View more on these topics

Interest rates after the inflation figures and MPC minutes

Following yesterday’s publication of the disappointing March inflation figures, with the year-on-year Consumer Prices Index up from 3% to 3.4%, and the Retail Prices Index up to 4.4%, today the Monetary Policy Committee’s April meeting minutes and the latest unemployment figures were published.

On Friday we will get the Office for National Statistics’ first estimate of the first quarter gross domestic product.

Unemployment in the UK rose 43,000 in the three months to February to 2.5 million, the highest for 16 years and pushing the unemployment rate up to 8% of the workforce, the highest since 1996.

One positive spin which could be put on these figures is that at least our 8% unemployment rate is less bad than the 9.7% in the US and 10% in the Eurozone. However, this doesn’t alter the fact that these figures reaffirm the truism that all Labour governments have left office with unemployment higher than when they came in.

The increase in CPI, although it is still 0.1% lower than the January figure, has generated some comments on the likelihood that Bank of England base rate will start increasing earlier than previously expected.

The MPC minutes helped fuel this with a note that some members of the committee were concerned about a change in the balance of risks to inflation. However the vote was 9-0 for no change in Bank rate or the quantitative easing programme and of course when the MPC does decide it is time to tighten monetary policy it can do so either by increasing Bank rate or selling some of the £200bn of assets, mainly gilts, it bought in the QE programme, or maybe a combination of both.

The increase in CPI was mainly due to increased petrol/diesel prices, air fares and household gas bills, with transport costs now up 11.3% on the year. Sterling oil prices have increased by 20% in the last two months and following the flight disruption airlines will be able to charge premium prices in the short-term, which may well mean another increase in the air fares figure for the April CPI. Oil prices are notoriously difficult to forecast and so this makes forecasting CPI challenging.

“There are still many risks to the economy and the balance of risks still suggests Bank rate will need to remain very low for quite some time.”

Ray Boulger

Senior technical manager at John Charcol

I think the MPC will want to see what the new government’s tax policies are before making any change in Bank rate because an increase in taxation has a similar impact on the economy to an increase in Bank rate, as both reduce people’s spending power. Likewise a reduction in public spending reduces economic activity and so the more taxes are increased and/or public spending cut there less need there is for interest rates to increase to achieve the same objective.

This of course assumes the new government avoids handing control of our destiny to the markets and the International Monetary Fund, not only by making its game plan clear quickly but also producing a budget which satisfies the markets that it will be fiscally responsible.

There are still many risks to the economy and the balance of risks still suggests Bank rate will need to remain very low for quite some time. However, there is a stronger argument now than there has been for about nine months for buying a five-year fixed rate deal on the basis that the best five-year fixed rates have come down almost to the levels available a year ago.

There is also increased political and other uncertainty, specifically with inflation persisting at a higher level than the MPC expected, although it still expects the rate to fall later this year. The risk of a hung parliament is clearly greater than it was a week ago and with it the risk that Vince Cable might become chancellor, something my City contacts tell me would be perceived very negatively.

A two-year fixed rate deal on the other hand in many respects offers the worst of all worlds. If Bank rate stays low for at least two years a tracker will work out cheaper and if interest rates rise one may pay a little less over the two years but will then probably only be able to get another fixed rate at a significantly higher level in two years time.

Recommended

Good relationship I had with Abbey has disappeared

I was intrigued to read on Mortgage Strategy Online recently that Abbey is looking to reward brokers for good packaging. Under my own ’reward the efficient lender’ initiative I am sending cases to lenders that treat me fairly. That’s why I am disinclined to send cases to a lender that agrees a case three times […]

Use of AVMs may become restricted to surveyors soon

Automated valuation models will only be used by chartered surveyors rather than lenders in future, according to Richard Sexton, director of business development at e.surv. Sexton says AVMs penetrated the market quickly but were used inappropriately by some lenders. He says: “At the moment no lenders are using AVMs for purchases and only around 10% […]

cap_comp.gif
5

CAN YOU HAVE A POP TO WIN THIS POSH MONTBLANC ROLLERBALL PEN?

Drawbridge Finance’s Mark Posniak (left) and Jonathan Samuels (centre) at the lender’s official launch party last week Can you put the boot in to your nearest and dearest to win this super-stylish pen? Submit a witty caption for the photo above and you will be automatically entered into our prize draw. Remember, the funnier it […]

Identifying best-in-class UK stocks — Mark Martin, Neptune UK Opportunities Fund

FE Alpha Manager Mark Martin assumed management of the multi-cap UK Opportunities Fund at the beginning of February. As manager of the highly regarded UK Mid Cap Fund, Martin has begun restructuring the new portfolio to focus on our very best UK stock ideas from across the FTSE All-Share Index. In this video, update Martin addresses:

– Themes informing the UK Opportunities Fund
– The multi-cap structure of the fund
– UK equity valuations

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up
Comments
  • Post a comment
  • JOHN.MILLER 22nd May 2010 at 2:04 pm

    Treasury bills rise at a rate greater than one-for-one with expected inflation, while the nominal yields on default-free municipal bonds rise approximately one-for-one with expected inflation. It is shown that variation of expected inflation is not overwhelmingly larger than that of the after-tax real rate.
    ******************************

  • Ray Boulger 23rd April 2010 at 3:01 am

    In answer to the various comments:

    Anon 1. The City contacts I am referring to are mainly stockbrokers, who of course talk to a variety of different clients. Obviously I can’t mention names but I wouldn’t have written this if I wasn’t confident that the information I was being given was genuine. Incidentally if you haven’t seen Vince Cable being very effectively skewered for his flip flopping (on policies, not his property) by Andrew Neil on yesterday’s BBC Daily Politics I suggest you watch it.

    Anon 2. May’s MPC meeting has been delayed by 2 days because of the election and so we will get the Bank Rate decision on Monday 10 May. Nevertheless I agree with you that a rate change next month is out of the question, and probably for longer, certainly not until after a new budget, if there is one.

    Anon 3. I thought carefully before writing that but whilst the result of the election has become very difficult to forecast the one thing that looks certain is that Labour won’t have a majority. Hence I think my comment is on safe ground because the best Labour can realistically expect is to be part of a coalition. I am certainly not predicting unemployment 5 years ahead.

    John Lacy. I am at least at cynical as you about government statistics, whether it is the unemployment figures or the Enron style accounting. However, when making unemployment comparisons it is important to compare like with like as far as possible and one can only work with the published numbers. Just as today’s figures understate the real number of unemployed, although not by as much as 8.16m, so will earlier figures, although probably not by as much. Therefore the real increase in unemployment over the last 13 years is probably greater than the figure shown by the statistics but that doesn’t alter the validity of my comment.

  • Ray Boulger 22nd April 2010 at 5:57 pm

    In answer to the various comments:

    Anon 1. The City contacts I am referring to are mainly stockbrokers, who of course talk to a variety of different clients. Obviously I can’t mention names but I wouldn’t have written this if I wasn’t confident that the information I was being given was genuine. Incidentally if you haven’t seen Vince Cable being very effectively skewered for his flip flopping (on policies, not his property) by Andrew Neil on yesterday’s BBC Daily Politics I suggest you watch it.

    Anon 2. May’s MPC meeting has been delayed by 2 days because of the election and so we will get the Bank Rate decision on Monday 10 May. Nevertheless I agree with you that a rate change next month is out of the question, and probably for longer, certainly not until after a new budget, if there is one.

    Anon 3. I thought carefully before writing that but whilst the result of the election has become very difficult to forecast the one thing that looks certain is that Labour won’t have a majority. Hence I think my comment is on safe ground because the best Labour can realistically expect is to be part of a coalition. I am certainly not predicting unemployment 5 years ahead.

    John Lacy. I am at least at cynical as you about government statistics, whether it is the unemployment figures or the Enron style accounting. However, when making unemployment comparisons it is important to compare like with like as far as possible and one can only work with the published numbers. Just as today’s figures understate the real number of unemployed, although not by as much as 8.16m, so will earlier figures, although probably not by as much. Therefore the real increase in unemployment over the last 13 years is probably greater than the figure shown by the statistics but that doesn’t alter the validity of my comment.

  • John Lacy 22nd April 2010 at 3:43 pm

    Ray I really wish our unemployment rate was 8%. On the governments own figures there are 8.16 million people of working age who are “economically inactive” so I make the true figure closer to 21% unemployment. Successive governments have massaged the figures to make the headline announcement irrelevant so perhaps youi should be a little more sceptical of the bollocks that we’re being fed

  • Norrie Henderson 22nd April 2010 at 3:37 pm

    A bold statement by Ray that that all Labour governments have left office with unemployment higher than when they came in

    Are you predicting 5 years ahead???

  • bob 22nd April 2010 at 3:32 pm

    is the MPC really going to consider a change in rates the day we vote (if we bother) for a new chancellor? cant see a change happening until the MPC directions are given by the new goverment ie at least june

  • Malcolm Shaw 22nd April 2010 at 8:32 am

    Ray, comments like “my City contacts say” are hearsay, I am sure you would slam down any comments of this nature by the election parties. can you be more specific ?