Categories
Economics

[2385] A case of MPs subverting the independence of the Bank Negara?

The importance of central bank independence has a lot to do with inflationary concerns. By independence, it typically means independence from political pressure. That entails strict separation between the central bank and the government. The central bank is not answerable to the government in general and the government does not represent the central bank. These two different entities are of two different minds. If they ever agree with each other, then it is necessarily a coincidence, or a conclusion achieved independently of each other. In its strong form, it is not achieved through any kind of discussion between the two parties.

It is feared that without independence and with exposure to political pressure, the central bank would embark on a populist policy, just as a democratic government that is susceptible to popular sentiment would. In times of crisis and without independence, the bank could run a loose monetary policy to appease the masses, eventually causing unacceptably high inflation simply by the operation of expectations.

The relationship between inflation and the independence of the central bank is widely known and is largely accepted within the field of economics: independence is correlated is an environment of low inflation. There are ample evidence for this.[1]

This is probably not subscribed by some Members of Parliament in Malaysia. Or they are unaware of it. Or that they define it very differently from what it is unusually understood. Whatever it is, three MPs are heading in the direction of subverting the idea.

According to The Malaysian Insider, MP for Kuala Selangor, Dzulkefly Ahmad of PAS wanted the Prime Minister to justify the recent rate hike by the Bank Negara. MP for Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah said in the same report, despite stating she “was not asking the government to intervene”, she effectively blamed the government for the rate hike.[2] In the Parliament today, MP for Rembau Khairy Jamaluddin asked the Finance Minister to explain whether the Bank Negara would change the base interest rate and the reserve requirement between now till the end of the year.[3]

Truly, the concern for the rate especially is not for the Prime Minister, the Finance Minister or any person of their choosing to explain. These questions should be directed to the Bank Negara itself.

If these elected officials do try to explain it, then it will create a perception that the government and the Bank Negara are in cahoot in managing monetary policy. A mere hint of relationship as far as monetary policy is concerned is damaging to the idea of independence. The relationship suggests that the central bank in some ways is responsive to popular demand; popular demand is a code word for loose monetary policy.

What will make it worse is the possibility of the government flip-flopping, which is not rare at all in Malaysia. For a central bank that is not independent, any u-turn is especially damaging to the the credibility of the bank. Without credibility, the bank can say goodbye to its ability to manage inflation expectations.

Because of the possible implications, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet members should be careful in answering any of such questions.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — The degree of central bank independence varies considerably across countries. Several authors including Bade and Parkin (1982), Alesina (1988, 1989), and Grilli, Masciandaro, and Tabellini (1991) found that more independent central banks are associated with lower levels of inflation. This note investigates whether one can find a correlation between central bank independence and the level and variability of real economic variables such as growth, unemployment, and real interest rates. Our conclusion is that while central bank independence promotes price stability, it has no measureable impact on real economic performance. [Alberto Alesina. Lawrence H. Summers. Central Bank Independence and Macroeconomics Performance: Some Comparative Evidence. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking. May 1993]

[2] — PAS MP for Kuala Selangor Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad said that the prime minister, who also holds the finance portfolio in cabinet, should explain the move, which surprised economists who were expecting Bank Negara to maintain the benchmark lending rate to preserve the country’s growth momentum in the face of dimming global economic prospects.

PKR MP Nurul Izzah Anwar also stressed that they are not asking the government to intervene in Bank Negara’s policies but said that it was important for the finance minister to clarify what she claimed were ”very inconsistent justifications.”

Nurul said that while the government could be trying to cool down the investment climate with an eye on keeping a lid on inflation, she was unconvinced that an interest rate hike could also drive the growth of the local domestic economy at the same time. [Melissa Chi. Justify May interest rate hike, PR MPs tell Najib. Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking. June 21 2001]

[3] — Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin [ Rembau ] minta MENTERI KEWANGAN menyatakan apakah Bank Negara Malaysia berhasrat untuk menyemak atau meminda Kadar Dasar Semalaman (Overnight Policy Rate) dan Keperluan Rizab Berkanun (Statutory Reserve Requirement) bagi bank-bank tempatan sehingga akhir tahun ini. Sila jelaskan sebab-sebabnya sekiranya ya mahupun tidak. [Order Paper. Dewan Rakyat. June 21 2001]

Categories
Politics & government

[1781] Of the battle of credibility

With September 16 passed without a change of government despite the promise of Anwar Ibrahim, members of Barisan Nasional wasted no time to point out how the promise is merely hot air. The Barisan Nasional government still stands on the day after despite Pakatan Rakyat’s threat. In the media aligned to the ruling coalition, there is a clear hint of celebration and contempt against Pakatan Rakyat.

Anwar’s credibility is on the line at the moment and with the influence Barisan Nasional over the mainstream media, it is not hard to encourage the public to question Anwar’s credibility. Anwar has only himself to blame for allowing him to be openly attacked in such manner.

Even the Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi openly challenged Anwar’s reputation. I do not think I have seen the Prime Minister using so harsh a tone one national television. Given the grandfatherly nature of the Prime Minister, I found myself almost at a state of shock watching and listening how the Prime Minister was directly undermining Anwar’s credibility and the words which he used.

The Prime Minister was referring to a letter which Anwar sent to him early. Anwar stated that he mentioned about power transfer and request for refrain from declaring emergency rule but the Prime Minister revealed to the media that Anwar’s statement is untrue.[1]

As the Prime Minister continued speaking, I began to feel how ironic the whole situation is. Here is the Prime Minister and the President of Barisan Nasional, who has repeatedly damaged his own reputation through inconsistent policies and flip-flopping, questioning another person’s credibility.

A colleague shared his opinion with me earlier in the morning at work on how Anwar has more credibility than the Prime Minister. I cannot help but nod in agreement with him. I have no doubt that Anwar’s credibility suffers from his failure to stick to the promise of September 16. Yet, for me personally, Anwar still have more credibility than Prime Minister Abdullah.

After the Prime Minister was no more on the television, I concluded that he should be the last person on television to talk about credibility.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

[1] — PUTRAJAYA: PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s letter to the Prime Minister only mentioned national security, the leadership and problems on morality and politics and had not touched on the transfer of power to the Opposition. [‘Anwar’s letter didn’t mention transfer of power’. V.P. Sujata. The Star. Accessed September 17 2008]