Ultimately, central bank independence depends upon having built a coalition of support in society for that independence – legislative rules and protections regarding the central bank’s ability to set monetary policy will change to reflect sustained variations in that degree of support, albeit with some lag. The only way for a central bank to defend its instrument independence is by making a persuasive case to the public, or at least to a majority of their elected officials, that it is doing a good job. That kind of transparent accountability has been the source of inflation targeting’s success in anchoring inflation expectations, which shows how this can work.
Thus, religious declarations of what assets a central bank should or should not handle in its pursuit of monetary policy goals, or of what constitute fiscal versus monetary policy, are shibboleths. They are mouthed with fervor but should not be taken seriously. What matters instead is that the goals of monetary policy being pursued are consistent with the central bank’s legislated mandate, that the means used in that pursuit are transparent to monitor, and that the central bank can and does explain why the means fit the goals. In short, monetary policy is like any other delegated public responsibility. Read more
1Bernanke weighs in on robot wars; brings Keynes for backup
2Secret liquidity and Scottish independence
3Spain's awful unemployment
4S&P 2,100, by Goldman Sachs
5Pump up, debase
Show more6Buyback to enrich
7Collateral crunch-counting gets sophisticated
8Apple Operations International, facts (?) du jour
9In which the FTSE puts the crisis behind it
10Everlasting credit, the long view
Show fewer