Why does the Reserve Bank want to send everyone broke?
The RBA will make its interest rate decision shortly.
In this video from the last interest rate decision, I explain how crazy their plan is and how it’s a problem they created.
Posts
The BRICS member states are abandoning the United States’ dollar and other nations are seeking to join the BRICS bloc, which accounts for 25% of world trade and is expected to grow to 50% by 2030. The US dollar is now just 58% of all world trade. As the world moves away from the US dollar its value may fall.
Our Reserve Bank holds AU$35 billion in foreign reserves and half of that is in US treasuries securities. I asked the Governor whether the RBA had modeled the probability of that fall on Australia’s US holdings and whether they intended to invest in more US treasuries. The governor expects Australia’s economy to grow and foreign holdings to increase — as part of risk management however they are looking at other currency markets in line with the RBA’s key bench marks, but without speculating on any future currency fluctuations.
The BRICS group of major emerging economies — Brazil, Russia, India, China (the four founding members of the bloc) and South Africa is holding its 15th heads of state and government summit in Johannesburg on 22nd August. Founded as an informal club in 2009, it was initially created as a platform to challenge a world order dominated by the US and its allies with a focus on economic cooperation and increasing multilateral trade and development. As many as 23 countries have now formally applied to join the group and many more are said to be interested.
With more countries investing in and accumulating greater gold reserves and widespread reports that the BRICS alliance is working on creating a new gold-backed trading currency, I asked the Governor if Australia is planning to increase our gold reserves.
The answer was no. “We’ve got our gold reserves and we haven’t bought and sold for a long time, and we have no intention of changing that.”
Transcript
Senator Roberts: I have a question about the Reserve Bank’s reserves. Let me get to it by giving some background. At the BRICS meeting in Cape Town on 2 and 3 June, 13 nations will formally apply to join BRICS, which is currently Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa—and Saudi Arabia, with an each-way bet. Candidate nations include Mexico, Argentina, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Indonesia and Iran. BRICS is now the world’s largest trading bloc, accounting for 25 per cent of world trade which is expected to grow to 50 per cent by 2030. And it’s big in oil.
BRICS member states are abandoning the US dollar in favour of using their own currency or the Chinese renminbi in an environment where other countries, including Australia, are doing the same thing. Pakistan is now buying Russian oil and renminbi. The US dollar is now denominating just 58 per cent of all world trade. The United States has printed $10 trillion over the last seven years, doubling their M2 money supply. That increase has been absorbed in part by an increase in international trade. As the world moves away from the US dollar the value of the US dollar may fall. The Reserve Bank holds United States treasuries and dollars. Have you modelled the effect on your balance sheet from that probable fall in the value of US holdings.
Mr Lowe: Not as a result of these other global changes you’ve talked about. We spend a lot of time and part of our risk management processes looking at volatility in currencies, because currencies move around all the time, don’t they? That affects the value of those assets on our balance sheet, so we model that from a risk-management perspective. Despite the developments you’re talking about, most countries still hold the bulk of their foreign reserves in US dollars. There’s diversification going on, which is good, but the US dollar is going to remain the dominant currency for some time.
Senator Roberts: What is the value of Reserve Bank holdings of US dollar and US treasuries in Australian dollars?
Mr Lowe: Our total foreign reserves at the moment I think are the equivalent of U$35 billion. What’s the share, Brad?
Dr Jones: I think it’s 55 per cent.
Mr Lowe: Roughly half of that $35 billion is allocated to US dollars, and then we have holdings of yen, Korean won, euros and rmb.
Senator Roberts: What about treasuries?
Mr Lowe: When we hold US dollars we invest it in US Treasury securities. We don’t invest in bank deposits or any other securities. We invest in US government securities.
Senator Roberts: What’s the reverse holding of Australian government currency and bonds held by the US government or their agencies?
Mr Lowe: We don’t have data on that.
Senator Roberts: Could you get that on notice?
Mr Lowe: No.
Senator Roberts: You don’t have it?
Mr Lowe: We don’t have data on specific holdings of other countries.
Dr Jones: If I understood your question correctly, Senator, the US holds euros and yen, from recollection, but not in large quantities.
Senator Roberts: While that arrangement helps with international stability across holdings, it is a method for backdoor quantitative easing. Does the Reserve Bank expect to increase your holding of US treasuries in the next 12 months?
Mr Lowe: We’ve just done an exercise where we were looking at how much of our balance sheet should be held in foreign assets. We said we’ve got $35 billion at the moment. As the size of the economy grows you would expect that to gradually increase. But, no, nothing dramatic. As the economy grows and the nominal value of the Australian economy gets bigger, then you would expect a bigger portfolio in US dollars and foreign currency.
Senator Roberts: The Reserve Bank has a mission to anticipate movements in major trading partners and in world markets. As it affects your provisioning and portfolio, does the Reserve Bank anticipate being affected by any out of the ordinary moves in financial markets in connection with the US economy or the US dollar over forward estimates?
Mr Lowe: We’ve recently been focused on the US debt limit issues in the US. If an agreement had not been reached there, that would have had implications for currency markets and economies around the world. So that’s one thing that we’ve looked at carefully. It looks like that has been resolved, thankfully. And, just as part of our general risk management exercise, we’re looking at developments in other economies and their implications for currency markets in own economy.
Dr Jones: As a general rule though, the way the bank has operated its reserves has changed quite a bit over the last, say, 25 years, and now the bank effectively sets key benchmarks and sticks to them. There are not big discretionary decisions going on every day. There’s wild speculation going on at the Reserve Bank, I can assure you, about the future value of exchange rates.
Senator Roberts: I wasn’t implying that. Worldwide purchases of US treasuries by central banks has fallen $600 billion in 2022 as compared to a baseline year of 2013. That’s just arbitrary—2013. Purchases of gold have increased $300 billion. So something is going on that Australia would be prudent to hedge against. Is the Reserve Bank increasing its gold reserves as an each way bet against BRICS introducing a gold brick currency of some form?
Mr Lowe: No, we’re not. We’ve got our gold reserves. We haven’t bought and sold for a long time and we have no intention of changing that at the moment.
Senator Roberts: Thank you, Governor.
Customers of Australia’s ‘Big Four’ banks are not getting a fair go.
The Commonwealth Bank announced a $10.2 billion annual profit made on the backs of the hard work of their customers and staff, who deserve better.
The Senate inquiry into bank closures in regional Australia has heard evidence of banks acting in concert, if not collusion, to close branches, forcing customers online and preventing the use of cash. Even with online banking unavailable in areas where bank branches close and despite their actions not serving their customers’ needs they’ve gone ahead with closures. Worse, the banks have misled the committee not only about their plans to close branches in the future, but even about the reasons why.
I will be addressing the reprehensible behaviour of the Big Four banks in the next sitting.
Transcript
As a servant to the many different people in our one Queensland community, it’s my duty to ensure that our constituents get a fair go. Customers of the big four Australian banks are not getting a fair go.
The Commonwealth Bank announced a $10.2 billion annual profit made on the backs of the hard work of their customers and staff, who deserve better. While the banking superprofits tax will return some of that excess profit to taxpayers, my question is: how are the big four banks able to exploit their oligopoly power to deliver obscene profits?
One Nation, of course, supports the right of companies to invest money and receive a fair return on investment—a fair return. One Nation believes that free market competition is the answer to providing all Australians with wealth and prosperity. Australia does not have free market competition in many industries, including in banking. We have an oligopoly conspiring together to rip off as much money as they can from captive clients. That was evident in 2017, when I chaired the Senate Select Committee on Lending to Primary Production Customers. The committee heard evidence of inhuman banking behaviour that screwed their own customers, taking homes, livelihoods, equity and even cattle, to which the banks were not legally entitled. No compensation has ever been made, because good luck suing a bank. Banks are above the law.
The Senate inquiry into bank closures in regional Australia has heard evidence of banks acting in concert, if not collusion, to close branches, force customers online and prevent the use of cash, despite online banking not being available in areas where bank branches closes and not suiting customers’ needs. Worse, banks have misled the committee regarding their future branch closure plans and misled the committee on the reasons for closures. The big four banks’ behaviour is reprehensible. In the next sitting, I’ll advance the debate regarding a proposal to stop banks further hollowing out the bush and forcing their customers into digital prison.
Watch this space.
During the recent Senate Estimates, I questioned the Reserve Bank about the effect of the ascendant BRICS alliance on the Reserve bank’s holdings of US Dollars (USD) and US Treasuries (UST). I also asked Mr Lowe about his expectations of the US Economy’s movement in the next few years and how this may affect Australia. Mr Lowe avoided any pessimistic projections regarding the US economy.
I then asked if the Reserve Bank was increasing its gold reserves as a precaution against the BRICS group releasing a gold-backed currency. The RBA has actually reduced our gold reserves from a peak of $5.2 billion to $3.9 billion now. The answer I received was also negative.
I think this is a mistake. Australia should be increasing our gold reserves as a hedge against international currency fluctuations in the uncertain times ahead.
Transcript
Chair: Senator Roberts?
Senator Roberts: I have a question about the Reserve Bank’s reserves. Let me get to it by giving some background. At the BRICS meeting in Cape Town on 2 and 3 June, 13 nations will formally apply to join BRICS, which is currently Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa—and Saudi Arabia, with an each-way bet. Candidate nations include Mexico, Argentina, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Indonesia and Iran. BRICS is now the world’s largest trading bloc, accounting for 25 per cent of world trade which is expected to grow to 50 per cent by 2030. And it’s big in oil. BRICS member states are abandoning the US dollar in favour of using their own currency or the Chinese renminbi in an environment where other countries, including Australia, are doing the same thing. Pakistan is now buying Russian oil and renminbi. The US dollar is now denominating just 58 per cent of all world trade. The United States has printed $10 trillion over the last seven years, doubling their M2 money supply. That increase has been absorbed in part by an increase in international trade. As the world moves away from the US dollar the value of the US dollar may fall. The Reserve Bank holds United States treasuries and dollars. Have you modelled the effect on your balance sheet from that probable fall in the value of US holdings.
Mr Lowe: Not as a result of these other global changes you’ve talked about. We spend a lot of time and part of our risk management processes looking at volatility in currencies, because currencies move around all the time, don’t they? That affects the value of those assets on our balance sheet, so we model that from a risk-management perspective. Despite the developments you’re talking about, most countries still hold the bulk of their foreign reserves in US dollars. There’s diversification going on, which is good, but the US dollar is going to remain the dominant currency for some time.
Senator Roberts: What is the value of Reserve Bank holdings of US dollar and US treasuries in Australian dollars?
Mr Lowe: Our total foreign reserves at the moment I think are the equivalent of U$35 billion. What’s the share, Brad?
Dr Jones: I think it’s 55 per cent.
Mr Lowe: Roughly half of that $35 billion is allocated to US dollars, and then we have holdings of yen, Korean won, euros and rmb.
Senator Roberts: What about treasuries?
Mr Lowe: When we hold US dollars we invest it in US Treasury securities. We don’t invest in bank deposits or any other securities. We invest in US government securities.
Senator Roberts: What’s the reverse holding of Australian government currency and bonds held by the US government or their agencies?
Mr Lowe: We don’t have data on that.
Senator Roberts: Could you get that on notice?
Mr Lowe: No.
Senator Roberts: You don’t have it?
Mr Lowe: We don’t have data on specific holdings of other countries.
Dr Jones: If I understood your question correctly, Senator, the US holds euros and yen, from recollection, but not in large quantities.
Senator Roberts: While that arrangement helps with international stability across holdings, it is a method for backdoor quantitative easing. Does the Reserve Bank expect to increase your holding of US treasuries in the next 12 months?
Mr Lowe: We’ve just done an exercise where we were looking at how much of our balance sheet should be held in foreign assets. We said we’ve got $35 billion at the moment. As the size of the economy grows you would expect that to gradually increase. But, no, nothing dramatic. As the economy grows and the nominal value of the Australian economy gets bigger, then you would expect a bigger portfolio in US dollars and foreign currency.
Senator Roberts: The Reserve Bank has a mission to anticipate movements in major trading partners and in world markets. As it affects your provisioning and portfolio, does the Reserve Bank anticipate being affected by any out of the ordinary moves in financial markets in connection with the US economy or the US dollar over forward estimates?
Mr Lowe: We’ve recently been focused on the US debt limit issues in the US. If an agreement had not been reached there, that would have had implications for currency markets and economies around the world. So that’s one thing that we’ve looked at carefully. It looks like that has been resolved, thankfully. And, just as part of our general risk management exercise, we’re looking at developments in other economies and their implications for currency markets in own economy.
Dr Jones: As a general rule though, the way the bank has operated its reserves has changed quite a bit over the last, say, 25 years, and now the bank effectively sets key benchmarks and sticks to them. There are not big discretionary decisions going on every day. There’s wild speculation going on at the Reserve Bank, I can assure you, about the future value of exchange rates.
Senator Roberts: I wasn’t implying that. Worldwide purchases of US treasuries by central banks has fallen $600 billion in 2022 as compared to a baseline year of 2013. That’s just arbitrary—2013. Purchases of gold have increased $300 billion. So something is going on that Australia would be prudent to hedge against. Is the Reserve Bank increasing its gold reserves as an each way bet against BRICS introducing a gold brick currency of some form?
Mr Lowe: No, we’re not. We’ve got our gold reserves. We haven’t bought and sold for a long time and we have no intention of changing that at the moment.
Senator Roberts: Thank you, Governor.
The greedy major banks have closed more than 70 branches in rural, regional and remote Australia in just 42 days.
The banks are looked after by the Australian government extremely well, so they have a responsibility to serve Australians.
It’s another reason why we need a people’s postal bank.
Since 2019 the RBA created $508 billion out of thin air through electric journal entries. I have been warning the RBA directly that this money printing will contribute to the inflation we are experiencing.
What did Governor Phillip Lowe say? He acknowledged I warned about creating money, he acknowledged it was a mistake and he also said nation building projects like Iron Boomerang would help fix inflation.
Transcript
Senator ROBERTS : Thank you both for being here. Dr Lowe, in 2016, I had my first Senate estimates session. I asked the Treasury secretary, who at the time was John Fraser, a question about the huge increase in money supply. He pretty much dismissed me and said, ‘No, don’t worry about it.’ At the next Senate estimates session, he said yes; he acknowledged it. In the third one, he said, ‘Yes. The theory is that it will lead to inflation, you’re correct, but we haven’t seen it yet and we don’t know why.’ So I understand that it’s a vexing problem. You said that one of the solutions is to make the pie bigger. You are saying that the answer to the government’s funding dilemma is to grow the economy and, as a result, the tax base. Have you heard of the project Iron Boomerang? We’ve got the world’s best metallurgical coal for making steel in the east coast and the best iron ore in the west coast. It would build a railway line fully funded. The investors are ready to go. There is a Senate inquiry taking off on it pretty soon. It would take coal to the west and iron ore to the east. There would be massive steelmaking complexes both in the east coast and the west coast. It would remove shipping and road transport. It would be a huge investment. It would add $100 billion to our GDP, which is five per cent. It would open up the north and all of central Australia for the Indigenous living there and rural communities and agriculture. Is that something that we should be thinking about?
Mr Lowe : If the rate of return on that investment is as you describe it and both the financial and social returns are as you describe them, it is something to think about. There may be other projects that have better returns. I don’t want to endorse it, because I don’t know anything about it. But, in principle, we should be looking at the financial and social returns we get from these projects. If they are greater than the cost of funding and the economy has enough resources to do it, then certainly we should be thinking about it.
Senator ROBERTS: We’ve got investors, we’re told, from overseas lining up and also from within. I will come back to the formal questions I had. The Reserve Bank spent the COVID years increasing the money supply, as Deputy Governor Debelle said at the time, by electronic journal entry; they are his words. It is commonly called printing money. At an earlier estimates, I was given a figure of $508 billion as the total for electronic journal entries since 2019. Can you update that figure, please?
Mr Lowe : That’s still roughly the same. I think our balance sheet is a bit over $600 billion at the moment.
Ms Bullock: It is about $600 billion. Exchange settlement account balances are probably around $450 billion or something like that.
Mr Lowe : Our balance sheet has roughly $100 billion of banknotes on it. That is still $100 billion of banknotes. That is $4,000 for every person in the country, which I find extraordinary. That is one of the elements on our balance sheet. We have these exchange settlement balances, which is the electronic money that you talked about.
Senator ROBERTS: Thank you. So inflation has gone from not a problem to a 30-year high, 7.8 per cent in the December quarter. On 2 February 2022, Dr Lowe, you said that inflation had surprised on the upside. In March 2022, you predicted inflation would peak at 4.2 per cent. That was at the ABA, Australian Banking Association, conference that we both attended. Why were you surprised, Dr Lowe, when many, including myself, had spent 2020 and 2021 warning the Reserve Bank and the government, including at Senate estimates, that the sheer volume of this money expansion would inevitably cause significant inflation?
Mr Lowe : You were one of these people who were making the argument that the money supply expansion was ultimately going to be inflationary. That has played a role. As we were talking about before, at least half, maybe three-quarters, of the increase in inflation is due to what went on in Europe and the supply-side disruptions. The expansion of money supply, the low interest rates and, I would say, the government support during the pandemic have driven inflation. But it’s not the full story.
Senator ROBERTS: Is 7.8 per cent inflation the price the public is paying for the Reserve Bank supporting the government’s wasteful mismanagement of COVID using lockdowns and other restrictions, leading to JobSeeker, JobKeeper and mismanagement that the government caused, which is what necessitated the money creation? Did you even consider saying to the government, ‘No, I’m not going to print the massive amount of money, so perhaps reconsider your COVID strategy’?
Mr Lowe : No. We did not do—I want to be very clear about this—the money creation at the request of the government. The nine people who sit on the board of the Reserve Bank decided to do this. We had meetings with the government and we understood—
Senator ROBERTS: Was it because the government had put in place so many onerous restrictions?
Mr Lowe : No. It is easy to forget this now. In early 2020, we were being told by the health people that tens of thousands of Australians would be dead within months. Remember that there were preparations for, including in the Reserve Bank, temporary morgues in our cities. Our borders were closed. We were told the vaccine was maybe three years or longer away. This was going to be something that would take the society a long time to get over. That is what we were being told. That was the information—
Ms Bullock: And we were observing what was happening overseas.
Mr Lowe : And we were seeing what was going on in New York and Italy. It was really terrible and scary. People were locked in their homes. That was the base upon which we made the decision to go on this route. It turns out that the scientists developed a vaccine much more quickly and the economy was more resilient and we did too much. But we didn’t do too much because the government told us to or we wanted to; we thought it was the right thing to do given the information we had at the time.
CHAIR: We’re out of time for this line; sorry, Senator Roberts.
While rate rises may have been foreseeable, they are only happening because of the Government’s incompetence causing inflation in the first place.
The government printed hundreds of billions of dollars out of thin air, leading to massive inflation which the RBA is trying to bring under control with a sledgehammer.
Australians who bought a house under the RBAs promise that rates wouldn’t rise until 2024 are struggling with more pain to come.
A Central Bank Digital Currency goes hand in hand with the idea of a Digital Identity. With all of your information and money stored online, central banks or governments could turn off your access to money and society in the blink of an eye.
The last time I asked the Reserve Bank about a Central Bank Digital Currency, there seemed to be no real plans. Conveniently they are now considering it, just as the feared Digital Identity Bill proposal is being pushed by Government.
Transcript
[Chair] Senator Roberts.
Thank you. Thank you for appearing again. I’m gonna start with a sincere compliment, Mr Debelle. I’ve been impressed with your frankness and your directness and your succinctness. You convey a lot of confidence and I would also like to start by complimenting the Reserve Bank for the answers I received in the last estimates, which after examination were complete and factual. So question one, Chair: the Reserve Bank has now signed on to the International Central Bank Digital Currency Platform, Project Dunbar, and I quote, “aims to develop prototype shared platforms for cross border transactions which will allow financial institutions to transact directly with each other in the digital currencies issued by participating central banks.” Now, as I understand it, Mr Debelle, Australia will be testing this platform, along with Malaysia, Singapore, and South Africa, which suggests we have a digital currency to use, to test the platform. Where is the Reserve Bank on the development process for the Reserve Bank Digital Currency and what’s the timeframe here for testing and implementation?
Hello, pass that one to Ms Bullock, please, Senator, she’s the expert in this space. Well, has carriage of this, at least.
Thank you, Senator. So, the first thing to note is that Project Dunbar is a proof of concept, so I’d distinguish it from a pilot. Pilot is where you actually have actual real money. This isn’t a pilot, it’s actually a proof of concept. So really, what it’s about is going through the technical infrastructure you might need, the legal arrangements you might need, to patent requirements you might need to set this sort of multicurrency approach up. So there is no Central Bank Digital Currency, we don’t have one, the other central banks don’t have one, it’s purely a proof of concept, if you like, It’s a little bit of a desktop exercise with a little bit of experimentation with technical approaches to do it, so there’s no actual Central Bank Digital Currencies involved.
Okay. Thank you. Oh, sorry.
I was just gonna go on to your second question, if that’s all right.
Okay.
So, your second question was about where we are at with Central Bank Digital Currency. So, we’ve had a multiyear process in this. We’ve done some small experiments. We’ve experimented internally with the concept of a wholesale Central Bank Digital Currency. Again, it’s not real, it’s just sort of a mock-up if you like, and we’ve done that internally to see whether or not individual banks could perhaps use it for settlement between them. We’ve also expanded that fairly recently. There was a report in December, Project Atom, which was an experiment again with Commonwealth Bank, National Australia Bank, Perpetual and Consensus and ourselves. And the concept here was, again, a proof of concept. It wasn’t a pilot; a proof of concept to see whether or not a Central Bank Digital Currency, paired with tokenized syndicated loans, would actually make a more efficient way of having syndicated loans transacted through the economy. We released the report on that in December and I think it proved that there were some efficiencies in this area, but –
Excuse me, did you say there were inefficiencies?
Efficiencies.
[Roberts] Efficiencies.
Efficiencies. So, syndicated loans is a very manual process, and quite lengthy, and what the project proved was if you tokenized the syndicated loans, you had a Central Bank Digital Currency to transact amongst the various players in the syndicated loan, that actually that made that a much more efficient process. Whether or not you can do it with normal payment systems as well is another question, but we didn’t test that, so there’s that. We’re also participating, as you mentioned, in Project Dunbar with the Bank for International Settlements Innovation Hub and those three other countries, and we’ve recently formed ourselves a Central Bank Digital Currency Group in the Payments Policy Department, and we’re going to be engaging with the Digital Finance Cooperative Research Centre, which is looking at all sorts of things digital. We’re going to be engaging with them on looking at Central Bank Digital Currencies as well, so that’s a little bit of a potted history of where we’re at with our work on this.
Okay. Thank you. If a new digital currency is to be created out of electronic ledger entries, will existing amounts of cash be converted into digital dollars? The public may be confused about how this is going to work. Can the Reserve Bank please provide a simple overview of what happens after the project gets the green light? Where’s the value coming from? So when we have a cash?
What we’re assessing, Senator, really, is exactly that: their value, given we have a pretty decent payment system as it is, which includes cash, clearly, but also electronic settlement, and you sort of nailed the question, really, which is: is there value in this? Is it worth the investment at this stage or not? Michelle, I don’t know if you wanna add anything to that.
The only thing I’d add, Senator, is that there is no suggestion in which we are getting rid of cash. This concept is not to replace cash and it hasn’t even been decided that we would do it. This would be a decision not for the Reserve Bank, but for, in fact, the Government, and it wouldn’t be replacing cash, so that’s very clear.
When I was talking about the value, I wasn’t talking about the value of the process. Is it gonna be more efficient? Is it worth doing, so I appreciate your answer and that quite clearly, that’s one valid interpretation of my question, but what I was getting at was, if someone’s got so much value in Australian dollars, how will that be converted into digital currency dollars or whatever the currency is? Will they still have that purchasing value?
Sure. So the way that most central banks are looking at this around the world is that the central bank itself won’t be providing people with digital money. It will work like cash does. So at the moment, if you want cash, you go to your ATM or your bank and you withdraw some cash from your bank account. A digital currency, if we had one, would work in a very similar way. You would go into your bank and your bank would have presumably a digital wallet, or you’d have a digital wallet, and you would take some money out of your bank account and you would put it into Central Bank Digital Currency, just like cash. So you can think about it in a very parallel way.
Yes, but if someone’s got $2,000 in cash today in their bank account, will that give them the equivalent purchasing power if there’s a conversion into digital currency?
Yes. Correct. It would be exactly the same as if it was a $100 bill or $100 on your mobile wallet.
Okay. Thank you. Now the BIS is involved. So, one specific case: our foreign exchange reserves are used to settle international transactions. These will now be replaced with the Reserve Bank Digital Dollars, if it goes ahead. Is the process to simply replace the US dollars we have in reserve with US Government-issued crypto dollars or a similar value-basis digital currency?
[Debelle And Bullock] No.
[Bullock] Do you wanna take this?
Straight to the chase: no, Senator, we would still continue to hold $USD reserves in the instruments we currently hold them at, which is primarily US Treasuries.
Okay. That’s pleasing to hear. What are the risks in doing this, for example, if this was handled badly, not necessarily from the Reserve Bank, but for the people you’re dealing with overseas, if the system wasn’t tight? What are the various risks that you can foresee that need to be managed?
This is why I think there’s a lot of water to flow under the bridge before any advanced economies really have launched into this. There are obviously cyber issues. You need to make sure that the system is secure. Overseas consultations demonstrate that people are very concerned about privacy, which is a very valid concern, but by the same token you’re also concerned about a use of digital currency for criminal purposes, so there’s a balance there. Another concern, that is one that most central banks identify, is concerns about the banking system and whether or not there might be a flight of deposits, if you like, to the Central Bank Digital Currency, which would have implications for banks’ balance sheets, potentially make it easy to run on banks, if people were concerned about banks, so there’s a whole lot of financial stability risks and issues associated with it. That’s just a sample of some of the issues that need to be considered if we were going to go in this direction and have some sort of what I would call “retail” Central Bank Digital Currency.
Thank you. Two more questions, Chair. Digital or cryptocurrency is not backed by any asset. It’s literally an exercise in trust that the government can protect the value of someone’s currency. Is this the time now to start talking about getting an asset backing behind this new currency, such as gold?
Senator, just like cash at the moment, it would be a feat currency, which is to say it isn’t backed by anything. And you’re right. It’s all about trust in the institutions of the country, in the government, in the Reserve Bank, so in that sense, it would be just like cash, if we were going down this route, it would be an unbacked currency.
But it’s backed by the government’s capacity to raise revenue from its citizens, basically.
Backed by the government’s capacity to raise revenue, did you say?
Yep.
Thank you. Last question. During COVID, there’s been a hell of a lot of money spent on non-productive outcomes. As much as food and rent can be considered non-productive, they’re essential, but they’re non-productive, the outcome of long-term borrowing for short-term gain is inflation. Is spending on productive capacity: roads, railways, bridges, dams and irrigation in this recovery phase, likely to produce a lower inflation outcome across forward estimates than continuing to spend on what can only be described as economic sherbet?
I don’t know, I mean, that’s an an interesting question, Senator. I mean, I’m not sure I would draw that distinction, I think food I would regard as a pretty productive and essential service, an essential thing for people to consume, so, I mean, we build roads for a purpose, not just because, which is to satisfy people wanting to use them, and the same with food and same with shelter, so not quite sure how we can draw such a clean line between what’s productive and unproductive.
Well, perhaps, well food is essential, as I said, perhaps spending on non-productive assets: entertainment, instead of travelling overseas, people are buying new cars, that kind of thing. What I’m talking about is spending on such items that may be essential, but not producing increased wealth, could lead to inflation. That’s the risk. On the other hand, spending on something that increases productive capacity, like a dam with irrigation systems to supply increased food productivity and lower the cost of food, leaves people better off and wealthier overall. That’s what I was getting at: a productive capacity, rather than just consumption.
There is a reasonable amount of dollars investment in infrastructure at the moment, that’s increased quite a bit, both from the Commonwealth and the State Governments, so that sort of spending is absolutely happening. Again, I’m still not quite sure I would draw such a clean distinction. In the end, people consume what they want to consume and I’m not sure it’s up to us too much to tell them what’s good and bad about that, within reason.
Well, that’s a wonderful statement to hear coming into my ears now. I love that, but yeah, sorry?
I said, “I thought you’d like that.”
So what we’ve got, though, is an acknowledgement that there is money being spent on infrastructure. You’ve answered my question. I just personally believe, Chair, that we need to spend more on improving our productive capacity. Thank you very much. Again, Chair, I’d like to put on record that the Reserve Bank always answers quickly, succinctly and factually. So thank you. It’s really appreciated.
[Chair] Dr Debelle, you’ve got a fan there.
[Roberts] Yep. He has.
[Debelle] Thank you.
Great chat with Marcus Paul today. We discussed the Queensland and US elections and the proposed federal crimes commission.
Transcript
Marcus Paul
Yeah, it’s a good thing that Malcolm loves to talk, because I’m losing my voice. Good morning, mate, how are you?
Malcolm Roberts
I’m very well, thanks, Marcus, how are you?
Marcus Paul
Yeah, good. I spoke to Pauline earlier in the week, we were surprised to hear from her, because, you know, given what happened last week, but she was very clear that she believed the recent election in Queensland was an incumbent election. And that’s your first point you want to talk about this morning.
Malcolm Roberts
Well actually the first thing I’d like to talk about is the State of Origin. Do you know the score last night, mate?
Marcus Paul
Oh, was there a game of football on last night? I thought the footy season was over. There was a Grand Final a couple of weeks ago, yes, I know. 18-14, New South– to Queen, whoa, I nearly, a Freudian slip, I nearly said New South Wales, but no, well done.
Malcolm Roberts
Habits break. Yeah. Yes, the, it was a disappointment last Saturday at the Queensland election for us, but we did retain our seat of Mirani, Marcus, and with an increased majority. So where we had a candidate, and not just a candidate, a sitting MP, he’s actually done a fabulous job, Steve Andrew. But Pauline’s correct. It was an incumbent election. But I think more to the point, in times of fear, and that’s what the Queensland Labour machine did, they created a lot of fear about COVID. Especially amongst the elderly. And in times of fear and something major, people tend to go not only with the incumbent, but with the, with the larger parties, the parties they supposedly know. So, I think it was all about fear. So basically, my summary of the election is, fear won and Queensland lost, because there are a lot of things being neglected and, fear of COVID was no match for the long-term vision and sensible local policies we had going. So, that’s just a summary, but we’ve got to learn from that.
Marcus Paul
Well absolutely. I mean, at the end of the day, it was quite an amazing victory, to the incumbent, Annastacia Palaszczuk. I mean, Pauline was very adamant that, you know, again, as always, as she’s always done, she’ll get back up, dust herself off, and continue, you know, with her thoughts and policies on, you know, as to what is in the best interests, of voters not only in Queensland, but around the country.
Malcolm Roberts
Yeah exactly. And she and I are very similar in that. It doesn’t matter what happens. We always do what’s in the national interest, in Australia’s interest, and in Queensland’s interests. So, in Queensland, and New South Wales’s interest, Mark Latham’s doing a fabulous job, holding the government accountable in New South Wales. Same with WA. Our MPs over there in the upper house in WA have a very, very good record of holding the government accountable and stopping some major problems that should have, that would have otherwise gone through, Marcus. So we won’t stop, Pauline and I. We’ll be right onto it. We have got some things to learn, and some things for the future but, you know, as a prominent Brisbane radio announcer, and a former State MP said, never waste a crisis. That’s an established political maxim, and that’s what the Labour machine did. And he also said, fear wins over optimism. And when afraid, people run to the incumbent and to major parties. And that’s just the way it was.
Marcus Paul
All right now, just on this, I noticed that there was some comments made by James Ashby. And I noticed in the notes here, the demise of regional media does make it challenging to get other views out to voters, other than from the major parties. Now, there’ve been some suggestions, obviously it’s been a little difficult with a lack of media diversity in Queensland, in particular in the regions that that’s been a big part of the problem for One Nation, there was criticism of Pauline perhaps not being out and about enough, and I don’t know whether I buy into any of that. And of course, the other issue surrounding all of this is the fact that you just weren’t able to get your message to enough people, Malcolm.
Malcolm Roberts
That’s correct. The demise of media in Queensland is a big factor, because we are very well-known on the ground. Pauline, I want to make it very clear to everyone. News Corp misreported, misrepresented Pauline. She didn’t stop working. She is an amazing person, not just an amazing woman, an amazing person. And she was from, tip of Cape York, Thursday Island, all the way through to the Gold Coast, Coolangatta. Cape York to Coolangatta. She was all over the place, on the ground. And she did a phenomenal job. And everywhere she went, she raised interest. But no one reported it. And News Corp had the temerity to say that they, that she wasn’t around. That was a complete fabrication on News Corp’s part, and because of the local media, regional media being decimated, the messages just didn’t get out. So we’re going to have to think about that, Marcus, very, very seriously. It’s a great point you raised.
Marcus Paul
All right. The other issue of course, in relation to what you’ve just mentioned, and something that I brought up on the programme this morning in relation to the former prime minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd. His petition calling for a federal, well, some sort of inquiry, whether it’s a royal commission or otherwise, into News Corp. And obviously the ownership of so much media in places like Queensland, he got more than a half a million signatories, signatures, before it closed at midnight last night. I see the Greens were tweeting up a storm, saying that they will table it in Parliament if they get the support of Labour. So it’s over to Anthony Albanese, who so far has baulked at the idea. What’s, what’s, I guess, the One Nation stance on this?
Malcolm Roberts
Well I think these days, Marcus, there is so much going on in the media space. The fact is that there’s so many options for people. We have got a huge option, choice of options coming on. We can go to the internet, we can listen to radio, we can watch the, we can take the local newspaper, even if it’s online. But you know what’s happening? In response to News Corp–
Marcus Paul
I can tell you what’s happening, you’re not answering my question, that’s what’s happening.
Malcolm Roberts
No no, I am, your question is what’s happening. I won’t be supporting the News Corp, petition against News Corp, because there’s so much happening on the ground. There are local newspapers popping up in Queensland, in Queensland and giving us the news. There are local community radio stations. There’s your radio station network, which is, which will grow, Marcus, because people know that just like in America, they can’t trust the mainstream media. They can’t trust the ABC here. And they’re losing trust in News Corp. So they will go either into the community channels, the radios, the TVs. And that’s the real issue where we’ve got, we’ve got a fabulous opportunity there.
Marcus Paul
All right, okay. All right. I’ll delve into that a little bit more, but I suppose it’s more a question for Anthony Albanese and hopefully we’ll get him on to nut out the ideas there. Now, the US election. Boy, oh boy. Donald Trump. You say he’s doing amazingly. I say he’s off the bloody, he’s off the, I dunno.
Malcolm Roberts
No, he’s–
Marcus Paul
What’s going on with him, hey?
Malcolm Roberts
He’s done a remarkable job. You look at, look at Michigan. Michigan is a rust belt state, it was full of manufacturing. Manufacturing was sold out by Obama, by Clinton. And by George Bush junior. And, and Trump came along and said, Ford Motor Company, if you keep making cars in Mexico, then you’ll pay a tariff. And Ford Motor Company then reopened the factory in Michigan. The people in Michigan love him, the people in Pennsylvania love him. And that is a testament to this man. He said some things before the previous election. Then he damn well did it. He put, he followed up on his promises. The man is on track, I believe, to win again. The only thing that’s going to stop him from winning, I think, is corruption in the voting system. Which is what he’s been saying–
Marcus Paul
Hang on, all right–
Malcolm Roberts
Trump’s done an enormous job.
Marcus Paul
All right, well, have a listen to this. And I wanna get your thoughts on it. Here we go.
Malcolm Roberts
This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country. We were getting ready to win this election. Frankly, we did win this election.
Marcus Paul
Ah, come on. Surely he went a bit early there.
Malcolm Roberts
No, he actually was slower than Biden, Marcus, because I listened to Biden’s comments, and Biden’s comments were similar. And he was claiming victory for the Democrats, far, far too early.
Marcus Paul
Righto.
Malcolm Roberts
Trump had to come out, and what they’re doing is they’re both posturing to get their lawyers a good position. That’s the way I see it anyway, but I’m no expert. But there are serious questions being asked about the numbers, in some of the states, the crucial battleground states.
Marcus Paul
All right, the RBA this week cut the interest rate down to you know, virtually nothing. 0.1% interest rates. I mean, it’ll help people buy or stay in their homes, but there is a cost of course, self-funded retirees, as we’ve talked about on the programme, who rely on investment income, and seeing their returns fall to basically nothing.
Malcolm Roberts
That’s right. And then so, these people providing for their so-called own retirement is just hot air because, the legs have been cut out from under them now. We’re now at the point where retirees are having to spend their capital, because the return on their nest egg is almost non-existent and heading negative. And what’s disturbing is that, you know, this is going to create a lot of pressure for people at a time when people don’t need it. And by printing another a hundred billion, and giving it to the banks, they’re going to prop up the banks to do more mortgage lending. This government, the state and federal are completely ignoring the need to invest in productive capacity. We need to invest in power stations, dams, roads, ports, bridges. The Iron Boomerang Scheme, the Bradfield Scheme. These and many other prime investments, opportunities in our country are being neglected. And we need to get into building the productive capacity of our country.
Marcus Paul
I spoke to Andrew Leigh from labour, earlier in the week, on this Commonwealth Integrity Commission Bill. He basically says, it’s not a, it’s an anti, well, it’s basically a toothless tiger. That’s the best way that I can describe it. His description of it. Retired Victorian Supreme Court judge, Stephen Charles, said this is not a corruption commission, it’s designed to protect parliamentarians and senior public servants from investigation. After two years of waiting, this is a tremendous disappointment. An annual budget of $42 million when fully operational. And of course it, it will fail. In its current form of how it’s, you know, being sold. It will fail to hold people to account. It won’t be anything like a New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption.
Malcolm Roberts
Yeah. I always make comment after doing my work on this, and I haven’t done my work on this, but some of my staff have, Marcus, and the early indications from what we can see is there will be no public hearings for public sector and members of parliament corruption. None.
Marcus Paul
Well, that’s right. And we won’t have–
Malcolm Roberts
And that’s the, that’s the place where you need it. That’s gotta be out in front and transparent. The prime minister, the attorney general, have dragged their feet on this, for a couple of years now. And they now produce something that falls short of the mark. And, you know, so how can, how can we do public hearings for law enforcement and police, but not for members of parliament? And for public sector employees.
Marcus Paul
Well that’s right.
Malcolm Roberts
This is wrong.
Marcus Paul
Yeah.
Malcolm Roberts
And then we’ve got to have the names out in the open. People are entitled to make sure that the government that they elect are working for the people. And that’s what we need to get, we need to make sure that there is pressure on politicians to be clean at all times.
Marcus Paul
Absolutely. And, you know, under its current proposed format, you won’t see people like, you know. I mean, look what’s happened in New South Wales, in the last couple of months. We’ve had a Premier dragged before the Independent Commission Against Corruption, and grilled to within an inch of her personal life. That won’t happen under this proposed Federal CIC, and that’s an issue for me.
Malcolm Roberts
Yes, and the attorney general has the power to limit information that can be considered by the Commonwealth Integrity Commission. There are also, the bars for referral are way too high. Someone approaches the institution with reasonable suspicions of corruption breaches, but no actual evidence. It can be ignored. And then with, there’s no retrospectivity, which means the sport rorts, the sports rorts and the Murray-Darling basin water buybacks, they won’t be investigated, because they were in the past. This is just way, way too short of where we need to be.
Marcus Paul
All right Malcolm, great to have you on, we’ll chat soon, mate. Thank you again, as always.
Malcolm Roberts
Thanks Marcus.
Malcolm’s Fight
Casual Coal Wage TheftFebruary 21, 2024 - 2:09 pmOver $30,000 a year being stolen, and it’s been signed off by the union and the government. Find out about the largest wage theft from casuals in Australia.
My Other IssuesFebruary 16, 2021 - 12:08 pm
Murray Darling BasinMarch 23, 2020 - 3:05 am
Foreign OwnershipOctober 16, 2019 - 4:58 am
Property rightsOctober 16, 2019 - 4:39 am
United Nations #AUSEXITOctober 16, 2019 - 2:31 am