Will the ECB carry on bullying governments into doing what it wants?

The central bank sees the merit of the carrot and the stick. Democracy? Not so much.

The European Central Bank announces its next monetary policy decision at 1:30pm today, and here's hoping it's a good one.

The eurozone is by no means fixed, and as Alphaville's Izabella Kaminska points out:

The ECB’s accomodative policy has failed to make an impact due to a broken transmission mechanism. Under its own mandates, this leaves the ECB open to the use of unconventional tactics to get it going again.

What sort of unconventional tactics? Well, the expected plan looks to be to begin primary debt purchases – the ECB will start to buy debt directly from the European Stability Mechanism (the organisation in charge of the eurozone bailouts).

But the really worrying possibility in today's announcement is highlighted by Slate's Matt Yglesias:

Here's Philipp Rösler, Vice-Chancellor of Germany and Economy Minister, offering the clearest account yet of how European monetary policy has gone so far off the rails:

“If you take away the interest rate pressure on individual states, you also take away the pressure for them to reform.”

The view here is that because countries ought to pursue good pro-growth structural policies, central banks ought to create unfavorable monetary conditions as a way of pressuring countries to pursue structural reforms.

Yglesias points out that this tactic makes it impossible to tell which structural reforms have actually worked, but the other massively damaging aspect is what it does to the democratic legitimacy of the Bank. They are using their one tool, not to improve the economy of the eurozone, but to cajole elected governments into doing things they wouldn't do otherwise. It's the sort of thing that makes a person take Nigel Farage seriously.

Protesters camp outside the ECB in Frankfurt in October 2011. Photograph: Getty Images

Alex Hern is a technology reporter for the Guardian. He was formerly staff writer at the New Statesman. You should follow Alex on Twitter.

Show Hide image

No, David Cameron’s speech was not “left wing”

Come on, guys.

There is a strange journalistic phenomenon that occurs when a party leader makes a speech. It is a blend of groupthink, relief, utter certainty, and online backslapping. It happened particularly quickly after David Cameron’s speech to Tory party conference today. A few pundits decided that – because he mentioned, like, diversity and social mobility – this was a centre-left speech. A leftwing speech, even. Or at least a clear grab for the liberal centre ground. And so that’s what everyone now believes. The analysis is decided. The commentary is written. Thank God for that.

Really? It’s quite easy, even as one of those nasty, wicked Tories, to mention that you actually don’t much like racism, and point out that you’d quite like poor children to get jobs, without moving onto Labour's "territory". Which normal person is in favour of discriminating against someone on the basis of race, or blocking opportunity on the basis of class? Of course he’s against that. He’s a politician operating in a liberal democracy. And this isn’t Ukip conference.

Looking at the whole package, it was actually quite a rightwing speech. It was a paean to defence – championing drones, protecting Britain from the evils of the world, and getting all excited about “launching the biggest aircraft carriers in our history”.

It was a festival of flagwaving guff about the British “character”, a celebration of shoehorning our history chronologically onto the curriculum, looking towards a “Greater Britain”, asking for more “national pride”. There was even a Bake Off pun.

He also deployed the illiberal device of inculcating a divide-and-rule fear of the “shadow of extremism – hanging over every single one of us”, informing us that children in UK madrassas are having their “heads filled with poison and their hearts filled with hate”, and saying Britain shouldn’t be “overwhelmed” with refugees, before quickly changing the subject to ousting Assad. How unashamedly centrist, of you, Mr Prime Minister.

Benefit cuts and a reduction of tax credits will mean the Prime Minister’s enthusiasm for “equality of opportunity, as opposed to equality of outcome” will be just that – with the outcome pretty bleak for those who end up losing any opportunity that comes with state support. And his excitement about diversity in his cabinet rings a little hollow the day following a tubthumping anti-immigration speech from his Home Secretary.

If this year's Tory conference wins the party votes, it’ll be because of its conservative commitment – not lefty love bombing.

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.