logo
Britain's Borrowing Strategy Needs an Overhaul

Britain's Borrowing Strategy Needs an Overhaul

Bloomberg21-05-2025
A successful 30-year £4 billion ($5.4 billion) syndicated sale of gilts on Tuesday doesn't mean all is sunny with long-dated UK debt. Demand of £75 billion for this new issue offering a juicy 5.4% yield masks a disturbing softening in structural appetite for ultra-long duration debt — the foundation of Britain's borrowing strategy.
Bluntly, higher yields are failing to attract alternative buyers, and domestic funds already have sufficient portfolio duration.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Defamation case against Fox News highlights role of its hosts in promoting 2020 election falsehoods
Defamation case against Fox News highlights role of its hosts in promoting 2020 election falsehoods

San Francisco Chronicle​

time19 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Defamation case against Fox News highlights role of its hosts in promoting 2020 election falsehoods

NEW YORK (AP) — Court papers in a voting technology company's $2.7 billion defamation lawsuit against Fox News point to Maria Bartiromo, Lou Dobbs and Jeanine Pirro as leaders in spreading false stories about election fraud in the weeks after Democrat Joe Biden's victory over President Donald Trump in 2020. Arguments for summary judgment by Smartmatic were filed in lightly redacted form this week at the New York Supreme Court. It's like a bad rerun for Fox: Similar revelations about its conduct following the 2020 election came in a lawsuit by another company falsely accused of doctoring votes, Dominion Voting Systems. Fox agreed to pay Dominion $787 million in a 2023 settlement after the judge found it was 'CRYSTAL CLEAR' that none of the claims against the voting system company were true. In short: Fox let Trump aides spread conspiracy theories despite knowing they were false because it was what their viewers wanted to hear. Fox was trying to hold on to viewers who were angry at the network for saying Biden had won the election. Fox said it was covering a newsworthy story. It accuses the London-based company, which had only Los Angeles County as a client for the 2020 election, of exaggerating its claims of damages in the hope of receiving a financial windfall. Pirro now working in the second Trump administration The focus on Pirro is noteworthy because the former Fox personality now serves in Trump's second administration as U.S. attorney in Washington, D.C. Smartmatic, relying on emails and text messages revealed as part of the case, said Pirro was using her position as a Fox host in 2020 to help Trump and persuade him to pardon her ex-husband, Albert Pirro, who was convicted of conspiracy and tax evasion. Trump pardoned him before leaving office in 2021. In a text to then-Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel in September 2020, Pirro said, 'I'm the No. 1 watched show on news cable all weekend. I work so hard for the President and the party,' Smartmatic said in court papers. One of her own producers, Jerry Andrews, called Pirro a 'reckless maniac,' Smartmatic said. He texted after one of her shows in November that it was 'rife (with) conspiracy theories and bs and is yet another example of why this woman should never be on live television." The court papers said Pirro also suggested 'evidence' of supposed fraud to Trump lawyer Sidney Powell that she could use on a television appearance — material that also was spread by Bartiromo. Bartiromo still works at Fox, and in 2020 had shows on both the news channel and Fox Business Network. The court papers uncovered messages showing her desire to help Trump: 'I am very worried. Please please please overturn this. Bring the evidence, I know you can,' she texted to Powell. Dobbs, whose business show was canceled by Fox in February 2021, texted to Powell four days after the election, saying 'I'm going to do what I can to help stop what is now a coup d'etat in (its) final days — perhaps moments," a reference to Biden's victory. Dobbs died in 2024. A central figure in Fox's 'pivot' Smartmatic portrayed Pirro as a central figure in Fox's 'pivot' to deemphasize Biden's victory because it angered Trump fans. Instead, the network found that ratings jumped whenever claims of election fraud were discussed, it said. As in the Dominion case, the discovery process helped Smartmatic find messages and statements that seem embarrassing in retrospect. For example, in early December, Fox's Jesse Watters texted colleague Greg Gutfeld that 'Think of how incredible our ratings would be if Fox went ALL in on STOP THE STEAL.' Fox, in a response to the newly-revealed court papers, pointed to an ongoing corruption case involving Smartmatic and its executives, including a claim by federal prosecutors that it used money from the sale of voting machines to set up a 'slush fund' for bribing foreign officials. 'The evidence shows that Smartmatic's business and reputation were badly suffering long before any claims by President Trump's lawyers on Fox News and that Smartmatic grossly inflated its damage claims to generate headlines and chill free speech,' Fox said. 'Now, in the aftermath of Smartmatic's executives getting indicted for bribery charges, we are eager and ready to continue defending our press freedoms.' ___

Guild Esports, Beckham's Former Team, Calls It Quits After 6 Years
Guild Esports, Beckham's Former Team, Calls It Quits After 6 Years

Forbes

time6 hours ago

  • Forbes

Guild Esports, Beckham's Former Team, Calls It Quits After 6 Years

After nearly six years of operation — just 13 days short of its iron anniversary — British competitive gaming outfit Guild Esports & Gaming Limited, which David Beckham initially backed, has announced that it's shutting down operations for good. The company, which finalized a ten-year lease on its headquarters in London's Shoreditch in 2022, rebranded under the former soccer star in June 2020, turned heads when it completed its public market flotation on the London Stock Exchange the following October, with a market capitalization of $52.3 million. However, following its acquisition by DCB Sports in October 2024 for £100,000 ($134,000) — and withdrawing from the LSE to become a privately traded company — Guild has run into financial difficulties, which it attributed to the 'current economic climate.' Today (August 21), it took to socials to release an official statement. Guild Esports' closing statement in full 'An Important message from Guild Esports & Gaming Limited. 'After careful consideration, we must share the difficult news that Guild Esports & Gaming will be closing. Despite our best efforts, financial challenges and the current economic climate have made it impossible for us to continue operating. FEATURED | Frase ByForbes™ Unscramble The Anagram To Reveal The Phrase Pinpoint By Linkedin Guess The Category Queens By Linkedin Crown Each Region Crossclimb By Linkedin Unlock A Trivia Ladder 'From day one, our mission extended far beyond competition. We've been privileged to champion representation and create opportunities within our industry using esports and gaming as powerful tools for inspiration, inclusion, and empowerment. 'We recognise that this closure disappoints the community that believed in us, and for that we are sorry. However, we hope this does not overshadow the work our dedicated staff delivered throughout our journey. This outcome is also not a reflection of the support of all our partners who supported our work in the esports space alongside us over the past five years. 'To everyone who became part of the Guild family, from our fans and players to staff and partners - thank you. Your passion and belief helped us build something truly special.' The road to closure is paved with good intentions I'm not going to lie: when it launched, Guild Esports was a thrilling proposition for a Brit like me. A homegrown team with superstar backing… what could go wrong? In April 2021, as Guild was still riding the wave of excitement, I interviewed its former executive chairman, Carleton Curtis, an Activision veteran behind Call of Duty League (and, er, Overwatch League and Major League Gaming), who said his new outfit wanted to redefine esports as we knew them. It was one of the nicest conversations I've had with a gaming exec — one underpinned by genuine positivity and a desire to shape the future of what was (and still can be) a very toxic place, with mental health, academy-nurtured talent, and team-building as core focuses for success. Still, it never quite worked out that way. Despite its ideologies, Guild Esports never quite struck the right balance between 'esports organization' and 'lifestyle brand.' On the most crucial stage, Guild never really registered massive successes, or even regular contender status, despite major signings like Fortnite's TaySon in 2021 (who lasted five months) and Flikk (a year), plus Rocket League's Deevo (who achieved mid-tier success over two years). Later, it promoted its shirt collabs and built state-of-the-art sim racing hubs, but never quite managed to make anything of these ideas beyond the initial announcements. For more casual fans like me, esports is an ever more unpredictable industry. Gone are the days of the mega deals with sponsors, even if the big-stage competitions continue. Still, I'm sad Guild's gone. Let's hope, for the sake of other teams, it's not the next of many.

The UK's year of climate U-turns exposes a deeper failure
The UK's year of climate U-turns exposes a deeper failure

Yahoo

time6 hours ago

  • Yahoo

The UK's year of climate U-turns exposes a deeper failure

We're now halfway through the UK government's critical decade for tackling climate change – and 2025 is fast becoming a year of climate U-turns. Airport expansions have been approved, the phaseout of gas-fired boilers shelved and, under the government's latest industrial strategy, green levies on industrial energy bills that support renewables have been slashed. All while key indicators of global climate stability are deteriorating. As carbon budget and energy policy researchers, we believe the UK's official climate advisers, the Climate Change Committee (CCC), are failing to hold the government accountable for backsliding on climate action. Worse still, the CCC's recommendation that the UK reach net zero emissions by 2050 does not align with international commitments to limit global warming to 1.5°C and 'well below 2°C'. It also fails to reflect the UN principle of fairness and equity whereby wealthier nations like the UK cut emissions earlier and faster than poorer countries. In fact, it systematically undermines these promises, with the CCC's 2025 seventh carbon budget (a landmark report that advises the UK government how to tackle its emissions for the period 2025-2050) a case in point. Hiding carbon colonialism As a signatory to UN climate agreements, the UK is obligated to 'take precautionary measures' based on 'best available scientific knowledge' to prevent 'threats of serious or irreversible damage' to the climate. This includes setting carbon budgets rooted in the principles of equity and with a high chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C. Yet, scientists warn this window is closing fast. Recent research concludes that from 2025, the world can emit no more than 160 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (GtCO₂) for a 50% chance of not exceeding 1.5°C. Despite this, the CCC uses a global carbon budget almost 50% higher, at 235GtCO₂. Internationally, the UK ranks tenth in wealth, fourth in historical cumulative emissions, and has per capita historical emissions four times the global average. Yet, the CCC disregards the UN principle that wealthy nations, whose prosperity was built on fossil fuels, must shoulder greater responsibility to rapidly cut emissions. With just 0.84% of the global population, the UK's equal share of the remaining 1.5°C carbon budget (160 GtCO₂) would be 1.34 GtCO₂. The CCC allocates it 3.7 GtCO₂ – nearly three times its equal per person share. However, even an equal share allocation would fall far short of the UN's equity framework. Past CCC analyses have likewise embedded significant inequities. Such misappropriation of the carbon budget shifts the burdens of climate change on to more vulnerable communities globally, prioritising the UK's high-carbon norms over the right of low-income nations to sustainable development. The CCC's departure from the UN's core equity principle reveals how colonial norms remain deeply embedded in climate policy. Carbon removal roulette Major societal transformations, such as moving from private car to public transport, are largely absent from the CCC's recommendations. In contrast, large-scale engineered removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and fossil fuel carbon capture and storage are assumed to be technically and socio-economically feasible. The CCC definition of 'feasible' prioritises near-term political convenience over scientific integrity and climate stability. Despite a 4% decline in car travel over the past decade, the CCC estimates a per person increase of 10% by 2050. By avoiding pathways that challenge consumption norms, the CCC sidelines proven approaches like reducing car dependence or enforcing robust energy efficiency standards. This highly cautious approach to behavioural change contrasts sharply with its assumptions on the future deployment of CDR, projecting UK engineered removals to increase from 0-13MtCO₂ by 2035, and 36MtCO₂ by 2050 – or nine and 26 times the total global level in 2024. This scale of expansion contradicts historical trends. Similar heroic assumptions underpin CCS projections in electricity and blue hydrogen production (from natural gas). The CCC proposes the UK capture and store 33 MtCO₂ annually by 2050, triple the current global rate – for a technology that has barely advanced despite decades of promises and investment. While some carbon removal is necessary to offset 'impossible to mitigate' emissions from agriculture – for example, nitrous oxide from fertiliser use – using CDR to justify ongoing fossil fuel use is a high-risk approach that undermines the Paris climate commitments. Read more: Nature-based carbon removal options are also overstated. The CCC projects removing 30 MtCO₂ per year by 2050 but insufficiently addresses the impacts on food security and land conflicts. Though reforesting offers ecological benefits, climate-driven wildfires, droughts and pests can rapidly re-release stored carbon. Such insecure carbon storage cannot offset guaranteed emissions from burning fossil fuels. Ultimately, the CCC is deeply conservative on near-term changes to consumption norms, while embracing dangerously optimistic projections of future carbon removal technologies. It accepts temperatures will overshoot global targets significantly, and banks on future correction – despite the risk of triggering irreversible climate tipping points. Hard truth The allure of the CCC's net zero 2050 advice is that it claims to offer a pathway to avoid both major social transformation and a rapid phaseout of fossil fuels, yet still meet the UK's fair share of the 1.5°C commitment. This politically appealing interpretation is scientifically flawed, downplays the gravity of climate risks and disregards principles of international justice. The CCC and others must stop being silent on these critical issues and end the carbon colonialism at the heart of the climate agenda. The UK's net zero 2050 framing isn't just delaying urgent action, it normalises ecological breakdown while maintaining the illusion of responsible stewardship. It worsens climate impacts and undermines preparedness by presenting inadequate measures as 1.5°C compatible. A fundamental rethink of the UK's climate policy requires a consensus that is grounded in equity, scientific integrity and transformative ambition. Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation's environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who've subscribed so far. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Kevin Anderson is presenting views here that belong to the named authors, and do not necessarily reflect those of researchers within the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. Chris Jones has received funding from UKRI. The views in this article are of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. Gaurav Gharde does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store