Business and Economy

CME blamed the outage, which halted trading for more than 11 hours, on a cooling failure at a data centre in Chicago.

Global futures markets were thrown into chaos for several hours after CME Group, the world’s largest exchange operator, suffered one of its longest outages in years, halting trading across stocks, bonds, commodities and currencies.

By 13:35 GMT on Friday, trading in foreign exchange, stock and bond futures as well as other products had resumed, after having been knocked out for more than 11 hours because of an outage at an important data centre, according to LSEG data.

CME blamed the outage on a cooling failure at data centres run by CyrusOne, which said its Chicago-area facility had affected services for customers, including CME.

The disruption stopped trading in major currency pairs on CME’s EBS platform, as well as benchmark futures for West Texas Intermediate crude, Nasdaq 100, Nikkei, palm oil and gold, according to LSEG data.

‘A black eye’

Trading volumes have been thinned out this week by the United States Thanksgiving holiday, and with dealers looking to close positions for the end of the month, there was a risk of volatility picking up sharply later on, market participants said.

“It’s a black eye to the CME and probably an overdue reminder of the importance of market structure and how interconnected all these are,” Ben Laidler, head of equity strategy at Bradesco BBI, said.

“We complacently take for granted that much of the timing is frankly not great. It’s month-end, a lot of things get rebalanced.”

“Having said that, it could have been a lot worse; it’ll be a very low-volume day. If you’re going to have it, there would have been worse days to have a breakdown like this,” he said.

Futures are a mainstay of financial markets and are used by dealers, speculators and businesses wishing to hedge or hold positions in a wide range of underlying assets. Without these and other instruments, brokers were left flying blind, and many were reluctant to trade contracts with no live prices for hours on end.

“Beyond the immediate risk of traders being unable to close positions – and the potential costs that follow – the incident raises broader concerns about reliability,” said Axel Rudolph, senior technical analyst at trading platform IG.

A few European brokerages said earlier in the day they had been unable to offer trading in some products on certain futures contracts.

Biggest exchange operator

CME is the biggest exchange operator by market value and says it offers the widest range of benchmark products, spanning rates, equities, metals, energy, cryptocurrencies and agriculture.

Average daily derivatives volume was 26.3 million contracts in October, CME said earlier this month.

The CME outage on Friday comes more than a decade after the operator had to shut electronic trading for some agricultural contracts in April 2014 due to technical problems, which at the time sent traders back onto the floor.

More recently, in 2024, outages at LSEG and Switzerland’s exchange operator briefly interrupted markets.

CME’s own shares were up 0.4 percent in premarket trading.

In its deal with Alberta, Canada will scrap emissions cap on the oil and gas sector, among other moves.

Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney has signed an agreement with Alberta’s premier that will roll back certain climate rules to spur investment in energy production, while encouraging construction of a new oil pipeline to the West Coast.

Under the agreement, which was signed on Thursday, the federal government will scrap a planned emissions cap on the oil and gas sector and drop rules on clean electricity in exchange for a commitment by Canada’s top oil-producing province to strengthen industrial carbon pricing and support a carbon capture-and-storage project.

Carney is counting on the energy sector to help the Canadian economy weather uncertainty from United States President Donald Trump’s tariffs, and is seeking to diversify from the US market, which currently takes 90 percent of Canada’s oil exports.

He has relaxed some environmental restrictions implemented by his predecessor, Justin Trudeau, while reaffirming his commitment to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Alberta is also exploring the feasibility of a new crude oil pipeline to British Columbia’s northwest coast in order to increase exports to Asia, but no private-sector company has committed to building a new pipeline.

Pipeline companies and the Alberta government have repeatedly said significant federal legislative changes – including removing a federal cap on oil and gas sector emissions and ending a ban on oil tankers off British Columbia’s northern coast – would be required before a private entity would consider proposing a new pipeline.

Thursday’s agreement includes a commitment by the federal government to adjust the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act in order to facilitate oil exports to Asia.

British Columbia Premier David Eby, who opposes a new pipeline through his province, said on Wednesday the legislation should stay in place.

Other pipeline opponents are also speaking out. A coalition of Indigenous groups in British Columbia said this week it will not allow oil tankers on the northwest coast and that the pipeline project will “never happen”.

The Trans Mountain pipeline from Alberta to the British Columbia coast, which is owned by the Canadian government and is currently the only option to ship Canadian oil directly to Asian markets, tripled its capacity last year with a 34 billion Canadian dollar ($24.2bn) expansion.

The federal government and Alberta also said they would conclude an agreement on industrial carbon pricing by April 1 next year.

In addition, the two agreed to cooperate on building the Pathways Plus project, expected to be the world’s biggest carbon capture project and designed to capture emissions from Canada’s oil sands.

The federal government will also assist Alberta in building and operating nuclear power plants, strengthening its electricity grid to power AI data centres, and building transmission lines to neighbouring provinces.

South Africa secured a declaration from the rest of the G20, despite United States objections.

Washington boycotted the meeting over President Donald Trump’s accusations that South Africa persecutes its white minority, a claim widely rejected.

The document calls for more funding for renewable energy, fairer critical mineral supply chains and debt relief for poorer nations.

The first G20 summit on African soil broke with tradition by releasing the document at the start.

And there was no ceremonial handover between the outgoing South African and incoming American chairs.

Also, can Britain’s Labour government satisfy both businesses and households?

Plus, the weight-loss drug booming industry.

Russian “shadow vessels” are using false flags to skirt sanctions imposed on Moscow over its war in Ukraine, according to a new report.

A total of 113 Russian vessels have flown a false flag in the first nine months of this year, transporting some 11 million tonnes of oil valued at 4.7 billion euros ($5.4bn), according to the report published on Thursday by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), a Helsinki-based think tank.

“The number of Russian ʻshadowʼ tankers sailing under false flags is now increasing at an alarming rate,” said report co-author Luke Wickenden.

“False-flagged vessels carried 1.4 billion euros ($1.6bn) worth of Russian crude oil and oil products through the Danish Straits in September alone.”

Russia’s clandestine shadow fleet transports sanctioned commodities, especially oil, under non-Russian flags to evade scrutiny.

Every vessel sailing on the open seas is required to fly a flag that provides it with legal jurisdiction for its operations in international waters.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea allows countries to grant their nationality to ships and fly their flag.

Some countries provide open registries that allow foreign-owned or controlled vessels to use their flag, a practice favoured by some shippers due to lower regulatory burdens and registration costs.

In its report, CREA said that 96 sanctioned vessels had flown a false flag at least once this year as of the end of September.

A total of 85 vessels registered at least two flag changes six months after being sanctioned by the European Union, the United States Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) or the United Kingdom, according to the think tank.

Six flag registries that had not flagged a Russian ship before Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 had at least 10 such vessels each in their fleet in September 2025, according to CREA, for a total of 162 shadow vessels.

“In addition to the risks of false flagging, we also see that ʻshadowʼ vessel operators are taking advantage of capacity limitations of economically weak nations to exploit their flags and existing regulations to gain passage rights to deliver blood oil,” said co-author Vaibhav Raghunandan, calling on the EU and the UK to reform their flagging regulations and practices.

CREA said it based its report on vessel ownership and flag registry records obtained from maritime safety platform Equasis.

It said it cross-referenced the data with the IMO Global Integrated Shipping Information System (GSIS), a global shipping industry database.

‘More evasive techniques’

Rachel Ziemba, adjunct senior fellow at the Washington-based Center for a New American Security, said the CREA’s findings aligned with previous reports on Russia’s shadow fleet.

Ziemba said Moscow had resorted to “more evasive techniques” on the back of increased pressure from the EU, as well as moves by China to block so-called “zombie vessels”, which use the registration numbers of retired vessels.

While the US and the EU have continued to roll out new sanctions on Russian oil, “there is an open question about enforcement”, Ziemba said.

With sanctions enforcement becoming more difficult due to the growing illicit trade, countries would need to target vessels, intermediaries and buyers to significantly reduce Russia’s oil sales, she said.

“But that comes with costs,” Ziemba said, suggesting that China, a major buyer of Russian oil, could retaliate against countries that tightened sanctions.

“Plus, actual enforcement might mean more quasi-military stoppages of vessels to check papers, something that these countries might be wary of doing,” she added.

Bangkok, Thailand – Stewed, seasoned with sugar and cloves, deep-fried or dished up in a zingy chilli mince – the diets of most Thais are incomplete without pork.

But a $3bn market – supplied nearly entirely by domestic pig farmers – may be about to face competition like never before from the giant hog farms of the world’s third-largest producer, the United States.

While the fine print of the Thai government’s preliminary trade deal with the US is yet to be revealed, some details have emerged.

Washington has a 10,000-item-long wish list of goods it wants to enter Thailand duty-free to reduce its $45.5bn trade deficit with the Southeast Asian country, an imbalance President Donald Trump says unfairly disadvantages US producers.

The list includes pork, corn, soya beans and some fruits.

Shortly after Trump met Thailand’s caretaker prime minister, Anutin Charnvirakul, on the sidelines of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia last month, the White House revealed some of the many strings attached to its trade deal, which set the tariff rate for the kingdom’s exports to the US at 19 percent.

They include Thailand agreeing to “address and prevent barriers to US food and agricultural products in the Thai market”, according to the White House, and a commitment to “expediting access” for US meat and poultry products.

That has panicked Thailand’s pig farmers, who say the industry may not survive a flood of cheaper, subsidised US pork, which is fattened up on ractopamine, a livestock additive banned in many countries, including the kingdom.

If US pork is allowed into Thailand without duties, nothing less than the kingdom’s food security is at stake, according to Worawut Siripun, deputy secretary-general of the Swine Raisers Association of Thailand.

“Producers will not be able to survive and will stop raising pigs. But the risks are not only for farms facing falling pig prices,” Worawut, who has about 10,000 pigs, told Al Jazeera.

“Those who grow feed crops are also affected, as well as animal feed traders, animal feed producers, and veterinary drug sellers. Everyone in the production cycle is impacted.”

Trump had made trade talks with Thailand contingent on Bangkok signing an extended ceasefire agreement with Cambodia.

But in the weeks since meeting Anutin, Thailand has suspended truce talks over alleged Cambodian breaches of the terms of the agreement.

While there are conflicting signals over whether tensions with Cambodia have put Thailand’s trade negotiations with its biggest export destination on the back burner, farmers and livestock companies are bracing for intensified competition.

Thailand’s pork industry has weathered challenges ranging from outbreaks of swine flu to illegal imports from China and Vietnam.

But it faces high costs, largely as a result of government price controls on corn and soya used to feed pigs and other livestock – a measure intended to protect the country’s crop farmers, a key voting bloc.

And like most of Thailand’s agricultural producers, the country’s pig farmers deal with slim margins.

“Both imported and locally produced feed materials in Thailand are more expensive compared to the US, where feed is cheaper,” Worawut said.

Corn and other feed farmers are also bracing for tough times.

Thailand announced earlier this month that it would lift its annual corn import limit, from approximately 50,000 tonnes to 1 million tonnes, and scrap a 20 percent tariff to appease Washington.

Prime Minister Anutin is likely to dissolve parliament in the coming weeks and set a date for new elections.

He is angling to return to office in defiance of critics who say he has already given away too much to Washington before a comprehensive trade deal has been signed.

Trump officials have already announced a deal to gain preferential access to Thailand’s rare earths, the sale of billions of dollars of US-made aircraft and a promise by Bangkok not to tax US digital services companies.

Anutin’s bargaining position has been weakened by tough economic conditions.

On Monday, the Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council trimmed its economic growth forecast for 2026 to 1.2 percent, down from an expected 2 percent expansion this year – by far the weakest performance among Southeast Asia’s leading economies.

With a third round of trade talks with the US under a cloud following the suspension of the Thailand-Cambodia peace deal, the main political opposition party has called on the government to pause the negotiations and consult with local stakeholders.

“This is a crucial moment,” said Weerayut Karnchuchat, deputy leader of the opposition People’s Party, Thailand’s largest in parliament.

“The minister of commerce has said negotiations will conclude by the end of 2025. That leaves around two months. The government should hold eight weeks of stakeholder hearings … especially groups directly affected, such as corn farmers.”

Thailand should take stock and assess if regional peers with full US trade deals – including Cambodia, Vietnam and Malaysia – are happy with the outcomes and “whether Thailand is offering too much”, he added.

For many midsized businesses, the return of Trump and his trade war has made for a difficult year, with demand depressed across countless supply chains exposed to the US.

Orders are retreating inside Thailand for everything from lightbulbs to electrical wires needed to run factories that export to the US.

Tipok Lertwattanaweerakul, a durian farmer and middleman, said he has seen his profit margins slashed.

Saudi Arabian buyers who sold durian to customers in the US had been Lertwattanaweerakul’s main source of business, but with the Arab country hit with a 10 percent tariff, “they are no longer purchasing from me at all,” he told Al Jazeera.

The new plan comes amid stalled trade talks between Ottawa and Washington.

Canada will offer more support to help the steel and lumber industries deal with United States tariffs and create a domestic market, as well as ramp up protections for steel and lumber workers.

Prime Minister Mark Carney outlined the new plan on Wednesday in a news conference.

Ottawa will reduce the quota for steel imports from countries that do not have a free trade agreement with Canada to 20 percent from 50 percent of 2024 levels, Carney said.

Countries with a free trade agreement (FTA) with Canada will see their quotas cut to 75 percent from 100 percent of the 2024 level. This does not include the US and Mexico, which are bound by the United States-Canada-Mexico free trade deal.

Canada will also impose a global 25 percent tariff on targeted imported steel-derivative products, and incorporate border measures to combat steel dumping.

In July, Ottawa set a quota of steel imports at 50 percent of the 2024 level from non-FTA countries in a bid to stop the dumping of foreign steel into Canada.

The measures are being tightened to open up the domestic market for Canadian-produced steel, said a government official.

The steel industry contributes more than 4 billion Canadian dollars ($2.8bn) to Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP) and employs more than 23,000 people directly. It is, however, one of the two sectors hit hardest by US President Donald Trump’s 50 percent tariffs on steel imports from Canada.

Trump has imposed 50 percent tariffs on steel, and softwood lumber, long subject to US tariffs, is currently taxed at 45 percent after the Trump administration’s hike last month.

Carney said the decades-long process of an ever-closer economic relationship between Canada and the US is now over.

“As a consequence, many of our strengths have become vulnerabilities. Last year, more than 75 percent of our exports went to the United States. Ninety percent of our lumber exports, 90 percent of our aluminium exports, and 90 percent of our steel exports, all bound for a single market,” Carney said.

Ottawa will work with railway companies to cut freight rates for the inter-provincial transfer of Canadian steel and lumber by 50 percent, beginning in early 2026.

“We will make it more affordable to transport Canadian steel and lumber across the country by cutting freight rates,” Carney said.

The government said it would also support the use of locally made steel and lumber in homebuilding, and financial aid for companies dealing with tariff-related impacts, such as on their workforce, liquidity crunch, and for restructuring operations.

Trump tensions

Trump cut off trade talks with Canada last month after the Ontario provincial government ran television advertisements in US markets that criticised Trump’s tariffs by citing a speech by former US President Ronald Reagan.

Carney said he would be in Washington for the final draw on December 5 for the FIFA World Cup 2026 tournament. He said he would speak to Trump then and said he spoke briefly to the president on Tuesday.

“We are ready to re-engage on those talks when the United States wants to re-engage,” Carney said.

Carney’s announcement comes even as there is increased pressure on US businesses reeling from Trump’s tariffs.

Deere & Co, the maker of John Deere tractors, said on Wednesday that it expects a bigger hit from tariffs in 2026. The company expects a pre-tax tariff hit of around $1.2bn in fiscal 2026, compared with nearly $600m in 2025.

International Rights Advocates also sued Tesla for a similar issue, but that case was dismissed.

A United States-based advocacy group has filed a lawsuit in Washington, DC, accusing Apple of using minerals linked to conflict and human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and Rwanda despite the iPhone maker’s denials.

International Rights Advocates (IRAdvocates) has previously sued Tesla, Apple and other tech firms over cobalt sourcing, but US courts dismissed that case last year.

French prosecutors in December also dropped a case filed by the DRC against Apple subsidiaries over conflict minerals, citing lack of evidence. A related criminal complaint in Belgium is still under investigation.

Apple denied any wrongdoing in response to the DRC’s legal cases, saying it had instructed its suppliers to halt the sourcing of material from the DRC and neighbouring Rwanda.

It did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the latest complaint.

IRAdvocates, a Washington, DC-based nonprofit that tries to use litigation to curtail rights abuses, said in the complaint filed on Tuesday in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia that Apple’s supply chain still includes cobalt, tin, tantalum and tungsten linked to child and forced labour as well as armed groups in the DRC and Rwanda.

The lawsuit seeks a determination by the court that Apple’s conduct violates consumer protection law, an injunction to halt alleged deceptive marketing and reimbursement of legal costs but does not seek monetary damages or class certification.

The lawsuit alleges that three Chinese smelters – Ningxia Orient, JiuJiang JinXin and Jiujiang Tanbre – processed coltan that United Nations and Global Witness investigators alleged was smuggled through Rwanda after armed groups seized mines in the eastern DRC and linked the material to Apple’s supply chain.

A University of Nottingham study published in 2025 found forced and child labour at DRC sites linked to Apple suppliers, the lawsuit said.

Ningxia Orient, JiuJiang JinXin and Jiujiang Tanbre did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The DRC – which supplies about 70 percent of the world’s cobalt and significant volumes of tin, tantalum and tungsten used in phones, batteries and computers – did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Rwanda also did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Apple has repeatedly denied sourcing minerals from conflict zones or using forced labour, citing audits and its supplier code of conduct. It said in December that there was “no reasonable basis” to conclude any smelters or refiners in its supply chain financed armed groups in the DRC or neighbouring countries.

Congolese authorities said armed groups in the eastern part of the country use mineral profits to fund a conflict that has killed thousands of people and displaced hundreds of thousands. The authorities have tightened controls on minerals to choke off funding, squeezing global supplies.

Apple says 76 percent of the cobalt in its devices was recycled in 2024, but the IRAdvocates lawsuit alleged its accounting method allows mixing with ore from conflict zones.

On Wall Street, Apple’s stock was up 0.8 percent.

British Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced the latest budget on Wednesday, setting out sweeping tax hikes which are projected to raise 26.1 billion pounds ($34.4bn) for the public purse by 2030.

The budget had been highly anticipated as a “make or break” moment for the UK’s governing Labour party, which has grappled with poor polling over the past year. Earlier this year, an opinion poll by YouGov found that if an election were to be held now, the far-right Reform UK Party, which takes a hard line on immigration, would come to power.

In an embarrassing turn, the country’s Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) published its economic outlook as a result of the budget on its website two hours before the announcement – something it never normally does until afterwards. Reeves called the blunder “deeply disappointing” and a “serious error”.

Reeves acknowledged that the tax rises – to be paid in large part by freezing existing income tax thresholds, meaning more people will pay higher tax as their incomes rise with inflation – would adversely affect working people. This breaks a key pledge Labour made in its manifesto before last year’s general election.

“We are asking everyone to make a contribution,” Reeves told parliament.

However, she said the tax rises would help pay for nearly 22 billion pounds ($28.9bn) in fiscal headroom within five years. Reeves also said government borrowing would fall each year. Borrowing in 2025-26 is expected to be 138.3bn pounds ($183bn), falling to 112.1 billion pounds ($148.3bn) the year after and to 67.2 billion pounds ($88.9bn) by 2031.

While the UK’s budget deficit is forecast at 28.8 billion pounds for the financial year 2026/2027, Reeves said this would move to surplus in 2028 and forecast a 24.6 billion pound ($32.55) surplus for 2030/2031.

That will pay for welfare spending and means there “will be no return to austerity measures”, Reeves said.

“I said there would be no return to austerity, and I meant it. This budget will maintain our investment in our economy and our National Health Service. I said I would cut the cost of living, and I meant it. This budget will bring down inflation and provide immediate relief for families. I said that I would cut debt and borrowing, and I meant it,” Reeves said.

Here are five key takeaways from this budget.

1. Labour broke its promise not to raise taxes for working people

Reeves raised taxes by about 40 billion pounds ($52.6bn) in last year’s budget – the biggest hike in revenue-raising measures in decades – in what she said would be a one-off needed to put the government’s finances on an even keel.

This time around, while she did not increase income tax or National Insurance Contributions for working people, she did extend a freeze on the income thresholds at which tax must be paid.

This means that more people will be dragged into higher tax brackets as their income rises with inflation. The move will pull 780,000 more people into paying basic-rate income tax for the first time by the 2029-2030 fiscal year along with 920,000 more higher-rate taxpayers and 4,000 additional-rate payers.

“This ‘fiscal drag’ means that hundreds of thousands will start paying income tax for the first time, and all existing taxpayers will face higher liabilities,” Irem Guceri, associate professor of economics and public policy at Oxford University’s Blavatnik School of Government, said.

The previous Conservative government had already frozen these thresholds until 2028. Reeves, who was highly critical of that action at the time – saying it hurt working people – now plans to extend that to 2031.

“I know that maintaining these thresholds is a decision that will affect working people,” she said. “I said that last year, and I won’t pretend otherwise now.”

“I can confirm that I will not be increasing National Insurance, the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax or VAT [value added tax]”, the chancellor added.

Reeves said she will also target wealthier people via a “mansion tax” on those who own property worth more than 2 million pounds ($2.65m) and is reducing the amount of tax relief some higher earners can obtain on pension contributions. She also announced a 2 percentage point increase in tax rates on rental income, dividends and capital gains.

Nigel Green, chief executive of the financial advice firm DeVere, said these moves will have wider “behavioural impacts”. “People make long-term decisions about where to work, where to build wealth and where to retire,” he said.

“When rules around pensions tighten sharply, it undermines confidence in the broader system. Wealth moves where governments show stability over decades, not sudden extractions,” he added.

Following the announcement, Kemi Badenoch, leader of the opposition Conservative party, described Reeves decision to raise taxes, despite promising not to do so again, as “a total humiliation”.

2. Labour will spend money on welfare

One of the highly anticipated announcements of the budget was the scrapping of the two-child benefit cap from April 2026. Currently, parents can only claim special tax credits worth about 3,455 pounds ($4,571) per child for their first two children. The cap was imposed by the previous Conservative government. Reeves said this would lift thousands of children out of poverty.

“The removal of the two-child limit in child benefit is likely to provide significant support to families currently living in poverty,” Guceri said.

Experts said the move would appeal strongly to Labour Party backbenchers. “The two-child benefit cap is widely despised among rebellious Labour MPs as a major contributor to child poverty,” said Colm Murphy, senior lecturer in British politics at Queen Mary University, London. “Repeal was critical for Reeves to have any chance of political survival.”

Gregory Thwaites, research director at Resolution Foundation (RF), a British think tank that focuses on improving living standards, also said the move was a positive step towards reducing child poverty in the UK.

“That’s something that we’ve been campaigning for RF for some time, and we’re very pleased to see that. And then there are some welcome reforms to the tax system, as well. So, for example, charging the people who own very expensive properties a bit more money that will, that’s very welcome, as well,” Thwaites told Al Jazeera.

“Ultimately, budgetary responsibility should not just be seen in terms of fiscal balance but also measures of broader wellbeing,” said professor Jasper Kenter, professorial research fellow at Aberystwyth Business School. “Lifting the two-child benefit cap is important in this regard.”

GMB workers’ union General Secretary Gary Smith welcomed Reeves’s decision to tax wealth and to increase welfare spending, calling this budget the “final nail in the coffin for the Conservatives’ failed austerity project”.

“Key public services, essential national infrastructure, and communities across the UK suffered deep wounds because the Tories made the wrong economic choices – we must never go back to those dark days,” a statement from Smith read.

“The challenge for Labour is to grip the task of rebuilding our economy and country, lock in essential investment to create growth, and start bringing a bit of hope to people,” the statement added.

3. UK’s hated ‘rape clause’ will be scrapped

Reeves said she would scrap the so-called “rape clause”, which exempts women from the two-child benefit cap policy if they can prove their child was conceived non-consensually.

She described the exemption requirement as “vile, grotesque, dehumanising, cruel”.

“I’m proud to be Britain’s first female chancellor,” Reeves told parliament. “I take the responsibilities that come with that seriously. I will not tolerate the grotesque indignity to women of the rape clause any longer.”

4. Slower-than-expected economic growth forecast

In response to the budget, the OBR upgraded its forecast for economic growth for this year from 1 percent to 1.5 percent.

However, it downgraded economic growth for the following four years. GDP growth in 2026 is now expected to be 1.4 percent (down from 1.9 percent), while the OBR has downgraded its forecast for each of 2027, 2028 and 2029 to 1.5 percent (down from approximately 1.8 percent).

Much of the downgrade stems from lower expectations for productivity growth. Reeves insisted the sluggish outlook was the legacy of the previous Conservative government, however.

Reeves also announced a freeze on fuel duty and rail fares, as well as support with energy bills, causing the OBR to revise inflation down by 0.4 percentage points for next year, Guceri said. However, the OBR revised up its forecast for this year to 3.5 percent, “reflecting stronger real wage growth and persistent food price pressures”, she added.

5. The pound and financial markets responded positively

Sterling rose by 0.3 percent against the dollar to $1.3213 just in advance of the budget announcement, before settling back to roughly where it started by the end of it.

London’s blue-chip FTSE index and the FTSE 250 index rose by about 0.6 percent each in the wake of the budget.

“So far, markets showed little reaction to the Budget – something the Chancellor will view as a success,” Guceri said.

It has been a whiplash-inducing month for the American rancher, one of United States President Donald Trump’s most steadfast voting blocs.

Starting with an October 19 quip from Trump that the US would increase beef imports from Argentina to the ensuing rancher backlash against the announcement of an investigation into the hyperconsolidated US meatpacking industry and the dropping of tariffs on Brazilian beef, ranchers have found themselves caught between the president’s desires to appease both them and the American consumer in the face of high beef prices.

US ranchers have enjoyed rising cattle prices, largely the result of the lowest herd numbers for beef cattle since the 1950s. Other factors constricting supply include the closure of the Mexican border to live cattle due to concerns over screwworm and steep tariffs on foreign beef.

Cattle prices paid to ranchers are separate from consumer beef prices, which, as of September, were $6.32 for a pound (453 grams) of ground beef, an 11 percent rise from September 2024 when they were $5.67 a pound. The Bureau of Labor Statistics did not release economic data, including the consumer price index for last month, because of the government shutdown.

Trump had no patience for the typically loyal ranchers objecting to his plan to import more Argentinian beef, which they saw as a threat to their recent economic gains.

“If it weren’t for me, they would be doing just as they’ve done for the past 20 years – Terrible! It would be nice if they would understand that,” Trump wrote in an October post on his Truth Social platform.

While Corbitt Wall, a commercial cattle manager and market analyst, is clear that he “totally supports Trump and everything he does”, he also saw hubris and a misunderstanding of the cattle industry by the president.

“There was not a person in the cattle business on any level that was not insulted by that post,” he told Al Jazeera.

Wall religiously follows prices across the cattle trade from ranch to slaughterhouse and has watched the futures market for cattle slide down by more than 15 percent since Trump’s October 21 announcement.

Futures prices dictate what ranchers can expect to sell cattle for down the line and sway current sale prices as well. For ranchers’ sake, Wall said he hopes Trump leaves the cattle market alone.

“He doesn’t live in this world, in this cattle world, and doesn’t realise the impact that a statement can make in our business,” Wall said.

Years of rough seasons

Oregon rancher David Packham said that while cattle prices have jumped in ranchers’ favour, many are still struggling in the face of years of rough seasons.

Years of drought across the country raised feed costs for all and pushed some ranchers to sell off cattle. Sticker prices on farm equipment from tractors to pick-up trucks have ballooned as well, especially on the back of supply chain challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, and are expected to rise further on account of Trump’s tariffs.

Packham said he has regularly sold cattle at a loss and doesn’t want consumers to think ranchers are living high off the hog.

“I’m looking at a 40-year-old tractor that I use on a daily basis just to keep putting off replacing it, making repairs, although it’s difficult to find parts for now, just to keep it limping along because I couldn’t afford $100,000 for a new tractor,” Packham said. “When I say we’re not really making a whole lot of money, it’s because we have all this loss carryover.”

Packham was a registered Republican until Trump’s first term. The president’s Argentina comments and the subsequent chaos for the cattle industry have propped open a door for ranchers critical of Trump, but they represent a minority within the community, he said.

“I’m noticing more and more of them [ranchers] that had been cautiously neutral, that are now kind of like me and just saying, ‘You know what? No. This is bulls***. He’s a train wreck,’” Packham said.

‘Perennial issue’

One action ranchers can support, however, is Trump’s November 7 announcement of a Department of Justice investigation into the big four US meatpackers – Tyson, JBS, Cargill and National Beef – “for potential collusion, price fixing and price manipulation”.

Historically, ranchers looking to sell cattle have held little negotiating power as the four companies control more than 80 percent of the market.

However, a prior Department of Justice investigation into meatpacker price-fixing was started under the first Trump administration in 2020 due to a gulf created by falling cattle prices and rising consumer beef prices. The investigation continued under President Joe Biden’s administration but was never publicly concluded. According to Bloomberg News, the investigation was quietly closed with no findings just weeks before Trump announced the November antitrust probe.

James MacDonald, a research professor in agricultural and resource economics at the University of Maryland, views the administration’s antitrust investigation announcement as “entirely for political consumption”.

“It is a perennial issue that p***es off ranchers, and you can gain some political ground by attacking the packers,” MacDonald said.

Packham would prefer the new investigation to come at a different time and said that given the squeeze from the tight cattle market, packers are operating under slimmer margins and not from a position of absolute power.

On Friday, Tyson announced the closure of a Nebraska beef-processing plant that employed more than 3,000 people. MacDonald called the decision a “shock” indicative of the depths of the US beef shortage. The current low cattle inventory in the US came from years of drought, which wiped out grazing lands and slowed herd rebuilding. Replenishing the cattle supply chain is a years-long process.

“That’s sort of a fact and a fundamental, and it’s not going to change for a while,” MacDonald said.

MacDonald also doesn’t believe the increased Argentina imports will ease this shortage or lower prices as the country largely sends lower-grade, lean beef to the US, accounting for only 2 percent of imports. He expected that while the reintroduction of largely lean Brazilian beef will impact the import market, it holds less weight on overall beef supply.

McDonald also cited heifer retention numbers, which indicate how many female cattle that ranchers hold back to produce future herds years down the line, which are still low.

Tyson likely factored in these numbers when making the decision to shutter its Nebraska plant, and it doesn’t seem like the industry is expecting herd numbers to rebound either, McDonald told Al Jazeera.

“It’s Tyson saying we don’t think cattle supplies are going to recover anytime soon,” MacDonald said.

While the actual mechanisms of Trump’s recent policies might not budge consumers’ bottom lines or change the cattle market for the time being, Wall is more concerned about the ripple effects from the news cycle, saying ranchers “live and die” by the cattle markets. While his faith is shaken, Wall regardless believes that ranchers, conservative as ever, will show up for Trump when election time comes around.

“You look at what the other side has to offer, and there’s no way people are going to go for that,” Wall said. “So in the long run, they’ll stick with him.”

A sluggish job market lowers consumer confidence but may also lead to another rate cut from the Federal Reserve by the end of the year.

United States consumer confidence sagged in November as households worried about jobs and their financial situation, likely in part because of the recently ended government shutdown.

The Conference Board said on Tuesday its consumer confidence index dropped to 88.7 this month, from an upwardly revised 95.5 in October, hitting its lowest level since April.

Economists polled by the Reuters news agency had forecast the index edging down to 93.4 from the previously reported 94.6 in October.

“Consumers’ write-in responses pertaining to factors affecting the economy continued to be led by references to prices and inflation, tariffs and trade, and politics with increased mentions of the federal government shutdown,” said Dana Peterson, chief economist at the Conference Board.

“Mentions of the labour market eased somewhat but still stood out among all other frequent themes not already cited. The overall tone from November write-ins was slightly more negative than in October.”

Consumer confidence remained low among all income brackets. While confidence among those who make less than $15,000 annually ticked up slightly, it still remained the group with the lowest consumer confidence.

The consumer confidence report was released amid a slowing labour market. The September jobs report, released late last week, showed 119,000 jobs were added to the US economy as the unemployment rate ticked up 0.1 of a percentage point to 4.4 percent.

However, there is limited economic data available to fully gauge the sentiment of the US economy because the government shutdown, the longest in US history, hindered federal agencies’ ability to gather the data needed to assess current conditions.

“More worries about what lies ahead … hence, putting purchases for major items on hold,” Jennifer Lee, senior economist at BMO, wrote to Reuters.

The economic data followed dovish comments from policymakers in the past few days that helped cement rate cut expectations.

On Monday, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller said the job market was weak enough to warrant another quarter-point rate cut in December although action beyond that depended on a flood of data that was delayed by the federal government shutdown.

Trump signs order to integrate supercomputers and data assets in order to create ‘AI experimentation platform”.

United States President Donald Trump has unveiled a national initiative to mobilise artificial intelligence (AI) for accelerating scientific breakthroughs.

Trump signed an executive order on Monday to establish “The Genesis Mission”, the latest iteration of his administration’s aggressive strategy for spurring AI development through deregulation, infrastructure investment and public-private collaboration.

Trump’s order directs US Energy Secretary Chris Wright to unite scientists and technologies at the country’s 17 national laboratories into “one cooperative system for research”.

Under the initiative, US supercomputers and data resources will be integrated to create a “closed-loop AI experimentation platform”, according to the order.

The White House, which likened the initiative to the Apollo programme that put the first man on the moon, said priority areas of focus would include the “greatest scientific challenges of our time,” such as nuclear fusion, semiconductors, critical materials and space exploration.

Michael Kratsios, the White House’s top science adviser, said the initiative took a “revolutionary approach” to scientific research.

“The Genesis Mission connects world-class scientific data with the most advanced American AI to unlock breakthroughs in medicine, energy, materials science, and beyond,” Kratsios said.

Chipmaker Nvidia and AI startup Anthropic said on Monday that they were partnering with the Trump administration on the initiative.

“Uniting the National Labs, USG, industry, and academia, this effort will connect America’s leading supercomputers, AI systems, and next-generation quantum machines into the most complex scientific instrument ever built – accelerating breakthroughs in energy, discovery, and national security,” Nvidia said in a social media post, referring to the US government (USG).

Since re-entering the White House, Trump has made cutting red tape to fast-track the development of AI a key plank of his economic agenda.

Last week, Trump called on the US Congress to pass legislation to create a national standard for AI, while criticising state governments over their laws regulating the emerging technology.

“Overregulation by the States is threatening to undermine this Growth Engine,” Trump said on his platform, Truth Social.

“We MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes.”

Benjamin H Bratton, an AI expert at the University of California, San Diego, welcomed the initiative as a move towards the “diffusion” of the technology.

“It is less important ‘whose’ AI people have access to than they have universal access at all,” Bratton told Al Jazeera.

“Most attempts to throttle AI in the USA and EU [European Union] come from cultural, economic and political incumbents protecting their turf.”

“Those locked out of positions of artificially scarce social agency have the most to gain,” Bratton added. “I support diffusion, not any particular administration.”

Islamabad, Pakistan – A new assessment by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has concluded that corruption in Pakistan is behind an economic crisis driven by “state capture” – where public policy is manipulated to benefit a narrow circle of political and business elites.

The Governance and Corruption Diagnostic Assessment (GCDA), finalised in November 2025, presents a grim picture of a system marked by dysfunctional institutions that are unable to enforce the rule of law or safeguard public resources.

According to the 186-page report, corruption in Pakistan is “persistent and corrosive”, distorting markets, eroding public trust and undermining fiscal stability.

The report, requested by the Pakistani government, warns that without dismantling the structures of “elite privilege”, the country’s economic stagnation will persist.

While corruption vulnerabilities are present at all levels of government, according to the report, “the most economically damaging manifestations involve privileged entities that exert influence over key economic sectors, including those owned by or affiliated with the state.”

The report argues that Pakistan stands to gain substantial economic benefits if governance improves and accountability is strengthened. Such reforms, it notes, could significantly lift the country’s gross domestic product (GDP), which stood at $340bn in 2024.

“Based on cross-country analysis of the reform experience of emerging markets, IMF analysis projects that Pakistan could generate between a 5 to 6.5 percent increase in GDP by implementing a package of governance reforms over the course of five years,” the report said.

Stefan Dercon, a professor of economic policy at the University of Oxford who has advised the Pakistani government on economic reforms, said that he agreed that the absence of accountability in corruption cases was eating away at the country’s economic potential.

“Failure of implementation [of laws and principles of accountability] gives vested interests too often free rein and addressing this must be at the core of efforts for economic reform,” he told Al Jazeera.

Here is what we know about the IMF report, the areas of weakness it highlights, the policy recommendations it makes, and what the experts say.

What does the IMF report say?

Pakistan has turned to the IMF 25 times since 1958, making it one of the fund’s most frequent borrowers. Nearly every administration, whether military or civilian, has sought IMF assistance, reflecting chronic balance of payments crises.

The current programme was started under Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif.

The GCDA’s release comes ahead of the IMF executive board’s expected approval of a $1.2bn disbursement next month, part of the ongoing 37-month-long, $7bn programme.

Pakistan narrowly avoided default in 2023, surviving only after the IMF extended an earlier nine-month deal, which was followed by the ongoing 37-month programme.

According to the GCDA, Pakistan consistently ranks near the bottom of global governance indicators among nations. Between 2015 and 2024, the country’s score on control of corruption remained stagnant, placing it among the worst performers worldwide and within its neighbourhood.

At the heart of the IMF’s findings is the concept of “state capture”, where, according to the fund, corruption becomes the norm and, in fact, the primary means of governance. The report argues that the Pakistani state apparatus is frequently used to enrich specific groups at the expense of the broader public.

The report estimates that “elite privilege” – defined as access to subsidies, tax relief and lucrative state contracts for a select few – drains billions of dollars from the economy annually, while tax evasion and regulatory capture crowd out genuine private sector investment.

These findings echo a 2021 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report, which said economic privileges granted to Pakistan’s elite groups, including politicians and the powerful military, amount to roughly 6 percent of the country’s economy.

Ali Hasanain, an associate professor of economics at the Lahore University of Management Sciences, said the IMF’s description of elite capture is accurate but added that it was “hardly a revelation”.

He pointed to the 2021 UNDP report and other domestic studies that describe how Pakistan’s economic system has long served politically connected actors who secure “preferential access to land, credit, tariffs and regulatory exemptions.”

“The IMF diagnostic repeats what many domestic studies, including those by the World Bank and Pakistan’s own institutions, have already emphasised: Powerful interests shape rules to maintain their advantage,” he told Al Jazeera.

The new report notes that tax expenditures, including exemptions and concessions granted to influential sectors such as real estate, manufacturing and energy, cost the state 4.61 percent of GDP in the 2023 fiscal year alone.

It also calls for an end to special treatment for influential public sector entities in government contracts and urges greater transparency in the functioning of the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC).

The SIFC, created in June 2023 during Sharif’s first term, is a high-powered body comprising civilian and military leaders and tasked with promoting investment by easing bureaucratic obstacles. Although positioned as a flagship initiative jointly owned by the government and the military, it has faced sustained criticism for a lack of transparency.

The report describes broad legal immunity granted to SIFC officials, many from the armed forces, as a major governance concern. It warns that this immunity, combined with the council’s authority to exempt projects from regulatory requirements, creates significant risks.

Highlighting the absence of transparency, the GCDA says the SIFC should publish annual reports with details of all investments it has facilitated, including concessions granted and the rationale behind them.

“The recently established Special Investment Facilitation Council, which has been vested with substantial authority to facilitate foreign investments, operates with untested transparency and accountability provisions,” the report said.

Judiciary and rule of law

The report identifies the judiciary as another critical bottleneck. Pakistan’s legal system is overwhelmed by more than two million pending cases. In 2023 alone, the number of unresolved cases before the Supreme Court increased by 7 percent.

Over the last 12 months, Pakistan has passed two constitutional amendments, both of which faced severe backlash from many in the legal community who said that they represent a “constitutional surrender”. In essence, the amendments create a parallel Federal Constitutional Court that critics say will reduce the powers of the Supreme Court, while also changing rules that guide how judges are appointed and transferred, in ways that opponents say could give the executive great control over whom to promote and whom to punish.

The government, however, has insisted that the changes were made to improve the efficiency and efficacy of the judicial system.

Similar credibility challenges affect the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), the two principal bodies responsible for investigating corruption.

The GCDA cites a 2024 government task force, which found that NAB has, at times, exceeded its mandate and launched politically motivated cases. This selective accountability, the report says, has damaged public trust and created a climate of fear within the bureaucracy, slowing decision-making.

While NAB says it recovered 5.3 trillion rupees ($17bn) between January 2023 and December 2024, the report notes that conviction rates remain low.

The diagnostic calls for fundamental reforms to NAB’s appointment processes to ensure independence and a shift from “political victimisation” to “rule-based enforcement”.

Was the report necessary?

The IMF outlines reforms which experts acknowledged would be comprehensive if pursued by authorities.

Yet analysts also note that international institutions and domestic researchers have repeatedly made similar observations in the past, with little follow-through by the government.

Sajid Amin Javed, a senior economist at the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) in Islamabad, says the fact that Pakistan is already under an IMF programme may compel the government to take the findings more seriously.

He said that the IMF report could have gone further than it has by acknowledging that many of its recommendations have been made by others in the past, “without bringing any change”.

“Perhaps the assessment could have been made to see why these failures happened,” he said.

Javed welcomed the report’s attempt to quantify economic losses from corruption, hoping it might push policymakers to act.

“Corruption and governance are intrinsically tied to each other. Corruption leads to weak governance, and weak governance promotes corruption, making them conjoined,” he said.

Hasanain, however, was more sceptical, questioning why the IMF waited for a formal request from the Pakistani government despite having its own internal assessment mechanisms.

What can the government do?

Analysts said Pakistan’s economic landscape has long been shaped by politically connected actors who enjoy preferential access to land, credit, tariffs and regulatory exemptions. The IMF’s observations, they noted, are not new.

Hasanain argues that corruption, including elite capture of markets, regulatory bodies and public policy, is political in nature and cannot be addressed without deeper reforms.

“Without a broader political awakening, governance reforms will remain technical fixes built on unstable foundations. Ultimately, elite capture is undone only when political incentives change,” he said.

Javed, meanwhile, pointed to what he called policy design capture, arguing that those responsible for drafting governance and anticorruption reforms are often part of the same elite ecosystem.

“Elite policy capture on policy design is perhaps the most important component which allows the elite capture. The report’s recommendations show that we must go for participatory and inclusive methods to get out of our current conundrum,” he said.

For Hasanain, the most urgent reform is a unified economic turnaround plan that is fully owned by the prime minister and communicated clearly.

He said that Pakistan’s economic landscape was cluttered with “committees, councils, task forces and overlapping ministries”, each producing its own documents without accountability.

“The government should consolidate these scattered structures into one clear reform platform with defined priorities, timelines and measurable outcomes. Progress should be published monthly, debated publicly, and subjected to independent scrutiny,” he said.

Hasanain argued that such consolidation would improve coordination, build public trust and signal seriousness to investors.

For Javed, the most immediate priority is reforming the public procurement system, which governs how government bodies buy goods and services using public funds.

“Our procurement system is not working on value of money, but instead it focuses on quantity of money, where lowest bidder wins the bid,” he said, arguing that this approach meant that contracts often did not go to those best suited to deliver what was needed. “This system needs urgent modernisation.”

“An urgent realisation is the order of the day that if we need to have a flourishing, transparent economy, we have no choice but to overhaul our entire economic framework,” Javed said.

Heads of state from the world’s most powerful countries gathered in Johannesburg, South Africa, over the weekend for a summit that had been billed, under South Africa’s G20 presidency, as a turning point for addressing debt distress across the Global South.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa had consistently framed the issue as central to his agenda, arguing that spiralling repayment costs have left governments, particularly in Africa, with little room to fund essential services like healthcare and education.

But despite repeated pledges – including in the leaders’ summit declaration to “strengthen the implementation of the G20 Common Framework” – South Africa did not deliver any new proposals for easing fiscal constraints in indebted nations.

Hopes that world leaders would use the G20 summit to tackle sovereign debt distress were further dashed when United States President Donald Trump, at odds with South Africa over domestic policies, skipped the meeting altogether amid Washington’s retreat from multilateralism.

The summit also marked the close of a brief period of Global South leadership in the G20, following presidencies held by Indonesia in 2022, India in 2023, and Brazil in 2024. The US is set to assume the G20 presidency on December 1.

Debt ‘vulnerabilities’

The G20 – which consists of 19 advanced and emerging economies, the European Union and the African Union – represents 85 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP) and roughly two-thirds of the world’s population.

In October, G20 finance ministers and central bank chiefs met in Washington and agreed to a consensus statement on debt.

“We recognise that a high level of debt is one of the obstacles to inclusive growth in many developing economies, which limits their ability to invest in infrastructure, disaster resilience, healthcare, education and other development needs,” the statement said.

It also pledged to “reaffirm our commitment to support efforts by low- and middle-income countries to address debt vulnerabilities in an effective, comprehensive and systematic manner”.

The communique committed to improving the much-criticised Common Framework, a mechanism launched by the G20 five years ago to accelerate and simplify debt restructuring – when countries have to reprofile debts they can no longer afford to repay.

Elsewhere, the statement advocated for greater transparency around debt reporting and more lending from regional development banks.

Record-high debt levels

According to the Institute of International Finance, a banking industry association, total debt in developing countries rose to a record high of $109 trillion by mid-2025.

In recent years, COVID-19, climate shocks and rising food prices have forced many poor countries to rely on debt to stabilise their economies, crowding out other investments. For instance, the United Nations recently calculated that more than 40 percent of African governments spend more on servicing debt than they do on healthcare.

Africa also faces high borrowing costs. In 2023, bond yields – the interest on government debt – averaged 6.8 percent in Latin America and the Caribbean, and 9.8 percent in Africa.

Meanwhile, Africa collectively needs $143bn every year in climate finance to meet its Paris Agreement goals. In 2022, it received approximately $44bn.

At the same time, countries on the continent spent almost $90bn servicing external debt in 2024.

No progress

Shortly before the release of the G20’s final communique, 165 charities condemned the group’s slow progress on debt sustainability and urged President Ramaphosa to implement reforms before transferring the G20 presidency over to the US in December.

“While this year’s G20 has been put forward as an ‘African G20’, there is no evidence that any progress has been made on the debt crisis facing Africa and many other countries worldwide during the South African presidency,” the group said in a letter.

The missive called on the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to sell its gold reserves and set up a debt relief fund for distressed governments. It also backed the creation of a ‘borrowers club’ to facilitate cooperation among low-income countries.

The call for a unified debtor body reflects growing frustration with existing frameworks, notably the Paris Club, in which mostly Western governments, but not China, have exerted undue influence over the repayment policies of debtor nations.

In May 2020, the G20 launched a multibillion-dollar repayment pause to help poor countries cope with the COVID‑19 crisis. Known as the Debt Service Suspension Initiative, the programme is continuing to provide relief to some participating countries.

The launch of the Common Framework, soon afterwards, was designed to coordinate debt relief among all creditors. At the time, the initiative was hailed as a breakthrough, bringing together the Paris Club, China and private creditors to help prevent a full-blown debt crisis in developing countries.

But coordinating equal treatment, including government lenders, commercial banks, and bondholders, has made the process slow and prone to setbacks.

To date, none of the countries that joined the Common Framework – Ethiopia, Zambia, Ghana, and Chad – have completed their debt restructuring deals.

And even then, the programme has relieved just 7 percent of the debt costs for the four participating nations, according to ONE Campaign, an advocacy group.

‘Outmanoeuvred’

In March, South Africa convened an expert panel – headed by a former finance minister and a former Kenyan central banker – to explore how to assist heavily indebted low-income countries, particularly in Africa.

In a report released earlier this month, the panel echoed many of the ideas put forward by the 165 charities that wrote to Ramaphosa in October, calling for measures like an IMF-backed special debt fund and the formation of a debtors’ club.

But the experts’ proposals “weren’t even acknowledged at the leaders’ summit”, Kevin Gallagher, director of Boston University’s Global Development Policy Center, told Al Jazeera. He said that the G20 presidency “failed to address the scale of the global debt problem”.

“Ultimately,” Gallagher added, “South Africa was outmanoeuvred by larger, more economically important members of the G20 who saw little benefit to themselves in reforming the international financial architecture on debt.”

‘Double whammy’ of debt

In the early 2000s, the IMF, World Bank and some Paris Club creditors cancelled more than $75bn of debt – roughly 40 percent of external obligations – under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative.

Since then, however, many developing countries have slipped back into the red. After the 2008 financial crisis, private creditors poured money into low-income economies, steadily replacing the cheaper loans once offered by institutions like the World Bank.

Between 2020 and 2025, almost 40 percent of external public debt repayments from lower-income countries went to commercial lenders. Just one-third went to multilateral institutions, according to Debt Justice, a United Kingdom-based charity.

China has also emerged as the world’s largest single creditor, especially in the Global South, committing more than $472bn through its policy banks – such as the China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank – between 2008 and 2024.

“On top of debt becoming more expensive over the past 10 or 15 years, there is now a wider universe of lenders that developing countries have turned to,” says Iolanda Fresnillo, a policy and advocacy manager at Eurodad, a civil society organisation.

“It’s been a double whammy. Debt is now costlier and harder to resolve,” she said, noting the difficulty of coordinating creditors in a restructuring. Protracted debt crises slow growth by squeezing public investment.

Overcoming these hurdles is made harder when creditors pursue competing commercial interests. Fresnillo says an independent debt-restructuring body, designed to shorten negotiation times and limit economic costs, could help.

In September, the head of the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Rebeca Grynspan, said, “There is no permanent institution or system that is there all the time dealing with debt restructuring … maybe we can create new momentum.”

However, talk of an international sovereign debt restructuring mechanism isn’t new. The IMF spearheaded a push for a neutral body – which would be akin to a US bankruptcy court – in the late 1990s.

The Fund’s proposed restructuring mechanism faced swift pushback. Major creditor countries, particularly the US, opposed ceding power to an international body that could override its legal system and weaken protections for US investors.

Still, “the need for this type of international solution is obvious”, says Fresnillo. “Having a basic set of rules, as opposed to an ad hoc negotiation for every new debt crisis, should be a bare minimum.”

She added that “adopting a global standard on taxing transnational corporations could also guarantee a baseline of revenues for low-income countries. But with multilateral cooperation so weak right now, I wouldn’t hold my breath.”

The federal government seeks to develop tailored artificial intelligence (AI) solutions and drive significant cost savings by leveraging AWS’s dedicated capacity.

Amazon is set to invest up to $50bn to expand artificial intelligence (AI) and supercomputing capacity for United States government customers, in one of the largest cloud infrastructure commitments targeted at the public sector.

The e-commerce giant announced the investment on Monday.

The project, expected to break ground in 2026, will add nearly 1.3 gigawatts of new AI and high-performance computing capacity across AWS Top Secret, AWS Secret and AWS GovCloud regions through new data centres equipped with advanced computing and networking systems.

One gigawatt of computing power is roughly enough to power about 750,000 US households on average.

“This investment removes the technology barriers that have held the government back”, Amazon Web Services (AWS) CEO Matt Garman said.

AWS is already a major cloud provider to the US government, serving more than 11,000 government agencies.

Amazon’s initiative aims to provide federal agencies with enhanced access to a comprehensive suite of AWS AI services. These include Amazon SageMaker for model training and customisation, Amazon Bedrock for deploying AI models and agents and foundational models such as Amazon Nova and Anthropic Claude.

The federal government seeks to develop tailored AI solutions and drive significant cost savings by leveraging AWS’s dedicated and expanded capacity.

The push also comes as the US, along with other countries such as China, intensifies efforts to advance AI development and secure leadership in the emerging technology.

Tech companies, including OpenAI, Alphabet and Microsoft, are pouring billions of dollars into building out AI infrastructure, boosting demand for computing power required to support the services.

On Wall Street, Amazon’s stock was up 1.7 percent in midday trading.

Other tech stocks surged amid the recent investments. Alphabet, Google’s parent company, closed in on a $4 trillion valuation on Monday and was set to become only the fourth company to enter the exclusive club. Its stock was up 4.7 percent.

Last week, Nvidia announced expectations of higher fourth-quarter revenue — a month after the tech giant announced a partnership to build supercomputers for the US Department of Energy — a deal that sent the company’s valuation topping $5 trillion.

Nvidia stock was up by 1.8 percent in midday trading.

Africa’s first-ever Group of 20 (G20) summit – and the first boycotted by a prominent member – has wrapped up.

Host South Africa hailed it as a success, as a declaration was agreed covering a wide range of issues.

But what’s next for the G20?

Presenter: Imran Khan

Guests:

Thembisa Fakude – Director of Africa Asia Dialogues (Afrasid) in Johannesburg

Richard Weitz – Senior non-resident associate fellow at the NATO Defense College in Washington, DC

Omar Ashour – Professor of strategic studies and international security at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies

The unions demand the laws be withdrawn before nationwide protests they plan to hold on Wednesday.

Ten large Indian trade unions have condemned the government’s rollout on Friday of new labour codes, the biggest such overhaul in decades, as a “deceptive fraud” against workers.

The unions, aligned with parties opposing Prime Minister Narendra Modi, demanded in a statement late on Friday that the laws be withdrawn before nationwide protests they plan to hold on Wednesday.

One of the trade unions, Centre of Indian Trade Unions, organised protest marches on Saturday in the eastern city Bhubaneswar, where hundreds of workers gathered and burned copies of the new labour codes.

Modi’s government implemented the four labour codes, approved by parliament five years ago, as it seeks to simplify work rules, some dating to British colonial rule, and liberalise conditions for investment.

It says the changes improve worker protections. While the new rules offer social security and minimum-wage benefits, they also allow companies to hire and fire workers more easily.

Unions have strongly opposed the changes, organising multiple nationwide protests over the past five years.

The Labour Ministry did not immediately respond on Saturday to a Reuters news agency request for comment on the union demands. The government has held over a dozen consultations with unions since June 2024, an internal ministry document on the labour codes shows.

The rules allow longer factory shifts and night work for women, while raising the threshold for firms that need prior approval for layoffs to 300 workers from 100, giving companies greater flexibility in workforce management.

Businesses have long criticised India’s work rules as a drag on manufacturing, which contributes less than a fifth to the country’s nearly $4 trillion economy.

But the Association of Indian Entrepreneurs expressed concern that the new rules would significantly increase operating costs for small and midsize enterprises and disrupt business continuity across key sectors.

It asked the government for transitional support and flexible implementation mechanisms. Not all unions oppose the overhaul.

The right-wing Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh, aligned with Modi’s party, called on states to implement them after consultations on some of the codes. Indian states are expected to craft rules aligning with the new federal codes covering wages, industrial relations, social security and occupational safety.

US President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani met in the Oval Office on Friday after weeks of trading barbs. Trump, who described their meetings as “productive,” gave Mamdani a warm welcome, and said he’ll be “cheering for” the 34-year-old incoming mayor.

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has announced it will not release inflation information for the month of October, citing the consequences of the recent government shutdown.

On Friday, the bureau updated its website to say that certain October data would not be available, even now that government funding has been restored and normal operations have resumed.

“BLS could not collect October 2025 reference period survey data due to a lapse in appropriations,” it wrote in a statement. “BLS is unable to retroactively collect these data.”

The cancelled data includes the Consumer Price Index (CPI) — a report that is commonly used to calculate inflation by measuring the changing costs of retail items — and the Real Earnings summary, which tracks wages among US workers.

For some of the reports, including the Consumer Price Index, the bureau said it would use “nonsurvey data sources” to make calculations that would be included in a future report for the month of November.

The November Consumer Price Index will also be published later than anticipated, on December 18.

The most recent government shutdown was the longest in US history, spanning nearly 43 days.

It began on October 1, after the US Congress missed a September 30 deadline to pass legislation to keep the government funded.

Republicans had hoped to push through a continuing resolution that made no changes to current spending levels. But Democrats had baulked at the prospect, arguing that recent restrictions to government programmes had put healthcare out of reach for some US citizens.

They also warned that insurance subsidies under the Affordable Care Act are set to expire by the end of the year. Without an extension to those subsidies, they said that insurance premiums for many Americans will spike.

Republicans rejected the prospect of negotiating the issue until after their continuing resolution was passed. Democrats, meanwhile, feared that, if they passed the continuing resolution without changes, there would be no further opportunity to address healthcare spending before the end of the year.

The two parties hit an impasse as a result. Non-essential government functions were halted during the shutdown, and many federal employees were furloughed.

Only on November 10 did a breakthrough begin to emerge. Late that night, seven Democrats and one independent broke from their caucus to side with Republicans and pass a budget bill to fund the government through January 30.

The bill was then approved by the House of Representatives on November 12, by a vote of 222 to 209. President Donald Trump signed the legislation into law that very same day.

Trump had openly sought to leverage the shutdown to eliminate federal programmes he saw as benefitting Democratic strongholds.

He also attempted to blame the political left for the lapse in government services, though he acknowledged public frustration with Republicans after Democrats won key elections in November.

“If you read the pollsters, the shutdown was a big factor, negative for the Republicans,” he told a breakfast for Republican senators on November 5. “That was a big factor.”

The Trump administration had warned as early as October that the month’s consumer price data would be negatively affected as a result of the shutdown.

In a White House statement, Trump officials touted Trump’s economic record while slamming a potential lapse in the government’s collection of data. Once again, they angled the blame for any slowed economic growth at the Democrats.

“Unfortunately, the Democrat Shutdown risks grinding that progress to a halt,” the statement said.

“Because surveyors cannot deploy to the field, the White House has learned there will likely NOT be an inflation release next month for the first time in history — depriving policymakers and markets of critical data and risking economic calamity.”

September’s Consumer Price Index, the most recent available, showed that inflation across all retail items rose about 3 percent over the previous 12-month period.

For food alone, inflation for that period was estimated at 3.1 percent.

The company’s stock has zoomed this year, driven by the explosive growth of the weight-loss drug market.

Eli Lilly has hit $1 trillion in market value, making it the first drugmaker to enter the exclusive club dominated by tech giants and underscoring its rise as a weight-loss powerhouse.

A more than 35 percent rally in the company’s stock this year has largely been driven by the explosive growth of the weight-loss drug market and saw it join the $1 trillion club on Friday.

Once seen as a niche category, obesity treatments are now one of the most lucrative segments in healthcare, with steadily rising demand.

Novo Nordisk had the early lead in the space, but Lilly’s drugs – Mounjaro and Zepbound – have surged in popularity and helped eclipse its rival in prescriptions.

The company’s shares were up 1.3 percent at a record high of $1,057.70.

Lilly now trades at one of the richest valuations in big pharma, at about 50 times its expected earnings over the next 12 months, according to LSEG data, reflecting investors’ belief that demand for obesity drugs will remain strong.

Shares have also far outpaced the broader United States equity market. Since the launch of Zepbound in late 2023, Lilly has gained more than 75 percent, compared with a more than 50 percent rise in the S&P 500 over the same period.

In the latest reported quarter, Lilly posted combined revenue of more than $10.09bn from its obesity and diabetes portfolio, accounting for more than half of its total revenue of $17.6bn.

“They are doing so many things outside of obesity, but to suggest anything is driving share price beyond obesity at this point, I don’t know if that would be a factual statement,” said Kevin Gade, chief operating officer at Lilly shareholder Bahl and Gaynor, in advance of the milestone.

‘Sales phenomenon’

Wall Street estimates the weight-loss drug market to be worth $150bn by 2030, with Lilly and Novo together controlling the majority of projected global sales.

Investors are now focused on Lilly’s oral obesity drug, orforglipron, which is expected to be approved early next year.

In a note last week, Citi analysts said the latest generation of GLP-1 drugs have already been a “sales phenomenon”, and orforglipron is poised to benefit from the “inroads made by its injectable predecessors”.

Lilly’s recent deal with the White House to cut prices for its weight-loss drugs, as well as planned investments to expand drug production, augur well for its growth.

Lilly is starting to resemble the “Magnificent Seven” again, said James Shin, director of Biopharma Equity Research at Deutsche Bank, referring to the seven tech heavyweights, including Nvidia and Microsoft, that have powered much of the market’s returns this year.

At one point, investors viewed it as part of that elite group, but after some disappointing headlines and earnings, it slipped out of favour.

Now, however, it seems poised to rejoin that circle, possibly even as an alternative for investors, especially given recent concerns and weakness in some AI stocks, he added.

Still, analysts and investors are watching whether Lilly can sustain its current growth as prices of Mounjaro and Zepbound come under pressure, and whether its scale-up plans, along with its diversified pipeline and dealmaking, will offset margin pressure.

US President Donald Trump’s decision to snub the G20 summit in South Africa this year has handed an opportunity to China, as it seeks to expand its growing influence in the African continent and position itself as an alternative to the dangers of a unilateralist United States.

Washington said it would not attend the two-day summit set to kick off on Saturday over widely discredited claims that the host country, previously ruled by its white minority under an apartheid system until 1994, now mistreats white people.

South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa hit back at Trump’s claim that hosting the summit in Johannesburg was a “total disgrace”. “Boycott politics doesn’t work,” Ramaphosa said, adding that the US was “giving up the very important role that they should be playing as the biggest economy in the world”.

By Friday morning, Trump appeared to have backtracked on his stance somewhat, when speculation that Washington might send a US official to Johannesburg after all circulated.

Regardless, the spat comes as Chinese President Xi Jinping sends Premier Li Qiang to represent him on the world stage. China’s 72-year-old president has dialled back foreign visits, increasingly delegating his top emissary.

“The US is giving China an opportunity to expand its global influence,” Zhiqun Zhu, professor of political science and international relations at Bucknell University, told Al Jazeera. “With the absence of the US, China and EU countries will be the focus of the summit and other countries will look for leadership [from them].”

But observers say that while Trump’s absence will direct heightened attention to Beijing’s statements and behaviour, it does not spell the end of the US-led order altogether.

Jing Gu, a political economist at the United Kingdom-based Institute of Development Studies, said the US’s failure to attend “does not automatically make China the new leader, but it creates visible space for China to present itself as a more stable, reliable partner in governance”.

“It reinforces the perception that the US is stepping back from multilateralism and the shared management of global problems,” she said. “In that context, China can present itself as a more predictable, stable actor and emphasise continuity, support for open trade and engagement with the Global South.”

Expanding influence in the African continent

This year’s G20 will, for the first time, have an African chair and take place on the African continent. The African Union (AU) will also participate fully as a member.

South Africa, which holds the G20 presidency, is expected to push for consensus and action on priority issues for African countries, including debt relief, economic growth, climate change and transition to clean energy.

Zhu, who also serves as editor-in-chief of the academic journal, China and the World, said South Africa’s themes were a “natural fit” for China, Africa’s largest trading partner.

“China aims to become a leader in green energy, and there’s a lot of room for China and African countries to work on that,” he said.

The African continent, with its mineral wealth, booming population and fast-growing economies, offers huge potential for Chinese firms. Li, China’s premier, travelled to Zambia this week, marking the first visit to the country by a Chinese premier in 28 years. The copper-rich nation has Beijing as its largest official creditor for $5.7bn.

Eager to secure access to Zambia’s commodities and expand its exports from resource-rich East Africa, China signed a $1.4bn deal in September to rehabilitate the Tazara Railway, built in the 1970s and connecting Tanzania and Zambia, to improve rail-sea transportation in the region.

“The Chinese economy and African economy are complementary; they both benefit from trade,” Zhu said. The G20 “is a great platform for China to project its global influence and seek opportunities to work with other countries”, he added.

Africa’s growing demand for energy and China’s dominance in manufacturing make the two a good fit, observers say. This is playing out. A report by energy think tank Ember, for instance, found Africa’s imports of solar panels from China rose a whopping 60 percent in the 12 months to June 2025.

According to Gu at the Institute of Development Studies, China will be looking to tap into this growing synergy with Africa and will deliver a three-fold message at this year’s G20.

“First, it will stress stability and the importance of global rules and regulations,” she said. Second, “it will link the G20 to the Global South and highlight issues like development and green transformation”.

Third, “by offering issue-based leadership on topics such as digital economy, artificial intelligence and governance, it will position itself as a problem-solver rather than a disruptor”, the economist added.

China as a bastion of multilateralism

An absence of American officials at this year’s G20 – after skipping the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting in Korea as well as the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Brazil – would be “another opportunity for China”, Rosemary Foot, professor of politics and international relations at the University of Oxford, told Al Jazeera.

“It can contrast, yet again, its declared commitment to multilateralism and responsible behaviour as a major state versus the dangers of a unilateralist America focusing not on public goods but on benefits to itself only.”

China has been looking to expand its influence in Africa as a counterweight to the US-led world order. In stark contrast to Trump’s decision to end Africa’s duty-free era and slap 15-30 percent tariffs on 22 nations, Xi announced at the APEC summit last month a zero-tariff policy for all African nations with diplomatic ties to Beijing.

On that occasion, Xi emphasised China’s commitment “to joint development and shared prosperity with all countries”, stressing the country’s goal to “support more developing countries in achieving modernisation and opening up new avenues for global development”.

Similarly, Li, China’s premier, marked the United Nations’ 80th anniversary at the General Assembly in September by expressing the need for stronger collective action on climate change and emerging technologies, calling for greater solidarity to “[lift] everyone up, while division drags all down”.

His remarks were in stark contrast to Trump’s, who, in his speech, described climate change as the “greatest con job ever perpetrated” and called renewable sources of energy a “joke” and “pathetic”.

Foot said the spotlight will now be on Beijing as it seeks to strike a similar conciliatory pose – and in doing so, set itself apart from the US – at the G20. “Whether Beijing will have a major impact on the G20 agenda is more difficult to determine,” she said.