Perhaps my thought process was preoccupied with Dundee United’s magnificent performance in Vienna. Perhaps the argument was a tanner short of a half crown in any case.

Either way, I found it decidedly difficult to match the enthusiasm evinced by the Chancellor over the 0.25% cut in interest rates.

It was, she told us, the fifth such cut during her occupancy of Number 11. It would bring down borrowing costs for business and for homeowners with mortgages. In short, rejoice.

A few caveats. For one thing, it was not her call. The decision was taken, on a split vote, by the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee under the independence granted to them by Gordon Brown. Of whom, more later.

For another, only a third of citizens in the UK have mortgages. Of those, many are on fixed rates and so unaffected. Plus, the cut means lower returns for savers.

The Chancellor said the change reflected “stability” engineered by her and the UK Government. Again, point taken.

However, this MPC decision scarcely amounts to a ringing endorsement of current direction. Rather, it mirrors disquiet over low growth; a desire to stimulate a sluggish economy. The split vote reflects concern over inflation above target.

It is the Chancellor’s job to talk up prospects. And she duly insisted that she was “locking in growth” through public investment, global trade deals and technological reform.

Even assuming that works, how quickly might it happen? And what would be the political consequences? That question of timing creates alternative perspectives north and south of the Border.

The Chancellor, the Prime Minister, still have up to four years before they have to face the voters at a UK General Election, although they will, of course, seek to ameliorate Labour’s poll standing........

© Herald Scotland