Christine lagarde

Another day, another warning about the economic bombshell which would follow Brexit. This time it’s the turn of the IMF. In a press conference at the Treasury, Christine Lagarde spoke of the outcome of a vote to leave the EU ranging from ‘bad to very bad’. Whilst the IMF’s report said: ‘A vote to leave the EU would create uncertainty about the nature of the UK’s long-term economic relationship with the EU and the rest of the world. A vote for exit would precipitate a protracted period of heightened uncertainty, leading to financial market volatility and a hit to output.’ George Osborne was clearly grateful for the support of the

How much longer should the IMF be run by a European? The job of the fund is to assist any member country which is in trouble, not to advance the dream of European integration. So far, since it all began after the war, the IMF’s managing directors have been Europeans, most commonly French. The current one, Christine Lagarde, is a French former politician, as was her predecessor, the socialist sex-maniac Dominique Strauss-Kahn. In her opinion, the needs of the EU trump everything, but that is a political view, not a financial one. It must be annoying for the scores of poorer, non-European IMF members — e.g. the Philippines, Mexico, Jamaica — to

Stephen Green — the former trade minister Lord Green of Hurstpier-point, who became this week’s political punchbag— was always a rather Olympian, out-of-the-ordinary figure at HSBC. This was a bank that traditionally drew its top men from a corps of tough, non-intellectual, front-line overseas bankers typified by the chairmen before Green, Sir John Bond and Sir Willie Purves. As the dominant bank in Hong Kong and a market leader throughout Asia and the Middle East, it was habituated to dealing with customers who took big risks, hoarded cash when they had it, and did not necessarily regard paying tax as a civic duty. But if ethics were rarely discussed in

This trip to Washington couldn’t have gone much better for David Cameron. Not only has he had serious meaty talks with President Obama about the importance of tackling terrorism and cyberterrorism, but he also seems to have the President on side when it comes to Tory-sounding language about the need for a strong economy. But it’s not just Obama who has been helping Cameron as he campaigns in the General Election from across the Atlantic. Christine Lagarde, whose organisation has not always been a friend to the Tories in the past few years, has given Cameron the best possible support he could hope for (as well as a slightly awkward

It is probably unfair to say that the Queen’s Speech will have nothing to do with the economy: we are, after all, expecting a deregulation bill among others, which the Treasury hopes will speed things up for small businesses. But if George Osborne looks a little distracted today, it’s probably because his mind is on events outside Parliament. The International Monetary Fund’s team arrives in London today for the start of a fortnight’s inspection of the UK economy. The Chancellor must feel sympathy with teachers who fear the approach of their school’s Ofsted inspection. Like teachers who suspect their Ofsted visit won’t go their way, Osborne’s allies have recently started

In my Observer column on Sunday I mentioned in passing that in a crisis, elites have to be able to show that they are sharing the plight of the masses. Asking for ‘equality of suffering’ is too much, you will never have that, but there has to be a sense that — to coin a phrase — we are all in this together. Christine Lagarde had just lectured the Greeks on why they must pay their taxes. She was in no way inhibited by the knowledge that as an official of the IMF she was a ‘diplomatic agent’ and hence exempt from taxes under the terms of the 1961 Berne

On one side of the Atlantic, there’s Christine Lagarde begging for more cash for the IMF. On the other, there’s George Osborne more or less willing to hand it over on behalf of British taxpayers. This is how it’s been for months now. This is why it’s no surprise to read in today’s Telegraph that Osborne may be ‘close to agreeing’ an extra £10 billion for the fund. There are the usual caveats, of course: the Exchequer will only stump up if various other countries do likewise, and then the money has to go into one big pot for all the world, not into special mechanisms targetted at the eurozone.

George Osborne’s allies may be filtering across government, but what of the man himself? He was at a meeting of G20 finance ministers in Paris yesterday, and trying to maintain a difficult balance over the imploding eurozone. In part, our Chancellor was firm about Europe’s troubles — the area, he said, “remains the epicentre of the world’s current economic problems,” and he urged its leaders to come up with something “quite impressive” at next weekend’s European Council meeting. But he also tried to sound understanding — the UK, he suggested, would consider shuffling more cash into the IMF’s bailout account. The offer of more funding for the IMF was arresting

The appointment of Christine Lagarde as head of the IMF is a diplomatic victory for George Osborne. The Chancellor was one of her earliest supporters, was the first to nominate her and hit the phones hard on her behalf. She will be a useful ally for Osborne in this position especially given how choppy the global economic waters remain. But the UK government also used the IMF nomination process to do some diplomatic horse-trading. The government made it clear that UK support for Lagarde was contingent on Paris agreeing that Britain should have to play no part in the coming bailout of Greece. There will be those who argue that