Hamish McRae: Dubai crisis will prompt investors to look critically at sovereign debt
Economic Life: Dubai made the classic mistake that the maturity of the debt did not matter as it could always be rolled over
There is a Dubai story and there is a wider sovereign risk story. The first is straightforward enough; the second, more complicated, more important and more interesting.
The Dubai story itself comes in two parts. One is the economic proposition that it makes to the world, the idea that it is possible to create sustained growth by becoming an entrepôt trading and service centre for the Gulf region. That is the justification behind the port, the airport, the banking offices, the medical centre and so on. This determination to become the service hub for the region led to the property boom, indeed was the only justification for it. As everyone knows, things got a bit out of hand. The "build it and they'll come" approach is all very well but it left Dubai vulnerable to any drop in demand. Ultimately Dubai will recover because the core proposition – that the region needs high-quality services – still stands. But there will be a nasty and continuing adjustment for some years and the more outlandish building projects may never be completed.
The other part to the Dubai story concerns finance. On any sort of long view its public finances will be all right. This is not an Iceland. It has assets, including a sizeable sovereign wealth fund. The United Arab Emirates, taken as a whole, has massive oil-generated wealth and that wealth will continue to accumulate as it is very hard to see circumstances when oil will not remain reasonably expensive. But Dubai itself is caught in a classic liquidity squeeze. Property development is its biggest business and this has happened countless times in the property game. Think Canary Wharf here in Britain. But as we have learnt so savagely over the past year, this is a world where assets are at a discount and cash is king. The world is not through this squeeze yet and the financial pressures on Dubai will mount further.
Nevertheless the effective default has led to a shock. You can see that in the global market reaction. That raises the inevitable question of the Queen: why did people not see this coming?
The answer is that to some extent they did. Standard & Poor's downgraded its credit rating on some of the big government-related companies last March. It did however assume that the government would stand behind these government-supported banks and companies, an assumption that now seems to have been over-optimistic. Everyone, too, assumed that Dubai's much richer fellow emirate, Abu Dhabi, would make sure there was no hint of default, and that was over-optimistic too. Much of the problem is timing: the structure of Dubai's debt is short term, for it has made the classic mistake that the maturity of the debt did not matter as it could always be rolled over. It is not alone in making that assumption, but the consequences are particularly serious.
That leads to the sovereign risk story. It is complicated because it has so many elements to it. There is the conventional credit rating system, and I have put on the right a list of selected countries, showing their credit ratings. I have taken the Fitch ratings as they pioneered country risk analysis, particularly among the emerging economies, though they have not done a rating on Dubai. As you can see, there is a clear hierarchy from Finland to Argentina, starting with the AAA countries at the top. The UK for the time being still carries that rating. The agencies take in a huge amount of data when assessing countries, going far beyond the actual size of the debt and rate to which it is being added or paid down.
There are many difficulties, though, with this sort of exercise. There is the rear-view mirror problem: that the agencies have to work with the data they have got and things change. No one, two years ago, could have predicted that Britain was on course to double its National Debt. But more important still, when it comes to a country rather than a company, is that this is not just about accounting: political will is crucial. If countries wish to cut their debts, they can almost always do so, because they have the tax base of a nation to deploy. Companies are different, for they can go bust in a way a sovereign country cannot.
Now have a look at the bar chart on the right. That shows the top sovereign wealth funds, the national funds that countries have accumulated and invested on behalf of their citizens. And number one is, wait for it, Abu Dhabi. So Dubai's neighbour is, on this measure, the richest country in the world. Now have a look a little further down the list and there, at number 10, is Dubai. Huh? What is all this about? A lot of us would have wished that the UK had used its oil wealth to build up such a fund as Norway has done. Most people would assume that any country with a large pile of assets would be a secure place to which to lend. But the import of this list is to suggest that even countries that do build up such funds and therefore have a strong asset position can still run into trouble if they miss-manage the debt side of their balance sheet.
I am not sure how this will play in the coming months but I have a nasty feeling that this threatened default by Dubai will make investors scrutinise sovereign risk much more critically. People who have assumed that Dubai was rock-solid, partly because of its own stock of assets but more particularly because of the resources of Abu Dhabi, have been proved wrong.
So what does this mean for Greece, whose debt position is probably the weakest among the eurozone members? As you can see it is in the middle rank of creditworthiness. But there is, I think, an implicit assumption that the rest of the eurozone countries will support it if it gets into difficulties: Germany will pick up the tab. Well maybe it will, but what should the premium be for the risk?
There is a further twist. What happens at the moment when ratings are downgraded is that the borrowing costs rise a bit but not that much. I wonder whether all sovereign debt will now be more sensitive to rating changes, or even warnings of the possibility of these. To come right back to home, we should be concerned here in the UK if we lose our AAA rating, as indeed we may next year. The US rating is by no means secure either.
The main developed countries will emerge from this crisis with debts of on average 100 per cent of GDP. For the moment the markets take on trust that the countries will have the political will to service those debts and make a start on cutting them back. But they took on trust that Dubai would have that political will. We have hardly begun to see the consequences of this ballooning of public debt, but I am sure that this will become a real concern from now on. Things could get ugly, and they could get ugly fast.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Also in this section
- Hamish McRae: Yes, the eurozone will bail out Greece, but its currency has taken a battering
- Hamish McRae: Europe's weakest states will be bailed out, but we'll all pay the price
- Hamish McRae: Prepare for normal interest rates... and the rise could be a sharp one
- Hamish McRae: Some growth for the UK – but will we drop back into recession?


Comments
Rising risk premiums will kill it, which will lead to cut-backs of a severity of the same order as that in the Baltics.
A bold prediction. So how long will it take, then, davemart, before we have 'cut-backs of a severity of the same order as in the Baltics' here in the U.K.? If, by any chance, it turns out that you've got it wrong, and the U.K. economy does recover and get out of recession without experiencing those Baltic cut-backs, will you be equally bold in admitting your mistake?
However, it is the conventional economists notably the likes of Kaletski in 'The Times' who using their models did not see any slump coming, and who still continue to use the same faulty models.
Those of us who are in the Austrian school pointed to ever increasing debt problems, and hold that any attempt to deal with it by taking on yet more debt is futile.
It must be paid down or written off before any recovery is possible.
Poor demographics take out one of the major engines of post-war growth.
Cheap abundant oil has also been critical in rising living standards.
Going forward oil is going to be increasingly scarce and expensive, and any world recovery would be knocked on the head by oil prices shooting upward.
Every major world recession has been preceded bya spike in oil prices.
The Government policy of takking on debt to tide us over until 'normal'growth resumes is mistaken, as thsi growth cannot resume until we have moved off of oil and paid down debt.
This will take decades, not a couple of years.
I would love to be wrong!
A capital gain on your own goes untaxed. Rent property and capital gains are no more than if you built up a business. Die and your wife gets it all free. A gift--seven years makes it tax. Trusts are allow taxes to be bypassed.
Economically this money can be taxed without impairing growth (unlike income or corporation taxes that reduce incentives). But the mind set prevents it being touched (unlike income, NI or VAT increases). The UK however faces a national emergency - it there to be raided without economic impact. Politics puts it off discussion. But for how much longer?
check out a real deal worth 10 fold,
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi
Undoubtedly one of the reasons the Dubai sovereign wealth fund makes it to Hamish's top 10 is that the book value of Dubai Port is included in the valuation. I suspect the reason Abu Dhabi is letting Dubai stew is that it had a fright, just like other oil producers, when the oil price fell back to the production cost earlier this year. When Abu Dhabi started to run out of spending money it was easy to let the folly of the "Canary Wharf of the Middle East" go to the wall.
Banks, just you don't love them, sovereign debt default in the 1980s and 90s with Argentina and Russia, now Dubai, plus some Baltic states I suspect, in the 2000s.
My goldfish has got a better retentive memory than the average banker: it is suppose to be six seconds - that is for the goldfish, by the way.