Tag: Treasury

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 22 December 2000.

Chancellor Gordon Brown and International Development Secretary Clare Short today welcomed the news that 22 countries have now had exceptional debt relief agreed, amounting to some $50 billion.

Speaking after the IMF and World Bank announced the news, the Chancellor and Clare Short said:

“Last year we agreed the action that needed to be taken to remove the burden of unpaid and unpayable debt on the poorest countries. The IMF and World Bank committed that 20 countries would have their debt relief agreed by the end of this year, and governments of HIPC countries, as well as the international community have worked hard to achieve this. We are pleased that we have not only met, but exceeded that target. On average these countries’ debts will be reduced by two thirds.

“More importantly, this action has enabled us to take forward our efforts to tackle the extreme poverty which affects the lives of so many millions of people in these countries. It is important to remember that the measure of success is not simply the amount of debt cancelled, but the number of people who are lifted out of poverty.

“This achievement owes much to the commitment and dedication of Horst Kohler, James Wolfensohn and their staff, and the determined efforts of countries themselves to demonstrate their commitment to addressing poverty, and to using the money freed up by this debt relief to benefit the poor.”

Continuing, they stressed that the achievement announced today was an important element in the wide ranging fight to eliminate poverty:

“We must create a virtuous circle of debt relief, poverty reduction and economic growth. The achievement announced today removes a huge barrier to tackling poverty in these countries. We are very concerned that a large number of other HIPC countries are unable to qualify for debt relief either because of their involvement in conflict, or because they do not yet have clear Poverty Reduction Strategies which show how the savings from debt relief will flow to spending on poverty reduction. We call on all concerned to work for peace, so that we can begin to work together towards poverty reduction. We are committed to intensifying our efforts to help them resolve their conflicts.

“The UK, for its part, stands ready to assist, and continues to play a leading role on debt. From this month, debt payments from the HIPC countries have either stopped, or will be held in trust, to be returned later for poverty reduction. No longer will we benefit from these historic debts.”

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 11 January 2000.

The UK today took a lead in the international effort to encourage the wider use of collective action clauses in sovereign debt contracts,  particularly by emerging market countries, when it included such a clause for the first time in a UK sovereign debt contract denominated in euros.

Greater use of collective action clauses in debt instruments is one method of facilitating coordination between creditors and debtors and  promoting an orderly resolution of financial crises. G7 Finance Ministers agreed in Cologne in June 1999 on the importance of encouraging wider use of such clauses in sovereign debt contracts.

Welcoming the development, the Chancellor, Gordon Brown said :

“The international community must continue its efforts to develop a comprehensive new framework for crisis prevention and resolution between the public and private sector.

“Greater use of collective action clauses in bond contracts is one step we can take to promote better management of crisis situations where they arise.

“We have for some time included collective action clauses in our dollar debt.  By including a collective action clause for the first time in the euro Treasury Note we have announced today, I hope further to encourage other countries, especially emerging markets, to include similar provisions in their own foreign currency bond issues.

“By making the use of collective action clauses the market norm, the international community may continue to improve its approach to crisis management.”

The clause is included in contracts for the auction of a new UK Government Euro Treasury Note announced by the Bank of England today. This makes the Note programme consistent with other UK Government foreign currency issues.

The press release issued by 9 February 2000.

Chancellor aims for £1 billion more to be given to charity

Measures to encourage more people and companies to give more money and time to voluntary action were set out today by the Chancellor Gordon Brown in a speech “A Civic Patriotism” at the NCVO annual conference in London today.
The Chancellor outlined the case for a “new and stronger relationship between individuals, communities and government” in a four point plan. The plan includes:

• tax changes to promote individual giving;
• tax changes to promote corporate donations;
• measures to promote the giving of time and volunteering; and
• measures to develop a new role for voluntary organisations.

The Chancellor said:

“I want to outline the case for a new and stronger relationship between individual, community and government – for the renewal of British civic society – or a great British society which not only defines the importance of voluntary organisations, but engenders a civic patriotism.

“I want to propose a new financial foundation for this civic renewal – a modern financial foundation for charitable, voluntary and community action.”

The Chancellor confirmed his pledge to “put charities on a firm foundation for the future.” He encouraged charities to exploit the new tax regime which makes it easier for individuals and companies, to give with the aim – “millions more giving so that by the end of the year 2002, as a people, have given a £1 billion more.”

But encouraging more people to give more time rather than money was an important part of the strategy. The Chancellor said:

“Our next task is to encourage new volunteers, create new volunteering opportunities and to build networks that match those who can give help to those which need help.”

Work is already underway working with charities and the voluntary sector on key initiatives but the Chancellor announced that:

“To advance both and the giving of money and time, we will bring together all relevant parties – the voluntary sector, key government departments, business leaders, employees’ representatives and media experts – to examine proposals for a national campaign based on a partnership with the voluntary sector.”

The Chancellor stressed the importance of the voluntary community and charitable organisations’ involvement in projects like Sure Start and the proposed new children’s fund. He said:

“These are partnerships in which the voluntary community and charitable organisations can take the lead, using their local knowledge and skill to put their ideas and projects to work.

To encourage the social enterprise sector in Britain, which can play a vital role in the economic regeneration of deprived communities the Chancellor also announced the setting up of a Social Investment Taskforce.

The Chancellor made clear he wanted to see “more investment in the UK in social enterprises – projects which have social objectives, and are not simply profit orientated.”

The Taskforce will look at:

• the case for social investment and a social investment fund;
• identify barriers to the further development of this field; and
• propose solutions and models for the future development of social investment.

It will report by autumn 2000.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 11 February 2000.

Peter Gershon is to be Chief Executive of the new Office of Government Commerce, Andrew Smith, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, announced today. Brian Rigby will be the Deputy Chief Executive.

The Office of Government Commerce (OGC) is being set up to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Government’s £13 billion annual civil procurement budget. The appointment of Peter Gershon and Brian Rigby will ensure that the OGC will spearhead a new era of Government efficiency.

Speaking about the appointments Andrew Smith said:

“I am very pleased to have secured the services of Peter as Chief Executive and Brian as Deputy Chief Executive. It was Peter who was instrumental in carrying out the review of central government purchasing last year and we have at the helm two people who can deliver on the Government’s modernisation and competitiveness agenda.

“Peter is highly respected in the private sector and we are fortunate to have acquired his services. His skills in IT, industry and business are second to none and, along with Brian’s own civil service experience in procurement balanced with his private sector skills, we have the ideal partnership.

“In the developing electronic age, we must seize the opportunity to combine a new era of central Government efficiency with the huge potential from its civil procurement buying power to deliver real savings for the taxpayer.”

Sir Richard Evans, Chairman of BAE Systems, commented :

“Peter Gershon’s appointment to this key new government body is fitting recognition of his outstanding capabilities as a manager. Whilst we are naturally sorry to lose him from the BAE SYSTEMS team, we recognise the importance Ministers attach to this move and wish him every success.”

The Office of Government Commerce will oversee the purchasing activity of some 200 Government departments and agencies employing some 5000 staff on procurement tasks and spending some £13 billion of taxpayers’ money every year. The OGC will perform an important role in the Government’s modernisation and competitiveness agenda and will ensure the best value for this major element of public expenditure.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 11 February 2000.

Professor Stephen Nickell has been appointed to the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), the Chancellor Gordon Brown announced today.

Professor Nickell is currently School Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics (LSE). Professor Nickell will take up his membership of the MPC on 1 June. He will replace Professor Willem Buiter whose three-year term as a member of the MPC expires on 31 May. Professor Buiter has been appointed Chief Economist of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

Gordon Brown said:

“I am delighted that Stephen Nickell has agreed to join the Monetary Policy Committee. He has had a long and distinguished academic career, and his expertise in such areas as the labour market and productivity growth will be of invaluable assistance to the work of the Committee.

“I am very grateful to Willem Buiter for his excellent contribution to the Committee’s work in the first three years of its existence, and wish him well in his new post.”

CURRICULUM VITAE

Name: STEPHEN JOHN NICKELL

Date of Birth: 25 April 1944

Nationality: British

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION

1. 1962-65 BSc Mathematics
Pembroke College, Cambridge University

2. 1968-1970 MSc Mathematical Economics and Econometrics (distinction)
London School of Economics
Ely Devons Prize

EMPLOYMENT

1. 1998 – Date School Professor of Economics, London School of Economics

2. 1984 – 1998 Professor of Economics and Director of the Institute of Economics and Statistics, University of Oxford. Professorial Fellow of Nuffield College.

3. 1979-84 Professor of Economics, London School of Economics.

4. 1979 Visiting Research Associate, University of Princeton (Industrial Relations Section).

5. 1977-79 Reader in Economics, London School of Economics

6. 1974-75 Visiting Research Fellow, Ecole Nationale de la Statistique et de l’Administration Economique, Paris.

7. 1970-77 Lecturer in Economics, London School of Economics

8. 1965-68 Mathematics Teacher, Hendon County School, London.

OTHER ACTIVITIES

General Academic Activities:

1973-87 Editorial Board, Review of Economic Studies

1974-75 Assistant Editor, Review of Economic Studies

1975-78 Joint Managing Editor, Review of Economic Studies

1977-79, Programme Committee, Econometric Society
1981-83 European Meetings

1980-85 Programme Committee, Econometric Society World Congress

1981-89 Treasury Academic Panel

1981- Associate Editor, Economic Journal

1983-87 Associate Editor, International Journal of Industrial Organization

1983- Fellow, Centre for Economic Policy Research

1984-98 Editor, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics

1984-94 Council, Royal Economic Society

1984-87 Economic Affairs Committee, ESRC (vice-chairman 1985-87)

1985-88 Founding Council Member, European Economic Association

1985 N&g Lecture, Austrian Economic Association

1987-93 Council, Econometric Society

1987-90 Research Grants Board, ESRC; Industry, Economics and Environment Research Development Group, ESRC

1987 President’s Lecture, Scottish Economic Association

1988-94 Scientific Council of the Center for Economic Research, University of Tilberg, Holland

1990-94 Chairman, Research Grants Board, ESRC;
Member of Council, ESRC

1990- Advisory Board of the Institute for International Economic Studies, University of Stockholm, Sweden

1990- Governor of the National Institute of Social and Economic Research

1992 Mitsui lectures, University of Birmingham

1994- International Board of Advisers of the Tinbergen Institute, Amsterdam

1996- Labour Markets Panel, H.M. Treasury

1998 Adam Smith Lecture, European Association of Labour Economists

1999- Council, European Economic Association.

Academic Consulting:

H.M. Treasury; Manpower Services Commission; Department of Employment; Department of Health and Social Security; Economic and Social Research Council; Morgan Grenfell; Reserve Bank of New Zealand; OECD.

Academic Honours:

1980 Fellow of the Econometric Society

1993 Fellow of the British Academy

1997 Foreign Honorary Member of the American Economic Association

---

LETTER TO: THE RT HON GORDON BROWN MP FROM PROFESSOR WILLEM BUITER

I believe you have been informed by the Governor that I will not be a candidate for a second term as external member of the MPC. I am writing to you to explain the reason for this decision.

It was a singular honour to be appointed a member of the MPC. My period on the Committee has been the high point of my professional career. Membership of the MPC is the most rewarding responsibility a monetary economist can aspire to.

Your decision to grant operational independence over the conduct of monetary policy to the Bank of England was a bold and imaginative move. So was your insistence that the sole criteria for membership of the MPC would be professional competence and independence. The division of labour between the elected political authority which sets the target of monetary policy, and the appointed MPC charged with the pursuit of this target, without political interference of any kind, is a model of how a monetary authority should be designed. Even those who were sceptical at first must now be convinced of the wisdom of its design and implementation: the clear, numerical and symmetric inflation target, the existence of the ‘open letter procedure’, the transparency and openness of the arrangements and the accountability of those who participate in it. There is now a widely-based constituency for low inflation. There is growing awareness of the sometimes uncomfortable truth, that it is through the uncompromising pursuit of macroeconomic stability for the country as a whole, that we best serve the long-term interests of all its citizens and of its diverse regions, sectors and industries.

With the end of my term approaching, I have given considerable thought to whether I should be a candidate for re-appointment. I have come to the conclusion that both the appearance and the substance of independence of the external members of the MPC are best served by restricting their membership to a single term – three years as envisaged in the Bank of England Act 1998. Come May 2000, I will have served for three years, one year under the interim arrangement in effect between June 1997 and the coming into force of the new Bank of England Act, and the two-year term I was appointed to in June 1998, as part of the procedure for staggering the appointments of the external members.

Having reached the conclusion that, as a matter of principle, external members should be appointed for a single term only, I cannot in good faith claim special circumstances for myself, much as I feel tempted to do so. The past 2_ years have exceeded all my expectations. The new arrangements have worked and the UK’s model of central banking compares favourably with best practice elsewhere. I will look back with gratitude and a measure of pride on my term as a member.

I hope that, in the years to come, I will be able to support in some other capacity, the process of progressive, radical reform of policies and institutions in this country, which is now my home. I want to thank you personally for having given me the opportunity to be part of the process of embedding macroeconomic stability in the UK in a set of rules and institutions that will stand the test of time.

---

REPLY TO: PROFESSOR WILLEM BUITER FROM THE CHANCELLOR

Thank you for your letter of 18 January.

I would like to thank you very sincerely for the excellent work you have done on the Monetary Policy Committee. You have played a significant role in helping to establish the credibility of the new institutional framework.

I am delighted you enjoyed your time on the Committee and I wish you every success for the future.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 11 February 2000.

The Chancellor Gordon Brown today spelt out the benefits of devolution and how working together the whole of Britain could rise to the challenge of e-commerce.

Chairing the first Joint Ministerial Committee on the Knowledge Economy, and also the first to be held outside London the Chancellor said:

“Today we are agreeing measures which will help us rise to challenge of e-commerce.

“By 2002 every school to be linked to the Internet. 1,000 computer learning centres throughout the country. 200,000 computers loaned to families who need them. New incentives for small businesses to join the e-commerce revolution.

“Amid the day to day news about devolution, it is important not to lose sight of the longer view.

“The case for devolution starts from the over-centralised, remote and insensitive machinery of government that we inherited in 1997.

“The old uniform and rigid state – with everything directed from London – denied expression to our regions and nations. So devolution does not create new identities within Britain but simply gives democratic expression to existing identities.

“And centralisation did not make for good government, nor does a centralised state reflect lasting and shared British values .

“So there is no question of a dangerous meddling with British traditions and the constitutional reforms we made were not invented in a laboratory. They responded to the strong sense that our constitution should be updated to reflect enduring and shared British values – not least that government should always be close to the people.

“The new democratic constitutional architecture not only rights past wrongs but better equips Britain for the future. The new devolved institutions allow for innovation in policy making.

“The proposed Drugs Enforcement Agency in Scotland may, once up and running, lead the way for the whole country. The Welsh Assembly has introduced new services for the elderly, leading, not least, in concessionary travel. And added to that is the innovative work of regional development agencies in England tackling skill shortages and the investment shortfall in their areas.

“It is good for Britain that new centres of initiative are already developing. Because in the new devolved framework, the whole of Britain can learn and benefit from the distinctive initiatives and energies of each of its parts. In a very real sense the new Britain can draw both from our democracy and our diversity.

“Those who assume that the next stage will be dominated by messy arguments about dividing up the spoils or simply by confrontation are also guilty of being backward looking – still looking only to Whitehall to solve their problems, arguing over who the centre will favour.

“Instead of people looking upwards to Whitehall for their solutions, from region to region, locality to locality, more and more people will themselves take more charge of the decisions that affect their lives. So the next stage will be further devolution and, through, for example, elected mayors, the democratic strengthening of local government.

“This does not threaten Britain – and its democracy – but strengthens it, applying lasting British values to new conditions. So British values and British institutions, until recently increasingly at odds with each other, are now coming together.”

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 14 February 2000.

Lucy de Groot has been appointed as a new Deputy Director in the Treasury’s Public Services Directorate and becomes the first person to be appointed to a Treasury post of this kind from outside the civil service.

Currently working for the Audit Commission, Lucy de Groot, 48, was previously Chief Executive of Bristol City Council. She brings with her wide experience of local government and delivery of public services.

The main objective of the Public Services Directorate is to improve the quality and cost effectiveness of public services while keeping within the Government’s fiscal plans.

Amongst Ms de Groot’s initial tasks will be to focus on the Spending Review which will set the Government’s spending plans for the years 2001-04, together with clear objectives and targets for all departments and cross-departmental programmes.

Ms de Groot will be managing the teams dealing with education, housing, urban policy and social exclusion, transport, culture, rural and agriculture policy, the environment, defence and foreign affairs.

Ms de Groot has been working at the Audit Commission on a temporary basis with the new Best Value Inspectorate. She was appointed as the Chief Executive of Bristol City Council in 1995 in the lead up to the local government reorganisation. She has extensive experience in the management of public services and in cross-sectoral partnerships.

Prior to her appointment as Chief Executive, Ms de Groot was the Head of Policy in Bristol City Council and the London Borough of Lewisham. Ms de Groot has also worked in a number of not-for profit organisations dealing with adult education, housing, employment and economic development.

A graduate of Oxford University and the London School of Economics, she has been a non-Executive Director on the Board of Employment Service since the summer of 1998.

She takes up her post at the Treasury on 13 March.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 23 December 2022.

Laszlo Szabo, 49 of London, was the sole director of Letting Base Ltd, which was incorporated in 2009 and traded as a letting agency on Holloway Road until it went into liquidation in January 2022.

In October 2020, Szabo applied for a Bounce Back Loan of £38,000 to support his business, which had formerly traded as Hungarian Lettings Ltd. The company received the loan money the following day.

Bounce Back Loans were a government scheme to help keep businesses afloat during the Covid-19 pandemic, whereby companies could apply for loans of up to 25% of their 2019 turnover, up to a maximum of £50,000.

Under the rules of the scheme, businesses could only take out one loan, although they were permitted to apply for a top-up if the original loan was less than the maximum to which they were entitled.

Yet five days after applying for the first loan, Szabo applied for another Bounce Back Loan of £50,000 for Letting Base Ltd, this time from a different bank. And 10 days after this, he applied for a £12,000 top-up to the first Bounce Back Loan, taking the total borrowed through the scheme up to £100,000.

The following day he returned to the second bank, seeking a further top-up of £50,000 to the second Bounce Back Loan. This time the application was rejected.

Letting Base Ltd went into liquidation in 2022 owing more than £243,000, including the full £100,000 of the Bounce Back Loan money, triggering an investigation by the Insolvency Service.

Investigators discovered that Szabo had made the four separate applications for Bounce Back Loans and top-ups, despite signing a declaration each time confirming it was his only application, and that Letting Base Ltd was entitled to the money he was applying for.

On 21 November 2022 the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy accepted a disqualification undertaking from Laszlo Szabo after he did not dispute that he had misused the Bounce Back Loan scheme by claiming money to which his business was not entitled.

His ban lasts for 11 years and began on 12 December 2022. The disqualification prevents him from directly or indirectly becoming involved in the promotion, formation or management of a company, without the permission of the court.

Due to Laszlo Szabo’s personal circumstances, it is unlikely that repayment of the Bounce Back Loans will be made.

Nina Cassar, Deputy Head of Investigations at the Insolvency Service, said:

The Bounce Back Loan scheme was set up to support businesses in genuine need during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the terms of the scheme were widely publicised to make clear that directors were required to self-certify their eligibility for support.

Laszlo Szabo made false declarations to his company’s banks, and then entered liquidation having made no repayments towards its Bounce Back Loans, which resulted in a loss of £100,000 of public funds.

His blatant and repeat abuse of taxpayer’s money has resulted in a lengthy disqualification, which will serve to safeguard the economy from traders who exploit financial support packages designed to help UK businesses.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 28 February 2000.

An historic opportunity to look more widely at the whole question of audit, access and performance validation across central Government was signalled today by the Chief Secretary Andrew Smith as he proposed that a study be set up to recommend suitable audit and accountability arrangements for central Government in the 21st Century.

He commented:

“This is a great opportunity for Parliament and Government to work together to make sure transparency and accountability go hand in hand with the modernising Government agenda.”

In answer to a written Parliamentary Question from Jackie Lawrence MP (for Preseli Pembrokeshire) he said that the proposed review will cover the modernising Government agenda, audit/validation of performance measures, the implications of devolution, the wider European context, with particular reference to European Directives affecting audit arrangements, possible models from other countries and the relationship with other audit and regulatory bodies.

Mr Smith stressed that he was keenly aware of the importance of Parliament’s rights in these matters. He recognised the need for its interest in scrutiny, accountability and control of expenditure to be reflected in the way the review was undertaken, including the steering group for the study. The steering group will direct a project board responsible for the delivery of the study and the project board will have an independent Chair.

The press release issued by HM Treasury on 3 March 2000.

“The performance of the UK economy continues to be impressive” and macroeconomic prospects “remain good” according to the latest assessment by experts from the International Monetary Fund.

At a discussion in Washington on 1 March, the IMF’s Board of Directors concluded that the Government was on course to deliver its central economic objective of high and stable levels of growth and employment. The IMF assessment says that “real growth has been strong…and both unemployment and inflation have declined steadily”.

The Directors’ assessment was that “the authorities’ policy frameworks and their track record of skilful policy management would be conducive to a continuation of sustained growth and low inflation”

Commenting on the IMF’s report, the Chancellor, Gordon Brown, said:

“I welcome the IMF’s report on the UK economy. It clearly supports the Government’s new framework for economic policy, and our prudent and cautious approach to managing the public finances, and the efforts we are making to promote enterprise and fairness in this country.”

The UK has been championing transparency and openness in the IMF’s scrutiny of countries’ economic policies and performance. This transparency is a key element in avoiding future international crises. Today’s publication marks a further step forward by the UK. We are publishing for the first time the IMF’s report on the UK in full, along with the record of the IMF Board discussion of the report, and the UK’s statement in response to the report. The Chancellor welcomed these new publications, saying;

“The publication of the IMF’s report on the UK economy clearly demonstrates our commitment to open up the IMF’s scrutiny process. Today marks an important step forward by the UK in economic policy making, by making available clear independent information on policy that is an essential part of the new international financial architecture.”

Other points the IMF Directors have made include:

• praise for the “effectiveness of the inflation targeting framework in the United Kingdom”, and in particular “the forward-looking, transparent and pre-emptive approach.” They added that “the transparency of the UK monetary framework is already among the highest internationally”.
• a welcome for “the efficiency gains and improved public resource allocation arising from the strengthened fiscal framework”.
• They “praised the authorities for focussing long term policies toward achieving greater equity and strengthening productivity.”
• praise for the Government’s policies to move people off welfare and into work, and to make work pay. They note the Government’s welfare and labour market reforms “were aimed at strengthening incentives to work, particularly among jobless households.”