1) It's terribly fashionable in central banking to be seen to be green. This is a red flag for me because this isn't the role of central banks
2) Hauser at no stage attempts to quantify the effect of BoE bond buying on the environment. Let's be clear, he would if he could. So, it's irrelevant to the issue
3) The BoE has resorted to the use of rubbish infographics - it always does this when it's got nothing to say
4) There's not a strong argument to suggest that the ownership of bonds makes much of a difference to environmental outcomes and could go in multiple directions - as Hauser acknowledges when rejecting a mass sale of dirty assets
5) Even though the BoE is desperate for favourable coverage for its "green agenda" it still, deep down, understands the day job in owning bonds is the management of demand - again this makes any of its actions peripheral
Finally - peripheral actions cut no ice with the climate. To get to net zero we need huge changes in electricity production, transport, domestic heating and to ensure we don't import carbon emissions if we stop producing them here....
All this bond buying stuff is a sideshow
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
BoE upgraded forecasts disguise a much more gloomy assessment for economy - the central bank revised down the growth forecast for future quarters, only increasing the assessment of the past ft.com/content/1e328f… via @financialtimes
@FinancialTimes Safe to say this was not the impression given by governor Andrew Bailey last week or the message received by him, but these are the forecast changes
They lend weight to Andy Haldane's argument that growth might well be stronger
@FinancialTimes Certainly, spending growth has not been slowing down because growth was better than feared in the third lockdown
The US really wants to make its global minimum corporate tax plan work and has just made a big concession to other countries in a bid to sue for peace internationally on.ft.com/3cVVWgS
If others roll back their digital taxes, US has recognised for the first time they should have the right to a slice of revenues from the likes of Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon etc based on sales in their jurisdictions
The suggestion is that apportionment rules should apply to all the sales on just the largest and most profitable multinationals globally. The results would be similar to those proposed by the OECD, but without specifically targeting digital companies (although they all be caught)
The chart shows the moving parts
- oil (worth next to nothing now)
- worsening Scottish revenues
- no longer any U.K. fiscal consolidation planned, so Scotland can’t assume the U.K. will do it’s fiscal dirty work for it any more
2/
Since the SNP commissioned 2018 sustainable growth commission, the fiscal gap needed to be filled has doubled from 2.9% of GDP to 5.7%
Note: this uses all of the SNP’s standard assumptions, which would be challenged by London in independence negotiations
3/
Sunak now faces pressure to lower tax on the Red Wall northern seats because they say they are unfairly treated on tax, paying too much and on spending, not getting the transport spending of London
Eg Miriam Cates, new Tory MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge
2/
There are now loads of funds for levelling up
- the towns fund
- the levelling up fund
- the shared prosperity fund
- changes to the green book for investment
You’d have thought that London and the South East had been partying on the backs of northern tax revenue
3/
There is a vaccine effect now in the UK, but it is dwarfed by the lockdown effect
- With case numbers still high, suggests a need for caution
- but a delicate balance on opening up because the virus and lockowns hurt