In recent days and weeks, the central bank has been busy refuting market rumors and media speculation that its repeated warnings on inflows of hot money and its checks on banks’ foreign-exchange transactions and forward trades have caused a decline on the stock market.
For its part, the central bank has done what it is required to do to safeguard the nation’s economy, monetary policy and price stability in the long term, although its recent rhetoric did have a direct impact on the exchange rate of the New Taiwan dollar and indirectly on the stock market. Make no mistake, the currency markets can impact equity markets in various ways — and vice versa.
Indeed, the growing uncertainty surrounding the world’s major economies’ monetary policies, international fund flows and exchange rates will likely lead to considerable volatility in global stock and commodity markets this year. Many investors are worried about governments potentially withdrawing stimulus measures and central banks possibly tightening monetary policy.
The global financial crisis has not only reshaped the world’s financial system and influenced policymakers’ attitude toward financial problems, but also changed the relationships between governments and central banks.
The announcement that US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke would stay for a second term, the conflict between resigning Argentine central bank president Martin Redrado and Argentine President Cristina Fernandez and South Korea’s decision to send a vice minister to a central bank board meeting for the first time in more than 10 years all suggest increased political influence on central banks.
Taiwan is no exception, although in a more subdued way.
Like its global peers, Taiwan’s central bank will have to make a decision on when to raise interest rates and implement other credit-tightening measures to keep inflation in check, but that move will surely meet with corporate opposition, especially from property developers, who will face higher borrowing costs.
On the other hand, the central bank also needs to pursue a monetary policy that is anti-inflationary, counter-cyclical and able to balance the needs of exporters and importers, as well as of average income earners and big business.
The truth is, the central bank is not all-powerful and that is why economists have long supported a central bank that is independent and able to defend its credibility in the face of market and political pressure.
An amendment to the Organic Act of the Executive Yuan (行政院組織法), approved by the legislature earlier this month, however, has raised concern about the independence of the central bank, as it stipulates that the bank is a subordinate agency under the Executive Yuan, instead of an independent institution.
The central bank has immediately defended its independence on monetary policy issues following the amendment’s legislative passage, citing the Central Bank Act (中央銀行法).
The track record of Governor Perng Fai-nan (彭淮南) — who has been in the post since February 1998 — shows that he is not concerned about market and political pressure, but supporters of the central bank’s independence are concerned about the long-term consequences of the amendment, especially when the central bank is under a leader other than Perng.
Will future governments have the same respect for the central bank’s “independence” after the passage of this amendment?
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
Taiwan People’s Party Legislator-at-large Liu Shu-pin (劉書彬) asked Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) a question on Tuesday last week about President William Lai’s (賴清德) decision in March to officially define the People’s Republic of China (PRC), as governed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as a foreign hostile force. Liu objected to Lai’s decision on two grounds. First, procedurally, suggesting that Lai did not have the right to unilaterally make that decision, and that Cho should have consulted with the Executive Yuan before he endorsed it. Second, Liu objected over national security concerns, saying that the CCP and Chinese President Xi
RSS