it has been a woeful one for the Bank of England in the era of Forward Guidance. We can argue now about how much importance it put on an unemployment rate of 7% back in 2013. But what is not in dispute is the fact that it was rescinded at express pace and the “threshold” has gone 6.5%,6%,5.5% and now 4.5%. With the unemployment rate now 4.3% with record employment and no sign of wage pressure the last number may soon be due a demotion as well giving the MPC a rather full recycling bin.


There are two ways of looking at this. The first is to say that the current expansion is getting rather mature. Or as the Office for National Statistics puts it.

Following growth of 0.4% in Quarter 3 2017, GDP has grown for 19 consecutive quarters.

So you could say that it is past time to ease the monetary stimulus although of course that would have people looking over your shoulder to August 2016! The other way of looking at it is more awkward as having cut Bank Rate when GDP growth was of the order of 0.6/7% a rise now would be doing so when it is 0.3/4%. Ooops!


If we look at this as the Bank of England is likely too then there are various issues for it. We see that it can do very little about the current inflationary episode and that its claims of seeing higher wage growth after so many mistakes may bring laughter even at what is often a supine media at the press conference ( after all they want to be able to get in an early question….). It will be doing so at a level of economic growth that has often made it cut not raise interest-rates. If we look at the unsecured credit growth issue that I analysed on Monday the problem is that it has been at the same growth rate for a while and the Bank of England lit the blue touch-paper for it in August 2016,

Thus if it does raise Bank Rate it is likely to involve a downbeat assessment of productivity and the supply side of the UK economy. This will then allow it to continue its post EU leave vote pessimism and attempt to dodge the obvious timing problem. The catch is that its theoretical efforts in this area have had about as much success as Chelsea’s defence last night.

As for my views the first bit is easy yes Bank Rate should be 0.5% as part of an effort to take it higher, the catch is in the timing as this inflationary episode is past us in monetary policy terms. But as we can see from the current level of the UK Pound ( US $1.33 and Euro 1.14) it can help going forwards. The market is settled it will happen but I expect some to vote against as intriguingly two inside members ( Cunliffe and Ramsden) have hinted they will and of course Silvana Tenreyro was reported as saying this by Reuters only last month.

New Bank of England rate-setter Silvana Tenreyro said she was not ready to vote to raise the Bank’s record low interest rates in November although she might do so in the coming months if inflation pressure builds in Britain’s labour market.

Could the “unreliable boyfriend” emerge again or will it be a case of one and done like in Canada under Governor Carney? ( correction as Andrew Baldwin points out in the comments rates were raised to 1%).

Oh and as a reminder take care from late this afternoon as that is when the MPC actually vote. The delay between this and the announcement which was introduced by Governor Carney is something that can only go wrong ( i.e leak) in my opinion.