Did bank of England admit responsibility for Liz truss mini budget

1. The core disagreement: Truss versus the Bank

Liz Truss has repeatedly criticised the Bank of England — accusing it of contributing to her downfall, failing to warn the Treasury of LDI risks, and being part of an “establishment” that resisted her agenda — but those claims are contested in reporting; the Bank’s governor Andrew Bailey has pushed back, saying the decisions that led to the crisis were those of Truss and her team and that the Bank acted to preserve financial stability ^{[4] [2]}.

2. What the Bank actually did in the immediate crisis

Reporting describes the Bank stepping in with emergency gilt purchases to stabilise markets and support pension funds after gilt yields spiked following the mini‑Budget; journalists and analysts present this as an intervention to manage a market run, not an admission of culpability for the initial shock ^{[5] [4]}.

3. Why some observers say the Bank shares blame

Several commentators argue the Bank’s actions or communications may have influenced markets — for instance, a small rise in interest rates or pre‑budget moves that traders interpreted as signals — and some pieces suggest those actions formed part of a wider chain of events that worsened market reaction to the fiscal plan ^{[5] [6]}. Others point to alleged timing of gilt sales or regulatory choices as factors that intensified the sell‑off ^{[7] [8]}.

4. Why many analyses focus on the mini‑Budget itself

Multiple outlets and experts frame the root cause as the mini‑Budget’s £45bn of unfunded tax cuts and the absence of an OBR forecast before delivery; markets perceived a big increase in government borrowing risk, which led to sharp gilt price falls and higher yields — a sequence most reporting links directly to Truss and Kwarteng’s policy choices ^{[3] [4] [6]}.

5. The LDI/pension channel that amplified the shock

Coverage highlights liability‑driven investment (LDI) strategies used by pension funds: when yields rose, some funds faced forced selling, aggravating gilt market moves. Truss’s team later argued the Bank should have warned them about these vulnerabilities; the Bank and many analysts counter that the policy choices created the loss of investor confidence that precipitated the problem ^{[4] [9]}.

6. Claims of a formal Bank admission — what the sources say

None of the provided sources report a formal admission by the Bank of England that it was responsible for causing the crisis; rather, they document public disputes, critiques and explanations from both sides. Some opinion pieces and commentators argue the Bank shares blame or misstepped, but that is presented as interpretation or critique, not an official Bank confession ^{[10] [8] [1]}.

7. Competing narratives and implicit agendas

The dispute reflects competing political and institutional agendas: Truss’s narrative seeks to shift blame to technocratic institutions and defend her policy philosophy ^{[11] [12]}, while the Bank emphasises mandate‑driven crisis management and rejects the idea of a politically motivated “deep state” ousting a government ^{[2] [13]}. Opinion and partisan outlets sometimes amplify one frame over the other, so readers should note the source context when weighing claims ^{[1] [10]}.

8. What’s still unclear or debated in reporting

Available sources show disagreement about the relative weight of causes — the mini‑Budget itself, market psychology, pension LDI mechanics, and specific Bank communications or actions — and they do not settle a definitive, single cause or responsibility. Formal inquiries and detailed forensic accounting of trades and communications would be necessary to assign precise institutional responsibility; current reporting documents accusations and rebuttals rather than a legal or institutional admission ^{[4] [3]}.

Bottom line: reporting shows a contested public debate — lodged between Truss’s repeated accusations and the Bank of England’s denials and explanations — but does not record the Bank formally admitting responsibility for the mini‑Budget fallout ^{[2] [4]}.