,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
Although I am dead set against the Positive Money proposals, I should add that I do think that debate about the BoE's role is healthy. The mandate the Bank has is broad, and it has many powerful instruments. Using them has to be based on informed consent, continually renewed.
Without it, people forget what monetary and financial policy is for, and the policy design vacuum gets filled by empire builders in the Bank/Treasury, or the institution just ossifies and fails to keep up with today's challenges.
In that sense, letters like this are doing a considerable public service, even if IMO they reached the wrong conclusions on the details.
These concerns go back to themes in Paul Tucker's tome. The efficacy of monetary and financial policy to an extent relies on delegation. But to make that work, technocrats have to seek constant affirmation for what it is they have been empowered to do to the populace.
I'd make the same reflections on Labour's interventions too [Peoples' QE, The Turner Report and the 3% productivity target]. Although, each time, I think 'FFS this is mad', actually, at a deeper level, the renewal of the conversation about mon/fin policy is good.
