Business Standard

Central bankers and autonomy

A former deputy governor of the Bank of England offers a nuanced and contextual assessment of the ambit of autonomy for independen­t regulatory agencies, writes M S Sriram

- The reviewer is a faculty member with Centre for Public Policy, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore; mssriram@pm.me

The book Unelected Power came tome for review a while ago. It took quite sometime to read and intern ali se it before I could say something about it. Providenti­ally this is also an appropriat­e time to write about the book, when the issue of autonomy of the Reserve Bank of India( RBI) is being discussed and tested. The issue is never settled and never will be, but it will always be tested, discussed and new rules will be drawn up as new discussion­s, events and controvers­ies emerge.

Paul Tucker has been there and done it! Therefore, one would expect that his position would be in favour of greater autonomy for independen­t agencies. The position Tucker takes is very nuanced and contextual, however. He recognises the fact that the elected political class has an accountabi­lity framework both to parliament as well as to citizens through an electoral framework. Independen­t agencies, on the other hand, have the technical wherewitha­l to look at issues from an analytical frame and take independen­t decisions where the accountabi­lity framework is also more technical than political. Therefore, the legitimate question: How independen­t can independen­t agencies be and would their independen­ce encroach on the larger public policy function of the state itself?

While most of the illustrati­ons and arguments come from the prism of the central banking function—Tucker draws from his rich experience at the Bank of England and having interacted with and studied other central banks—he also brings in two significan­t institutio­ns to get to the difficult question of autonomy and accountabi­lity. These are( a) the military and(b) the judiciary.

The military is an institutio­n where elected representa­tives take a call on the desirabili­ty of an action keeping in mind larger geo-political considerat­ions while the agency itself decides details of the strategy of strike and tactics. In a way, the lines of accountabi­lity and independen­ce are somewhat clearly drawn and when they are breached— such as in a military coup— it is widely understood that the lines have been crossed. However, in the case of the judiciary and the central banker this line is fuzzy, causing Tucker to examine this lack of blueprint on “which public policy decisions should be made by politician­s, technocrat­s, or judges”.

Tucker provides a 4x4 matrix to understand the reach and power of the administra­tive state to locate the complexity of the institutio­ns working within that framework reproduced here.

From the matrix, some agencies have clearly defined functions and trigger situations. The central banker functions in all the slots and parallel ly with the state, and it is but natural that there are issues of turf and tensions. The political class will seek an accountabi­lity framework from the central banker, and it is complex to articulate an accountabi­lity hierarchy. The complexity of dealing with a central banker, such as the RBI, which is a full-service central bank, isth at it has multiple missions.

There has been much debate on whether there is an inherent conflict of interest in the same agency setting the monetary policy and also running a debt office with open market operations;foreign exchange and managing foreign exchange reserves and marketshou­ld be in the same agency; and how the regulatory function should be structured in an increasing­ly complex world where banking is intertwine­d with capital markets, insurance and other aspects of the financial world.

Tucker has some interestin­g responses. While he offers no check-boxes or specific answers, he does have some design precepts looking at whether multiple missions given to an are intrinsic ally connected and whether having them under a single agency will deliver materially better results. There are also some design principles in dealing with the dilemma of examining the role as apart of understand­ing the “other side” through a confluence of interests or having the “other side” as a conflict of interests. It is in this context that the debate about an independen­t payments regulator should be see non merits of whether payments are intrinsic ally connected with banking regulation( as argued by the RBI) or whether separating the function would deliver materially better results. In the Indian context, there was a deeper conflict of RBI owning stakes in the State Bank of India, National Housing Bank, being the promoter of National Payments Corporatio­n and soon, but over a period of time some of these have been disentangl­ed.

Before we look at the Government versus Central Bank turf issues, it maybe useful to apply the design precepts Tucker provides to examine the conflict and confluence test on the current functions of the RBI and examine the issues on merit.

Ultimately, the question is about whether the power is being concentrat­ed in a single agency and, if so, how one exercises checks and balances. The accountabi­lity framework emanates from these checks and balances. The larger point is that the state possibly has adequate checks and balances with the ultimate test being in getting voted out on a comprehens­ive evaluation of the performanc­e. However, the limits of the independen­t agencies—which are necessary for providing stability and technical reasoning—are to be determined through a complex process of negotiatio­ns, re defining boundaries and re-articulati­ng independen­ce. In this context, while it is possible to see the boundaries of the armed forces, it is fuzzy with the judiciary—but the two sides are not intertwine­d. The most complex agency where it is difficult to draw a clear line is the central bank. No wonder that it is not a constituti­onal authority with insulation, but at the same time not completely subservien­t to political authority.

This book is detailed, bringing in arguments from law, politicals­cience, economics, publicpoli­cy, philosophy­and weaving in specific contempora­ry events. The book raises more questions than it answers. And any such book that opens up issues in such a lu cid manner should be classified as an important and“must read” book. Tucker goes to the root of the issue in a detached and philosophi­cal way, thereby asking us to re visit our settled position son several matters. It certainly is not an easy book to read, but a delightful addition to the thought process on the continuing debate on how independen­t agencies—particular­ly the central bank— should be structured.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ??
 ??  ?? UNELECTED POWER THE QUEST FOR LEGITIMACY IN CENTRAL BANKING AND THE REGULATORY STATE Author:Paul Tucker Publisher: Princeton University Press, 2018Price: $35Pages: 642
UNELECTED POWER THE QUEST FOR LEGITIMACY IN CENTRAL BANKING AND THE REGULATORY STATE Author:Paul Tucker Publisher: Princeton University Press, 2018Price: $35Pages: 642

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India