The Treasury can't sell gilts during the Olympics because no traders are going to work

The Olympics' reverse Midas touch strikes again.

The Financial Times reports that the Government is suspending its weekly auctions of Treasury gilts for a four-week period between mid-July and mid-August over fears that "too many bond traders will be working from home – or not at all – during the Olympics."

Norma Cohen writes:

A spokesman for the DMO confirmed that the prospect of so few gilts traders being at their desks with trading screens switched on had caused it to take the unusual step of rescheduling auctions.

Such thin staffing raises the prospect of a "sloppy" auction that could force the Exchequer to pay more to borrow. "Why take operational risk when you don’t have to?" the DMO spokesman said.

The two lines which are expected to be unusable during the Games are the Central and Jubilee lines, which serve Stratford station, the main access for the Olympic stadium. They are also the main routes, respectively, to Bank and Canary Wharf stations, the two with the highest concentration of bankers. Worse, many stations used in commutes to those destinations are also expected to be affected. London Bridge station, an interchange between many commuter rail lines and the Jubilee, is expected to be "exceptionally busy" between 7 and 9:30 in the morning and 4 and 10:30 at night. Bond Street, as an interchange between the two key lines, carries warnings that it may take up to an hour to get from street level to the platforms.

Cohen adds:

The absence of new gilts auctions may have a serious knock-on effect, economists said. If, as expected, the Bank of England gives the go-ahead this week for another round of gilts purchases to help boost the economy, it may have to slow these down because of the Olympic effect.

Buying gilts in a market where no new securities are being issued could distort interest rates in unpredictable ways, economists warned.

The Olympics' reverse Midas touch continues.

The Olympic stadium and the Orbit thing. Photograph: Getty Images

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Carl Court/Getty
Show Hide image

To stop Jeremy Corbyn, I am giving my second preference to Andy Burnham

The big question is whether Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper will face Jeremy in the final round of this election.

Voting is now underway in the Labour leadership election. There can be no doubt that Jeremy Corbyn is the frontrunner, but the race isn't over yet.

I know from conversations across the country that many voters still haven't made up their mind.

Some are drawn to Jeremy's promises of a new Jerusalem and endless spending, but worried that these endless promises, with no credibility, will only serve to lose us the next general election.

Others are certain that a Jeremy victory is really a win for Cameron and Osborne, but don't know who is the best alternative to vote for.

I am supporting Liz Kendall and will give her my first preference. But polling data is brutally clear: the big question is whether Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper will face Jeremy in the final round of this election.

Andy can win. He can draw together support from across the party, motivated by his history of loyalty to the Labour movement, his passionate appeal for unity in fighting the Tories, and the findings of every poll of the general public in this campaign that he is best placed candidate to win the next general election.

Yvette, in contrast, would lose to Jeremy Corbyn and lose heavily. Evidence from data collected by all the campaigns – except (apparently) Yvette's own – shows this. All publicly available polling shows the same. If Andy drops out of the race, a large part of the broad coalition he attracts will vote for Jeremy. If Yvette is knocked out, her support firmly swings behind Andy.

We will all have our views about the different candidates, but the real choice for our country is between a Labour government and the ongoing rightwing agenda of the Tories.

I am in politics to make a real difference to the lives of my constituents. We are all in the Labour movement to get behind the beliefs that unite all in our party.

In the crucial choice we are making right now, I have no doubt that a vote for Jeremy would be the wrong choice – throwing away the next election, and with it hope for the next decade.

A vote for Yvette gets the same result – her defeat by Jeremy, and Jeremy's defeat to Cameron and Osborne.

In the crucial choice between Yvette and Andy, Andy will get my second preference so we can have the best hope of keeping the fight for our party alive, and the best hope for the future of our country too.

Tom Blenkinsop is the Labour MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland