With the the Olympics following hot on the heels of the Queen's Diamond Jubilee, he thinks UK consumers will start spending again. "Ticket sales alone for the Olympics are going to add 0.2pc to the GDP in the third quarter of the year. Things are set to get a lot better in the UK."
Simon Smith of FxPro is cautiously optimistic, pointing to the low yield on UK gilts and saying: "There's little doubt that the pound has benefitted from events in the eurozone. I would expect the pound to continue to appreciate vs. the euro as this effect continues, pushing EUR/GBP to new lows for the year."
However, many consider it is just a race for the bottom between the two currencies with the single currency definitely winning.
"We should be clear that this is not due to any inherent strength in the pound – just the euro's abject weakness," believes David Kerns of Moneycorp.
The pound is also being talked down. Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund, has suggested the UK base rate should be cut further below its current record low of 0.5pc while the Bank of England is yet again considering pumping more money into the economy.
Jeremy Cook of World First thinks the Bank could bring in more quantitative easing as early as this month but he doesn't believe it will have much of an impact.
"We would prefer to see the Bank take on some form of 'credit easing' – the purchase of corporate debt as opposed to that of the government. The fact is that the liquidity that the banks are receiving is not making it through to businesses and consumers."
The UK certainly can't afford to be complacent and imagine we can get away with sitting on the sidelines.
Charles Purdy of Smart Currency Exchange says: "There is a great possibility that the UK could run into trouble. The UK has been masterful in its management of international investment sentiment as it convinces the international market to finance our debt at a fraction of the cost of that of Spain or Italy. If this changes then we are in the same position as the southern states of the eurozone."
And Smith adds: "The eurozone crisis is ultimately a banking crisis. We remain a nation still very much reliant on banking and financial services. Therefore, it can't be dismissed."
The situation in the eurozone is creating a vortex threatening to suck everyone into it. It is hoped that the drawn out debacle in Athens has bought sufficient time to work out how to limit the damage.
"Hopefully the time spent will have allowed the authorities to build up an adequate firewall to protect the other 16 members of the euro," says Alistair Cook of Currencies Direct. "If not, then we're in real trouble."
Somalia government money 'goes missing' - BBC News
Large sums of money received by Somalia's interim UN-backed government have not been accounted for, a World Bank report says.
The report, seen by the BBC, is being circulated at talks in Turkey on how to end Somalia's decades of anarchy.
It alleges a discrepancy of about $130m (£85m) in the accounts over two years.
UK foreign minister William Hague told the BBC that an international board to oversee the distribution of aid funds needed to be established urgently.
Somalia's transitional government mandate expires in August when it is due to hand over to an elected president.
'Big question mark'The revelations in the World Bank report come as several hundred Somali politicians meet representatives of more than 50 countries in Istanbul to try to win new funding for the long-term reconstruction of country.
The report stops short of making specific allegations, but does not rule out corruption as a possible explanation for the missing government revenue funds.
"There is a discrepancy in what comes in and there's a lack of accounting of how money has been spent," the report's author Joakim Gundel is quoted by US broadcaster Voice of America as saying.
"So that opens naturally a big question mark for sure."
The report, which looks at the years 2009 and 2010, also says the transitional government has no real accounting system nor does it publicly disclose financial statements.
Contacted by the BBC, Mr Gundel said he would not make any comment about the report until later on Friday.
But VOA reports him as saying that the missing millions could significantly bolster Somalia's security without relying on foreign donations.
The conference in Istanbul is the second major international gathering this year about Somalia's crisis.
In London in February, at talks hosted by the UK government, it was agreed that a financial management board to oversee aid should be established.
"The details of this need to be finalised with the government of Somalia - and frankly I was hoping it could be done by now, by this conference in Istanbul - if it is not signed here, well then it needs to signed in the next few weeks," Mr Hague told the BBC Somali Service.
Last month, leaders of disparate Somali factions agreed to a timetable that will elect a new president by 20 August, ending the transition period of the interim government.
The Horn of Africa country has had no effective central government since 1991, and has been wracked by fighting ever since - a situation that has allowed piracy and lawlessness to flourish.
Mr Hague said it was important that those at the conference understood that deadlines were met and that the 18,000-strong African Union force in Somalia was properly funded.
"I hope it [the conference] will keep up the momentum, particularly towards a successful and legitimate political process in Somalia, towards making sure that development money can be spent properly and transparently in Somalia... And we'd like to see, of course, the continued success of African Union forces," the UK foreign secretary said.
All Somalia's rival groups have been invited to participate in the Istanbul talks, expect for the Islamist al-Shabab group, which joined al-Qaeda earlier this year.
Despite facing pressure on a number of military fronts, its fighters control much of the country.
In recent months, troops from Ethiopia and the African Union force, as well as pro-government militias, have helped government forces gain territory from al-Shabab but the militants continue to stage attacks in the capital, Mogadishu, and elsewhere.
Edwards Case Shows How Complex Campaign Finance Law Can Be - US News and World Report
Former Sen. John Edwards campaigning in Des Moines, Iowa during his 2008 presidential run.
After a drawn-out trial and nine days of jury deliberations, John Edwards was acquitted on one charge and his case was ruled as a mistrial, but the campaign finance landscape is no clearer than it was before.
The jury found Edwards not guilty on count 3—that he broke campaign finance law in accepting $700,000 from a billionaire supporter in 2008.
[Read: Jurors in John Edwards' Case Reach Verdict]
Neither side denied Edwards took the money and used it to cover up an affair. But U.S. Attorney George Holding indicted Edwards last summer under the belief that doing so was a crime under one interpretation of campaign finance law.
The case turned on deceptively complex question: Were the secret payments made, with Edwards' knowledge, for the purpose of influencing his 2008 presidential campaign? If so, they were illegal campaign contributions. If not, they were personal gifts.
The prosecution argued that Edwards solicited the money to hide his mistress and illegitimate child in order to maintain his public image during the 2008 presidential campaign. The defense depicted Edwards' actions as morally, not legally, wrong. The money was personal, Edwards' lawyers argued, used to hide the affair from his cancer-stricken wife, not keep afloat a 2008 campaign which was effectively over.
Had Edwards been found guilty, the legal definition of a campaign contribution, now defined vaguely as money given with the intent to "influence an election," would have been made more clear. The campaign finance implications of that would have been vast, but it would have taken a stronger case, legal experts say.
"In terms of campaign finance, you have to have that smoking gun," says Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center. "The prosecution was unable clearly to provide clear evidence, beyond the testimony of Mr. Young, that there was willful and knowing illegal activity by Mr. Edwards."
Given the current law and legal precedents, the prosecution's case was novel and the verdict a dodged bullet, says Allison Hayward, vice president of policy at the Center for Competitive Politics.
"Had there been a guilty verdict, especially on count 3, you would've had a lot of confusion among the bar and other prosecutors," Hayward says. "That the court would instruct the jury that the donor's purpose was somehow what made this a camp contribution, not the person being charged, that was a bit scary."
[Read: Justice Dept. Unlikely to Retry Edwards]
Edwards' case was interpreted differently by legal experts on both sides: the judge, the prosecutors, and Edwards' team. But however campaign finance law is interpreted, prosecutors should build a strong case before bringing an indictment, says Rick Hasen, a campaign finance expert and professor at UC-Irvine.
"This was a weak case to begin with," says Hasen. "(The verdict) doesn't have broad implications for campaign finance other than it might make prosecutors worry."
In many campaign finance law prosecutions, those being indicted are motivated by alleged political motivations, Hasen says. In this case, Edwards' indictment was brought by a Bush-appointed attorney general, George Holding, who this month won a GOP primary for a Congressional seat in a district that includes the courthouse where Edwards was tried.
"Whether or not there's any truth to that in this case or others I don't know," Hasen says. "But given the nature of the campaigns, I think prosecutors have a motive to chase the big fish. The incentives for prosecuting a political are very high."
Edwards case made one thing clear for both sides: campaign finance law is complex and prosecuting it is not easy.
No comments:
Post a Comment