Banner

Newsnet Main Articles

By Martin Kelly
 
The UK’s already weak economy is deteriorating according to a leading Business analyst as latest figures show that the trade gap has widened to its worst for seven years.
 
The latest official figures show that the UK total-goods trade deficit grew to £10.1 billion in April, up from £8.7 billion in March.

Exports fell by 8.6%, of which 6.2% was to other European nations - an indication of the effect concerns in the eurozone may be having on the UK.  The services sector showed a surplus of £5.7 billion, which brought the overall deficit down to £4.4 billion.

Peter Dixon, from Commerzbank, said: "I think if you look at where we are now... it does imply we're on a deteriorating trend.

"It suggests that yet again the eurozone crisis is beginning to have a bigger drag on exports and as a consequence a bigger drag on Q2 GDP [second quarter gross domestic product] numbers.  Along with the extra public holiday, it doesn't bode well."

There are now fears that the UK economy, already in a double dip recession, will contract further.

Howard Archer, chief European and UK economist at IHS Global Insight, said: "With the trade deficit widening in April and construction output again disappointing, the chances of the economy avoiding further contraction in the second quarter are dwindling."

The UK economy officially entered a double dip recession in April after the second successive quarter showed negative growth.  The 0.3% contraction was driven by a 13% fall in the construction sector.

Responding to the news, Scottish Building Federation chief executive Michael Levack said: “If the UK government is serious about rebuilding economic confidence and ending continuing job losses in the construction sector, it needs to change course and start investing in the infrastructure the sector and the economy as a whole so desperately need.”

The disappointing trade figures followed moves by Chancellor George Osborne to try to tackle the failing economy through a bank lending scheme.

Announced on Thursday, the “funding for lending” scheme will see the Treasury give more money to Banks on the condition they lend it to businesses.

Whilst welcoming the initiative, SNP Treasury spokesperson Stewart Hosie said it was not enough and again called for funding for Scotland’s 30 ‘shovel ready’ projects.

Mr Hosie said:

“The lack of bank lending remains a huge concern for businesses up and down the country, so measures to increase the flow of credit are welcome.  However it’s crucial to ensure the cash being released in these new schemes actually hits the targets and flows to the businesses that need it most.

“There is little evidence to suggest this emergency scheme on its own is enough to get the economy moving.  It’s time for a change of course from the UK Government, with a programme of capital investment in infrastructure to boost jobs and growth.

“The Eurozone crisis is a challenge for all of us - but it’s not an excuse for the UK Government’s own failed economic policies.  The double-dip recession is a direct result of a fall in output in the construction industry - at a time when the Scottish Government has consistently called for capital investment in 'shovel-ready' projects.

“We also need action on the high cost of fuel which is hammering businesses and families across the UK.   The Chancellor should get behind the cross-party campaign led by the SNP and scrap the 3 pence fuel duty hike planned for August.”

Comments  

 
# Big Eye 2012-06-16 08:36
I am concerned that the £120 billion the Chancellor has given the banks is another attempt to shore up the Banks rather than other businesses.

Many expect a real crisis with the Euro next week or shortly thereafter. The chances of a Greek default must be very high and with Spain's banks in trouble and British banks looking at huge potential losses Osborne has given them a huge amount of money under the guise that it will be used to lend to businesses.

No doubt his thinking is that it is better to give them money now under this guise than have to justify to the UK PUBLIIC another bank bailout when people are still infuriated about how their ridiculous bonus culture survived the last crisis.
 
 
# davemsc 2012-06-16 12:40
He doesn't have a clue what he is doing other than lining the pockets of the Tories' major donors. Remember they get 51% of their funding from the City.
 
 
# UpSpake 2012-06-16 12:14
Big Eye. Simply by 'giving' the Banks more money as opposed to calling it QE it will still have the same effect as QE. The bonus culture will still continue as the banks will be 'awash' with liquidity but it will not leak out to those who need it, the SME's. If, for face saving purposes they state that they have been lending to businesses, they might be as hard pressed to name those businesses that have been 'helped' as it was to defend last time that businesses were not seeking capital.
They were and were desperate for it but at what cost ?. Punitive interest rates are a leaden weight round the necks of business when overall activity is down, VAT stays stuck at the absurd level of 20% and petrol, the liquid that makes the economy run, at prohibitive prices.
This initiative will not work but then again, it's coming from a Chancellor no more qualified for the job than his previous encumbents ?.
 
 
# balgayboy 2012-06-16 13:12
The cold light of day is dawning on the UK economy, if the Eurozone falls the UK will collapse no doubt. The UK government know this and are trying to prepare the UK public by pretending that they have done what they can to protect the UK economy, unfortunately this QE will not be enough to save the GBP and it's economy. It has more debt than most of the PIIGS and will be thrown to to vultures with no respite. Only a Independent Scotland will be able to escape this impending economic disaster. Vote yes in 2014
 
 
# chicmac 2012-06-16 17:38
At the risk of sounding like a broken record.

The banks are not fit for purpose and have not been since the relaxation of regulations.

What is required is a National Enterprise Board consisting of the proper expertise to fund grants for start-ups and loans for expansions in a strategic and cohesive manner.

That is what taxpayer's money should be put into, to rebuild a genuine wealth creating capability in the UK.
 
 
# carpe diem 2012-06-16 17:52
Scotland does not have a deficit it has a Five Billion surplus see bit.ly/LX1Knk
 
 
# oldnat 2012-06-16 17:59
HMRC also analyse exports and imports of goods (NB not including services such as finance) by the nations and regions of the UK.

In Quarter 1 of 2012, "the balance of payments" for goods were as follows -

£+1530.5bn : Wales
£+1220.7bn : NE Eng
£+589.2bn : Scotland
£+102.7bn : NW Eng
£+18.2bn : East Midlands
£+11.8bn : Northern Ireland
£-289.7bn : Yorkshire and the Humber
£-1086.5bn : SW Eng
£-2839.2bn : West Midlands
£-5603.1bn : East Eng
£-9519.3bn : London
£-9665.6bn : SE Eng
 
 
# xyz 2012-06-16 19:01
Does this include oil?

I doubt it somehow . but which region is attributed the oil revenues? .. or is it that mythical land of no country, the UK continental shelf
 
 
# ubinworryinmasheep 2012-06-16 19:10
Oldnat ..can you explain those figures a bit more for us 'thickos' on here. Ok I'm assuming I'm not the only one with the 'us' bit.
 
 
# oldnat 2012-06-16 19:38
The figures are only "goods" - not tax revenues of any kind, or services like finance.

Ex Regio is not included!

They don't include trade in goods between different nations/regions of the UK - just import and export of "goods" between the nation/region and countries outwith the UK.

The sab-categories are

0 - Food & live animals
1 - Beverages & tobacco
2 - Crude materials, inedible, except fuels
3 - Mineral fuels, lubricants & related materials
4 - Animal & vegetable oils, fats & waxes
5 - Chemicals & related products
6 - Manufactured goods classified chiefly by material
7 - Machinery & transport equipment
8 - Miscellaneous manufactured articles
9 – Other commodities

flyingscotsman (below)

London and SE England are massively reliant on the City of London, related finacial business, and HQing companies who produce goods elsewhere in the country, or abroad.


ubinworryinmash eep (below)

No. The numbers represent the difference between goods sold abroad and goods imported from abroad. Scotland exported £4,102,904 million worth of goods, and imported £3,513,709 million worth of goods. London exported £8,563,743 million worth of goods and imported £18,083,085 million worth of goods.
 
 
# ubinworryinmasheep 2012-06-16 20:24
So the + figure relates to selling goods and the - buying ?
 
 
# flyingscotsman 2012-06-16 19:39
Negative figures are generally bad. It looks like to me that the southern half of England have taken out far more debt that the rest of us, while we have managed our resources and economy far better and have not taken risks with our income. The south rely heavily on imports and that any lack of payment of debts means lots of interest to pay back.

No wonder they dont want to get rid of us...
 
 
# UpSpake 2012-06-16 19:06
Chimac. That was the purpose of the Scottish Investment Bank that I proposed to Swinney way back in 2000. Nothing much more was heard of it till it popped up in a party political broadcast last Spring ahead of the May elections.
Swinney didn't acknowledge my idea and I did not provide him with details on modus as he didn't have the courtesy to reply. Now we find it 'parked' within Scottish Enterprise, a quango, doing nothing and not what it was originally proposed for.
This is the problem with the SNP, somewhat devoid of ideas and when they see something they grab it as their own. Pity they didn't have enough humility to ask how the whole thing worked.
They didn't, but the SDA did !.
 
 
# chicmac 2012-06-16 20:01
TBF the Scottish Government, even an SNP one, do not have the means to execute such a policy and won't have till independence.

My idea has always to have an inbuilt Keynsian re-balance mechanism whereby by means of a variable Wealth Generation Tax and Free Market based NEB, inflation can be attacked simultaneously by reducing money supply and increasing wealth generation. This has the effect of bringing inflation under control much more rapidly than by simply using the traditional brutal control of reducing money supply alone where there is a commensurate reduction in supply of wealth and an increase in unemployment.

By attacking inflation by reducing money supply but also increasing supply of wealth high unemployment is avoided and average wealth actually increases.

Of course such measures tend to reduce profit, which is why there needs to be several mechanisms to ensure free market competition remains the arbiter of success in the internal market.

I won't itemise these measures here just now, but they would guarantee increased competitiveness both internally and externally in the most stable fashion while generating the fastest increase in average wealth.
 
 
# Cattanach69 2012-06-16 19:30
This cant be right? I thought we were all stronger together? Ho hum!
 
 
# MyNameIsMud 2012-06-16 22:24
Would I be correct in thinking that, as far as the the trade gap goes, currently oil and related products pretty much amount to a massive 'neutral' for the UK? (depending on how 'self sufficient' the UK is with oil)
On independance, as well as the bulk of the oil tax revenue being collected by Scotland, Scotland will be exporting much of the actual product, and England will have to import most of theirs.
This would obviously have quite an effect on eachs 'balance of payments', how would this affect our economies?
 
 
# Edulis 2012-06-16 23:25
Despite all the doom and gloom about the future UK economy, the Telegraph is saying that Hammond is about to announce a £350 million contract to develop new nuclear reactors for the replacement Trident fleet, throwing the LibDems into a spin. Of course none of the work will come to Scotland since it is Rolls Royce Derby and BAE at Barrow who will secure the contract. Lord Dannat, former Head of the Army is saying it is a very fine balance as to whether we should replace Trident which is diplomatic speak for saying it is not where he would put the Defence resources.
 
 
# Ard Righ 2012-06-16 23:40
We do not need more construction. This is a myth. Look at the profusion of derelict buildings, empty buildings and glut of property generally available everywhere.
Supply and demand etc,etc.


The problem is the monetary system and the banks abusing our money. Declare interest illegal.
 
 
# oldnat 2012-06-16 23:47
Personally, I'd prefer not to try crossing the Forth on a derelict factory from Greenock, or travel up the A9 via the site of the old Glengarnock Steelworks.

Of course, that's just my personal preference.
 
 
# ttwapies 2012-06-17 02:58
Of course we need direct government investment to stimulate the economy. Otherwise we are heading for a very nasty depression (possibly the hidden agenda). However, the way such investment is currently enabled, ensures it is the private banks which profit at the expense of the tax payer.

Do not look to our politicians for answers though, as they are merely puppets of finance capital. As most of us are aware, the only posative effect of QE has been on the bottom lines of the banks that created the mess in the first place.

Take Greece for example, where we are repeatedly told the crises is due to the lazy, profligate, tax-dodging Greeks. However, this racist mis-reporting of the issue obscures the fact that approximately 80% of Greek debt was caused through speculative trading by banks. It also obscures the fact that approximately 80% of all bail-out money recieved by Greece, is immediately re-directed to German, French and UK banks to ease their exposure to the toxiac assests they were left holding. More fundamentaly though, it obscures the fact that Germany alone, has consistently kept its long-term interest rate at approximately half the level committed to through the Maastricht Treaty. As a result, German manufactures have had an unfair competitive advantage, especially against smaller European economies.

Why is the media obscuring the facts? Well it might be that it is largely bank owned or state controlled.

Will it be possible to bail-out all of the toxic debt, which is now estimated to be around $400 trillion globaly? The simple answer is NO. If you spent $1m to celibrate the birth of Christ, and then spend $1m every day since than until the present, you would still not have spent $1 trillion.

As continued QE and "Austrian School" austerity seem to been the only solutions being offered by the politicians, what might the results be and who will benefit? History professor at Georgetown University, mentor to US President Bill Clinton and archivist for the Council on Foreign Relations might have the answer.

Writting in his 1966 book "Tradgedy and Hope, Prof. Quigley tells us that the vast estate of Cecil Rhodes was not left to his heirs, bit instead funded the creation of "...a secret society, which was to devote itself to the preservation and expansion of the British empire". This Quigley called the "Anglo-American establishment", which fronted its programme through the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, and the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. This itself "was a front for J.P Morgan & Co.". Further, Prof. Quigley states;

"There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an internationl Anglofile network which opperates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act..."

"...in fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so..."

"...I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two yeas, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records..."

"...I have no aversion to it or most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and many of its instruments..."

"...The powers of international capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than the creation of a world system of financial control in private hands, able to dominate the political system of each contry and the economy of the world as a whole..."

"...This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences..."

"...The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks, which themselves are private corporations..."

"... Each central bank sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians..."

So with the UK apparently positioning itself to be last man standing,
is this the true purpose of the European Stability Mechanism and the Financial Stability Board, which operates out of the Bank for International Settlements?
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments