People are finally spending more on their cards

Is this the sign we've been waiting for?

I may just have spoken to the most optimistic and cheery senior UK-based banker for many a year.

Dave Chan, CEO of Barclaycard Europe, is not just chirpy about the prospects for UK plc; he says that there is evidence going back to the second quarter of the year that we may have turned a corner. In short, people are spending more on their cards.

In May and June, "nominal spend" – that is expenditure taking account of inflation – of Barclaycard cardholders rose for four months in a row for the first time in three years. Given the importance of consumer spending as an engine of growth and with expenditure now on a gentle upward trend, we may indeed be witnessing the recovery starting to gain momentum.

That is however only part of the story. The clever number-crunchers at Barclays have been analysing just what exactly we are using our cards to purchase. There are signs that discretionary expenditure is rising including purchases such as foreign holidays Perhaps the real clincher to back up Chan’s optimism relates to card expenditure on home improvements.

In the past couple of months he says that there has been a big uplift in expenditure in this sector.

Meantime, UK unemployment remains stubbornly high at 7.8 per cent. If the Bank of England forecasts for GDP growth are accurate – and here it has a decidedly mixed track record – we will only enjoy growth of 1.4 per cent this year and 2.3 per cent next year.

For those of us old enough to have lived through economic upturns following past recessions, such relatively low rates of growth are way below the growth levels witnessed during the Thatcher second term and Blair’s first term.

The chances of UK unemployment falling below 7 per cent and the trigger for a change in UK monetary policy – that means higher interest rates to you and me – is slim in the next three years. That inevitably will impact the prospects for the share prices of the major UK banks.

As for home improvements major players, such as B&Q’s parent Kingfisher, there may be renewed interest in how its share price performs. Analysts following Kingfisher are divided with six rating the stock a sell, seven say hold with 13 recommending a buy.

Time will tell if Chan’s grounds for optimism are well founded.

I am glad to report, that at no time during the course of a lengthy conversation did he use the phrase “green shoots” (Norman Lamont circa the 1991 recession).

A handful of credit cards. Photograph: Getty Images

Douglas Blakey is the editor of Retail Banker International

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

The problems with ending encryption to fight terrorism

Forcing tech firms to create a "backdoor" to access messages would be a gift to cyber-hackers.

The UK has endured its worst terrorist atrocity since 7 July 2005 and the threat level has been raised to "critical" for the first time in a decade. Though election campaigning has been suspended, the debate over potential new powers has already begun.

Today's Sun reports that the Conservatives will seek to force technology companies to hand over encrypted messages to the police and security services. The new Technical Capability Notices were proposed by Amber Rudd following the Westminster terrorist attack and a month-long consultation closed last week. A Tory minister told the Sun: "We will do this as soon as we can after the election, as long as we get back in. The level of threat clearly proves there is no more time to waste now. The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long."

Put that way, the plan sounds reasonable (orders would be approved by the home secretary and a senior judge). But there are irrefutable problems. Encryption means tech firms such as WhatsApp and Apple can't simply "hand over" suspect messages - they can't access them at all. The technology is designed precisely so that conversations are genuinely private (unless a suspect's device is obtained or hacked into). Were companies to create an encryption "backdoor", as the government proposes, they would also create new opportunities for criminals and cyberhackers (as in the case of the recent NHS attack).

Ian Levy, the technical director of the National Cyber Security, told the New Statesman's Will Dunn earlier this year: "Nobody in this organisation or our parent organisation will ever ask for a 'back door' in a large-scale encryption system, because it's dumb."

But there is a more profound problem: once created, a technology cannot be uninvented. Should large tech firms end encryption, terrorists will merely turn to other, lesser-known platforms. The only means of barring UK citizens from using the service would be a Chinese-style "great firewall", cutting Britain off from the rest of the internet. In 2015, before entering the cabinet, Brexit Secretary David Davis warned of ending encryption: "Such a move would have had devastating consequences for all financial transactions and online commerce, not to mention the security of all personal data. Its consequences for the City do not bear thinking about."

Labour's manifesto pledged to "provide our security agencies with the resources and the powers they need to protect our country and keep us all safe." But added: "We will also ensure that such powers do not weaken our individual rights or civil liberties". The Liberal Democrats have vowed to "oppose Conservative attempts to undermine encryption."

But with a large Conservative majority inevitable, according to polls, ministers will be confident of winning parliamentary support for the plan. Only a rebellion led by Davis-esque liberals is likely to stop them.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

0800 7318496