Today the ECB has finally arrived as a truly “European” Central Bank. It has acted against political opposition to deliver what is by most measures an ambitious programme of quantitative easing. The programme exceeded the predictions of most market participants and analysts, and it lies at the edge of our optimistic predictions.
In short, Mario Draghi has finally delivered on his “Whatever it Takes” pledge. But suffice to say that this QE will not, by itself, be sufficient to deliver on the ECB’s own target. The ECB has finally, if belatedly, done its part. Now its time for the Eurozone to relax the fiscal constraint.
The programme is as open ended in terms of delivering on the ECB’s core target of inflation “close to but under 2%”, as it was politically possible for the ECB to be and promises action all the way into September 2016.
The ECB will announce broad outlines of a programme of Quantitative Easing today. The programme itself will focus on the ECB buying large quantities of financial assets, mostly Eurozone sovereign bonds, with freshly created money. The actual purchases will start in March and more details of the programme are likely to follow over the next few weeks.
What is the objective of this programme?
The stated objective of the programme is to increase Eurozone inflation from the dismally low level of 0.6% (in 2014) towards the ECB target of “close to but below 2%”. In December, inflation in the Eurozone actually turned negative at - 0.3% and longer-term market expectations of inflation have also been falling for several months now.
The ECB hopes that the QE will also have a direct impact on increasing investment and consumption in the Eurozone and thus help give a boost to growth. The combination of higher real growth as well as higher inflation, the ECB hopes, will also help improve the sustainability of debt in the troubled countries in the Eurozone.
Note: This piece has been built on Re-Define's public call for an IMF programme for the Eurozone as published in the FT in 2012.
The IMF, historically the purveyor of crisis management for countries in financial trouble, is stuck in Europe. The IMF has, as today’s Charlemagne column in the Economist points out , become the junior partner in the ‘Troika’ arrangement and is often over-ruled, as was clear from the leaked IMF report on Greece. It was not always so.
The IMF is a body that is used to being in-charge. It has, over several decades, dictated policies to tens of countries that found themselves in a financial pickle. A visit from the IMF was an unpleasant experience and often involved a school-masterly dressing down of a country’s policy-making elite. For example, this image of the then IMF Managing Director Michel Camdessus standing, arms folded, over Suharto, appearing to dictate terms on the bailout during the Asian crisis is burned into the collective memory of Indonesians. It was even credited with helping hasten the end of the dictatorship.
Note: This is a longer version of what appeared as an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal on the 1st of Feb 2013
After a year in which European Union policy makers spent much time obsessing about banking union, it is time to take stock of the discussion. The question today is not about the intellectual case for a more unified approach to bank regulation and supervision within a single-currency area such as the euro zone. That case is still strong. Rather, it is about if what is being pedalled as a ‘banking union’ will deliver the goods—whether it will help tackle the economic crisis that still looms large over Europe or not. Evidence is now stacking up that it will not.
The EU's banking union was sold as a means to break the "vicious circle" connecting weak banks and weak sovereigns—and to do so quickly. As a way to mitigate the risks that troubled banks pose and weak sovereigns pose to each other, however, the plan is looking more ineffectual by the day. Although the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) can inject capital into struggling banks, a number of caveats apply.
This piece was written on the 14th of September and appeared as an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal on the 20th of September
Markets have been euphoric about the recent good news in the euro zone: the European Central Bank’s promise of potentially unlimited bond purchases, the announcement of a banking union, Germany’s green light for the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), a pro-European result in the Dutch election, and a softer EU stance on Greece.
All of this is in marked contrast to the fears of a summer meltdown that never quite happened. Could this be the beginning of the end of the euro zone’s crisis?