A thought-provoking intervention by @yanisvaroufakis on greening the @ecb debate. He highlights valid issues with to what extent an independent (aka 'unaccountable') central bank should be making key decisions reshaping the economy. (1/7)
https://twitter.com/greenCB/status/1412746905088671744
He argues that for ECB to green its policies - such as the collateral framework, would be 'too political' & argues instead for an @ecb @EIB 'alliance' instructed by the European Council, whilst calling for 'democratising' the ECB in some longer-term. (2/7)
But my take is that 'better' - if the latter was indeed better - can be the enemy of the 'good'. Varoufakis argues that the governments - EU council - should develop green policy, rather than the ECB. And if they did (going much beyond the EU Green Deal) it'd be great yes (3/7)
But if this is better & politically feasible, why haven't they already? Should we put all our faith in that one basket whilst letting the CBs off the hook (whilst they remain 'independent'), continuing with carbon-intense business as usual? I think the answer is 'no' (4/7)
To achieve a just green transition we need to use to the maximum all tools at our disposal. @ecb will continue its market-shaping operations, influencing flows of trillions of euros, no matter what the @EUCouncil & @EIB do. If they coordinate to inject extra 5% GDP green..(5/7)
..funding, then all the better. But regardless, we need the regular central bank operations to align with the transition - and support it - too. ECB already can - & must - act under its current mandate. We cannot wait either for the EU Council to come up with a .. (6/)
..better one, nor for it to agree to instruct EIB to provide massive green stimulus. So concluding, I see Varoufakis's proposal as a complementary one, not as either or! (/END)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
