The upcoming British election on Thursday 6 May has provided a fertile ground on television news for the "facial" and body language experts to comment on the veracity, or otherwise, of the candidates leading their parties into the next election. And whilst the politicians cannot agree with one another, naturally, there seems to be general agreement amongst the experts that all of them are lying through their teeth or, if that is too harsh, then they are least being very economical with the truth.
There are all the usual platitudes ... clean government, new, modern, progressive, we'll keep the cuts lower than the other guys/tax the rich higher than the other guys, defend the health system, make education better... wherever you turn there are new entreaties - but where is the truth?
Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, has probably got it nailed - even if it was in an unguarded and probably "not intended for public consumption" comment to the US economist David Hale the other day when he is reported to have said that the cuts required to turn around the British economy will be so severe as to leave the victor in Thursday's election subsequently out of power for a generation.
This is the sort of information that the British public need to hear directly from the leaders, not a third party - or in this case even a fourth party - but then let's be honest for a change. Whoever tells the truth might not win the election. By the same token, not winning the election might be the best thing to happen to any of the parties!
Oh, but why am I, a disenfranchised Brit living 10,000 kms away from Britain actually interested in the election? Well, first of all I still need to know what friends and colleagues are going to be talking about after the event. Secondly, you are becoming aware of the "PIGS" (Portugal, Ireland, Spain and Greece) - and by the way it is not a mnemonic I like, but it is in current usage - as a term being used to describe the sick economies of Europe. I do have a concern that if Britain does not get its act together very quickly after the election - and do many of the things that are going to make any Government, coalition or otherwise, unpopular, we might be hearing about "Brit PIGS".
Lastly, I said as part of a speech in Singapore two weeks ago, "...the outcome of the UK election will also most certainly have an impact on the global economy in general and the financial services sector in particular. Any form of bank tax that is introduced will push some firms out of London and onto maybe, Switzerland...". I used Switzerland because of its European location, as an alternative to London, but I make two observations here.
The City of London Global Financial Centres Index which, with my interest in emerging financial centres has always provided me with an interesting observation of changes in that arena, is being discontinued. The more cynical amongst us might suggest that this is perhaps due to London finding it harder and harder to justify its traditional number 1 ranking in the Index.
So, if London is really losing its way as a major financial centre, a position it has held "...since the 19th century because of the power of the British economy, and the wealth of its citizens..." (from Stephen Inwood's excellent book "A History of London") is there not a potential opportunity here that Hong Kong should be eyeing? If you don't dream, or aspire, you don't achieve. We've already persuaded the Group CEO of one of the world's largest banks to set up shop in Hong Kong (okay - a homecoming!), so can we not persuade others to do the same, by the quality of what we have here and what we can do as a financial centre? Will the "big boys" not laugh at the idea - you bet, they will.
But then Goliath laughed at David and look where it got him!!
I think it's a good point, but I don't know whether Hong Kong should take up the running; it might look too self serving. I also don't think that a Bank should, on its own take up that role - but I do believe that a global, independent, firm might be a candidate.
Perhaps I should be speaking to PricewaterhouseCoopers!
Posted by: David Eldon | 11 May 2010 at 22:00
You raise an interesting thought: if London no longer wants to sponsor the GFCI, perhaps Hong Kong should step in and pay for future surveys by the Z/Yen Group
Posted by: ldc | 04 May 2010 at 11:52