The National Audit Office released this worrying press release this morning:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General
Spending watchdog disclaims government's accounts for
the first time
- The disclaimed audit opinion from the Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Gareth Davies, on the Whole of Government Accounts (WGA) 2022-23 is the first ever.
- The cause is the severe backlogs in English local authority audits, with the consequence that there is inadequate assurance over material amounts throughout the WGA.
- The WGA is a vital tool in the management and scrutiny of public spending, as it brings together all public sector assets and liabilities. It is essential that the steps being taken by Government to restore timely and robust local authority audited accounts are effective.
As they note:
Backlogs in firms' audits of England's 426 local authorities have led to the National Audit Office (NAO) disclaiming the 2022-23 WGA for the first time.
They added:
Within his audit report, the NAO's head, Gareth Davies, said he had been “unable to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence upon which to form an opinion”.
Just over 10% (43) of England's 426 local authorities submitted reliable data to the WGA. Of the near 90% of local authorities that failed to submit reliable data, 46% (196) submitted information that hasn't been audited, and 44% (187) did not submit any data at all.
The Government is taking steps to address the backlog in audited accounts for English local authorities, including the use of fixed dates by which each year's audits must be completed. This process is unlikely to allow the disclaimer on WGA to be removed for 2023-24, but it does offer a medium-term solution to the problem.
What we have, in that case, is a situation where the UK government does, as a whole, not have the ability to explain what the public sector in the UK does.
Why has that happened? The answer is remarkably straightforward. The Audit Commission, an independent public corporation that oversaw local audits, was abolished in 2015. That was done so that local authorities might be required to appoint independent private-sector auditors to audit their accounts. The trouble is almost no firm wants that job, and the number of people considered able to do it is falling and is now well under 100. As a result, local government accounting has descended into chaos.
This is the madness of privatisation writ large for all to see - with a once well-managed system now hopelessly out of control and with accountability lost in the process.
You could not make stupidity on this scale - or the failure to react to it by past Tory administration who knew all about it - up.
The time to bring these audits back under state control has arrived, but I very much doubt Labour will do that. The N-word would be involved - and they are far too frightened to mention that even when the public good is involved.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
My goodness. Heartfelt thanks for publicising this Richard.
I doubt that (m)any mainstream publications are going to analyse the watchdog/Gareth Davies extra-ordinary decision, using it instead mainly for political point-scoring. I hope you investigate this fundamental surprise further and – as is your way -share your insight with taxresearch readers. We need you on this.
It is in the Guardian
Yes, but it is your analysis of it that will be critical. We trust. your expertise and method, i.e. that your diagnosis will be impartial, rigorous and fair. Also, you’ve already disclosed your opinion on the cause of the problem, That’s an advantage that many others will not be allowed by their editors or owners.
it is also in the Telegraph – but not easy to find – try ‘‘Inadequate’ public sector accounts will not be signed off for first time”
‘Nearly 90pc of local authorities fail to produce ‘reliable’ finance data’
Melissa Lawford
Economics Reporter.
Daniel Martin
Deputy Political Editor
Related Topics
Local councils, Banks and Finance, UK economy, Angela Rayner
26 November 2024 4:52pm GMT
67
Angela Rayner
Thanks
I don’t believe it
Actually sadly I do
Privatisation of local audit has been a huge failure as you and the NAO quite rightly point out.
Since it’s introduction under Mr Pickles, Fraud in local government has got out of control. The Annual Fraud Indicator 2023 shows Fraud in local government increased from an estimated £7.8 billion in 2017 to 8.8 billion in 2021-2022. The main area is procurement. Auditors who receive objections from the public about Council’s accounts rarely publish public interest reports even when it is glaringly obvious that fraud is occuring.
A real life example is where my local council had a a half a million pound contract with a roofing company and it over spent by a further £2m. Nobody noticed for two years. It was flagged and the auditor brushed it under the carpet, even when incontrovertible evidence was placed before them. The excuses where incredible let alone pure BS. The individual responsible purchased a house for a £1m in a country where it is warm, if not hot all year round while overseeing the contract. He resigned before he could be dealt with and the council took it no further, nor did they report it to the Police.
The internal report by the Council never saw the light of day.
Another real life case: “armchair auditor” activists in Barnet, assiduously uncovered a £1.3m audit failure involving a private security firm hired by the Tory flagship borough of Barnet which the official auditor had missed.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2011/jul/07/eric-pickles-praises-barnet-bloggers
The Financial Reporting Council who develop and maintain auditing standards for engagements that are performed in the public interest within the United Kingdom, is equally as useless. As Britain’s accounting watchdog they failed to notice a spate of corporate failures in which auditors failed to flag up concerns about companies and council accounts even when alerted.
Given Mrs Reeves has said there is a black hole of £22bn which she needs to plug, loooking at local government and doing something about the growing levels of fraud within, would go some way as to filling in the whole.
However, I like many do not think she or HMG will do anything about it. So expect things to keep on getting worse.
Thanks
“Since it’s introduction under Mr Pickles, Fraud in local government has got out of control. “……that was the point.
All govs since Thatcher was crowned have one central aim – to reduce the power of local gov. The obese one was thus just following policy.
This (oh look they can’t even produce audited accounts) will allow central gov to pull more powers off local gov & eventually it will have………almost no powers. That’s the point, that’s the agenda.
The irony here, is that it is the Conservatives who obsessively and hypocritically proselytise ‘localism’. In Scotland localism as devolution is pushed hard, principally to undermine the power of Holyrood, but never materially of the overwhelming power of Westminster. The problem here is that Conservatism endlessly plays games of deceit to survive; it is not an accident that Britain is one of the most centralised States in the West; it has predominantly had Conservative governments playing games with a treacherous and fraudulent claim to be the enemy of big government and friend of localism; when neither – in reality – has ever been true.
Agreed
If LINO & STP are going to lose council seats in May, which they will, then clearly they would have a motive in disempowering local authorities esp if they’ve gone green or independent or, God help us, Re****UK. A scary number of councils are already in deep trouble financially. But its a risky thing in terms of social stability, hence stronger police powers & tougher sentencing for crime of non-violent but noisy disagreement with the state.
Privatisation of local audit has been a huge failure as you and the NAO quite rightly point out.
Since it’s introduction under Mr Pickles, Fraud in local government has got out of control. The Annual Fraud Indicator 2023 shows Fraud in local government increased from an estimated £7.8 billion in 2017 to 8.8 billion in 2021-2022. The main area for fraud to occur in local government is procurement.
Auditors who receive objections from the public about Council’s accounts rarely publish public interest reports, even when it is glaringly obvious that fraud is occurring to the man on the Clapham omnibus.
A real life example is where my local council had a a half a million pound contract with a roofing company and it over spent by a further £2m. Nobody noticed for two years. It was flagged and the auditor brushed it under the carpet, even when incontrovertible evidence was placed before them. The excuses where incredible let alone pure BS. The individual responsible purchased a house for a £1m in a country where it is warm, if not hot all year round while overseeing the contract. He resigned before he could be dealt with and the council took it no further, nor did they report it to the Police.
The internal report by the Council never saw the light of day.
Another real life case: “armchair auditor” activists in Barnet, assiduously uncovered a £1.3m audit failure involving a private security firm hired by the Tory flagship borough of Barnet which the official auditor had missed.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/patrick-butler-cuts-blog/2011/jul/07/eric-pickles-praises-barnet-bloggers
The Financial Reporting Council who develop and maintain auditing standards for engagements that are performed in the public interest within the United Kingdom, is equally as useless. As Britain’s accounting watchdog they failed to notice a spate of corporate failures in which auditors failed to flag up concerns about companies and council accounts even when alerted.
Given Mrs Reeves has said there is a black hole of £22bn which she needs to plug, loooking at local government and doing something about the growing levels of fraud within, would go some way as to filling in the whole.
However, I like many do not think she or HMG will do anything about it. So expect things to keep on getting worse.
Thanks
But is this the same black hole as Ms Reeves black hole or is it a different black hole that can only be filled from the council tax??
I am not being silly. I am really worried and confused. I was waiting for Prof Murphy’s take on the situation. Alas not reassuring.
The literal answer is, who knows? We do not have the data to know.
It is the duty of an auditor to ensure that Accounts and relevany published information show a true and fair view etc. and in so far as the financial statements are concerned, that they are accurate and complete. But it is the duty of the Chief Executive Officer and of other non-elected employees (eg the Chief Financial Officer) to prepare the figures in a timely and accurate manner. This NAO statement quotes ‘Inadequate’ figures – so how is it that these people (CEO & CFO and their teams of paid emplyees) are allowed to remain in this employment when clearly many of them have not supplied the necessary reliable figures? If a PLC or a Private Limited Company failed to provide figures, the wrath of the various regulators would be let loose. Why has this only just come to light?
Excellent questions – at least for those who do not even have accounts
Well in some instances – I don’t know how many I can only speak of one group of 5 councils, 99% of the finance department was outsourced to CRAPITA who failed to deliver the accounts…………and getting out of that outsourced contract was a total nightmare where needless to say CRAPITA gained handsomely.
Another case of kneejerk deregulation – produceing not only a chaos of regulation but many more regulators. Just as Grenfeell showed how builders invented their own regulators – now apparently anyone can now audit LA accounts – except they dont want to.
Tories and Reeves already doubling down on more deregulation – stupidity upon stupidity.
It is becoming unbreable. Everything you look at is in chaos. There are scandals everywhere; Official Enquiries are daily shining a bright and ghastly light on the sheer rottenness erupting out of the heart of Britain’s Governance. The FCA is in a mess, the system to bring closure and recompense for the Postmasters is obviously defective (Government cannot competently finish anything – even correcting a blatant wrongdoing its maladministration has caused). In short “Britain isn’t working”.
Starmer foolishly thinks that phrase is just an employment issue, but it isn’t (I trust the words live on to haunt him); it literally means that in Britain nothing works. Employment levels are worse in Britain than in comparative ‘advanced’ States. We do Government badly. People are giving up, because everything is so bad, untrustworthy and Britain offers so little. That isn’t an employment problem, it is a trust problem. We have the oldest and worst housing stock in Europe, the building regulations are a mess, planning is hopeless, the sewage is floating down our rivers, and we build houses on floodplains. What could go wrong? The infrastructure is disintegrating, and 40% of the electorate don’t vote in general elections anymore. No wonder they don’t vote: there is nothing worth voting for; the same collection of ciphers in Parliament enabling neoliberalism to go on filleting the country, stripping out everything of value and investing in nothing of value (the real loss future generations will suffer, leaving them a ruinous, unsustainable burden of required infrastructure), and the answer to the mess we are in? More of the same. More of the same is destroying us.
Much to agree with
John your posting has got me thinking again about a question that’s been niggling me for a few years now: does anyone in Government actually do anything positive and tangible any more? Since the onset of austerity we’ve witnessed the steady depletion of public services and the concomitant damage/abandonment of crucial regulatory functions. The collapse of government and local authority audit functions in the aftermath of the abolition of the Audit Commission and the resultant chaos is just the latest to come to light in a long procession and is the inevitable result of an economic dogma that suits disaster capitalists and nobody else.
It also raises the question of the health of Scotland’s governmental and local authority record-keeping and audit. Is it afflicted by the same problem or has it somehow managed to maintain adequate services and, if so, how? I’ll have a dig into this on the 27th and post my findings, but my diary is already full for that day, so it may be late in the day. If anyone else can shed light on the Scottish dimension, please go ahead and don’t wait for me.
That would be good to know, Ken.
The Accounts Commision https://audit.scot/about-us/audit-scotland/audit-appointments show that all Scottish local councils were to be audited in 23/24. It also lists the name of the auditor for each council – 18 of them by Audit Scotland.
So much better than England then
Shed light on Scotland? The prevailing politics is a Unionist narrative that Scotland is, ‘de facto’ already independent; lavishly funded by Westminster, and couldn’t run a car boot sale. You can’t fault Unionism for its unfailing uplifting message of tangible, believable promise.
There are no adverse consequences to being in the Union (ignore Brexit, the endless scandals, the wasted money, the incompetent government, the lies, and the overwhelming stench of decay and corruption it emits; wear a nosegay). Britain is an example to the world.
It is indeed……….. unlike the EU, there are no States queuing up to join Britain; least of all from its old imperial possessions, who know it intimately, and know it best. Only tax havens find association with Britain convenient. And that leaves Scotland……..
Thank you and well said, John.
Further to our recent exchange after my “cheery” note from a City conference, you can understand why my parents and I want out.
Yesterday morning, my EU bank employer announced the closure of its asset based finance and SME banking arms in the UK and Germany. With regard to the UK, that’s about 100 jobs in London, Manchester and Brighton and the closure of the Manchester and Brighton offices. The division has been struggling over the past year or two. Moving up the food / value chain proved insurmountable. Clients typically sub-contracted to big construction firms and local authorities and provided transport related services.
I do understand, but it shouldn’t be this way.
This doesn’t surprise me at all. One of the most extreme privatisating authorities was Suffolk County Council, which virtually dismantled itself and became a commissioner of services.
I wonder what state their audit was in?
Suffolk has not been audited for the period in question. It has accounts, but he audit report is missing.
I mentioned Suffolk CC
Here we go – this is where “total outsourcing” flavoured with what I belive may be a fair dose of graft & incompetence, gets you (in 2011). I don’t have up to date info.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2011/may/04/suffolk-virtual-council-plan
I believe part of the reason why we keep defunding maintenance is a general perception that bureaucracy is inefficient.
But all working systems (btw, that includes biological systems) are “inefficient”. They spend most of their resources on “reproduction” and only a tiny percentage on “growth”. (I put these terms in quotes because they deserve a definition.)
In our current culture, innovation is valued highly, while maintenance is rarely talked about.
I believe that as a society, we need to better understand the value created by maintenance.
Much to agree with
Wrt my comment about innovation and maintenance, I would like to add the following.
The common arguments that private enterprise is better at technological innovation than the government, do not transfer to maintenance.
The conceptual distinction between innovation and maintenance could help to better distinguish what should be privatized and what should be nationalized.
Note that the wider sense in which I understand maintenance includes education and a large part of health care. In fact, it has been widely argued that technological innovation in education may be rather harmful. And while technological innovation in health care is very important, it is a rather small part of what makes health care valuable.
I agree, my dad was a maintenance engineer much of his working life. Temple Grandin wrote a book about education in US failing those with particular skills and the consequent terrible state of infrastructure, lack of innovation. Failing bridges, and failing to employ people with practical problem-solving skills.
Might this affect the UK’s international credit rating?
(& hence interest rates for government borrowing?)
I declare my ignorance of such things.
Unlikely
If it did they might do more to get it right
I may be wrong but I thought the NAO was concerned only with England and Wales. I wonder whether Audit Scotland is experiencing similar problems here.
I don’t know….
I have been looking at the situation in Scotland.
To date 18 Scottish local authorities have audited accounts available for 23/24.
A further 7 have unaudited accounts available.
Five have audited accounts available up to 22/33 and all of those have an audit plan for 23/24 in place (supposedly, the 2 noted below have too!).
https://audit.scot/about-us/audit-scotland/audit-appointments
That leaves 2 councils, one of which’s last audited accounts was in 21/22 and the other only published it’s audit plan for 22/23 in January of this year.
I haven’t read these reports so have no idea if there is a crisis in any Scottish local authorities. But, I do feel that the Auditor General in Scotland is much more political than the National Audit Office in England. He often appears on tv with what appear to be politically motivated comments on the performance of the Scottish Government which take no account of the Scottish Government not being fully in control of the economic and financial levers. The same is true of reports available on the web site.
Thanks
Meanwhile Lord Pickles enjoys his life peerage.
And in Somerset Council employees have lost their jobs.
Given that the Audit Commission was established under the Thatcher government in 1983, you might think the Tories would have seen it as a sacred monument, but apparently Mrs T sometimes wasn’t neoliberal enough.
You recall she created the single market?
and finally – on the subject of ‘auditors’ – I am reminded that (when I was training/being trained- if ever) in the early 1960s – an auditor is a blood hound – not a ****** greyhound!
🙂
I wonder what the Audit Commission cost the Treasury each year?
How much did abolishing it in 2015, save the Treasury per annum?
How much will the resultant chaos & corruption, correction and (if any) compensation & convictions & incarcerations (don’t laugh, I live in hope) cost us, from 2022/23 onwards till the system is working again and local services have recovered?
Can we have a system of personal accountability such as was used against councillors in Clay Cross (& other councils) when they failed to set a balanced budget because of the cuts or increased charges/rents involved? Can’t we have Cameron & Osborne & all his Treasury team sanctioned under the current legislation? (via First Tier Tribunal)
Of course nothing will happen to them, despite austerity, despite Brexit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surcharge_(sanction)
Ironically, guess what body USED to do the surcharging of councillors?
Yup – that’s right, the Audit Commission
The question of culpability seems key here.
How can this happen without anyone being accountable?
here is how Derbyshire County Council deal with it – and culpability?!
“Pre-audit statement of accounts – year ended 31 March 2024
On 31 May 2024 we published our notice of ‘Delay in publishing pre-audit statement of accounts: year ended 31 March 2024’, below.
The council published its draft statement of accounts for the year ended 31 March 2024, subject to audit, on 4 October 2024. The council’s pre-audit statement of accounts 2023 to 2024 are attached to this page.
Delay in publishing pre-audit statement of accounts: year ended 31 March 2024
The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015, as amended by the Accounts and Audit (Amendment) Regulations 2022,require local authorities to publish draft statement of accounts 2023 to 2024, certified by the Director of Finance and subject to audit, on or before 31 May 2024. Under the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 (Sections 25 to 28), the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 (Regulations 10, 14 and 15) and the Accounts and Audit (Amendment) Regulations 2022, based on a publication date of the statutory deadline of 31 May 2024, the period for the exercise of public rights to inspect the council’s unaudited 2023 to 2024 statement of accounts and related documents should commence on the first working day of June 2024 and include the first 10 working days of June 2024, with the inspection dates being between 3 June and 12 July 2024.
Notice is given under Regulation 15 (1A) that the council will not be in a position to commence the period for the exercise of public rights as set out above due to delays in the production and publication of the 2023 to 2024 accounts.
The council now aims to publish its unaudited 2023 to 2024 accounts ready for consideration at a future Audit Committee meeting as soon as possible. The council will ensure that the public has the right to inspect the council’s unaudited 2023 to 2024 statement of accounts and related documents commencing on the day after publication and for the appropriate length of period as required by Regulation 15.
Mark Kenyon, Director of Finance (Section 151 Officer)
Derbyshire County Council
County Hall
Matlock
DE4 3AH
Date: 31 May 2024
Approval of statement of accounts – year ended 31 March 2023
The Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015, as amended by the Accounts and Audit (Amendment) Regulations 2022, required us to publish draft statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 (for the year ended 31 March 2023), certified by our Director of Finance and ICT and subject to audit, on or before 31 May 2023. However, resolution of a national accounting issue resulted in June 2023 adjustments being required to our statement of accounts 2021 to 2022. This meant that adjustments to the opening balances in our draft pre-audit statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 were then required, and they were published following this, on 10 July 2023.
We were then unable to publish our audited statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 by the required date of 30 September 2023. This was mainly because of our external auditor, Mazars LLP, needing to clear a backlog of audit work from previous financial years, which was impacting on the timely delivery of the audit. We worked closely with them to ensure the required work was completed as soon as possible. The accounts were approved by Audit Committee on 15 May 2024 and they issued their Independent Auditor’s Report to us and an unqualified opinion on our statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 on 16 May 2024. Our audited statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 are attached to this page.
The external auditors will not be able to issue their 2022 to 2023 audit certificate formally concluding their audit until group instructions are finalised by the National Audit Office. As their audit certificate has not yet been issued, we are not yet able to issue the notice required by Regulation 16 of the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015.
The audited statement of accounts 2022 to 2023 are also available for inspection (Part 3, Regulation 10 of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015) by local government electors, who may make copies without payment (photocopies are chargeable), by appointment, from 10am to 4pm on Monday to Friday at:
County Hall
Matlock
Derbyshire
DE4 3AG
For more information, please contact Eleanor Scriven, email eleanor.scriven@derbyshire.gov.uk or write to her at County Hall.”
Thanks
Presumably, Treasury papers such as this one now become meaningless?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fixing-the-foundations-public-spending-audit-2024-25/fixing-the-foundations-public-spending-audit-2024-25-html
If you can’t do the costings, you can’t say what’s wrong, let alone “fix the foundations?
More “difficult decisions” ahead!
Indeed
One of the risks here is that nasty parliamentarians can say what they like about local government without revealing that they are actually being starved of cash (as RobertJ seems to confirm).
The other issue is that locally representative departments like DHLUC (Housing, Levelling Up and Communities) actively encourage Council managers to break rules to get things done that actually increases the risks to Councils in fulfilling central government policies.
It is policy by dogma – nothing else.
The average reasonably financially secure citizen has v limited exposure to local authorities, we pay our local taxes, and have our bins collected. Maybe we complain about fly tipping, potholes or streetlights, but that isn’t partcularly stressful because us, the basics, for now, are secure – money, a home, food, warmth, family & friends, our own transport.
But those at the bottom end of the ladder financially, are in daily contact with the chaos of underfunded local services, such as homelessness services, council housing repairs, rent arrears, bailiffs, social care, child protection, cladding issues on flats, . All these people are literally screaming in pain, facing life-threatening problems, day after day, feeling total despair. But the state has withdrawn from the front line, and has done so deliberately, with malice aforethought, and, in the case of many Labour politicians, with total self-serving hypocrisy.
So tens of thousands of decent but damaged vulnerable human beings suffer, while others ignore their pain.
Don’t give up. Please.
Thanks
[…] the fact that, as I noted yesterday, these accounts were subject to qualification by the National Audit Office because about 90% of the […]
Abolition of the Audit Commission was a very stupid idea – now the chickens are coming home to roost as it were!
It is not just at Local Authority level that audit has failed but at school level as well.
Before I retired I had been responsible for monitoring the audit reports on schools and supporting the implementation of any recommendations they’re in. These were carried out by the LA’s internal audit service and were rigorous. I then moved to work as a Regional Officer for a educational Trade Union, in that role I saw the very poor practice in a number of MATs, things which would never have been allowed when the LA did the audits.
In the worst case, after about a year of dispute and having to escalate the case to the Funding Agency for Schools, the whole of the Trust senior management, with the exception of the whistleblower, had to leave as did every trustee and board member. There was a report published on the trust and it was damning but nay touched the sides of the true level of both incompetence and, in my opinion corruption in that trust.
It was not the only MAT, I had to challenge on their financial system, another one saw all of the senior management and trust members leave at the end of my involvement .
The atomisation of the state, both national and local, to serve the needs of the private sector has damaged so much of the vital infrastructure structure which in the 20th century was responsible for good governance to the extent that it is far to easy to steal from the state.
Thanks
Is there and explanations as to why the private sector has not wanted (or been physically resourced) to take on Local Authority audit work?
I can understand why the removal of the independent The Audit Commissio, and what has followed may play to a government not over enthusiastic on being held accountable to Parliament. A key purpose of public sector audits being to ensuring that funds are spent only for purposes approved by Parliament an that limited public finance and resources have been used efficiently, effectively.
Worse is accountability for public spending on Covid measures still seems not existant, despite the efforts of the Public Account. Committee. Estimated cost £310 billion to £410 billion.
a) Price
b) Risk
c) A lack of skills
d) No willingness to create the skills
e) Lack of insurer comprehension of the market
see also Telegraph (27 Nov pm) = “Matthew Lynn
Britain is closer to bankruptcy than anyone feared
Local councils across the country are close to insolvency, but the real problems lay in Westminster”
Another increasingly inaccurate data set is information about schools.
Academies are refusing to supply data on the basis that it is “commercially sensitive”.
Thank you, Shelagh.
Good heavens. It makes sense.
As Labour hands over the keys to the kingdom to Big Finance, especially Wall Street*, one can see more of this happening. *Including the firm on whose boss Angela Rayner has a crush on, allegedly.
Thank you to John S Warren, above.
John is correct. I don’t really want to leave, either, or not yet.
Everything is collapsing. I can scarcely keep up. I have wittered on about Pensions Funds and LDIs, but as always with these things; that was obviously just a stalking horse. Here is what is happening now:
“A UK pension scheme has been called “deeply irresponsible” after investing in Bitcoin.
The unnamed defined-benefit scheme became the first in the UK to make the plunge, using 3% of its assets to buy into the cryptocurrency last month.
Pension specialist Cartwright acted as an adviser to the scheme and said the allocation was a “strategic move that, not only offers diversification but also taps into an asset class with a unique asymmetric risk-return profile”.
It claimed its approach meant the scheme could benefit from a significant potential bonus, while limiting the possible negative outcomes.” (Sky News)
I can scarcely believe it. I begin to feel I must be living in a re-make of the decades of the 1920s, or 2000s. I simply ask; what do pension fund actuaries make of all this?
I hope they’re having kittens
Bitcoin is valueless
A great piece, Richard!
It truly is shocking how much the Tories damaged the nation during 2010-2024. Certainly much of our trouble goes back further than that, but it is still rather shocking.
Though, one point of feedback – I understand that the ‘N-word’ in this case is Nationalization, but generally speaking the phrase ‘the N-word’ carries a very different connotation. It might be best to adjust that wording slightly 🙂
It was deliberate. I was deliberately using a known phrase in a totally appropriate unfamiliar context.
Problems with MOD auditing too:
https://bylinetimes.com/2024/11/26/ministry-of-defence-national-audit-office-report-blocked/