sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Finance Minister says purpose of the review of Covid-19 monetary policy is 'to learn from experience'

Public Policy / news
Finance Minister says purpose of the review of Covid-19 monetary policy is 'to learn from experience'
[updated]
Finance Minister Nicola Willis speaks to reporters.
Finance Minister Nicola Willis speaks to reporters. Image source: Mandy Te

The Government is launching an independent review of New Zealand's monetary policy response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

On Wednesday, Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the purpose of the review is to identify any lessons the country could learn to improve monetary policy response to future major events. 

“The Reserve Bank of New Zealand [RBNZ] took unprecedented action in response to the Covid-19 pandemic."

"This included reducing the Official Cash Rate to 0.25%, and the use of additional monetary policy tools, including a Large Scale Asset Purchase (LSAP) programme," Willis said.

“These actions helped to preserve jobs and keep businesses afloat, but the indirect impacts included decades-high inflation, and losses of about $10.3 billion on the LSAP programme and a significant spike in asset values with house prices increasing 30% in one year.

“The purpose of the review is to learn from experience."

The independent review will focus on "decisions by the [RBNZ] Monetary Policy Committee (MPC), and analysis provided by the Reserve Bank to support those decisions", Willis said.

"This includes MPC decision making and communication, the use of additional monetary policy tools, and the coordination of monetary and fiscal policy.”

The independent review will be done by Athanasios Orphanides and David Archer. 

Orphanides is a former governor of the Central Bank of Cyprus, member of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank, and a professor of the Practice of Global Economics and Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Archer is a former Reserve Bank assistant governor and former head of the Central Banking Studies Unit at the Bank for International Settlements.

The review is expected to be done in August and publicly released in September.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Willis said the Reserve Bank went through "a window dressing exercise of doing their own review of what they've done and gave themselves essentially full marks". 

"At the time in opposition, I was frank, I said 'they've marked their own homework. That's not good enough. If I was the Finance Minister, I would commission an independent review' and today, that's what I've done." 

Willis said the timing was good because the Reserve Bank had a new governor, a "refreshed" board and a "refreshed" Monetary Policy Committee. "I can tell you they are open to examining these questions."

She said she thought it was important the Reserve Bank "be given a reason to reflect on the decisions that were made".

"And actually as the Finance Minister, that should I be put in a position in the future where there is a major economic event that requires monetary and fiscal response that I have appropriately learned the lessons of history." 

LSAPs

In October, Reserve Bank chief economist Paul Conway made a speech about the use of alternative monetary policy tools at a Citi Australia & New Zealand Investment Conference.

Research released alongside the speech assessed the costs and benefits of the Large- Scale Asset Purchases (LSAPs), which were used in 2020 and 2021 as monetary policy stimulus after the Official Cash Rate was cut to its lower limit of 0.25%.

The LSAP programme, or quantitative easing (QE), saw the Reserve Bank (RBNZ) buy about $53 billion of Government and local government bonds from private investors to lower long-term interest rates and support borrowing during the pandemic. This decision was widely criticised after the Bank hiked rates to fight inflation, crystallising losses on its bond portfolio of roughly $10.5 billion.

But Conway said RBNZ research found the LSAP’s direct cost was offset by its indirect benefits. It first restored market confidence, then lowered long-term interest rates which held down the exchange rate and supported exports. 

“By boosting economic activity during the pandemic, LSAPs increased government tax revenues. This higher revenue almost entirely covered the direct losses from LSAPs, leaving consolidated Crown debt virtually unchanged over the medium term,” he said. 

Still, Conway said the policymakers would have preferred to use negative interest rates if that tool had been available in 2020. The research showed similar economic results as the LSAP but without a cost to the Crown balance sheet.

RBNZ’s research also showed the LSAPs did not contribute materially to the subsequent rise or peak in inflation, although broader policy reviews have found the central bank should have tightened policy sooner to fight inflation.

The International Monetary Fund came to a similar conclusion in 2023 research, and Former Governor Adrian Orr often defended the policy as being worth the cost.

Speaking to interest.co.nz in October, Conway said: “So the Reserve Bank bought the government bonds at scale to provide additional monetary policy stimulus once the Official Cash Rate hit its effective lower bound. And what I will say about those losses is that they’re very easy to quantify and they’re very easy to see … But the benefit of LSAPs is harder to see and harder to get a handle on."

"I think one of the most obvious benefits that you can see is that LSAPs kept wholesale financial markets operating over the pandemic," he said at the time.

“What we find is LSAPs, as pretty much anticipated by the Monetary Policy Committee at the time, they did lower longer term interest rates which got the currency to depreciate a bit more than it otherwise would. And they did generate additional economic activity which in turn, did stimulate tax revenue for the government.”

Conway said once those broader effects were taken into account, the increase in tax revenue largely offset those mark-to-market losses.

“I should say this is based on one model. This is just where we’re at. It’s not the last word, but it’s where we’re at.”

When asked if the central bank would consider LSAPs in the future if there was another pandemic-like event, Conway said “that’s absolutely where we’re at currently”.

But LSAPs are not a day-to-day thing, he said.

“You don’t just reach for your LSAPs when you want to stimulate your economy. You use the OCR for that. But in extreme conditions, our research to date shows that there’s clearly a need for having the capability to do LSAPs.”

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

22 Comments

Lord Farquaad "some of you may die but thats a price I'm willing to pay"

Up
7

Well the Cypriots had their own financial collapse some twelve years ago, so imagine the gentleman from there should have a few clues as to what should have or shouldn’t have been done. There certainly are questions that need to properly asked and answered. There are columns today in the NZH publicising occasions of the public purse being abused and/or squandered, they hardly are of unique material The whole area of public expenditure is overdue for effective scrutiny and discipline.

Up
6

I wonder if we have any Minnesota Somalian learing centers.

Up
0

A good idea

I think the governor only looked at a 3-month time frame and made decisions that weren't supported by data. Then gave the banks cheap money way too long, much longer than Australia did. Australia's covid response and subsequent stance provided way more stability than the RBNZ roller coaster which created feast then famine in NZ

Also(this is a perception and I could be wrong), but were the newly created monetary committee qualified and experienced enough and did they question and disagree with the Governor enough? 

Up
2

Fair call to proceed with but why leave this until electios year??? Yes we know, brownie points for voters.
There was the lowering of OCR, then FLP (just stupid), and LSAP all to stimulate, plus government COVID payments and silly things like cost of living payment. waaaaay too much stimulus that got sucked up by asset holders and increased wealth inequality.

Up
14

In National's position, why wouldn't you wait for election year?

Just too good a chance to pass up, and there might actually be a grain of truth in the idea that they now have a different set of eyes to look at what went on.

Labour's in a catch 22: 

  1. Protest about it too much, and the electorate looks sideways at you: 'what are you trying to hide?' 
  2. Go with it and all the shortcomings will come to the surface - although owning the errors and making the point the circumstances were unprecedented in our lifetimes might give some much needed credibility. Given the absolute aversion to admitting mistakes in NZ politics, I'd rate this option as a rank outsider.
Up
4

The RBNZ described LSAP (bond purchases) and FLP (cheap term funding to banks) as complementary tools used together to provide “additional monetary support to New Zealanders” when the OCR was near its lower bound.

 ASB CEO Vittoria Shortt said FLP “was there to help investment for New Zealand” and that ASB decided to use it “for the long-term benefit for all New Zealanders,” not a source of cheap funding (roll eyes).

Sanctimonious benevolence. At the end of the day, if the Ponzi goes, she all goes. Let's be honest about it.  

Up
2

If the Ponzi goes Fiat may go!!!

 

Up
2

The Ponzi is fiat and fiat is the Ponzi. 

Up
6

Utu

Up
7

Will the result be "Labout was rubbish", and released just before the run in to November? Will National crow about it to make them look better with money, despite present evidence? Hmmmmm, I wonder. Not saying mistakes weren't made, but frankly getting through it without all the death that was so popular elsewhere struck me as doing alright. Could have done better, sure, but which country did it all well at that time? Put all the best cases from around the globe into a file, and circulate for future reference.

This lot are woeful, ignorant, dinosaurs. School lunches. No apartment blocks overlooking the swimming pools of Epsom. build them on the outskirts of town. Kill native fauna for offshore profit. Tax breaks for landlords, but no money for ferries? Tobacco for the kids. (Stunted) growth, growth, growth. 

Eliminate the rentier economy, look after the populace, not just the people who line pockets, enable everyone's future to be brighter. Keep house prices affordable, tax the gains and price the loans at business rates if it is, indeed, a "business". Stop pulling the ladder up. We need better, we deserve better. 

Up
13

There was a very large amount of money printed by the RBNZ and spent by the sixth Labour government. The validity and nature of some of that expenditure is not unquestionable. For instance Mr Ryan the Auditor General in November 2021 released details of purposeless and unaccountable government spending that the Finance Minister Robertson was obliged to apologise about.

Up
8

"There was a very large amount of money printed by the RBNZ and spent by the sixth Labour government."

 

Fiscal Year ended 30 JuneTotal Crown Expenses (NZ$ billion)

2014/15~91.18

2015/16~93.06

2016/17~95.14

2017/18~99.01

2018/19~104.01

2019/20~111.38

2020/21~138.92

2021/22~133.72

2022/23~150.96

2023/24~161.82

2024/25~180.06

Up
6

That can’t be right can it? If so we’ve been had!

Up
2

2024/25~180.06  - is the seventh labour government.

Up
0

FG; You’re not wrong, no denying aspects were badly handled and funds spent inappropriately whilst navigating uncharted waters. But does the timing of an inquiry into how the previous government handled a totally unexpected global pandemic (six years ago), in the run-up to an election, as we endure a recession (two years and counting) instigated by this coalition, not strike you as a little bit convenient?

Up
4

Well you agree that aspects were inappropriate and I agree with you that the timing for the enquiry is politically calculated. It still needs to be completed but it should have a lot earlier than this.

Up
3

It needs to be part of the bigger Ponzi discussion - they wewre only attempting to continue the un-continuable, after all

Up
3

40 years of neoliberal ‘trickle-down’ nonsense has got us here and still people argue about left vs right. Tax needs to be paid, fairly and appropriately, safety nets need to be strong and supported for all of society.
We need to learn, fast. PDK is not wrong - we’re overshot and in trouble, leaving it to muppet politicians to decide where the money goes is asking for trouble and trusting them to do the correct thing is naive at best. Maybe we need referendums on all the important stuff - hospitals or tax breaks for landlords? Roads or ferries? Mining or wilderness? Water for all or Overextraction and pollution? Whatever is left over to ‘govern’ is theirs to squabble over in the sandpit for three years until playtime’s over.
Finger-pointing inquiries like this are a nonsense, there are plenty of studies done all the time worldwide on this and many other subjects. If only there was a way of linking all that knowledge from around the globe, searching it quickly and getting to a best-case for next time scenario.

Up
4

leaving it to muppet politicians to decide where the money goes is asking for trouble and trusting them to do the correct thing is naive at best

 

Thats why we need less government not more. 

Up
1

We elect people to be able to evaluate the obvious using their knowledge and experience. Unfortunately in an MMP 3 year election cycle, half our elected MPs are not that bright, just focused on survival. I would have thought the lessons to be learnt were obvious. National seem determined to lose the next election.

Up
3

"We elect people to be able to evaluate the obvious using their knowledge and experience" I wish that were true. The vast majority of politicians have a low level of knowledge and experience and are heavily dependent on the civil service for advice and I believe in many cases is flawed advice with decided omissions. The civil service just about becomes a law unto themselves.

 

Up
3