It is being widely leaked that, in his budget speech to Parliament on Wednesday, the Chancellor will announce an emergency amendment to the Sunday Trading Act 1994, to last for one summer only.
This is being presented as a welcome chance for all those Olympic visitors to go shopping in the West End & thus give an extra boost to our ailing economy.
This move will also save a lot of red faces all round.
For, in January, a serious flaw was discovered in the draconian law which was passed in 2006 to meet the stringent advertising & trading requirements of the owners of the Olympic 'brand'
Nobody had realised that the super-size ‘retail opportunities’ within the precincts of the purpose-built stadium are covered by the provisions of the same 1994 law on Sunday trading as every other large store in the UK – allowed to open only for a maximum of 6 hours, between 10am & 6pm.
The closing ceremony takes place on a Sunday evening, after 7pm. So nobody present will be able to buy presents
Let us hope that the attempt to force this legislation through does not meet with the same embarrassing defeat as did the Thatcher government’s 1986 attempt to liberalise shopping hours.
The Games have so far also failed to deliver on another promise, according to a report from Hometrack: houses in the area are still selling at prices 1/3 below the average for the rest of London.
We should not take this too much to heart – I suspect that even those who are attracted by a move to the regenerated area are holding off until after the disruption of construction & the influx of so may visitors.
And anyway, we should rejoice that housing in one part of London remains (relatively) affordable. The average home on the other side of the city, in Kensington & Chelsea, will now set you back a cool £2 million, according to another report today, this one from Rightmove.
Showing posts with label UK assets. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UK assets. Show all posts
Monday, March 19, 2012
Monday, February 13, 2012
Forestry questions
Who owns Scottish & Southern Energy?
Whoever they are, they now also own at least 3,000 hectares of Scottish forest.
All in a good cause of course. Burning ‘biomass’ is so much cheaper than building offshore windmills as a way of producing energy which is greener than the sort you get from burning coal. And wood creates more energy than other kinds of biomass available for burning.
Question: at what point does wood (green) become coal (black)?
There is a problem however. Power producers can afford to pay higher prices than can existing customers who want wood for building houses, making furniture, fixtures & fittings, or constructing pallets for industry & the transport of goods. So these latter are getting increasingly unhappy about this threat to their livelihood.
Britain currently produces about 10 million tonnes of commercial timber a year & one-fifth of this goes for energy. By the end of this decade we might need 80 million tonnes for energy alone.
One way or another it looks as though we shall have to start importing other countries’ forests.
Whoever they are, they now also own at least 3,000 hectares of Scottish forest.
All in a good cause of course. Burning ‘biomass’ is so much cheaper than building offshore windmills as a way of producing energy which is greener than the sort you get from burning coal. And wood creates more energy than other kinds of biomass available for burning.
Question: at what point does wood (green) become coal (black)?
There is a problem however. Power producers can afford to pay higher prices than can existing customers who want wood for building houses, making furniture, fixtures & fittings, or constructing pallets for industry & the transport of goods. So these latter are getting increasingly unhappy about this threat to their livelihood.
Britain currently produces about 10 million tonnes of commercial timber a year & one-fifth of this goes for energy. By the end of this decade we might need 80 million tonnes for energy alone.
One way or another it looks as though we shall have to start importing other countries’ forests.
The English forests sailed the oceans of the world & found new lands full of wildernesses & more forests waiting to be cut down - Kate Atkinson
Monday, January 30, 2012
Hot potatoes & water
In what seems like a carefully orchestrated move the China Investment Corporation has made its first investment in UK infrastructure – not in the form of new money for new projects, but by buying 8.7% of the shares in Thames Water which were previously 100% owned by 'Australian' investors.
I say orchestrated because the announcement of the share purchase on 20 January followed an article in the FT by Lou Jiwei, chairman of the CIC, last November which explained their interest in investing in British infrastructure because of its ‘solid returns*’ & George Osborne’s visit to China the week before the announcement.
We are now, in a sense, to pay for all those low price Chinese goods in which we have been able to indulge through the profits on what we pay for one of the basic necessities of life.
Lou Jiwei’s description of the attractions for investors of UK infrastructure mirrors an earlier expression by the majority shareholders, Macquarie, which described the key characteristics of infrastructure as
OFWAT will conduct a ‘fit & proper person’ test on CIC
In less than 40 years water bills have gone from something we paid through water rates (part of the property tax we paid to the local council) to something we paid to a separately constituted, part-nationalised industry in the form of Regional Water Authorities, to paying wholly privatised plc’s or other wholly private owners.
Meanwhile 15 December 2011 saw the publication of a report by the National Association of Pension Funds which showed that British funds are getting out of investing in UK companies at an ever increasing rate. Only £1 in every £8 of their investments is now in UK shares compared with £1 in every £5 two years ago, £1 in every £3 five years ago & well over £1 in every £2 a generation ago.
So yet more evidence of one of the great mysteries of our current economic thinking: why our assets are so attractive to foreign investors (including pension funds) but not to homegrown ones.
Perhaps a clue can be found in something said by former Treasury minister Lord Myners & quoted in The Times:
*An unfortunate turn of phrase for anybody who readthe recent post on the Economist Babbage blog Babbage Blog: Recycling water - Waste not, want not
I say orchestrated because the announcement of the share purchase on 20 January followed an article in the FT by Lou Jiwei, chairman of the CIC, last November which explained their interest in investing in British infrastructure because of its ‘solid returns*’ & George Osborne’s visit to China the week before the announcement.
We are now, in a sense, to pay for all those low price Chinese goods in which we have been able to indulge through the profits on what we pay for one of the basic necessities of life.
Lou Jiwei’s description of the attractions for investors of UK infrastructure mirrors an earlier expression by the majority shareholders, Macquarie, which described the key characteristics of infrastructure as
High entry barriers, inelastic demand, stable cash flow, moderate leverage and long duration. Investment in businesses which:
• provide an essential service to the community
• have a strong competitive position
• generate stable cash flows over the long term
OFWAT will conduct a ‘fit & proper person’ test on CIC
In less than 40 years water bills have gone from something we paid through water rates (part of the property tax we paid to the local council) to something we paid to a separately constituted, part-nationalised industry in the form of Regional Water Authorities, to paying wholly privatised plc’s or other wholly private owners.
Meanwhile 15 December 2011 saw the publication of a report by the National Association of Pension Funds which showed that British funds are getting out of investing in UK companies at an ever increasing rate. Only £1 in every £8 of their investments is now in UK shares compared with £1 in every £5 two years ago, £1 in every £3 five years ago & well over £1 in every £2 a generation ago.
So yet more evidence of one of the great mysteries of our current economic thinking: why our assets are so attractive to foreign investors (including pension funds) but not to homegrown ones.
Perhaps a clue can be found in something said by former Treasury minister Lord Myners & quoted in The Times:
With a few noble exceptions, foreign investors in British companies do not take an interest in governance questions, including keeping a check on excessive boardroom pay. Just too much of a hot potato, getting involved in wider political questions, easier by far just to concentrate on your own financial returns.Well the hot potato relly explodedthis weekend, & one can easily imagine UK pension funds not wanting to be holding anything like that.
Links
[PDF] China Investment Corporation Annual Report 2010
China vitae: Lou Jiwei
Chancellor George Osborne's visit to Asia, January 2012
Thames Water: Our investors
DOC]Privatisation and the history of the water industry
Macquarie: Our history
Why the chancellor wants China's cash
National Association of Pension Funds Annual Survey
Related posts
Men in suits
The foreigners are fleeing
Power & control
The bell tolls for capitalism
[PDF] China Investment Corporation Annual Report 2010
China vitae: Lou Jiwei
Chancellor George Osborne's visit to Asia, January 2012
Thames Water: Our investors
DOC]Privatisation and the history of the water industry
Macquarie: Our history
Why the chancellor wants China's cash
National Association of Pension Funds Annual Survey
Related posts
Men in suits
The foreigners are fleeing
Power & control
The bell tolls for capitalism
*An unfortunate turn of phrase for anybody who readthe recent post on the Economist Babbage blog Babbage Blog: Recycling water - Waste not, want not
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Economic intelligence
Some pieces of intresting economic news or comment over the Christmas period.
Bank ratios
Under the headline ‘Why banks must think carefully before they shrink their assets’ Robert Jenkins (an external member of the interim Financial Policy Cttee of the Bank of England) provided (Times, 14 December) an admirably clear explanation of the potential dangers & difficulties posed by the new regulatory requirement that banks should increase their ‘capital ratios’. As he points out, a ratio involves both a numerator & a denominator; a ratio can therefore be increased by either shrinking the denominator or by making the numerator bigger (or by some combination of the two), with very different knock-on effects for the future health of the financial system.
And an apt quote: The technical phrase is ‘adverse feedback loop’. The less technical phrase is ‘shooting yourself in the foot’.
No link to online version available because of paywall
National wealth
On 20 December the Office for National Statistics published the latest report on the Wealth of Great Britain. Further investigation showed that this was solely about the real & physical property of private households only – the value of which has fallen because of the drop in house prices. The graph of House prices since 1953 on page 19 shows how much of an illusion the so-called increase in value must have been.
Does this include non-household wealth? - No
Or any details of financial holdings – including those of households? - No
Is there any indication of how much is owned by non-British nationals or non-residents? - No
We really do need GDW & GNW equivalents to the GDP/GNP in the national current accounts.
National debt
At the very end of an interview with Eddie Mair on the Christmas Day News Review of the Year on Radio 4, Robert Peston said that there is one thing at least for which we should all be very grateful to Gordon Brown, namely his decision to set up an independent debt management agency.
When considering questions of national solvency it is not enough just to look at the ratio of debt to GDP (or government revenues & expenditure); the repayment schedules matter a lot, & ours are a lot less onerous or immediately pressing than are those, for example, of Italy, thanks to the expertise of these agents. So perhaps that is one area where independence, even of democracy, is to be welcomed.
The magic of pricing
There are independent consultancies which specialise in advising companies on pricing strategy. One such is Simon-Kucher.
Sainsbury’s till receipts now carry the footnote: Based on price perception data, you can live well for less than you thought at Sainsbury’s. Those sound like good weasel words to me.
Bank ratios
Under the headline ‘Why banks must think carefully before they shrink their assets’ Robert Jenkins (an external member of the interim Financial Policy Cttee of the Bank of England) provided (Times, 14 December) an admirably clear explanation of the potential dangers & difficulties posed by the new regulatory requirement that banks should increase their ‘capital ratios’. As he points out, a ratio involves both a numerator & a denominator; a ratio can therefore be increased by either shrinking the denominator or by making the numerator bigger (or by some combination of the two), with very different knock-on effects for the future health of the financial system.
And an apt quote: The technical phrase is ‘adverse feedback loop’. The less technical phrase is ‘shooting yourself in the foot’.
No link to online version available because of paywall
National wealth
On 20 December the Office for National Statistics published the latest report on the Wealth of Great Britain. Further investigation showed that this was solely about the real & physical property of private households only – the value of which has fallen because of the drop in house prices. The graph of House prices since 1953 on page 19 shows how much of an illusion the so-called increase in value must have been.
Does this include non-household wealth? - No
Or any details of financial holdings – including those of households? - No
Is there any indication of how much is owned by non-British nationals or non-residents? - No
We really do need GDW & GNW equivalents to the GDP/GNP in the national current accounts.
National debt
At the very end of an interview with Eddie Mair on the Christmas Day News Review of the Year on Radio 4, Robert Peston said that there is one thing at least for which we should all be very grateful to Gordon Brown, namely his decision to set up an independent debt management agency.
When considering questions of national solvency it is not enough just to look at the ratio of debt to GDP (or government revenues & expenditure); the repayment schedules matter a lot, & ours are a lot less onerous or immediately pressing than are those, for example, of Italy, thanks to the expertise of these agents. So perhaps that is one area where independence, even of democracy, is to be welcomed.
The magic of pricing
There are independent consultancies which specialise in advising companies on pricing strategy. One such is Simon-Kucher.
Sainsbury’s till receipts now carry the footnote: Based on price perception data, you can live well for less than you thought at Sainsbury’s. Those sound like good weasel words to me.
Links
Chancellor announces appointment of Robert Jenkins as an external member of the Interim Financial Policy Committee
Wealth in Great Britain - Main Results from the Wealth and Assets Survey 2008/10 (Part 1)
R4 Christmas Day News Review of the Year
UK Debt Management Office
SIMON-KUCHER & PARTNERS
Around the Sainsbiry’s aisles in 60 days
Related posts
The verb TO BE
Asset sales
Independent government
The illusion of income
Price fixing
Price psychology
Chancellor announces appointment of Robert Jenkins as an external member of the Interim Financial Policy Committee
Wealth in Great Britain - Main Results from the Wealth and Assets Survey 2008/10 (Part 1)
R4 Christmas Day News Review of the Year
UK Debt Management Office
SIMON-KUCHER & PARTNERS
Around the Sainsbiry’s aisles in 60 days
Related posts
The verb TO BE
Asset sales
Independent government
The illusion of income
Price fixing
Price psychology
Friday, September 16, 2011
Is anything safe?
In yesterday’s Times business editor Ian King commented on the success of overseas pension plans which have been investing in British assets, bemoaning the fact that the Hutton report was not prepared to look at the question of how UK pension funds invest their money & so failed to recommend that, for example, the UK Teachers’ Pension Scheme be equally adventurous, thus avoiding the need for the much-protested forthcoming rise in pension contributions payable by members.
As someone who is old enough to remember when pension funds were exhorted to follow the example of the British Rail Pension Fund & invest in works of art, but nevertheless knows very little about the subject except that it is complicated, I should want to be particularly cautious about joining the UK commercial property bandwagon, though I like the idea of infrastructure – especially power lines etc – being locally owned.
And I should really, really, like to understand enough about mark-to-market to form a view on how that affects the question of pension funds
As someone who is old enough to remember when pension funds were exhorted to follow the example of the British Rail Pension Fund & invest in works of art, but nevertheless knows very little about the subject except that it is complicated, I should want to be particularly cautious about joining the UK commercial property bandwagon, though I like the idea of infrastructure – especially power lines etc – being locally owned.
And I should really, really, like to understand enough about mark-to-market to form a view on how that affects the question of pension funds
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Selling more assets
Amsprop Estates (prop. Lord Sugar, managed by his son) has been selling some desirable Mayfair properties for a bumper profit.
The buyers were a Dubai-based consortium & an Italian manufacturer of domestic appliances. One of the properties is occupied by the royal jewellers Asprey & Garrard.
The buyers were a Dubai-based consortium & an Italian manufacturer of domestic appliances. One of the properties is occupied by the royal jewellers Asprey & Garrard.
Related post
The illusion of income
The illusion of income
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Woods & trees & paper money
Oberthur Technologies have dropped their bid for de la Rue.
I note that, among all the protests about the proposed sale (sell off or sell out) of Forestry Commission assets, has been not one expression of concern over the possibility of foreign ownership.
The English forests sailed the oceans of the world & found new lands full of wildernesses & more forests waiting to be cut down - Kate Atkinson: Human Croquet
I note that, among all the protests about the proposed sale (sell off or sell out) of Forestry Commission assets, has been not one expression of concern over the possibility of foreign ownership.
The English forests sailed the oceans of the world & found new lands full of wildernesses & more forests waiting to be cut down - Kate Atkinson: Human Croquet
Monday, December 06, 2010
Power & control
On Friday the Office of Fair Trading published the first national stocktaking report of the ownership of the UK infrastructure assets. Almost two-fifths of our energy, water, transport & communications are owned by foreigners.
The OFT has concluded that, because of healthy competition in the market, this has not led to poorer service for UK consumers. So that's all right then.
But then on Monday came the news that even our money may be taken over – not just by any old foreigners but by the French. De La Rue (whose founder came from Guernsey) has received a takeover offer, now confirmed to be from Oberthur Technologies.
The OFT has concluded that, because of healthy competition in the market, this has not led to poorer service for UK consumers. So that's all right then.
But then on Monday came the news that even our money may be taken over – not just by any old foreigners but by the French. De La Rue (whose founder came from Guernsey) has received a takeover offer, now confirmed to be from Oberthur Technologies.
Thursday, November 25, 2010
The illusion of income
All of a sudden it seems the difference between GDP & GNP has become real & important again, at least for commentators on Ireland.
In what Robert Peston calls a ‘refreshingly frank’ address Patrick Honohan, the governor of Ireland’s central bank said that GDP overstates the size of the Irish economy & productivity by including income which does not accrue to Irish residents. Last week a commentator on RTÉ1 said that part of the mad euphoria of the Celtic Tiger years came when Ireland’s GDP per head rose above that in the UK, & Irish residents formed the mistaken belief that they themselves were richer, which illusion would have been deflated if GNP per head had been compared.
But I wonder for how long might this remain true; with the rate at which our assets are being taken over might not UK GNP fall significantly below UK GDP.
In what Robert Peston calls a ‘refreshingly frank’ address Patrick Honohan, the governor of Ireland’s central bank said that GDP overstates the size of the Irish economy & productivity by including income which does not accrue to Irish residents. Last week a commentator on RTÉ1 said that part of the mad euphoria of the Celtic Tiger years came when Ireland’s GDP per head rose above that in the UK, & Irish residents formed the mistaken belief that they themselves were richer, which illusion would have been deflated if GNP per head had been compared.
But I wonder for how long might this remain true; with the rate at which our assets are being taken over might not UK GNP fall significantly below UK GDP.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Taking back what is ours
According to a report in last Thursday’s Times the UK government will have insisted that Ireland put up some high quality assets as collateral against the €7 billion loan which it is contributing to the bail out.
These could include posh hotels such as Claridge’s & the Connaught which are under the control of the Irish National Asset Management Agency.
So one small step towards regaining control.
These could include posh hotels such as Claridge’s & the Connaught which are under the control of the Irish National Asset Management Agency.
So one small step towards regaining control.
Related post
Asset sales
Asset sales
Tuesday, November 09, 2010
Asset sales
The latest figures of what the UK is worth - £6.7 trillion – were published in August; the homes we own (albeit with the deeds held as security for a mortgage from a bank which is largely foreign owned) or live in still make up over a half of this ‘wealth’.
I have already been noting how much commercial property has been taken over by non-UK investors such as sovereign wealth funds, but a report in yesterday’s Times has made me wonder how much of our stock of industrial buildings or civil engineering works may also be foreign owned.
E.ON (a German-owned company) is said to be about to sell off a subsidiary, Central Networks, which operates some of our electricity distribution system (pylons, substations & cables) to a consortium which includes the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority & the Canadian Pension Plan.
In March this year Central Networks formed the UK's first utility connections alliance with Morrison Utility Services.
I got dizzy in the very unaccustomed business of trying to find out who owns Morrison Utility Services. What does “March 2008 – AWG sold Morrison Utility Services to two private equity firms, Cognetas and Englefield Capital. Morrison Utility Services becomes a standalone business” mean exactly?
Still, one of the private equity firms says on its website that they welcome “complex situations and are agnostic on ownership structures”, so perhaps I am not meant to understand.
E.ON are said to be keen to sell their subsidiary to help reduce their £39 billion debt burden in London, & to use the proceeds to invest in faster growth areas in China or Brazil; but sovereign wealth investors & pension funds are keen on power grids because they offer a reliable & well-regulated long term revenue. I wonder if the BBC could solve some of its pension problems via this route.
And although I belong to the school which is persuaded that, at least after 1857, the Empire was more of a financial liability than an asset, when you think that, even a century ago, ‘we’ owned railways, mines, farms, hotels … all over the world it seems disconcerting, in that one wonders where it will all end.
Although my head is in a spin with all this, the news item did help clear up one small mystery for me. The soon-to-be-sold assets of Central Networks include cabling which connects the Peak District to Bristol. This connection presumably in turn explains why so many of the men working on a local E.ON ground source heat exchange project are travelling from the West Country to do so.
I have already been noting how much commercial property has been taken over by non-UK investors such as sovereign wealth funds, but a report in yesterday’s Times has made me wonder how much of our stock of industrial buildings or civil engineering works may also be foreign owned.
E.ON (a German-owned company) is said to be about to sell off a subsidiary, Central Networks, which operates some of our electricity distribution system (pylons, substations & cables) to a consortium which includes the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority & the Canadian Pension Plan.
In March this year Central Networks formed the UK's first utility connections alliance with Morrison Utility Services.
I got dizzy in the very unaccustomed business of trying to find out who owns Morrison Utility Services. What does “March 2008 – AWG sold Morrison Utility Services to two private equity firms, Cognetas and Englefield Capital. Morrison Utility Services becomes a standalone business” mean exactly?
Still, one of the private equity firms says on its website that they welcome “complex situations and are agnostic on ownership structures”, so perhaps I am not meant to understand.
E.ON are said to be keen to sell their subsidiary to help reduce their £39 billion debt burden in London, & to use the proceeds to invest in faster growth areas in China or Brazil; but sovereign wealth investors & pension funds are keen on power grids because they offer a reliable & well-regulated long term revenue. I wonder if the BBC could solve some of its pension problems via this route.
And although I belong to the school which is persuaded that, at least after 1857, the Empire was more of a financial liability than an asset, when you think that, even a century ago, ‘we’ owned railways, mines, farms, hotels … all over the world it seems disconcerting, in that one wonders where it will all end.
Although my head is in a spin with all this, the news item did help clear up one small mystery for me. The soon-to-be-sold assets of Central Networks include cabling which connects the Peak District to Bristol. This connection presumably in turn explains why so many of the men working on a local E.ON ground source heat exchange project are travelling from the West Country to do so.
Links
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Income or product
In his book, Butterfly Economics, Paul Ormerod dismisses as merely technical the difference between GDP & GNP
In the context of his argument this is fair enough, but I find myself wondering just how real is the difference these days
Back in the heady 1960s, the decade of independence, new countries, new economies, new development plans, the difference was far from technical
Put simply GDP (Gross Domestic Product) was the value of everything produced within a country
GNP (Gross National Product, more often called Gross National Income these days) was the total income of the people living in the country
Income from capital – rent, profits, dividends – was the main cause of any difference
In many countries the differences were not large, but generally speaking, in developing countries GNP was lower than GDP because more of their productive assets were owned by foreigners
In the UK, though the difference was shrinking rapidly, GNP was more than GDP
The definitions have not changed. I expect in these mobile days wages & salaries earned/sent abroad play a larger role but I cannot really begin to imagine where all those ginormous international financial (or credit) flows showed up in national accounts
Sadly I have not been able to find a source which makes it easy to make direct international comparisons
In the context of his argument this is fair enough, but I find myself wondering just how real is the difference these days
Back in the heady 1960s, the decade of independence, new countries, new economies, new development plans, the difference was far from technical
Put simply GDP (Gross Domestic Product) was the value of everything produced within a country
GNP (Gross National Product, more often called Gross National Income these days) was the total income of the people living in the country
Income from capital – rent, profits, dividends – was the main cause of any difference
In many countries the differences were not large, but generally speaking, in developing countries GNP was lower than GDP because more of their productive assets were owned by foreigners
In the UK, though the difference was shrinking rapidly, GNP was more than GDP
The definitions have not changed. I expect in these mobile days wages & salaries earned/sent abroad play a larger role but I cannot really begin to imagine where all those ginormous international financial (or credit) flows showed up in national accounts
Sadly I have not been able to find a source which makes it easy to make direct international comparisons
Monday, January 26, 2009
Don't panic
This is a bit scary - A Thought-Provoking Bank Graphic, from Here is the City blog. Granted it shows market values, rather than balance sheet assets, but still …
Maybe Barclay’s open letter will have done a little to stop the rot
It set me thinking about the national balance sheet – terra incognita to me, though I remember a news item some years ago boasting about how much our national wealth had grown with the value of our houses & thinking: If you’ll believe that …
“Residential buildings” made up getting on for 2/3rds of our national net worth of £7 trillion at the end of 2007 - measured at market value
What is even more startling is that the increase in house prices (plus whatever new building there was) accounted for most of the total increase in our wealth between the end of 1999 and 2007
Residential buildings more than doubled from £1.8 trillion to £4.3 trillion. Total net worth grew from £3.7 trillion to £7 trillion
I think I need a lie down
Maybe Barclay’s open letter will have done a little to stop the rot
It set me thinking about the national balance sheet – terra incognita to me, though I remember a news item some years ago boasting about how much our national wealth had grown with the value of our houses & thinking: If you’ll believe that …
“Residential buildings” made up getting on for 2/3rds of our national net worth of £7 trillion at the end of 2007 - measured at market value
What is even more startling is that the increase in house prices (plus whatever new building there was) accounted for most of the total increase in our wealth between the end of 1999 and 2007
Residential buildings more than doubled from £1.8 trillion to £4.3 trillion. Total net worth grew from £3.7 trillion to £7 trillion
I think I need a lie down
Link
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)