Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
Appreciate your acknowledgement.
The £7bn is a highly dubious figure pedalled by the Daily Telegraph. The Sunday Times puts it at £2bn and that paper was no fan of Brown. This needs to be offset by the longer-term financial returns of the investments that replaced gold.
I think the idea was a good one but Brown was rightly criticised for announcing it in advance, thus impacting negatively on gold prices. But no one apart from a Captain Hindsight knew that gold was in a trough at a time and would recover and no one has sought to buy more gold, thus vindicating the move.
Brown's legacy is independence for the Bank of England and that has stood the test of time.
|
Well with that last bit, I agree.
---------- Post added at 16:19 ---------- Previous post was at 16:11 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1
The £7bn is a highly dubious figure pedalled by the Daily Telegraph. The Sunday Times puts it at £2bn and that paper was no fan of Brown.
|
You can’t keep denigrating articles in the Telegraph just because they were printed in that newspaper, Andrew.
This one is from The Guardian, that says the same thing.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...my-gordonbrown
I note, however, there was later a re-estimate that it eventually came to £4.7bn. So I guess we can split the difference!