[外部リンク] LIESMAN. Mr. Chairman, I want to talk about that same line in the statement. Does that mean that your tolerance for inflation will be higher in coming years, in the middle of the recovery? And, if not, what good is that language there if it doesn’t tell people that the reaction function relative to inflation has changed? Secondly, stock prices are up today, so are oil prices and gold. Why aren’t those part of the same reaction to the Fed’s acts today?』
インフレを容認するのかという質問と、金や原油価格上昇に関する見解をただしています。
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Well, our policy approach doesn’t involve intentionally trying to raise inflation. That’s not the objective.』
ということで、インフレを(必要以上に)引き上げる事は目的では無い、と表明。
『The idea is to make sure we provide enough support so the economy will grow fast enough to bring unemployment down over time. I mean, as we look back at the last six months or so, we’ve seen unemployment at basically the same place it was in January. We’ve seen not enough jobs growth to bring down the unemployment rate, and what we need to see is more progress. And that’s what we will be looking at.』
『In terms of the mid-2015 date, we think by that point that the economy will be recovering, we’ll be providing the support it needs. But if you look at our projections, you’ll see it doesn’t involve any inflation, that we still believe that inflation is going to be close to our 2 percent target.』
『STEVE LIESMAN. All right, I just need to follow up. Does this-so you’re saying it does not include greater tolerance for inflation, that you will-you would reverse course if inflation were to be above your target level, even given that statement?』
ターゲットを超えた場合には追加緩和を元に戻すのかという質問。
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Well, if inflation goes above the target level, as we talked about in our statement in January, we take a balanced approach. We bring inflation back to the target over time, but we do it in a way that takes into account the deviations of both of our objectives, you know, from their targets.』
『MIKE MCKEE. You’ve made an eloquent explanation over the past couple of weeks of the Fed’s ability to lower interest rates. But what’s missing for many economists is how the transmission mechanism is going to work. Most people think this will have a minimal effect on rates. Can you give us an idea of how much you think it might push rates down, and why moving rates down a few basis points might change demand, which seems to be the problem in the economy?』
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Well, the ultimate effect is going to depend, of course, on how much we end up doing, and that, in turn, is going to depend on what the economy does. This is a conditional program; we’re going to be providing accommodation according to how the economy evolves.』
『I think that’s the virtue of putting it this way, is that if the economy is weaker, we’ll provide more support; if the economy strengthens on its own or other headwinds die down, then it will require less support. So the amount of support we provide is going to depend on how the economy evolves.』
とまず逃げを打っておいて(^^)。
『We do think that these policies can bring interest rates down-not just Treasury rates, but a whole range of rates, including mortgage rates and rates for corporate bonds and other types of important interest rates. It also affects stock prices. It affects other asset prices-home prices, for example. So looking at all the different channels of effect, we think it does have impact on the economy. It will have impact on the labor market, but, as again, the way I would describe it is a meaningful effect, a significant effect, but not a panacea, not a solution for the whole issue. We’re just trying to get the economy moving in the right direction, to make sure that we don’t stagnate at high levels of unemployment, that we’re making progress towards more acceptable levels of unemployment.』
『ROBIN HARDING. Robin Harding from the Financial Times. Mr. Chairman, is this the limit of what the Fed could do? You refer in your statement to other policy tools. If the unemployment situation doesn’t improve, then what other measures do you have available? Thank you.』
質問は「効かなかったら他のツールはあるの?」という話ですが。
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Well, there’s a variety of possibilities, and we continue to look at all different options. But the two primary types of tools, as I’ve discussed, are balance sheet actions-and, of course, we can restructure those, change those in various ways; the other type of tool is communication tools.』
『And we could-we continue to work on how best to communicate with the public and how best to assure the public that the Fed will remain accommodative long enough to ensure recovery. So, working with our communications tools, clarifying our response to economic conditions, might be one way in which we could further provide accommodation.』
『MARCY GORDON. Marcy Gordon with the Associated Press. One of the aspects we’ve seen in recent reports on unemployment is the shrinking labor force. Is that something that’s of specific concern to you, and what does it tell us about the labor market and the economy?』
レーバーフォースが縮小しているのも問題ですよね?という質問に対して。
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE. Well, you are absolutely right.』
キタコレ。
『And as I mentioned earlier, the unemployment decline last month was more than 100 percent accounted for by declines in participation. Some decline in participation is anticipated, is as expected. We’re an aging society. We have more people retiring. Female participation has flattened out; it hasn’t continued to climb as it did for several decades. We’re seeing less participation among younger people, fewer college students taking part-time jobs and the like. So part of this decline in participation was something that we anticipated quite a long time ago, but part of it is cyclical. Part of it reflects the fact that some people-because they have essentially given up or at least are very discouraged-have decided to leave the labor force. And the anticipation is that if the economy really were to strengthen, and labor markets were to strengthen, at least some of those people would come back into the labor force. They might even temporarily raise the unemployment rate because they’re now looking again.』
この辺はレーバーフォースが低下している件とその要因の話。
『So the participation rate over and above-the decline in participation rate over and above the downward trend is just one of the other indicators of a generally weak labor market. And it’s why I said earlier that we do want to look at a range of indicators, not just the unemployment rate, although that’s a very important indicator, not just payrolls, although that also is a leading indicator, but participation, hours, part-time work, and a variety of other measures which suggest that our labor market is still in quite weak condition.』
[外部リンク] economies have moved somewhat deeper into a deceleration phase.』(今回) 『Overseas economies have shown moderate improvement, though limited in scope; on the whole, they still have not emerged from a deceleration phase.』(前回)
『Japan's economy registered relatively high growth in the first half of 2012, supported by the firmness in domestic demand. Nonetheless, the pick-up in economic activity has come to a pause, reflecting the aforementioned developments in overseas economies.』(今回)
『Japan's economic activity has started picking up moderately as domestic demand remains firm mainly supported by reconstruction-related demand.』(前回)
ということで、「started picking up moderately」としていたものが「the pick-up in economic activity has come to a pause」と、こちらも英文で見た方がニュアンスとして下方修正しましたねえという感じがするのですがどうでしょうか。しかし「aforementioned」って確かに英和辞典見ると「先に述べた」って訳があるのですが、中々お目に掛かれない単語のような気がするんですけれども(^^)。
『Against the backdrop of these developments, economic activity is expected to level off more or less and the year-on-year rate of change in the CPI to remain at around 0 percent for the time being.』(今回)
『As for the outlook, Japan's economy is expected to return to a moderate recovery pat has domestic demand remains firm and overseas economies emerge from the deceleration phase. The year-on-year rate of change in the CPI is expected to remain at around 0 percent for the time being.』(前回)
ということで、CPIの見通しの所に前回も今回も「for the time being」ってありますので、CPIの見通しそのものに変化がある訳ではありません。しかし横ばいって「level off more or less」って言うのか・・・・・
『Regarding risks, there remains a high degree of uncertainty about the global economy, including the prospects for the European debt problem, the momentum toward recovery for the U.S. economy, and the likelihood of emerging and commodity-exporting economies simultaneously achieving price stability and economic growth. Furthermore, attention should be paid to the effects of financial and foreign exchange market developments on economic activity and prices.』(今回)
『Regarding risks to the economic outlook, there remains a high degree of uncertainty about the global economy, including the prospects for the European debt problem, the momentum toward recovery for the U.S. economy, and the likelihood of emerging and commodity-exporting economies simultaneously achieving price stability and economic growth. Regarding risks to the price outlook, careful attention should be paid to future developments in international commodity prices and in medium- to long-term inflation expectations.』(前回)
『Based on these economic and price developments, the Bank of Japan judged it appropriate to expand the total size of the Program substantially by about 10 trillion yen and take the aforementioned measure to ensure the steady implementation of asset purchases. These measures in pursuit of powerful monetary easing will make financial conditions for such economic entities as firms and households even more accommodative by further encouraging a decline in longer-term market interest rates and a reduction in risk premiums. The Bank expects that, together with the cumulative effects of earlier policy measures, today's decision to enhance monetary easing will ensure the return of Japan's economy to a sustainable growth path with price stability.』(今回)
ということで、ここで「measures in pursuit of powerful monetary easing」と入れていまして、最後のパラグラフには元々「the Bank has been providing support to strengthen the foundations for economic growth and pursuing powerful monetary easing.」というのがございまして、「pursuing powerful monetary easing」というのを2回入れる形でまあ強調していますなという所ではございます。
9月18日日本時間の朝時点では初稿です。 [外部リンク] you know, the Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy under a dual mandate from Congress to promote maximum employment and price stability. The United States has enjoyed broad price stability since the mid-1990s and continues to do so today. The employment situation, however, remains a grave concern. While the economy appears to be on a path of moderate recovery, it isn’t growing fast enough to make significant progress reducing the unemployment rate. Fewer than half of the 8 million jobs lost in the recession have been restored. And, at 8.1 percent, the unemployment rate is nearly unchanged since the beginning of the year and is well above normal levels.』
『The weak job market should concern every American. High unemployment imposes hardship on millions of people, and it entails a tremendous waste of human skills and talents. Five million Americans have been unemployed for more than six months, and millions more have left the labor force--many of them doubtless because they have given up on finding suitable work. As the skills of the long-term unemployed atrophy and as their connections to the labor market wither, they may find it increasingly difficult to get good jobs, to their and their families’ cost, of course, but also to the detriment of our nation’s productive potential.』
『The FOMC has taken several actions this year. In January, it extended its forward guidance, stating that it anticipated that the federal funds rate will remain near current levels until late 2014. In June, the Committee decided to continue through the end of the year the previously established program to extend the average maturity of the securities it holds by buying longer-term securities and selling an equivalent amount of shorter-term securities. However, incoming data confirm that the modest pace of growth continues to be inadequate to generate much progress on unemployment. With inflation anticipated to run at or below our 2 percent objective, the Committee has become convinced that further policy accommodation is warranted to strengthen the recovery and support the gains we have begun to see in housing and other sectors.』
『Accordingly, the FOMC decided today on new actions, electing to expand its purchase of securities and extend its forward guidance regarding the federal funds rate. Specifically, the Committee decided to purchase additional agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) at a pace of $40 billion per month. The new MBS purchases--combined with the existing maturity extension program and the continued reinvestment of principal payments from agency debt and agency MBS already on our balance sheet--will result in an increase in our holdings of longer-term securities of about $85 billion each month for the remainder of the year.』
『The program of MBS purchases should increase the downward pressure on long-term interest rates more generally, but also on mortgage rates specifically, which should provide further support to the housing sector by encouraging home purchases and refinancing.』
『The Committee also took two steps to underscore its commitment to ongoing support for the recovery.』
commitmentキタコレ。
『First, the Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments in coming months, and if we do not see substantial improvement in the outlook for the labor market, we will continue the MBS purchase program, undertake additional asset purchases, and employ our policy tools as appropriate until we do. We will be looking for the sort of broad-based growth in jobs and economic activity that generally signal sustained improvement in labor market conditions and declining unemployment. Of course, in determining the size, pace, and composition of any additional asset purchases, we will, as always, take appropriate account of the inflation outlook and of their efficacy and costs.』
『Additionally, the Committee emphasized that it expects a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy to remain appropriate for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens.』
『This should provide greater assurance to households and businesses that policy accommodation will remain even as the economy picks up.』
経済がピックアップしても相当の期間に渡って超金融緩和が継続するという大きな安心感を与えるとな。
『In particular, the Committee today kept the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and stated that it anticipates that exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted at least through mid-2015.』
(2)ガイダンス文言の前に入れた『To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee expects that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens.』
毎度おなじみのラッカー怒りの声明ですが、今回は気合の入り方が違います。 [外部リンク] 15, 2012 Richmond Fed President Lacker Comments on FOMC Dissent
『The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decided on September 13, 2012, to purchase additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month. The Committee released a statement after the meeting saying that it expects a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy to remain appropriate for a considerable period after the economic recovery strengthens, and that it currently anticipates that exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted at least through mid-2015.』
と、ここまでは決定事項なのでまあどうでも良いですが。
『I dissented because I opposed additional asset purchases at this time.』
追加の「資産買入」に反対とな。
『Further monetary stimulus now is unlikely to result in a discernible improvement in growth, but if it does, it’s also likely to cause an unwanted increase in inflation.』
『Economic activity has been growing, on average, at a modest pace, and inflation has been fluctuating around 2 percent, which the Committee has identified as its inflation goal. Unemployment does remain high by historical standards, but improvement in labor market conditions appears to have been held back by real impediments that are beyond the capacity of monetary policy to offset. In such circumstances, further monetary stimulus runs the risk of raising inflation in a way that threatens the stability of inflation expectations.』
『I also dissented because I disagreed with the characterization of the time period over which the stance of monetary policy would be highly accommodative and the federal funds rate would be exceptionally low.』
金融緩和スタンスの強化に対して反対と。
『I believe that such an implied commitment to provide stimulus beyond the point at which the recovery strengthens and growth increases would be inconsistent with a balanced approach to the FOMC’s price stability and maximum employment mandates.』
『Finally, I strongly opposed purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities.』
で追い打ちを掛けるように「strongly」まで付けてエージェンシーMBSの買入に反対。
『These purchases are intended to reduce borrowing rates for conforming home mortgages. Such purchases, as compared to purchases of an equivalent amount of U.S. Treasury securities, distort investment allocations and raise interest rates for other borrowers. Channeling the flow of credit to particular economic sectors is an inappropriate role for the Federal Reserve. As stated in the Joint Statement of the Department of Treasury and the Federal Reserve on March 23, 2009, “Government decisions to influence the allocation of credit are the province of the fiscal authorities.”』
『JEFFREY LACKER: The effects are very hard to gauge, but my sense is that this is going to have a greater effect on inflation and a minimal impact on jobs. And while asset purchases are not without some costs and risks down the road, at some point, we're going to need to sell these securities and raise interest rates when the economy recovers more fully. And the larger a balance sheet is, I think the riskier that process becomes. It becomes more sensitive to fine errors and trickier to get out of the large asset positions we're in.』
『LACKER: Well, that's a good question and that's a very controversial aspect to this decision as well, an aspect I opposed as well. I think the theory behind it, first of all, it's a deep and liquid market, and the impetus, I think, is to aid the housing market. That's an area that's fallen short in this recovery. In most other U.S. postwar recoveries, we've seen a pretty sharp snapback in housing.
Of course, the reason it hasn't come back in this recovery is that this recession was essentially caused by us building too many houses prior to the recession. We still have a huge overhang of houses that haven't been sold that are vacant. And it's going to take us a while before we want the houses we have, much less need to build more.』
[外部リンク] in real GDP. . . . . 1.7 to 2.0 2.5 to 3.0 3.0 to 3.8 3.0 to 3.8 2.3 to 2.5 June projection . . . . . . 1.9 to 2.4 2.2 to 2.8 3.0 to 3.5 n.a. 2.3 to2.5
Unemployment rate. . . . . 8.0 to 8.2 7.6 to 7.9 6.7 to 7.3 6.0 to 6.8 5.2 to 6.0 June projection . . . . . 8.0 to 8.2 7.5 to 8.0 7.0 to 7.7 n.a. 5.2 to 6.0
PCE inflation. . . . . . . 1.7 to 1.8 1.6 to 2.0 1.6 to 2.0 1.8 to 2.0 2.0 June projection . . . . . . 1.2 to 1.7 1.5 to 2.0 1.5 to 2.0 n.a. 2.0
Core PCE inflation . . . . .1.7 to 1.9 1.7 to 2.0 1.8 to 2.0 1.9 to 2.0 June projection . . . . . . 1.7 to 2.0 1.6 to 2.0 1.6 to 2.0 n.a.
『CHAIRMAN BERNANKE: Good afternoon. Earlier today, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) approved new measures to support the recovery and employment growth. I’ll get to the specifics of our actions in a few moments, but I will first describe the economic conditions that motivated the Committee’s decision to take additional actions.』
『As you know, the Federal Reserve conducts monetary policy under a dual mandate from Congress to promote maximum employment and price stability. The United States has enjoyed broad price stability since the mid-1990s and continues to do so today. The employment situation, however, remains a grave concern. While the economy appears to be on a path of moderate recovery, it isn’t growing fast enough to make significant progress reducing the unemployment rate. Fewer than half of the 8 million jobs lost in the recession have been restored. And, at 8.1 percent, the unemployment rate is nearly unchanged since the beginning of the year and is well above normal levels.』
『The weak job market should concern every American. High unemployment imposes hardship on millions of people, and it entails a tremendous waste of human skills and talents. Five million Americans have been unemployed for more than six months, and millions more have left the labor force-many of them doubtless because they have given up on finding suitable work. As the skills of the long-term unemployed atrophy and as their connections to the labor market wither, they may find it increasingly difficult to get good jobs, to their and their families’ cost, of course, but also to the detriment of our nation’s productive potential.』
『The Committee will closely monitor incoming information on economic and financial developments in coming months. If the outlook for the labor market does not improve substantially, the Committee will continue its purchases of agency mortgage-backed securities, undertake additional asset purchases, and employ its other policy tools as appropriate until such improvement is achieved in a context of price stability. 』(今回)
ということで、先ほど申し上げた「ヘッジ」はここで入っているのですけれども、労働市場が顕著に改善するまでのMBS購入および効きが悪い場合の追加購入を宣言という威勢の良い話をしていまして、超遅行指標の失業の改善にコミットキターではあるのですが、そこには「in a context of price stability」をさすがに入れているのがヘッジですわな。
んでもってまあ中長期的に物価が安定しているという見通しの元では買入の継続および労働市場状況によっては買入拡大が続くという意味では緩和的スタンスの拡大キタコレ(何せ経済の現状認識改善しているのですし)なのですけれども、物価が上昇してくると政策運営が禿しく難しくなるでしょうなあと思われる次第でして、特に来年になると物価重視派の地区連銀総裁が票決権持つので、「in a context of price stability」の解釈でFOMC内部の意見が割れそうな悪寒も致します。まあ物価が上昇しなければ無問題なのですけれども。
『In determining the size, pace, and composition of its asset purchases, the Committee will, as always, take appropriate account of the likely efficacy and costs of such purchases.』(今回)
まあつまりこの辺りの文言って追加緩和のおかわり有るべしという積極的な話をしながらも、「労働市場の顕著な改善」という部分はまあ具体的な数値とか出さないで裁量の余地を残した上に、「in a context of price stability」というのも入れて、物価情勢にも配慮するとかプロコン比較の文言も入れて、先行きの自由度を確保するようにしていますな。
『To support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability, the Committee expects that a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens. 』(今回)
『To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee expects to maintain a highly accommodative stance for monetary policy. 』(前回)
前回分は第3パラグラフになります。最初の所で金融政策の「highly accommodative stance」について今回は「for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens」という表現で押し上げ介入チックな表現にしていますが、それは最初の方でありましたように、今回は経済の現状認識と先行き見通しが改善している中での追加緩和を実施しているというのがあるので、そういう意味では先行きの経済見通しと金融政策運営スタンスが直接リンクしませんよ(=先行きの見通しが引き上げになっても金融緩和スタンスを継続するかもしれませんよ)という話っすな。
『In particular, the Committee also decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted at least through mid-2015.』(今回)
『In particular, the Committee decided today to keep the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 1/4 percent and currently anticipates that economic conditions--including low rates of resource utilization and a subdued outlook for inflation over the medium run--are likely to warrant exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate at least through late 2014.』(前回)
今回のフォワードガイダンス延長では「FOMCの想定する経済状況がFFレートがいついつまで低位推移をすることを正当化します」という表現からよりシンプルに「FOMCはFFレートがいついつまで低位推移をすることを予想します」ということで、フォワードガイダンス文言を単に「予想」としていまして、こっちは微妙な感じです。ただまあ前半で「a highly accommodative stance of monetary policy will remain appropriate for a considerable time after the economic recovery strengthens」という事で文言を強化しているので、まあ差し引きすれば文言が強化されてるちゃあされてるかなとは思います。
・・・・・・とまあそこまでは良いのですが、今回のSEP図表3枚目(最初の方に入れたURL先を見てちょ)になります『Figure 2. Overview of FOMC participants’ assessments of appropriate monetary policy, September 2012』を拝見いたしますと、『Appropriate timing of policy firming』の方では「想定される適切な金融引き締め時期」で2012年から2014年までが合計6/19票で、2015年が12/19票(残りの一票は2016年)なのでまあフォワードガイダンス文言と整合的に見えるのですが、毎度おなじみの『Target federal funds rate at year-end』を見ますと、2015年末のFF金利予想で1%以下が10/19でその次のレートが1.5%となっていて、1.5%以上が9/19という事で、またまた毎度の如く整合性的にちと微妙な感じではございます。
『Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Dennis P. Lockhart; Sandra Pianalto; Jerome H. Powell; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Jeremy C. Stein; Daniel K. Tarullo; John C. Williams; and Janet L. Yellen.』(今回)
というのは前回と同様で、ラッカー先生の反対も同様です(^^)。
『Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who opposed additional asset purchases and preferred to omit the description of the time period over which exceptionally low levels for the federal funds rate are likely to be warranted.』(今回)
『Voting against the action was Jeffrey M. Lacker, who preferred to omit the description of the time period over which economic conditions are likely to warrant an exceptionally low level of the federal funds rate.』(前回)
声明文 [外部リンク] received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in August suggests that economic activity has continued to expand at a moderate pace in recent months. 』(今回)
『Information received since the Federal Open Market Committee met in June suggests that economic activity decelerated somewhat over the first half of this year.』(前回)
『Growth in employment has been slow, and the unemployment rate remains elevated. 』(今回) 『Growth in employment has been slow in recent months, and the unemployment rate remains elevated. 』(前回)
『Household spending has continued to advance, but growth in business fixed investment appears to have slowed. The housing sector has shown some further signs of improvement, albeit from a depressed level. 』(今回)
『Business fixed investment has continued to advance. Household spending has been rising at a somewhat slower pace than earlier in the year. Despite some further signs of improvement, the housing sector remains depressed. 』(前回)
表現がちまちま変わっていますが、家計消費に関しては現状判断が上がり、企業投資については現状判断が下がっています。んでもって住宅セクターに関しては従来主文が「the housing sector remains depressed」となっていたのに対して今回は主文が「The housing sector has shown some further signs of improvement」となっておりまして、「更に幾らかの改善の兆しが見られている」が主文ということでこちらは 現状判断改善ですな。
『Inflation has been subdued, although the prices of some key commodities have increased recently. Longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.』(今回)
『Inflation has declined since earlier this year, mainly reflecting lower prices of crude oil and gasoline, and longer-term inflation expectations have remained stable.』(前回)
『Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee is concerned that, without further policy accommodation, economic growth might not be strong enough to generate sustained improvement in labor market conditions. 』(今回)
『Consistent with its statutory mandate, the Committee seeks to foster maximum employment and price stability. The Committee expects economic growth to remain moderate over coming quarters and then to pick up very gradually. Consequently, the Committee anticipates that the unemployment rate will decline only slowly toward levels that it judges to be consistent with its dual mandate. 』(前回)
『Furthermore, strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee also anticipates that inflation over the medium term likely would run at or below its 2 percent objective.』(今回)
『Furthermore, strains in global financial markets continue to pose significant downside risks to the economic outlook. The Committee anticipates that inflation over the medium term will run at or below the rate that it judges most consistent with its dual mandate.』(前回)
海外の金融市場ガーという話はまあいつも通りでして、今回は物価の所に関して「it judges most consistent with its dual mandate」という言い方ではなくて「its 2 percent objective」という言い方に変更していまして、まあこれは今回の追加緩和決定において労働市場重視のようなスタンスになっている事に対して「物価についてもちゃんと見て行きます」というのを強調するために「2%」という数値を明示化してバランス取っているという所だと思います。
・第3パラグラフ:MBS購入決定なのですが今回は「定額購入」
前回の第3パラグラフは途中からフォワードガイダンス文言になりますのでそこの辺りの比較は後ほど。
『To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee agreed today to increase policy accommodation by purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month. 』(今回)
最初の所はいつもと同じですが、今回は「毎月400億ドルのMBS購入」を決定。
『The Committee also will continue through the end of the year its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in June, and it is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities.』(今回)
『These actions, which together will increase the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities by about $85 billion each month through the end of the year, should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.』(今回)
でね、今朝の書き物でそこまで詳細説明が行けるか判らないのですが(大汗)、会見の冒頭での「Opening Statement」を読みますとそちらでは『The program of MBS purchases should increase the downward pressure on long-term interest rates more generally, but also on mortgage rates specifically, which should provide further support to the housing sector by encouraging home purchases and refinancing.』(最初の方で並べたURLの中にある会見のオープニングステートメントの2ページのケツの辺りにあります)と言う風に説明していまして、「モーゲージ金利に対してより効果がある」という形でモーゲージ金利の引き下げを強調しておりまして、一つには長期金利の引き下げを強調しすぎないようにしているのと、もう一つは「住宅市場」を強調することによってQE批判への答えにしようとしているのかなと思いました。
『Before I take your questions, I’d like to briefly address three concerns that have been raised about the Federal Reserve’s accommodative monetary policy. The first is the notion that the Federal Reserve’s securities purchases are akin to fiscal spending. The second is that a policy of very low rates hurts savers. The third is that the Federal Reserve’s policies risk inflation down the road.』(最初の方で並べたURLの中にある会見のオープニングステートメントの4ページの真ん中辺りにあります)
『In light of the policy actions the FOMC has taken to date, as well as the economy's natural recovery mechanisms, we might have hoped for greater progress by now in returning to maximum employment. Some have taken the lack of progress as evidence that the financial crisis caused structural damage to the economy, rendering the current levels of unemployment impervious to additional monetary accommodation. The literature on this issue is extensive, and I cannot fully review it today. However, following every previous U.S. recession since World War II, the unemployment rate has returned close to its pre-recession level, and, although the recent recession was unusually deep, I see little evidence of substantial structural change in recent years.』
『Question: Under the new OMTs, will the purchases continue to be conducted by the national central banks according to the capital key, and will they take the risks associated with these purchases according to the capital share that they have of the ECB?』
という質問に対してですが。
『Draghi: Well, the answer to the first question is yes.』
ということですが、この次の質問の方が意地悪でしてアレ。
・過去にも国債買入をしたけれども、結局今回また買入することになりましたよねという意地悪質問
『And my second question is, this is kind of the third attempt at making a bond purchase programme work: you did it in May 2010, you did it again in August 2011, and they did not seem to work. What makes you think and why should people be convinced that this third attempt will work?』
『And the second is actually very, very important. We certainly discussed that. I would, by the way, disagree that the other two programmes have not worked in such a kind of decisive way, but let me talk about the present programme.』
『The present programme is very, very different from any other programme we had in the past.』
ほうほうそれでそれで?
『First of all, we have this conditionality element. That is, I would say, the most important difference, because it really puts together our intervention with an ownership of the economic programme that a certain country has, by the country’s government, but also by the other governments that have to vote in favour of the EFSF interventions. That is one of the differences, and I think it is probably the most important.』
今回の買入はconditionality elementであるのが違いますというのが最初。
『The second one is that there is going to be much greater transparency: as I said before, we will publish the OMT holdings, the duration, the issuer, the market value. So there is going to be much more transparency.』
『And the fourth is the explicit statement that we will accept pari passu treatment with the other creditors.』
今回の買入分には優先権を主張しないと。
『So, there are very many differences with the previous ones, which lead us to think that it will actually work.』
だそうですが、次の質問者の2つ目の質問で似たような嫌がらせ質問が。
『Question: Two questions, please. (最初のは割愛)And my second question is: Unlimited bond purchases are something very new. The SMP is in the past. Now, we have unlimited purchases. What is the rationale for this? Is it to say: “Look guys, we have spent more than ユーロ200 billion buying these bonds and still monetary policy measures are not being transmitted.”- Is it to ensure better transmission of monetary policy that you have decided this, which is a big step?』
で、この質問はもはやスルーして先ほど引用した
『On the second point - yes, we think that having it, ex ante, unlimited in size is adequate to reach our objectives.』
まあそもそも各国がオラシラネとなったらユーロが崩壊するのだから同じっちゃあ同じと言う議論もあるのですが、国としてのToo big to fail大作戦がこのスキームだと可能ですので、ラホイのおっちゃんにおかれましてはもう欧州安定化基金の救済に手を挙げてジャンジャン国債をECBに買わせて、うちがコケたらECBも共倒れ、という状況まで持って行ってから、「いやあちょっと状況的に赤字削減には時間が掛かりますなああっはっは」と開き直った債務者攻撃をかましたらどうするんでしょうというのは提案したらダメですかそうですか。
○時間が無いので一発ネタ
先週の木曜にこんなのがあったんですけどね。
[外部リンク] is said that the German Chancellor Helmut Kohl once stated that "I did not like many of the monetary policy decisions of the Bundesbank, but as a citizen, I am very glad about the existence of the Bundesbank." As this episode shows, the Bundesbank is well known for its independence and achievements in securing price stability.』
『Question: I also have a question on the conditionality. In your statement, you say that “the involvement of the IMF shall be sought”. Does that mean that the involvement of the IMF is a firm condition or is it just the preferred scenario? My second question is: am I right in understanding that you will retain your senior status for bonds bought under the Securities Markets Programme (SMP) and for all other bonds held by the Eurosystem? And finally, did you discuss a change in interest rates at your meeting today?』
『Draghi: The involvement of the IMF is sought for the design of the policy conditionality, but we cannot dictate what it should do. It is an independent institution, but if the Board of the IMF, its management and its Managing Director want to participate in the programme, they would be more than welcome. This is definitely the preferred scenario.』
IMFの関与は「推奨シナリオ」であるという事のようです。
『However, because I can read the question on your mind - is this a condition sine qua non? - it is important to explain how the ECB is retaining its independence in all this. We have provided governments with a broad framework for conditionality, but it is very much up to the governments themselves, the European Union, the European Commission and the IMF to decide on the precise nature of this conditionality. It is important that the Governing Council retains full discretion and full independence when deciding on issues relating to monetary policy.』
絶対条件(sine qua nonって絶対に必要な物とかそういう意味らしい)なのかという件に関しては、ECBは独立してこれらの機関から独立しているという事を強調したいという話を頼まれもしないでおっぱじめておりまして、まあこれって普通に読めば「球は政府にあります」という話をしているのでしょうけれども、ことさらに「independence」の話を強調するのは「政府との協力」をあまりにもアピールしながら明らかにお助け措置となる国債買入を実施することによって、「財政ファイナンス」と言われるのを避けようという配慮があるんでしょうなあと思います。
『What we have put in place today is an effective backstop to remove tail risks from the euro area, and the ECB will retain its independence throughout.』
つーことでこの購入プログラムは「an effective backstop to remove tail risks」と明言しておりますな、うんうん。
『With regard to seniority, the statement on outright monetary purchases does not apply to the SMP holdings.』
『Finally, yes, we discussed interest rates today, but it was decided that it was not the right time to make a change. The reason for this is, in a sense, given in the introductory statement. When we last decided to reduce rates, we had anticipated this weakening in the business cycle.』
利下げの検討もおこなったようですが、今回は前回利下げしたのでとりあえず様子見という所のようですな。
・unlimitedという言葉がヘッドラインに出るのですが・・・・・・・
正面切ってこういう質問をされると答えがどうなるかという事を鑑賞。
『Question: Mr Draghi, will the purchases be unlimited in amount and time? And my second question is: Spain is facing a huge refinancing hump at the end of October. Will the ECB’s new programme be up and running in time for this?』
『Draghi: Well, on the first question, there are no ex-ante limits on the amount of Outright Monetary Transactions. And the size - as I think it said in the first press release or the introductory statement - is going to be adequate to meet our objectives.』
『As regards Spain, we have designed a parcours, a path, and it is now in the hands of the government and the Eurogroup - in the hands of the government of Spain and the governments of the euro area.』
『Question: I have two questions, Mr Draghi. First of all, was there any discussion in today’s meeting regarding any other liquidity programmes, like an LTRO?』
これについては「今回は検討していない」と明確に否定。
『Draghi: No, there was no discussion on LTROs.』
・この質問はワロタ(^^)
で、上記の質問の2つ目の質問がこれまた酷い質問でテラワロタ。
『And my second question is: All global markets were waiting for this today. Even the Turkish central bank was waiting for it. Does this put pressure on you when deciding things?』
Even the Turkish central bank was waiting for it.って何だよという感じですが、世間のプレッシャーは影響していますかとかちょっとお前自制しろwwwwww
『And we are obviously all under pressure. It is not just me; the whole of the Governing Council has taken very important decisions today - also for the ECB as an institution - so we are fully aware of that.』
いやいや私たちの決定はいつもプレッシャーを伴うものですよ何を仰る兎さんという所で。
・「目的が達成される」というのはどのような所を見て判断するのかという質問
『Question: Mr Draghi, I think I am right in saying that in the statement, you are explicitly not providing any kind of level at which you think a bond yield of a country that applies for this is excessive. In fact, the language seems to basically say “you will know when it is there and then you will do it and you will tell us about it afterwards” - is that broadly it? Is there any more detail you can give us in terms of the work that the experts were doing over the last few weeks to try and figure out how you decide when a bond is suffering from convertibility risk?
And the second question is, since this is all designed to protect the transmission mechanism or repair it, would you say that the transmission mechanism is also broken in a sense in Germany, where perhaps the bonds are suffering from a sort of convertibility premium, and will you be doing anything to fix that?』
ということで質問が長いのですが、答えの方が見もの。
『Draghi: The answer to your last question is, if bond markets are distorted in the euro area, they are distorted in all directions. And this is one of the causes of the impairment of monetary policy transmission. And that is really the objective of this programme: it is to repair monetary policy transmission and to recreate the singleness of monetary policy for the euro area.』
でまあその辺の理念的な話は兎も角として。
『Now, on the specific question you had whether we had in mind a specific yield target - the answer is no. No, just because the repair of monetary policy transmission is a complex concept, so we will be looking at a variety of issues.』
『The level of yield ceilings is one, but there are also spreads - CDS spreads, bid-ask spreads - and more generally the conditions of liquidity, so we have a variety of indicators. Volatility is also very important, in terms of the indicators that we plan to take into consideration in planning our interventions.』
『Draghi: Well, it was not unanimous. There was one dissenting view. We do not disclose the details of our work. It is up to you to guess.』
「It is up to you to guess.」ってまあ普通ちゃあ普通の答弁だが何か吹いた(^^)。
・でまあいきなり意地悪質問が連発する
次の質問がこれまた意地悪。
『Question: Mr Draghi, you repeated that the euro is irreversible. What gives you the democratic legitimation, the authority to say that? Because I have looked it up in the Treaty. It does not say anywhere that it is the role of the ECB to decide what kind of currency the European countries have. Thank you.』
『Draghi: What I said exactly is that - and I repeat what I said in London the first time - we will do whatever it takes within our mandate - within our mandate - to have a single monetary policy in the euro area, to maintain price stability in the euro area and to preserve the euro. And we say that the euro is irreversible. So unfounded fears of reversibility are just what they are: unfounded fears. And we think this falls squarely within our mandate.』
ユーロを維持するのが物価安定のマンデートに資するという説明ですな。
次は「ユーロがリラ化してますねえ」という質問である。
『Question: The FAZ warned the other day about what they have called - pardon me - the “liraisation” of the euro, moving away from a Deutschmark culture to a lira culture. The FDP wants to protest the decisions you have taken today, because they say they are in breach of Article 123 of the EU Treaty of financing governments. Can you explain to us why they are wrong?』
『It shows that it is not only the decision of former lira members or others, it is basically the almost unanimous decision of the Governing Council. So, first of all, I would not identify with this caricature of it being a southern cabal or an Italian thing. No, it is not. It is the Governing Council that, in its almost unanimous decision, has taken this measure.』
殆どが賛成したというのを強調していますがブンデス(以下同文^^)。
『Second, no, we are sure that we are acting within our mandate, that we are not violating Article 123. It is pretty explicit: it says for purchases on the primary market, this is a violation, not for purchases on the secondary market as I have stated this programme will work. And incidentally, outright purchases of bonds are identified, in Article 18 of the Statute of the ECB, as one of the various possible tools that our monetary policy has and can use. So we are not creating anything new here.』
セカンダリーマーケットから購入するのは財政ファイナンスではありませんという理屈ですな。
更に意地悪質問は続くという3連発恐るべし。
『Question: Mr Draghi, how can you be sure the fact that the monetary impulse of the ECB seems not to be reaching a big part of the euro area is really a problem of “monetary transmission” and not maybe a problem of “liquidity trap”?』
『Draghi: We have substantial, significant and important evidence that the European monetary area is now fragmented. We see this from a variety of indicators: not only the level of yields, the yield spreads, but also volatility, and especially liquidity conditions in many parts of the euro area. So, the actions we decided on today are geared to repairing monetary policy transmission channels in a way that our standard monetary policy can address its primary objective, i.e. maintaining price stability. In other words, these decisions are necessary to restore our capacity to pursue the objective of price stability in the euro area and to restore the singleness of monetary policy in the euro area.』
『Question: When I listened to your words, I thought that there was quite a lot of Weidmann in it. I was quite surprised. But outside, there is a lot of pressure on you to put less Weidmann in your statements in the future. I fear that that will happen. What do you think?』
『Draghi: I am what I am, really. I think one thing that is required for this job, for me and my colleagues in the Governing Council, is that you have to think with your head, and external pressures do not really have a role to play in your decision-making.』
>I am what I am, really. >I am what I am, really. >I am what I am, really.
ワロタ。がそれで容赦する訳では無い意地悪記者の意地悪質問が。
『Question: Especially, Mr Weidman - I mean, Mr Draghi - all the conditionality. You have talked constantly about conditionality. Every second word was “conditionality”. I am a German. I really think your approach is great, but you know the markets. You know all these markets are putting pressure on you and your colleagues. In four weeks we will be sitting here again at another press conference. I hope that this conditionality will stay and you will not give ground regarding this issue of conditionality.』
いやもう読んでてマジでカフェオレ吹いたわ。
『Draghi: Certainly, certainly. And as I have said before, you know, all of us are convinced, all of the Governing Council is convinced, that really you need two legs to make it work. We are all convinced that having just one leg does not work. As you have said, Brian, we have had previous experience of this, and that was basically one leg and did not work. We need both to make it work. And I think that is a general conviction. Again, I think there is unfortunately a misconception - especially, I would say, in this country - about how the Governing Council works, and this is not accurate.』
『Question: Mr Draghi, on the maturity of the assets that you would intend to purchase under the OMTs you said between one and three years. Could you explain: does this involve bonds that have a residual maturity of that amount of time, i.e. a ten-year bond that has two or three years left to run as well as ones whose face maturity is that time? And my second question is about the conditionally aspect: you mentioned that the OMTs would be suspended if countries did not fulfil the necessary conditions set out in the MoU. Given that these purchases are explicitly for monetary policy purposes, does this mean that you will suspend the ECB’s independence if the countries do not fulfil the conditions? I don’t quite understand this contradiction; maybe you could elaborate on that for me?』
『Draghi: On the first question, the “three years” is to be understood in the way you mentioned. And it is three years because it seemed to us the maximum most effective maturity to target: it is close to our short-term policy rates; it affects also the medium-term yield curve; it is close to the rates that are being used to lend to the private sector; it is, in a certain sense, similar to the maturity we used for the LTROs; and also, in a very indirect way, it decreases concerns about our seniority over the bond holdings. So, there are many good reasons for choosing the “three years”. 』
『On “conditionality”, the assessment of the Governing Council is that we are in a situation now where you have large parts of the euro area in what we call a “bad equilibrium”, namely an equilibrium where you may have self-fulfilling expectations that feed upon themselves and generate very adverse scenarios.』
まず現状はリスク回避的に自己実現的な「悪い均衡」にあるのでこれを打開する必要があると。
『So, there is a case for intervening, in a sense, to “break” these expectations, which, by the way, do not concern only the specific countries, but the euro area as a whole. And this would justify the intervention of the central bank.』
従ってその悪い均衡の自己実現を打開するべく市場介入をしますと。
『But then, we should not forget why countries have found themselves in a bad equilibrium to start with. And this is because of policy mistakes.』
しかしまずはそのために各国が行動する必要があるという事を忘れてはいけませんと。
『That is why we need both legs to fix this situation and move from a bad equilibrium to a good equilibrium.』
『If the central bank were to intervene without any actions on the part of governments, without any conditionality, the intervention would not be effective and the Bank would lose its independence. At the same time, we see that we are in a bad equilibrium and, therefore, policy action, though convincing, does not seem to produce - at least not in the relatively medium term - the results for which it is geared. So that is why we need both legs for this action.』
[外部リンク] Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market Committee shall maintain long run growth of the monetary and credit aggregates commensurate with the economy's long run potential to increase production, so as to promote effectively the goals of maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.』
[外部リンク] statement to the press conference (with Q&A) Mario Draghi, President of the ECB, Vitor Constancio, Vice-President of the ECB, Frankfurt am Main, 6 September 2012
ちなみに冒頭にありますが、今回の理事会にはユンケルさんにレーンさんも出席の巻。
『Ladies and gentlemen, the Vice-President and I are very pleased to welcome you to our press conference. We will now report on the outcome of today’s meeting of the Governing Council, which was also attended by the President of the Eurogroup, Prime Minister Juncker, and by the Commission Vice-President, Mr Rehn.』
・背景説明部分では「景気見通し引き下げ」「物価見通しは足元引き上げ基調は変化なし」
まずは最初の所から。
『Based on our regular economic and monetary analyses, we decided to keep the key ECB interest rates unchanged.』
金利は変更なし。
『Owing to high energy prices and increases in indirect taxes in some euro area countries, inflation rates are expected to remain above 2% throughout 2012, to fall below that level again in the course of next year and to remain in line with price stability over the policy-relevant horizon. Consistent with this picture, the underlying pace of monetary expansion remains subdued. Inflation expectations for the euro area economy continue to be firmly anchored in line with our aim of maintaining inflation rates below, but close to, 2% over the medium term.』
『Economic growth in the euro area is expected to remain weak, with the ongoing tensions in financial markets and heightened uncertainty weighing on confidence and sentiment. A renewed intensification of financial market tensions would have the potential to affect the balance of risks for both growth and inflation.』
『It is against this background that the Governing Council today decided on the modalities for undertaking Outright Monetary Transactions (OMTs) in secondary markets for sovereign bonds in the euro area. As we said a month ago, we need to be in the position to safeguard the monetary policy transmission mechanism in all countries of the euro area.』
金融政策の波及経路を保護する為にOMTsを導入するという建付けですな。
『We aim to preserve the singleness of our monetary policy and to ensure the proper transmission of our policy stance to the real economy throughout the area. OMTs will enable us to address severe distortions in government bond markets which originate from, in particular, unfounded fears on the part of investors of the reversibility of the euro.』
『Hence, under appropriate conditions, we will have a fully effective backstop to avoid destructive scenarios with potentially severe challenges for price stability in the euro area. Let me repeat what I said last month: we act strictly within our mandate to maintain price stability over the medium term; we act independently in determining monetary policy; and the euro is irreversible.』
『In order to restore confidence, policy-makers in the euro area need to push ahead with great determination with fiscal consolidation, structural reforms to enhance competitiveness and European institution-building. At the same time, governments must stand ready to activate the EFSF/ESM in the bond market when exceptional financial market circumstances and risks to financial stability exist - with strict and effective conditionality in line with the established guidelines.』
『The adherence of governments to their commitments and the fulfilment by the EFSF/ESM of their role are necessary conditions for our outright transactions to be conducted and to be effective. Details of the Outright Monetary Transactions are described in a separate press release. 』
『Furthermore, the Governing Council took decisions with a view to ensuring the availability of adequate collateral in Eurosystem refinancing operations. The details of these measures are also elaborated in a separate press release.』
・経済のリスクはダウンサイドで物価に関しては概ねバランスも債務問題はダウンサイド
詳しい説明の部分は先ほど申し上げたような感じですが。
『The risks surrounding the economic outlook for the euro area are assessed to be on the downside. They relate, in particular, to the tensions in several euro area financial markets and their potential spillover to the euro area real economy. These risks should be contained by effective action by all euro area policy-makers.』
ということで経済のリスクは債務問題を受けてダウンサイドです。物価に関してですが・・・・
『Risks to the outlook for price developments continue to be broadly balanced over the medium term. Upside risks pertain to further increases in indirect taxes owing to the need for fiscal consolidation. The main downside risks relate to the impact of weaker than expected growth in the euro area, particularly resulting from a further intensification of financial market tensions, and its effects on the domestic components of inflation. If not contained by effective action by all euro area policy-makers, such intensification has the potential to affect the balance of risks on the downside. 』
