This morning, he has a go at Labour's Finance spokesman, David Parker. Trotter opines:
The most depressing contribution, so far, to the debate over quantitative easing (QE) belongs to Labour's finance spokesman, David Parker.
Responding to the Greens' call for $2 billion of QE, to bring down the value of the Kiwi dollar, Mr Parker stated: “I'm not in the camp that says the Government should direct the Reserve Bank as to what monetary policy tool it uses, whether it should be lower interest rates, or loan to valuation ratios or some sort of levy on capital inflows or quantitative easing.”
This is the old economic orthodoxy speaking, and proof of Labour's inability to free itself from the neoliberal ideology of the 1980s. It also gives the lie to all those who have taken comfort from Mr Parker's much publicised “conversations” with internationally renowned economists like Joseph Stiglitz.
Had Mr Parker been genuinely influenced by them, he would have been willing to challenge the notion that interfering politicians' hands must be kept away from the big economic levers. But, by pointedly distancing himself from those who are willing to direct the Reserve Bank to use its monetary tools for the public good, Mr Parker has proved that Labour, like Louis XVIII, has “learned nothing and forgotten nothing”.
He has also provided an alarming glimpse of what is likely to happen if National's increasingly inept economic management leads to a change of government in 2014. Should a David Shearer-led Labour Party emerge with the largest share of the Left vote, and with Mr Parker as its preferred finance minister, the Greens' more radical, people-first, approach to economic management will be over-ruled.
New Zealand will experience again what it was forced to endure between 1996 and 1998: a coalition government at odds with itself, seething with intrigue, and prone to sudden and destabilising political lurches. In this scenario, Greens co-leader Russel Norman will play the role of Winston Peters to Mr Shearer's Jenny Shipley and Mr Parker's Bill Birch.
And, just as the National-NZ First coalition government, riven by ideological differences, fell apart after less than two years, so too will any Labour-Green coalition in which the primacy of politics is not the activating principle of both parties.
On this occasion, we agree with David Parker's reluctance to arm the Reserve Bank with a new tool known in genteel circles as "quantitative easing". As we noted when commenting on the Dom-Post's editorial from earlier in the week, a return to Muldoon-like intervention in the economy is the last thing that New Zealand needs right now.
But we do agree with Trotter's assessment of likely political instability should Labour and the Greens form the next or a future government. Even the suggestion that David Parker and Russel Norman could form some sort of Finance super-team when they views on the Reserve Bank and its role are so far apart should send shivers down the spine of the electorate.
And after reminding readers about how small parties have fared in coalitions with larger ones, Trotter closes with a charge to the Greens that will strike fear into the hearts of Labour supporters:
Dr Norman's advocacy of QE and his championing of New Zealand's exporters and manufacturers is not only politically courageous but very shrewd. By promising to take the QE lever of economic power into their own hands the Greens have forced Labour to reveal its own.
Mr Parker, backed by his leader, has signalled Labour's unwillingness to abandon that creaking foundation of neoliberal statecraft, the “independent” (ie, subservient to the financial sector) central bank. In doing so, he has confirmed Labour's unwillingness to do any more than administer New Zealand's economic decline.
The Greens' path forward is as challenging as it is clear. Dr Norman should announce that a coalition with Labour will be contemplated only from a position of strength. Only if the Greens are the Left's largest party.
Fortunately, the Greens will NEVER be the largest party in the Parliament. For that we should all sigh with relief.
8 comments:
QE post number six!
John Key is currently the captain of this ship and he and his Ministers are steering a course that ignores the instruments in front of them and are refusing to look at the charts. They don't even want to look at the mayhem and damage they are causing and the debri being left in their wake. They claimed the ship was water tight and indestructible but leaks and malfunctions are appearing everywhere.
The Green's lifeboat is well constructed and high tech and they have plotted a course to safe shores. You stay on the ship, KS, I'm for the life boat! :-)
Don't shoot the messenger bsprout. Trotter actually seems to support printing of money, but he has illustrated that there is a gulf between Labour and your lot.
And as far as leaks go; are you saying that it's acceptable for public servants to breach their conditions of employment with regard to confidentiality?
KS
Are you saying that it's acceptable for public servants (Key) to breach their conditions of employment with regard to telling the truth?
"I'm for the life boat!"
That is what the Italian Captain of the Costa Concordia said, too.
Go bsprout!
@bsprout said "The Green's lifeboat is well constructed and high tech and they have plotted a course to safe shores. You stay on the ship, KS, I'm for the life boat! :-)"
Another slogan without any substantiation bsprout.
The 'Greens Lifeboat' is an illusion, a confidence trick - anyone who trusted an economy with it would lose the lot. Step into such a lifeboat and you would drown....
Quite so Ross; in fact I think that bsprout's Green lifeboat is probably just a printed one; like their money!
http://localbodies-bsprout.blogspot.co.nz/2012/10/hms-national-off-course-and-leaking.html
You are one straightforward writer. I enjoyed reading your article and taking in all the interesting information. I share your thoughts on many points in this content. This is great.
Depository trust company
Post a Comment