Inflation down, bond yields up. What’s going on?
Annualised inflation in the UK in July fell more than a full point compared with June. Good news, surely. Rishi Sunak may yet deliver one of his five pledges for 2023, to see inflation down to 5% by Christmas; 10-year Gilt yields already at 15-year highs did not miss an upward beat, effectively giving the riposte “so what?”. In another case of “yes, so…?”, in the US, reported inflation has fallen two thirds from its peak of more than a year ago, and yet Treasury yields have just surpassed where they were in the depths of the global bond hiatus last autumn sparked by the disastrous mishandling of the Truss/Kwarteng budget and the LDI (Liability Driven Investment) crisis in the UK pension sector. In both the UK and the US, persistently high bond yields suggest that policy to deal with inflation is more akin to economic whack-a-mole than it is a precision instrument to kill it cleanly.
US: “Slow down! Hold your horses!”
The overall economy is still growing at 2.6% year-on-year. Despite the big increase in interest rates it is showing a greater inclination to accelerate rather than to slow down. This in turn is inconsistent with being able to achieve a 2% inflation rate and to keep it there without the risk of it popping up again. The most recent Federal Reserve monetary policy committee meeting minutes also released this week reveal the divisions between members as to what happens next: continue with further interest rate increases and risk killing the economy through over-tightening? Or halt here and run the risk of inflation flaring up again? Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. The markets concluded that all other things being equal, further rate rises are still a possibility and that interest rates are likely to remain at elevated levels for longer than anticipated before heading south again. It is an evolving and dynamic story, prone to bouts of volatility.
UK wages accelerating faster than prices
The government is clearly hoping that the steam will now come out of the momentum behind wages as the pressure for consumers to manage the cost-of-living crisis eases with disinflation. Potentially still frustrating that is the competition for labour and the need for employers to pay up to fill vacancies. And there is that persistent nagging itch needing to be scratched that a decade or more of falling real earnings still leaves a sizeable proportion of the workforce worse off than they might have been with much catching up to be done. Despite high job security and attractive pensions, this is the nub of the issue in the public sector. Although some unions have already or are now settling claims (e.g. nurses, junior doctors in Scotland, some sectors in education), others are still hanging out for more. Notables are the Rail Maritime and Transport (RMT) union, ASLEF (the train drivers), university lecturers and the junior doctors in England represented by the British Medical Association (BMA).
Economically, the most important of these is the BMA. Rail strikes and overtime bans are a persistent irritant to the travelling public but thanks to the ability to work from home among many passengers, the economic impact is much less than historically. Likewise the university lecturers: the disruption to potential careers and the inconvenience for students emerging saddled with debt from university but without a graded degree is significant to them personally but it is immediately irrelevant to the wider economy. The doctors are different: with an estimated 61,200 patient appointments and procedures cancelled or deferred this week alone, and approaching 900,000 suffering the same fate so far this year thanks to industrial action by health workers across the piece, there is a measurable economic impact created by the disruption (the direct cost to the NHS is estimated already at approaching £1bn, leaving aside broader indirect costs).
The BMA takes political instruction from RMT’s Lynch
Such political motivation among doctors presents a direct challenge to the government and NHS management. It also presents the General Medical Council, the doctors’ regulator and registrar, with an ethical dilemma: at what point does an otherwise qualified and clinically competent practitioner become non-compliant for registration if for ideological reasons he/she persistently withdraws his/her labour and in doing so is demonstrably careless (in its literal sense) of patients’ health and wilfully puts them in potential danger? Is this simply an ‘HR’ issue? Or does it go to the heart of what defines a doctor’s vocation that whatever the circumstances the duty of care to patients comes first, the self-interests of doctors second. The medical profession exists because of its patients, not despite them; both patients and medical practitioners are in trouble when doctors think and behave otherwise.
Health strikes and the deeper malaise
Its fiscal gravitational pull is extraordinary. It is also clear the model is broken. Offered a clean sheet of paper and looking to create a health service fit for purpose in 2048, no rational person would invent today’s spaghetti-like confection, one built higgledy-piggledy on the narrow foundations of 1948.
NHS reform: time to get a grip
It is a formidable political challenge to reform the National Health Service, particularly when during the pandemic it was a national totem, cheered with almost religious fervour every Thursday night at 8pm, and then awarded the George Cross by The Queen. But that lustre has tarnished, not least with junior doctors and latterly consultants striking not only for pay settlements into double digits but now in the case of the juniors, with significant political intent in which patients’ interests are collateral damage. Rather than tinkering around the edges, the need for reform to be confronted head-on but constructively to restore the NHS’s efficiency in the wider national economic interest (including helping reduce government debt and the tax burden) has never been more obvious. With less than 18 months to the election, who is going to take it on?
And all of this started back along the trail 1800 words ago with the simple question of why Gilt yields are still going up!
The Jupiter Merlin Portfolios are long-term investments; they are certainly not immune from market volatility, but they are expected to be less volatile over time, commensurate with the risk tolerance of each. With liquidity uppermost in our mind, we seek to invest in funds run by experienced managers with a blend of styles but who share our core philosophy of trying to capture good performance in buoyant markets while minimising as far as possible the risk of losses in more challenging conditions.
The value of active minds – independent thinking
A key feature of Jupiter’s investment approach is that we eschew the adoption of a house view, instead preferring to allow our specialist fund managers to formulate their own opinions on their asset class. As a result, it should be noted that any views expressed – including on matters relating to environmental, social and governance considerations – are those of the author(s), and may differ from views held by other Jupiter investment professionals.
Fund specific risks