Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

John Ward calls for debt default via democratic election

Reposted from John Ward's blog, at his open invitation...
Why electing defaulters to power is the only way left
Friday having seen the enthusiastic support of De Nederlandsche Bank President Klaas Knot for Djisselbloem’s plan to pick the pockets of every despositor in Europe, there are now hardly any major nations still in the closet when it comes to Global Looting.

On Thursday, Canadian bloggers cottoned on to the plans of their government via the annual budget statement. On pages 144 and 145 of “Economic Action Plan 2013″ (already submitted to the Canadian House of Commons), it openly proposes ‘to implement a ‘bail-in’ regime for systemically important banks’ there.

The second wave of evidence about what’s coming I referred to yesterday: the banks hastily sending out acres of fly-shit to their customers to blame any future disappearance of money-substances from their accounts. The general line of defence being offering by these creeps is “ve are only obeyink orders”. The first one out of the blocks appears to have been Santander. Yesterday, the one from HSBC started landing on Slogger doormats. Guess what? The wording and headings are exactly the same as the Santander mailshots.

In short, the entire operation is being coordinated and run by the Treasury. Any chance of Ed Miliband – our friend in tough times – asking a PMQ about this next Wednesday? Don’t hold your breath. Our MPs these days simply do as they’re told, or what they want – whichever is the easiest and most profitable route at the time.

What we are seeing come to pass at the moment is what those previously nutwhack sites from three years ago were screaming at a deaf audience: in the end, they’ll confiscate our money to bail out the lunatics. But where will it end?

There’s a Radio 4 audio clip of Michael Winner at his best in the BBC archives, grumbling two decades ago about how restaurants steal from their customers. Winner says:

“I called a waiter over and said look, you’ve added an obligatory 15% service charge to the bill and a cover charge of 10%. Now my credit-card slip has arrive and you’ve left a blank space so I can add a further gratuity on top. Should I just undress so you can have my clothes as well?”

Bizarrely, we now have to ask ourselves the same about Djisselbloem Plan…and where it will end. After all, there’s plenty to go at.

For example, behind the guise of us “all being in this together”, George Osborne could painlessly announce an emergency Budget in the UK, and slap a 5% levy on all houses valued over £250,000.

“The rich must help depress house prices so the young can get on the bandwagon” the Squeaky Draper would allege. If nothing else, this would please Vince Cable, who has been demanding a ‘mansion tax’ for two years already. Note the use of ‘mansion’ there, to suggest ‘a tiny minority of the rich’. But it wouldn’t be of course: a good 60% of all houses in London are now worth over half a million, and the average British house price is currently about £160,000. So at least 40% of property owning Brits would have to cough up £10,000.

How they’d raise it is another matter – which is why thus far the emphasis has been on theft via a willing intermediary. There, the government takes what it already knows you’ve got available….without taxpayers having to bother the poor banks for a loan, they too having no money either, allegedly. The increasingly vicious nature of this circle is mind-blowing.

But such complications about property are seen by Treasury nomenklatura (and their accountancy advisers) as merely obstacles needing some creative thought applied to their removal. One said to me earlier this week, “It would actually be remarkably simple: the tax would be declared, payable with interest on the sale of the house. It would simply be a disguised way of bringing the Stamp Duty further downmarket”. Easy when you know how innit?

The problem for the Brussels-am-Berlin rapists in Greece was that they were (and still are) forced to demand tax monies from those who haven’t got any left. When one gets to the same stage of madness as Louis XVI, it’s time for a rethink. Cyprus was it, and this is now – quite clearly – going to be the future for all of us. But care must be taken not to turn a depression into a slump, so direct takes on future purchases have to be avoided: even the FinMin mobsters can grasp that much.

So the next stop could be property. But how much further could they go after that? I would say “not much”…because again, it is a classic case of taxing the sans coulottes and raising the price of their bread: you don’t collect any tax, and it results in Bastille-storming. Greece is, I would say, very close to this stage now, as is Italy. I suspect that only Tsipras and Grillo can stop it. Who might come after them, however, doesn’t bear thinking about.

For what it’s worth, here’s my two-pennorth: I suspect that what we’ll get is banks being ‘rescued’ worldwide, the quicker to empty them of SME and private deposits. It would be Communist seizure spun as national necessity.

Take the situation with Britain’s RBS. The Treasury has been trying to flog it for eighteen months without any success, and its CEO Stephen Hester has tried to rape his SME customers but been caught, stupid boy. Along the way, to save its subsidiaries the bank has had to inflict several ‘glitches’ to avoid paying some £80 billion by a certain date. But the situation inside the bank remains as dire as ever.

The official date suggest that ‘the taxpayer’ already owns 82% of the Royal Bank of Skullduggery, which is of course bollocks because all we own is a ginormous debt. The Establishment owns and runs it as a means of trying the fleece the taxpayer. But it would be a matter of two days work to nationalise (“save”) the bank completely, and then enact a Laika-style assets freeze. The rules having been changed already (see mailshots previously spotted) the Treasury would simply say to everyone – “the rich” – with monies over £100,000 in the bank that they they were no longer insured. Money is then printed by Carney the Canuck in Threadneedle Street to amortise the RBS debt into a ‘Bad Bank’, and the rest goes into the freezer….aka Her Majesty’s Government. What’s left – smaller savers and investment banking – is then given to another disaster like HBOS, thus making their balance sheet look better. Sorted. Until HBOS goes tits-up.

Of course, in the end you run out of things to nationalise rationalise. A wannabe popular Labour administration could dash in to stop electricity, water, gas and local councils ‘profiteering’ at the citizenry’s expense….an election winner if ever there was one. This gives you a free hand to put up all the prices and hand them straight over to the HMRC. But then you run out of things to improve, save, rescue and freeze. Inflation goes up and economic growth goes down. So ergo the tax take falls. What then?

It isn’t going to work.

The answer is that there is no “what” to happen “then”. The strategy is so obviously doomed, it cannot possibly get that far. Once the wealthy have all the ‘glitz bricks’ property and the gold, the global system will ban gold sales to the public. FDR did it, this mob wouldn’t hesitate to. For real people, there will be nowhere to invest, no way out of being levied, and in the end, nowhere to work.
But this still has no, zilch, zero and f**k all chance of monetising the debts, derivatives and other insurance calls sitting out there in the ether. What the Eunatics are doing today – and the other leeches will do the day after tomorrow – is a pointless waste of time, a last few yards along which to kick the battered can before it finally rolls over the cliff, has a string attached to it, and they all promise that hanging onto the string is the only way, and thus represents our socio-patriotic duty.

Wake up Dumbos, it isn’t going to work.

You’ve tried taxes, you’ve tried austerity, you’ve tried levies, you’ve tried asset freezes, and you’ll try every sneaky-snakey trick in your little black book: but it isn’t going to be enough. More and more money will go to Asia, more and more worthless fiat money will be printed, more and more debt will accrue in the West, and then one day when nothing is being produced and bond markets, stock markets and commodity markets are going through the floor, we will end up with what I identified years ago as Indeflation – inflated Sovereign demands, deflated goods value, and zero demand.

You will I’m sure all be bored by this by now, but as I have been saying since Spring 2009, debt forgiveness is the only way out.

The current asylum inmates will never do that: never never never. Be they BamBers promoting their euro, Wall Street running Washington, Beijing exporting crap and owed trillions by its buyers, globalist bankers, multinational producers, politicians, tax accountants or corporate lawyers, they will never relent. They can’t: if they do, the problems will be horrendous but soluble. Their downside is that there will no longer be any place in it for them.

While we still have the democratic electoral power to do so, the one and only way now to force debt forgiveness globally is for we, the People, to elect politicians who promise to default on all debt the day after they are elected. Yes, I know this will evoke a crisis via immediate capital flight from that country, but they’re just going to have to live with it. The alternative is, as I’ve tried to outline above, an unthinkable can-strewn road heading towards mass lemming impressions.

The first country to do this, I imagine, will be Italy. Greece may well be next, but I think Spain could still beat them to it. Without doubt, the nation that can do it with the least pain is France – given its relatively sparse population sitting on a huge amount of food-producing land. For Britain – dependent on services and hugely overpopulated – it would the the end.

But once such things happen, the game really will be up for mercantilist globalism. ‘Siege economies’ need be no such thing: self-sufficiency by nation – with judicious trade in surpluses – remains the best way forward: and the only way to avoid a cataclysmic thermo-nuclear conflict in the end.

Too many visitors to this site see me as ‘doom-mongering’, but they rarely leave anything in the way of rationally argued support for their opinion. My prediction is very simple:

1. Global Looting is coming and it will be self-defeating.
2. The people at the top are mad and stupid.
3. They will not countenance debt forgiveness, so they must be replaced by those who will.
4. The mercantilist model of global economics and Friedmanite econo-fiscal ideas are a busted flush.
5. Self-sufficient Sovereigns trading in surpluses represent the best future for the human race.
Tell me why I’m wrong – with the facts to support it – and I’ll happily listen. For me, it’s Page One sanity compared to what we have now. Over to you.

And for the rest of us who know the self-styled élite will wind up killing us all given half a chance, I’m making a special appeal for you to forward and repost this essay in as many places as possible. Hits are of absolutely no importance to me beyond the raising global awareness of the need to do something before it’s too late. Thanks.

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Thursday, March 28, 2013

The Colours Of Venus


A palette of colours from Sandro Botticelli's "The Birth of Venus" (1485-86) in homage to David Everitt-Carlson's ITOMB Project (2011- ). The hues are from the goddess' hair, body and the surrounding air.

A ghost

My wife does voluntary work at the city hospital on a Wednesday, in the Bereavement Office. One of the employees there told her yesterday about a conversation she'd had with a doctor on site, a couple of weeks ago.

The new hospital - which looks like three packets of those mints with a hole, side by side, and is the type to win a design award while being less fit for purpose than what it replaced - is connected to the old one by an aerial corridor. The doctor received a crash call - a drop-everything-and-run emergency - and as he was running through this bridge he met a woman coming the other way who asked him directions to the mortuary. He said he couldn't stop but when he got to the ward the patient, the woman he'd spoken to, had died.

The most interesting thing about this story is how you and I react to it. It's certainly true that my wife told it to me this morning, and that she knows the woman who told it to her; and I have no reason to doubt that the woman did speak to a doctor who related his experience to her.

But we fit new experiences into the framework of our old ones, so some will say urban myth, others that it was a lie or a delusion, others will say of course there are ghosts. We think we're being rational when we're merely explaining things by reference to our world view.

Thomas Kuhn said that major changes in science are not brought about by falsification, even though the received wisdom may be fundamentally wrong. If we say there no black swans and are then shown one, we can answer that it's not really a swan. What causes the revolution in thinking is a phenomenon that cannot be explained using the existing theoretical structure.

Perhaps there are also personal revolutions that we resist as long as possible.

Are we explaining, or trying to explain away?

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy.

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

App -etite control...

See how New Girl in New York used new technology to get a new shape, on World Voices here.

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Cyprus: why so timid?

Now that the Cypriot government, at the behest of its European masters, seems about to confiscate a portion of depositors' money, the question arises: why stop there?

Why not take 100% to shore up bank reserves, compensate the former savers by making them the joint shareholders (one share per Euro forfeited), pay the banks' managements a monster bonus to extract all remaining capital value and sell the whole shebang to some large international banking concern for a dollar (to be divided among shareholders)?

Isn't that what is happening all around the West anyway, by degrees and by means of inflation and forced subventions from governments whose members have an eye to their future post-democratic employment selling their contact books to stateless plutocrats?

Why are the Cypriot pussycats so afraid of wetting their paws?

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Why become an American?

Read about one Englishman's decision to stand with the Land of the Free, on World Voices here.

Friday, March 15, 2013

Sunday, March 10, 2013

New stories on Broad Oak's pages

On World Voices: tension excalating in Fiji and Slogmaster John Ward in France; on the Energy Page, Nick Drew reports how EDF is dunning the British Government for huge subsidies and guaranteed profits - with the Daily Telegraph giving the French the oxygen of publicity.

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Wednesday, March 06, 2013

Two great new stories on World Voices!

The smells of New York City, and how a Christian girl confronted Muslim burglars in Sierra Leone.

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy.

Monday, March 04, 2013

Nick Drew: Politics and future power cuts

Read the next instalment of Nick's disturbing analysis of energy supply threats here on the Energy Page.

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.

Sunday, March 03, 2013

Fighting the Government for savers and against inflation (1)

I am going to return to the fight on National Savings Index-Linked Certificates. As background, I give below the text of some of the relevant emails between myself and my Member of Parliament, Mr John Hemming (Liberal Democrat member for Birmingham Yardley):
 
11 June 2012:
 
Dear Mr Hemming
As one of your constituents, I should be grateful if you would ask questions in Parliament re the Government's intentions in respect of preserving our life savings against the ravages of inflation. This is especially a matter of concern because of continuing enormous financial support for the banking system, here and in other countries (latterly Spain) that seems destined to burst out as high inflation at some future point.

I note that Mr Cameron's private secretary has written recently to all members of the Cabinet saying, among other things:
 
"The Prime Minister wants to ensure that the Government as a whole is giving the highest priority to addressing the cost of living."
 
 
If this is so, why did National Savings & Investments withdraw Index-Linked Savings Certificates from sale on 19 July 2010, when they had previously been continuously available since 1975, a year in which RPI was 24.2%? Is this an indication that the Government expects RPI to be even worse than that figure in the intermediate future?
 
And why were these Certificates, somewhat grudgingly reintroduced (5-year term only) on 12 May 2011, withdrawn again on 7 September? Why are they not available now?
 
It is also worrying that the Government's 2011 Budget Plan (as given in Red Book Annexe B, page 90 - http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/documents/digitalasset/dg_196165.pdf) says "National Savings and Investments (NS&I) is expected to make a contribution to net finance of £2 billion."
 
Is this a sign that the Government is purely concerned about targets for government borrowing and not at all exercised about the protection of HMG's subjects' money savings, which in many cases have been built up slowly and with difficulty over many years. Why should simple savers have to accept risks to the real value of their deferred spending, as though they were speculators?
 
Is the Prime Minister's leaked pronouncement a misleading dog-whistle to the electorate, or is he really willing to put our money where his mouth is?
 
Yours faithfully
 
Answer (same day):

I will write to the chancellor about this.

2 July 2012:

Dear Mr Hemming
May I ask whether the Chancellor has responded on this matter, and if not, when and in what terms did you write to him? Surely he cannot disregard the issue?
 
Answer (same day):
 
I will chase for a response.

22 July 2012:

Dear Mr Hemming
As you have now asked the Chancellor twice for a response on inflation-protected savings, without success, may I respectfully request that you table a Parliamentary question to be asked at the first available opportunity?
Yours faithfully
 
Answer (same day):

No problem. The first opportunity will be in September. I will ask my researcher to work on drafting that with you.

I was not contacted by Mr Hemming or his researcher re tabling a Parliamentary question. But Mr Hemming had wriiten on 2 July to the Chancellor, George Osborne, and on 4 August I received a copy of a letter (dated 25 July 2012) to Mr Hemming from the Commercial Secretary to the Treasury, Lord Sassoon.

Cover letter from Mr Hemming to me (2 August 2012): (click to enlarge)

Main text of the above:
 
Re: JAMH21291 Protection of Savings
 
This is a short letter to confirm that we have received the enclosed response to the above enquiry from to the [sic] Her Majesty's Treasury.
 
The treasury has set out the reasons Savings Certificates were withdran from sale, owing, it seems, to them being over subscribed, and has set out other methods in which it is supporting savers.
 
It is also worth noting that the economic situation has improved, with Inflation currently running at 2.4%, much closer to target than a year ago.
 
I trust this information is useful to you, but if you have any further concerns please do not hesitate to contact me again.
 
Letter from Lord Sassoon to Mr John Hemming MP, 25 July 2012:
 
Main text of the above:
 
Dear Mr Hemming
 
Thank you for your letter of 2 July to George Osborne regarding correspondence from your constituent [...] about National Savings and Investments (NS&I). I am replying as Minister responsible for this policy area.
 
I appreciate that your constituent is concerned about savings in the current climate of relatively high inflation and low interest rates and is disappointed that Savings Certificates are no longer on sale. It is important, though, to recognise that inflation has come down from 5.2 per cent in September 2011 to 2.4 per cent in June 2012. The Government continues to give priority to reducing the impact of rising prices on families and businesses including through the recently announced deferral of fuel duty increases, which means that petrol prices will be 10p per litre lower than they would have been under the previous Government's plans.
 
NS&I provide cost-effective retail debt finance to Government. The money invested in their products contributes to the Government's overall debt financing remit. In doing this, NS&I follow a policy of balancing the interest of savers and the taxpayer with the stability of the financial services market. While doing so they aim to meet the financing objective set each year by HM Treasury.
 
It might be helpful if I explain the reasons why NS&I withdrew their Savings Certificates.
 
In July 2010, the popularity of both their index-linked and Fixed-interest Savings Certificates reached unprecedented levels and sales volumes far exceeded those either anticipated or required by NS&I to meet their financing target set by HM Treasury. Because of this, they took the difficult decision to take Certificates off sale on 18 July 2010. This change however did not affect existing customers.
 
The March 2011 budget confirmed NS&I's Net Financing target for 2011-12 as £2 billion with a range of £0-4 billion. To achieve this, they needed inflows of some £14 billion from sales and reinvestments during the year which gave them the ability to reintroduce one 5-year term of Savings Certificates on 12 May 2011. Their aim was to keep them on sale for a sustained period of time to enable as many savers as possible to invest.
 
As they expected, the Savings Certificates proved very popular and in just under four months they had received over 500,000 transactions. In order to stay within the Net Financing target range for the year, at this point they had to withdraw the certificates from sale.
 
Existing NS&I Savings Certificates customers can, on maturity, keep their investment for another term of the same length. Alternatively, they can reinvest into any of the other Savings Certificates terms and issues on offer to existing customers.
 
In more general terms, the Government wants a saving system based on freedom, fairness and responsibility, which is both affordable and effective.
 
To support and encourage savers the Government has:
 
  • ensured the amount that people can save tax-free is not eroded by inflation by indexing the amount that can be paid into ISAs each year. This means that the Government has increased ISA limits by £600 this year, including an extra £300 for cash ISAs;
  • announced at Budget 2012 that Government will work with industry to improve competitiveness and transparency in the ISA market, particularly by encouraging the industry to work towards faster ISA transfers;
  • introduced Junior ISAs, offering parent a clear, simple and tax-free way to save for their child's future;
  • confirmed that employees will have a new duty to automatically enrol qualifying employees into a pension scheme from October 2012. This has the potantial to encourage 5 to 8 million more people to start saving or save more into a workplace pension scheme. The Government is also establishing the National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) to provide a low-cost, high-quality pension scheme for individuals not currently served by the market;
  • set up the Money Advice Service to offer free and impartial information and advice on all money matters available online at www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk , face-to-face, or by calling its helpline on 0300 500 5000. The Money Advice Service also launched a financial health check to help people proactively manage their money. It also publishes comparative tables of savings accounts and the interest rates offered; and
  • given individuals more choice over the use of their pension savings to provide a retirement income by removing the effective requirement to purchase an annuity by age 75.
 
Please pass on my thanks to Mr Norfolk for taking the trouble to make us aware of these concerns.
 
Yours sincerely
 
James Sassoon
 
LORD SASSOON
 
Email from me to Mr John Hemming MP, 05 August 2012:
 
 Dear Mr Hemming
 


Thank you for forwarding Lord Sassoon's letter, which arrived here yesterday. It is not at all up to the standard that I would expect from a Treasury mind; in fact, it is little short of a disgrace.
The first page confirms what I suspected, that the present Government is concerned only with its own funding needs and not at all with what should be its commitment to savers, not to say the currency (which according to the BoE's own website has lost 99% of its value since 1900). As you know, National Savings Index-Linked Certificates were introduced in 1975, a year in which RPI inflation was, as I said to you before, 24.2%. If the government of the day could bring in this product at such a time of crisis and galloping inflation, I cannot see any justification for the present hiatus.
The point about the present level of inflation is useless. Savers need to know for sure that their money retains its spending power over the chosen period, not to be informed from time to time that RPI may have temporarily dipped.
The second page slides further downhill into irrelevant party political nonsense. To be specific about its failures to address the subject, I will take each of Lord Sassoon's points in order:
  • The cash ISA limit has nothing whatever to do with maintaining the purchasing power of cash.
  • ISA transfers, ditto.
  • Junior ISAs, ditto.
  • The NEST pension scheme is not a savings vehicle but an investment vehicle, a distinction that surely cannot have escaped someone with Lord Sassoon's background in the financial services industry. The nearest to cash within pension funds is either money market funds (which have a big fat question mark over them at the moment, I can tell you as an IFA) or bank/building society cash funds that (a) usually offer a significantly lower rate than cash ISAs and (b) are (except perhaps for SIPPs) not covered by the FSCS in the way that individually held accounts are (see the Pensions Advisory Service's article here).
  • The Money Advice Service is also irrelevant to the purchasing power of cash savings.
  • Changes to the requirement to purchase an annuity at age 75, ditto.
Sir, you have established something of a reputation as an MP who is prepared to ask awkward questions in Parliament, irrespective of party political aspects. This question is inconvenient to the present administration, but crucial to the financial wellbeing of many people throughout the country. I do not think it is ethical for the government to take the view that the man in the street must be forced to accept investment risk, merely when he decides to set aside some money for tomorrow instead of spending it today. His prudence should not be seen as an opportunity to shear his fleece with inflation.
May I respectfully request that you take this further to PMQs or Questions to Ministers, and make a proper fuss?
Yours faithfully
 
Answer (same day):

Parliament is not sitting at the moment.

I will look at the letter later next week (I am at a funeral on Monday) and come back to you on this. The sovereign debt issue is a very serious issue, however

Email from me to Mr John Hemming MP, today (03 March 2013):

Dear Mr Hemming
Thank you for your reply to my previous email.
Now that:
  •  the British Government creditworthiness has been downgraded by Moody's,and
  • the pound has dropped, and
  • inflation looks set to rise further, especially for imports;
- may I ask you to pursue my query vigorously in Parliament?
May I also draw your attention to two passages in Hansard from 1975 that make it perfectly clear that Government recognises the moral obligation to protect the value of savers' money?
____________________________________________________________

Does the Minister accept that the opportunity to invest in inflation-proof schemes is an act of belated social justice to millions of people who have seen their savings irreversibly damaged during the recent rapid rise in the rate of inflation? Will he make recompense to many of them by easing up on his vindictive attacks on the principle of savings embodied in the capital transfer tax and the wealth tax?

The hon. Gentleman has put his supplementary question at the wrong time, because National Savings are rising very well at present. I am sure he will be delighted to hear that. As to what he called "belated social justice", I am sure he will pay due attention to the fact that the scheme was introduced by a Labour Government and not by a Conservative Government.
Is the Chief Secretary confident that a further extension of index-linked schemes—which are welcome to savers—will not cause a diversion of funds away from deposits with building societies, leading to a rise in the mortgage interest rate?
We are, indeed, aware of those problems. That is precisely why we introduced the scheme in this limited way.
Hansard record of House of Lords debate, 4 November 1975:

Lord LEE of NEWTON

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that while the index-linked schemes are extremely good value for money, it would be a good idea—as inflation has been rather rampant—to increase the maximum amount that can be invested in them?

My Lords, the Government have two conflicting obligations. One is an obligation to the taxpayer to buy goods and services as economically as possible, and secondly there are certain social obligations. The Government believe that by the action they have taken they have got the right balance.
_____________________________________________________
On 22 July last year, you offered to allow me to work with your researcher to draft a Parliamentary question on this subject. May I ask whether that offer is still open?
Yours sincerely