Bank of Japan announces massive asset-purchase programme

£90bn of government assets purchased each month starting in January 2014.

The Bank of Japan has made its much-foreshadowed move to attempt to end the years of deflation the country has faced. This morning, it announced that it was repositioning its inflation target from 1 per cent to 2 per cent, and that it would aim to achieve that rate "at the earliest possible time".

The plan involves more than just expectations management, as well. Until the end of this year, the bank will continue with its ¥101trn round of quantitative easing, but from January 2014 it will begin buying ¥13trn — over £90bn — of assets, mostly short-term government debt, each month. The hope is that the massive burst of asset purchases will act to spike inflation, but there are indications that the government also plans to use some of the revenue this monetary policy will accord to it for fiscal stimulus.

As well as being higher than it was before, the inflation target is also stronger, replacing a "vaguely-worded “goal” for price stability over the medium to long-term", according to the Financial Times. That goal was not thought to be symmetrical, either: it merely targeted a positive rate of inflation below 2 per cent. Non-symmetric targets tend to inspire a tendency to undershoot (because if 1.9 per cent is OK but 2.1 per cent is terrible, no bank will aim for 2 per cent inflation), compounding the problems.

The news is not likely to please Germany's chief banker, Jens Weidmann, who yesterday warned of the danger of a government intervening too strongly in the actions of a central bank. Weidmann said in a speech at a Deutsche Boerse event that:

Already alarming violations can be observed, for example in Hungary or Japan, where the new government is interfering massively in the business of the central bank with pressure for a more aggressive monetary policy and threatening an end to central bank autonomy. A consequence, whether intentional or unintentional, could moreover be an increased politicisation of exchange rates.

But Weidmann is complaining into dead air, at this point. Japan's popular nationalist new prime minister, Shinzo Abe, is determined to restore the country to growth by any means possible. A recent tax bill, passed before his election, contains a (non-binding) target of 3 per cent nominal growth and 2 per cent real growth (implying a 1 per cent rate of inflation), which he is likely to adopt as a target for his own government. To achieve that, he needs some aid from the Bank of Japan — aid which he has secured. The question now is whether the bank will be allowed to return to independence when its job is done.

The Bank of Japan. 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.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either

The question of "who knew what, and when?" shouldn't stop with the Conservative peer.

If Grant Shapps’ enforced resignation as a minister was intended to draw a line under the Mark Clarke affair, it has had the reverse effect. Attention is now shifting to Lord Feldman, who was joint chair during Shapps’  tenure at the top of CCHQ.  It is not just the allegations of sexual harrassment, bullying, and extortion against Mark Clarke, but the question of who knew what, and when.

Although Shapps’ resignation letter says that “the buck” stops with him, his allies are privately furious at his de facto sacking, and they are pointing the finger at Feldman. They point out that not only was Feldman the senior partner on paper, but when the rewards for the unexpected election victory were handed out, it was Feldman who was held up as the key man, while Shapps was given what they see as a relatively lowly position in the Department for International Development.  Yet Feldman is still in post while Shapps was effectively forced out by David Cameron. Once again, says one, “the PM’s mates are protected, the rest of us shafted”.

As Simon Walters reports in this morning’s Mail on Sunday, the focus is turning onto Feldman, while Paul Goodman, the editor of the influential grassroots website ConservativeHome has piled further pressure on the peer by calling for him to go.

But even Feldman’s resignation is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Although the scope of the allegations against Clarke were unknown to many, questions about his behaviour were widespread, and fears about the conduct of elections in the party’s youth wing are also longstanding. Shortly after the 2010 election, Conservative student activists told me they’d cheered when Sadiq Khan defeated Clarke in Tooting, while a group of Conservative staffers were said to be part of the “Six per cent club” – they wanted a swing big enough for a Tory majority, but too small for Clarke to win his seat. The viciousness of Conservative Future’s internal elections is sufficiently well-known, meanwhile, to be a repeated refrain among defenders of the notoriously opaque democratic process in Labour Students, with supporters of a one member one vote system asked if they would risk elections as vicious as those in their Tory equivalent.

Just as it seems unlikely that Feldman remained ignorant of allegations against Clarke if Shapps knew, it feels untenable to argue that Clarke’s defeat could be cheered by both student Conservatives and Tory staffers and the unpleasantness of the party’s internal election sufficiently well-known by its opponents, without coming across the desk of Conservative politicians above even the chair of CCHQ’s paygrade.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.