The Bank of England gets ready for another cut interest-rate cut

Yesterday saw Bank of England Governor Mark Carney in full flow at the Bank of England itself in a type of last hurrah. I am grateful to him for being kind enough to exhibit at least 4 of the themes of this blog in one go! That is quite an achievement even for him. I will start by looking at something of a swerve which was introduced by the then Chancellor George Osborne and it has never received the prominence I think it deserves.

A major improvement to the inflation targeting framework itself was to confirm explicitly beginning with the
2013 remit that the MPC is required to have regard to trade-offs between keeping inflation at the target and
avoiding undesirably volatility in output. In other words, the MPC can use the full flexibility of inflation
targeting in the face of exceptionally large shocks to return inflation to target in a manner that provides as
much support as possible to employment and growth or, if necessary, promotes financial stability.

I make the point because you could argue from that date the Bank of England was acknowledging that its priority was no longer inflation targeting. Some of this was accepting reality as back in 2010 it had “looked through” inflation over 5%. To be more specific it is now concerned about inflation under target but much less so if it is above it. This is confirmed in the speech in part of the section on the period after the EU Leave vote.

Inflation rose well above the 2% target, eventually peaking at 3.1% in late 2017, an overshoot entirely due to
the referendum-induced fall in sterling.
UK growth dropped from the fastest to the slowest in the G7.

He cut interest-rates in this period in spite of the fact that the lower UK Pound £ meant that inflation would go in his words well above the 2% target. Actually tucked away on the speech is something of a confession of this.

In the wake of the referendum, the MPC’s
aggressive monetary easing, despite a sharply depreciating currency and rising inflation,

The Unreliable Boyfriend

It seems he cannot escape behaving like this and this week he has given us a classic example. We only need to go back to Wednesday for this.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Financial Times, the outgoing governor warned that central banks were running out of the ammunition needed to combat a downturn.

Yet a mere 24 hours or so later things were really rather different.

Of course, the effectiveness of unconventional policies means that there is considerable total policy space.
In the UK, the MPC can increase its purchases of both gilts and corporate bonds, providing stimulus through
a number of channels including portfolio rebalancing……..All told, a
reasonable judgement is that the combined conventional and unconventional policy space is in the
neighbourhood of the 250 basis points cut to Bank Rate seen in pre-crisis easing cycles.

Glen Campbell must be a bit disappointed as he famously took 24 hours to get to Tulsa whereas Governor Carney has managed the road to Damascus in the same time. Perhaps the new Governor Andrew Bailey had been on the phone. Anyway however you spin it “running out of ammunition” morphed into “considerable total policy space”.

Cutting Interest-Rates

Regular readers will be aware that I have been suggesting for a while now that the next move from the Bank of England will be to return us to a 0.5% Bank Rate. This was regarded as an emergency official interest-rate at the time but as so often language has been twisted and manipulated as it turned out to be long-lasting. I will discuss Forward Guidance in detail in a moment but for the moment let us just remind ourselves that Mark Carney has regularly promised interest-rate rises during his Governorship. Whereas yesterday we were given a hint of another U-Turn.

This rebound is not, of course, assured. The economy has been sluggish, slack has been growing, and
inflation is below target. Much hinges on the speed with which domestic confidence returns. As is entirely
appropriate, there is a debate at the MPC over the relative merits of near term stimulus to reinforce the
expected recovery in UK growth and inflation.

For newer readers central bankers speak in their own language and in it this is a clear hint of what is on its way.

Forward Guidance

The Governor cannot avoid a move which backfired rather quickly in his term.

The message the Committee gave UK households and businesses was simple: the MPC would not even
think about tightening policy at least until the unemployment rate had fallen below 7%, consistent with the creation of around three quarter of a million jobs.

The simple sentence below must have stung as he wrote it and later spoke it.

In the event, the unemployment rate fell far faster than the MPC had expected, falling below 7% in February

I will spare you the re-writing of history that the Governor indulges in but he cannot avoid confirming another issue I have raised many times.

As part of these exercises, the MPC revised down its (hitherto private) estimate of equilibrium unemployment rate from 6½% in August 2013 to 5½% in August 2014,

Actually the “hitherto private” claim is not true either as we knew. Also the equilibrium unemployment rather according to the Bank of England continued to fall and is now 4.25%. Thus as a concept it is effectively meaningless not only because it became a laughing stock but it’s use as an anchor was undermined by all the changes.

Anyway as we approach the end of the week it is opportune to have some humour, at least I hope this is humour.

 People understood the conditionality of guidance, as they and the MPC had learnt that there was still considerable
spare capacity in the economy.

I do love the idea that the (wo)man on the Clapham Omnibus had any idea of this! For a start it would have left them better informed than the Governor himself.

Inflation Targeting

I have argued many times that it needs reform and a major part of this should be to realise the influence of asset prices both pre and post credit crunch. On that road house prices need to go into the consumer inflation measure.

But apparently things have gone rather well.

This performance underscores that the bar for changing the regime is high.

I am not sure where to start with this.

Inflation expectations have remained anchored to the target, even when CPI inflation has temporarily moved away from it.

After all the Bank of England’s own survey told us this only last month.

 Asked about expectations of inflation in the longer term, say in five years’ time, respondents gave a median answer of 3.6%, up from 3.1% in August.


We can continue the humour with some number crunching Mark Carney style.

At present, there is sufficient headroom to at least
double the August 2016 package of £60 billion asset purchases, a number that will increase with further gilt
issuance. That would deliver the equivalent of around a 100 basis point cut to Bank Rate on top of the near
75 basis points of conventional policy space. Forward guidance at the ELB adds to this armoury. All told, a
reasonable judgement is that the combined conventional and unconventional policy space is in the
neighbourhood of the 250 basis points cut to Bank Rate seen in pre-crisis easing cycles.

So if 1% is from QE and 0.65% from an interest-rate cut to his “lower bound” of 0.1% then that means he is claiming that Forward Guidance can deliver the equivalent of 0.85% of interest-rate cuts. That really is something from beyond even the outer limits of credibility. Oh and I have no idea why he says “near 75 basis points of conventional policy space” when it is 0.65%.

As I have been writing this article a fifth theme of mine has been in evidence which is that these days Monetary Policy Committee members only seem to exist to say ” I agree with Mark”.

“If uncertainty over the future trading arrangement or subdued global growth continued to weigh on UK demand then my inclination is towards voting for a cut in bank rate in the near term,” she says. ( The Guardian)

That is Silvano Tenreyro who has rushed to be in line and it is especially disappointing as she is an external member. It is the internal members that have historically been the Governor’s lapdogs.

Has there been a more unreliable boyfriend than Mark Carney?

After looking this week at the trend toward negative interest-rates and the establishment lust for higher inflation today we can take a look at some of the case for their defence. It comes from Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and he will be relaxed as he has been able to do so in its house journal the Financial Times. Although I note that even it does not label him as a “rock star” central banker anymore and there does not seem to be any mention of film star good looks. Mind you film stars I guess are not what they were after this from Stella McCartney after the Golden Globes.

This man is a winner… wearing custom Stella because he chooses to make choices for the future of the planet. He has also chosen to wear this same Tux for the entire award season to reduce waste. I am proud to join forces with you… x Stella #JoaquinPhoenix

Saving the planet one tux at a time.

Monetary Policy

Governor Carney opens with this.

The global economy is heading towards a “liquidity trap” that would undermine central banks’ efforts to avoid a future recession, according to Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England.

As ever he is trying to lay a smoke screen over reality so let us break this down. Actually we have been in a type of “liquidity trap” for quite some time now. A major driver of it has in fact been central banking terror of a future recession which means that zombie companies and especially banks have been propped up. There has been little or none of the “creative destruction” of Josef Schumpeter where capitalism clears up many of its failures. Bad at the time but it also provides some of the fertile ground for new companies and growth. The deflection element is that by claiming a liquidity trip is in the future it deflects from his role in where we are now.

Er, who fired the ammunition?

In a wide-ranging interview with the Financial Times, the outgoing governor warned that central banks were running out of the ammunition needed to combat a downturn.

If we look at it we see that if we just look at interest-rates there is 0.65% left according to Governor Carney. That is the current 0.75% Bank Rate to his view of the lower bound which was 0.5% but is now 0.1%. Sadly he is not challenged on this allowing him to imply this is a worldwide problem.

“It’s generally true that there’s much less ammunition for all the major central banks than they previously had and I’m of the opinion that this situation will persist for some time,” he said.

An opportunity was missed here to expose the Governor’s rather odd thinking. The blanket view that there is less ammunition has sub-plots. For example the European Central Bank or ECB has an interest-rate of -0.5% and considered -0.6% and yesterday we looked at the Swiss National Bank with its -0.75% official interest-rate. So suddenly we have up to an extra 0.85% compared to his “lower bound”. Also the ECB and SNB could cut further.

I am not sure the explanation about a liquidity trap helps much as it describes a situation we have been in for some time.

A liquidity trap occurs on the rare occasions when monetary policy loses all effectiveness to manage economic swings and looser policy does not encourage any additional spending.

Somehow the editor of the FT Lionel Barber and its economics editor Chris Giles seem to have missed that the credit crunch era has seem many examples of a liquidity trap as highlighted by the use of “rare occasions”


Is there any other sphere where people who have asked for tools used them far more than expected but with little success would be given even more powers?

That meant there was a need to look for supplements to monetary tools, including interest rate cuts, quantitative easing and guidance on future interest rates, he said. “If there were to be a deeper downturn, [that requires] more stimulus than a conventional recession, then it’s not clear that monetary policy would have sufficient space.”

It is nice that the FT below confirms the central banking group think or if you prefer they borrow the same brain cell.

Mr Carney echoed other central bankers, such as the European Central Bank’s Mario Draghi and his successor, Christine Lagarde, in recommending that governments consider fiscal policy tools, such as tax cuts or public spending increases when tackling a downturn. However, he accepted “it’s not [central bankers’] job to do fiscal policy”.

Also this is something that Paloma Faith sang about.

I’ll tell you what (I’ll tell you what)
What I have found (what I have found)
That I’m no fool (that I’m no fool)
I’m just upside down (just upside down)

Central banks were supposed to be independent and run monetary policy yet a confession of failure seems to make them think they can tell elected politicians what to do. I would call it mission creep but it is more of a leap than a creep.

But I’m a creep, I’m a weirdo
What the hell am I doing here?
I don’t belong here
I don’t belong here ( Radiohead )

Mind you the unreliable boyfriend seems to be having doubts about his commitment to his own statement.

The governor said monetary policy was not yet a spent force internationally, with US and eurozone interest rate cuts last year encouraging borrowing and spending. “We’re starting to see that stimulus flow to the global economy.”

Indeed suddenly we find that his successor has loads of room.

He insisted that he was not leaving his successor, Andrew Bailey, without any tools in the armoury. The BoE could still cut interest rates from 0.75 per cent to close to zero and “supplement monetary policy with macroprudential tools” by relaxing banks’ capital requirements to enable them to lend more.

“The Precious! The Precious!”

Oh and weren’t we raising the banks capital requirements to make the system safer? The unreliable boyfriend does seem to enjoy a U-Turn.

He insisted that he was not leaving his successor, Andrew Bailey, without any tools in the armoury. The BoE could still cut interest rates from 0.75 per cent to close to zero and “supplement monetary policy with macroprudential tools” by relaxing banks’ capital requirements to enable them to lend more.

Being the FT the failures of his initial period of tenure get skated by.

Demand returned in 2013, just as he took up his position.

The 7% unemployment rate debacle gets a new spin.

how many people could be employed without inflation

I am sure that readers think it is really unfair that the Bank of England had to deal with a changing situation.

The monetary policy committee also had to grapple with structural difficulties

I like the use of “grapple” to describe confusion and inertia as it would be hard to be more misleading. The reality is that the chance to raise interest-rates around 2014 was missed and the boat sailed with the Governor still on the shore dithering over whether to buy a ticket.


It is perhaps most revealing that the Governor sets out the challenges for the Bank of England without mentioning monetary policy at all.

Amid these economic uncertainties, the main task of the BoE, according to the governor, was to finish core reforms to the global financial system and react appropriately to the political upheavals of the Scottish and Brexit referendums and the challenges of climate change. Mr Carney insists that rather than be too political, as his predecessor Mervyn King has suggested, the BoE had to get involved because it now had a duty to preserve financial stability.

Also there seems to be some form of amnesia about the fact that Governor Carney got into trouble for playing politics when he was at the Bank of Canada.

But frustrations of UK life in the crosshairs of polarised political debate will also haunt him in the search of a new job. “This role is just much more public than the same role in Canada,” said Mr Carney.

Oh and did I mention mission creep?

But he was clear that the financial sector could not mitigate global warming alone and without wider agreements to limit global warming and action to enforce targets.

The Investing Channel

Will the Bank of England ignore the UK GDP data and raise the Bank Rate in May?

We find ourselves facing another day where far too much pressure will be put on a GDP ( Gross Domestic Product ) print which is partly driven by the fact that the UK produces the numbers too quickly. That is about to change this summer and that change is for the better although I have to confess the addition of monthly GDP numbers is not helpful. They cannot be accurate enough and are more likely to confuse than enhance understanding I think.

Moving to prospects there was a downbeat tone on the first quarter provided yesterday by ECB ( European Central Bank) President Mario Draghi. At first we were presented with this in the Introductory Statement.

Following several quarters of higher than expected growth, incoming information since our meeting in early March points towards some moderation, while remaining consistent with a solid and broad-based expansion of the euro area economy.

But later as he replied to questions Mario left the marked runs and seemed to be going off-piste. The emphasis is mine.

 It’s quite clear that since our last meeting, broadly all countries experienced, to different extents of course, some moderation in growth or some loss of momentum. When we look at the indicators that showed significant, sharp declines, we see that, first of all, the fact that all countries reported means that this loss of momentum is pretty broad across countries. It’s also broad across sectors because when we look at the indicators, it’s both hard and soft survey-based indicators. Sharp declines were experienced by PMI, almost all sectors, in retail, sales, manufacturing, services, in construction. Then we had declines in industrial production, in capital goods production. The PMI in exports orders also declined. Also we had declines in national business and confidence indicators. ( PMI is the Markit Purchasing Managers Index)

There seems to be a lot of this sort of mood music around from central bankers today as earlier we got this from the Bank of Japan. From the Nikkei Asian Review.

The Bank of Japan kept monetary policy unchanged at Gov. Haruhiko Kuroda’s first meeting of his second term on Friday. At the same time, the central bank deleted from its statement the date for achieving 2% inflation, which had been targeted for “around fiscal 2019.”

Now of course this had been always just around the corner on a straight road but Japan is ploughing ahead in what we are told is a boom. Continuing the theme the Swiss National Bank has joined the (bloc) party.

 The negative interest rate and the SNB’s willingness to intervene in the foreign exchange market as necessary remain essential.

That is from a speech by Thomas Jordan its Chairman in Berne this morning and I also note this.

Tightening monetary conditions would be premature at this juncture, and would risk unnecessarily jeopardising the positive economic momentum that has been established.

That makes you wonder when he might ever tighten does it not?

A labour market perspective

Ed Conway has pointed out this in The Times.

Delve deeper into the data and you find something even more remarkable. During the recessions of the 1980s, nearly half of all unemployed Britons were jobless for more than a year. In other words, scarring was rife. In the 1990s recession the proportion dropped to just over 45 per cent. In this recession it peaked at 36 per cent and it is now below 25 per cent — the lowest level since the recession and, for that matter, lower than at any point in the 1980s or 1990s, boom or bust.


And here’s the really interesting thing: this improvement was UK-specific. In every other G7 country the share of long-term unemployed people flatlined or rose in the decades since the early 1980s. Indeed, the long-term share of unemployment in France is 44 per cent. In Italy it is 58 per cent, more than double Britain’s level. In Greece it’s a staggering 72 per cent and rising.

Put like that we are doing really well as I have noted in my updates but there are undercuts to this. For example it does not cover the issue of underemployment where the data we get is poor nor does it cover the weak levels of wage growth we keep seeing. There is for example an element of truth to this from David ( Danny) Blanchflower.

“In the gig economy they fear that they are going to lose their jobs. Other groups of workers fear that if they ask for higher wages, the employer will bring in workers from Poland or farm everything out overseas.”

Today’s data

The opening salvo from the release will make the headlines.

UK gross domestic product (GDP) was estimated to have increased by 0.1% in Quarter 1 (Jan to Mar) 2018, compared with 0.4% in Quarter 4 (Oct to Dec) 2017. UK GDP growth was the slowest since Quarter 4 2012.

So a weak number which was basically driven by this.

construction being the largest downward pull on GDP, falling by 3.3%……..However, construction contracted by 3.3%, contributing negative 0.21 percentage points to GDP.

Thus we see that in essence it was construction which was the player here and we get a confirmation that it is in recession.

This marked the second consecutive quarterly decline in construction output and the sharpest decline since Quarter 2 (Apr to June) 2012.

As we drill deeper we see that the issue was probably more related to the collapse of Carillion than the weather but both were factors.

The latest published monthly path for construction shows that output fell by 3.1% in January 2018, the largest monthly fall since April 2012. This was due mainly to an 8.3% fall in private new housing, following a historically high level of output in December 2017.

The campaign to blame the weather needs to note that it also had a positive effect on the numbers.

Production increased by 0.7%, with manufacturing growth slowing to 0.2%; slowing manufacturing was partially offset by an increase in energy production due to the below-average temperatures.


The headline number had the power to shock and will no doubt be emphasised by the media. Coming with it was the implication that there was no growth at all on an individual or per capita basis. However if we apply some critical analysis we can note that construction and agriculture subtracted from the numbers as we might have expected by a total of 0.22%. Accordingly rather than the “plummet” advertised by some the real situation is much more like what has taken place in the majority of our economy.

The services industries were the largest contributor to GDP growth, increasing by 0.3% in Quarter 1 2018, although the longer-term trend continues to show a weakening in services growth.

So we have shifted lower but perhaps from 0.4% to 0.3% especially if we remind ourselves that the UK economy has in the credit crunch era tended to produce weak first quarter numbers.

However the Forward Guidance of the Bank of England from as recently as at the time of the February Inflation Report is in disarray. From the MPC ( Monetary Policy Committee ) Minutes.

The Committee judged that the prospect was for continued growth in 2018 Q1, although the balance of
evidence at this early stage pointed to growth being a touch lower, at 0.4%, than in 2017 Q4………The Committee’s latest central projection for GDP growth had the economy growing at a steady pace,

It would seem that the May Bank Rate rise will find itself being deferred to 2019. Here is the economics editor of the Financial Times Chris Giles who  you may recall was telling us that the road to a Bank Rate rise this May was a triumph of Forward Guidance by the Bank of England.

Poor GDP figures today means the cost of keeps growing and hopes of a snap back more urgent