Evidence of meeting #14 for Finance in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was bank.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Elizabeth Kingston
Mark Carney  Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I call the meeting to order.

We want to thank the committee for being here. We have a special guest with us this afternoon: Mr. Mark Carney. Thank you for being here.

We want to make note that cameras will have to leave the room. The meeting is televised, so they'll be able to catch their pictures there. Would the cameras leave the room, please?

Okay, that's half of the room.

We want to welcome you sincerely to our committee. We hope this is the beginning of a long-lasting relationship with the committee and with your future job with the Bank of Canada. We look forward to the time we have here today and to being able to discuss some of what you have in mind for us.

We'll go right to that and ask you to start with your presentation.

Before we do that, we have a question from Mr. Dykstra.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Rick Dykstra Conservative St. Catharines, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Carney is here, and I know he's looking forward to his presentation. Certainly I welcome having him here, but this is a review, and as per any OIC appointment that's made, the committee has the right and privilege to call forward the person receiving the appointment.

I thought it might be a little bit helpful if perhaps you or the clerk could clarify the rules of engagement in terms of the bylaw, so to speak, or the parameters for the presentation, and also for the questions that will follow.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

We'll do that very quickly. I'm not going to go into it in any great depth. The principle is the same as an interview of any individual you would be interviewing for a job appointment. That is the principle I'll be applying to this committee, so the same kind of respect and rules will be applied here.

I'll limit the questioning to those considerations, unless the clerk has anything further than that. Those are the instructions I have, and they're in Standing Order 110(1).

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Garth Turner Liberal Halton, ON

Could we have some clarification on that, please? What does that mean? Which questions will you not allow?

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

I'll ask the clerk to just read the standing order on it, and that will help clarify everything here--very quickly, though, because we're wasting time.

3:35 p.m.

The Clerk of the Committee Ms. Elizabeth Kingston

Standing Order 110(1) states:

A Minister of the Crown shall lay upon the Table a certified copy of an Order in Council, stating that a certain individual has been appointed to a certain non-judicial post, not later than five sitting days after the Order in Council is published in the Canada Gazette. The same shall be deemed to have been referred to a standing committee specified at the time of tabling, pursuant to Standing Order 32(6), for its consideration during a period not exceeding 30 sitting days.

3:35 p.m.

Liberal

Garth Turner Liberal Halton, ON

Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I didn't hear any restrictions on the kinds of questions that can be asked under that standing order. Are you saying there are some?

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Just hang on a second. I'll consult.

The clerk has informed me, and I will concur with her, that as the chair I'll determine the latitude of the questioning, which is determined on the basis of whether it's appropriate for an interview for a position. That's the criterion I'm going to use.

We're going to continue. Unless this is a point of order, Mr. Crête, I'll continue on that basis.

Go ahead.

3:35 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Chairman, this is a non-issue. Reading Mr. Carney's presentation, it is clear that it deals with substantive issues. So, what we are talking about now is a non-issue. We have a brief that provides a great many details on important issues. As long as we ask Mr. Carney questions about what he discusses in his presentation, I don't think we will be out of line.

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Let's carry on.

Mr. Carney, the floor is yours. We look forward to your presentation.

3:35 p.m.

Mark Carney Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Thank you very much, Chair, and I do look forward to discussion of substantive issues.

I would like to begin by saying how pleased I am to be before this committee today to discuss my perspectives on the medium-term policy challenges facing the Bank of Canada. I am looking forward to many future appearances before this committee and its counterpart in the Senate, since a critical component of the bank's accountability to Canadians is having the governor appear periodically before parliamentarians to explain the bank's views on the economy, monetary policy, and the financial system.

I would like, however, to emphasize at the outset that I am not yet the governor of the Bank of Canada. Under the Bank of Canada Act, the current governor, David Dodge, remains very much responsible for Canada's monetary policy until the end of January. In recent years, the bank has operated under a convention whereby monetary policy decisions are taken on a consensus basis by the bank's governing council. I am also not yet a member of the governing council. In answering your questions today, I shall endeavour to comment neither on the current stance of monetary policy nor on the current economic outlook, so as to avoid prejudicing upcoming decisions of the governing council. I trust that all those listening will recognize those important caveats.

Reflecting my current position, I would like to focus on the principal medium-term policy challenges facing the bank. As set out in the preamble to the Bank of Canada Act, the bank's objective is “generally to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada”. The bank achieves this objective by, first, conducting monetary policy to maintain a rate of inflation that is low, stable, and predictable; second, promoting the safety and soundness of Canada's financial system; third, acting as the Government of Canada's fiscal agent to provide efficient and effective funds management; and, fourth, supplying quality bank notes that are readily accepted and secure against counterfeiting. This last point, if I may, is very important to the bank, and we have worked closely with our partners in law enforcement, particularly the RCMP, and the retail sector to deter counterfeiting through bank-note-related education, communication, and compliance. These efforts have yielded important results, and they will continue.

With that introduction, I will concentrate the balance of my remarks on the bank's work in monetary policy and the financial system.

With respect to monetary policy, I am in the fortunate position of inheriting an exceptionally sound and robust policy framework. Over time, it has become clear that the best contribution monetary policy can make to the promotion of the economic and financial welfare of Canada is to keep inflation low, stable and predictable. Put another way, inflation control is not an end in itself; rather, it is the means whereby monetary policy can best contribute to solid economic performance. Specifically, the Bank aims to keep the annual rate of consumer price inflation at the 2 per cent midpoint of a 1 to 3 per cent control range. By doing so, monetary policy helps to keep the economy as a whole operating at full capacity and promotes sustainable economic growth.

Canada has been served extremely well by its inflation-targeting policy framework, which has been widely emulated. The Bank's exemplary record of inflation control has meant that we have avoided the destructive effects of high inflation prevalent in earlier decades—effects that were disproportionately felt by poor Canadians, and which reduced our output and increased our unemployment. Despite all the shocks that Canada has faced since inflation targets were introduced, Canada's real output since that time has expanded at an average rate of 3 per cent per year and the unemployment rate has fallen to levels not seen in more than three decades. As in countries where inflation targeting has been adopted, inflation and interest rates have generally been lower and less volatile.

An explicit inflation target was first formalized in a joint agreement between the Bank and the Government of Canada in 1991. Given its initial success, this agreement has been extended four times with small modifications; most recently, until the end of 2011. This agreement sets out one clear objective—the inflation target—and creates a transparent accountability framework for the Bank of Canada. The Bank supports that framework through frequent and open communication with Canadians. If inflation deviates from its target, the Bank will explain the reasons why, what it will do to return it to target, and how long the process is expected to take. It is important to underline that the Bank approaches inflation control in a symmetric way.

A floating exchange rate is a key element of our monetary policy framework. It allows Canada to pursue an independent monetary policy appropriate to our own economic circumstances. Although there is no target exchange rate for the Canadian dollar, the bank does care why the exchange rate is moving and what the potential impact will be on output and inflation.

The exchange rate is an important relative price in our economy. Movements in the exchange rate influence the levels of imports and exports, which can help keep total demand and supply in balance. Further, exchange rate movements act as a signal to shift resources into sectors where demand is strongest. A floating exchange rate helps to smooth that process and to minimize the adjustments in other areas of the economy.

The challenge for the bank is to understand the reasons behind currency movements, to incorporate those with our assessments of other data, and to set a course for monetary policy that works to keep total demand and supply in balance and inflation on target. This means that the bank has to make judgments about the causes and likely persistence of exchange rate movements, the speed and degree at which exchange rate changes pass through to domestic prices, and the possible impact of exchange rate movements on confidence, and through confidence, on consumption and investment.

It is true that exchange rate movements can be, and have been recently, rather volatile. In these circumstances, it is not surprising that some have called for Canada to fix its currency to the U.S. dollar. In my opinion, it would be a mistake to do so. It would mean that, de facto, Canada would adopt U.S. monetary policy despite the reality that the structures of our economy are very different and, as a consequence, often require different types of adjustments in response to global developments.

We cannot avoid adjustment. The question is simply how we adjust to global economic forces. With a fixed exchange rate, the adjustments would have to come through movements in overall output and in all wages and prices. History has shown that these adjustments are more protracted and more difficult than exchange rate adjustments. Again, however, I stress that this position does not mean the bank is indifferent to movements in the exchange rate.

Another important aspect of our policy framework is the need to be forward looking given the lags between policy actions and their effect on the economy. Indeed, a forward-looking perspective is essential to the success of inflation targeting. The joint agreement between the Government of Canada and the Bank of Canada on the inflation target has helped concentrate inflation expectations at around 2%.

More fundamentally, the successful management of monetary policy by my predecessors has created a self-reinforcing process whereby increased policy credibility further anchors inflation expectations, which then contributes to a more stable macroeconomic environment, which in turn enhances policy credibility. We should not underestimate the value of these hard-won gains, and I have no intention of forfeiting them.

Well-anchored inflation expectations help reduce swings in interest rates, lower the cost of borrowing to Canadians, contribute to a more stable, competitive cost of capital for our firms, and ultimately support more sustainable growth in output and employment.

Now, despite our successes, the bank has an obligation to Canadians to continually evaluate possible improvements to its policy framework. As a result, the bank has launched a concerted research program to examine whether and how the monetary policy framework in Canada might be improved. This program is focusing on the potential costs and benefits of targeting a lower rate of inflation and of pursuing a price-level target instead of an inflation target. And it is focusing on the challenges of communicating these potential changes to Canadians.

The bank will conduct this research and publish its findings in an open manner in order to encourage debate and suggestions. I will say that the research would need to uncover compelling evidence in favour of a change before we would want to alter a system that has proven so successful over the past 15 years.

The conduct of monetary policy over the coming years will be challenged by four underlying trends. Their precise speed is difficult to predict, but their influence will be impossible to ignore. These trends are as follows:

First is the globalization of product capital and, increasingly, given outsourcing and technology, labour markets.

Second is the resolution of global imbalances. This requires both stronger domestic demand in countries with large current account surpluses and the move to flexible exchange rate regimes in those systemically important countries that currently actively manage their exchange rates. As the bank has consistently noted, this process may proceed in an uneven manner.

Third is the pace and direction of financial innovation and integration. This has important implications for the degree of financial intermediation, the levels of nominal and real interest rates, and the monetary policy transmission mechanism.

Fourth is the evolution of potential growth in Canada reflecting the balance of profound demographic changes in developments in Canadian productivity.

These underlined economic and financial trends complicate the pursuit of our inflation target, not only because none is likely to proceed at a steady, predictable pace, but also because they are all interrelated. For example, global imbalances, financial integration, and historically low nominal interest rates can all be partially explained by the familiar process of global integration that is currently taking place on an unprecedented scale.

The bank must better understand these forces to effectively meet its responsibilities. It should also continue to share its perspectives on these broader trends so that individual Canadians, companies, and governments have the necessary context when making their savings and investment decisions.

The strength of our financial system will help determine the ultimate impact of these trends, since each has the potential to affect asset-price volatility and the stability of growth and employment. Where financial systems are strong and resilient, they cushion shocks, efficiently allocate resources, and help improve the effectiveness of monetary policy. Where they are weak, however, they can amplify the impact of shocks on macroeconomic activity and reduce the effectiveness of monetary policy. As a consequence, the Bank has a fundamental role to play in promoting the safety and stability of Canada's financial system.

The Bank's role in financial stability is at the heart of our legislated mandate to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada. Before concluding, I would like to make five brief comments in that regard.

First, as Canada's central bank, we have legislative oversight responsibility for the safety and soundness of systemically important clearing and settlement systems.

Second, we play a central role in providing liquidity to facilitate the settlement of financial transactions. The Bank has traditionally undertaken open-market by-back operations only in Government of Canada debt, and offered standing liquidity facilities against high-quality collateral, in order to keep the overnight rate close to the target policy rate. However, recent events have raised questions over the appropriate role for central banks in the provision of liquidity in money markets. As my colleague, Pierre Duguay, noted last month, the Bank is currently examining whether some market failures might be addressed if the central bank had a facility that would provide liquidity at terms longer than overnight, possibly secured with a wider range of securities.

Third, the response to the recent turbulence in financial markets should reaffirm that market participants are fundamentally responsible for their actions. For example, investors must understand the price dynamics and liquidity risks of the products they buy, rather than relying solely on credit-rating agencies. The market is beginning to lead many of the necessary changes, as institutions are improving their liquidity management and credit discipline and as originators and distributors of new loans are beginning to adjust their products to standardize terms and, importantly, align incentives. At the same time, accurate and timely information about underlying risks is essential for the market to differentiate and properly price risk. Thus, as Governor Dodge highlighted in September, enhanced disclosure and transparency remain crucial.

Fourth, recent global events have underscored the importance of continued close cooperation among authorities in Canada. The bank will continue to work collaboratively with its partners, including the Department of Finance, OSFI, the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, and provincial securities commissions, to promote the safe and efficient operation of the key elements of our financial system.

Finally, the bank will continue to use its membership in international bodies and its extensive research capabilities to foster the safety, soundness, and efficiency of the international financial system. For example, the bank and the Government of Canada have actively promoted reform of the International Monetary Fund through a strengthened surveillance function. Strengthened surveillance can play an important role in the resolution of global imbalances and the development of a more robust international financial system. As part of the international response to recent market turbulence, the bank is also working through the Financial Stability Forum as that body considers possible changes to accounting and regulatory standards and the extent to which enhanced oversight can improve the management of credit and liquidity risk in global financial institutions.

In conclusion, let me say that it is an honour and a privilege to have been chosen to serve Canadians as the eighth Governor of the Bank of Canada. I am particularly looking forward to leading the bank's talented and dedicated staff as we face the challenges of the years ahead. I will do my best to live up to the very high standards of those who came before me and am confident that my experience in both the public and private sectors will help me contribute to the bank's important work on behalf of all Canadians.

Thank you very much for your time, and I look forward to your questions.

3:55 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much for being here. It's an honour and a privilege to have you here.

We'll now start our questioning with Mr. McCallum. You have seven minutes.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you.

Mr. Carney, welcome and congratulations.

My Liberal colleagues will ask some questions about the subprime mortgage crisis, the Montreal accord and income trusts, and I would like to focus on monetary policy, beginning with exchange rates, both the level and the volatility.

As you know, for many companies in manufacturing, the very high exchange rate is something of a killer, but I'd like to focus as much on volatility, because I think when you have the dollar going up by 10% and down by 10% in a matter of two or three months, that's pretty extreme volatility, if not unprecedented. I know from speaking to companies that volatility makes it extremely difficult to plan, and it also increases the number of those calling for some kind of fixed exchange rate system.

Given your fundamental commitment to inflation targeting--which I agree with--are you concerned about volatility? More to the point, is there anything the bank could or should or would do to limit or reduce that volatility compared with what we've seen in recent months?

3:55 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

Thank you very much for the question. It's extremely important, and obviously extremely timely.

Certainly, we have seen substantial volatility in exchange rate markets recently, including that for the Canadian dollar. It's important to remember, as you know, that exchange rate markets, like all asset markets, can be volatile and can overshoot, and certainly the volatility we have seen in the Canadian dollar cannot be accounted for purely by changes in fundamentals.

We can discuss, if you wish--although you may not want to use the time--potential reasons behind that volatility, but I'll leave that to the side and go more to the substance of the question, which is what the bank can do.

I'll say, first and foremost, because it bears repeating, that the experience of the bank, the experience of Canadian monetary history, is that the best contribution the bank can make to the economic and financial welfare of the country is to focus on its principal and sole objective, which is to achieve an inflation rate that's slow, stable, and predictable.

In the context of doing that, as I mentioned in my remarks, the exchange rate does play an important role, and certainly exchange rate movements that are detached or somewhat differentiated from fundamental movements need to be considered in the conduct of monetary policy.

How do we consider them? We need to look at the reasons the exchange rate may have moved; we need to think through the persistence of those exchange rate changes. We've obviously seen a very sharp spike up and rapid return. Then we need to think about the consequences of this for the economy, all in the context of achieving the exchange rate target.

What specifically can the bank do? I do not favour a pegged exchange rate. I do not favour a monetary union. We can go into more detail on why, if people wish to later. But I think there is a premium on the bank communicating openly with Canadians, being open with the market about the potential impact of these changes on output and, ultimately on inflation, and providing a sense of stability as its objective function.

The way to inject more volatility into asset markets, whether they're interest rates, exchange rates, or equities, is to be perceived to change between targets. I would submit that at the bank we need to retain focus on the inflation target, explain what we're doing, explain what the potential consequences are of exchange rate movement, differentiate between the potential reasons behind that, and the market will adjust accordingly.

3:55 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

I totally agree with you on the inflation targets. Given those targets, I think that excessive volatility can be a negative, in terms of business planning and so on. So would you see the use of instruments like intervention or talking the currency up or down, or other things that you can do to enhance currency stability, without sacrificing your basic philosophy of inflation targeting?

4 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

Terms such as “talking the currency up and down” or “verbal intervention” are not terms we use at the Bank of Canada—I'll make that clear—again keeping to the framework.

You asked about intervention. As you know, and other members would be aware, the bank has not intervened in the exchange rate market—in the exchange rate market for the Canada dollar, to be more precise—since 1998, since the Asian crisis. That does not mean the bank will never intervene in exchange rate markets.

We have a clear policy, which is on our website, that specifies the occasions when the government—the bank, as agent on behalf of the government—might intervene in exchange rate markets. They're twofold: one is a breakdown in the actual market—gapping, lack of liquidity in the exchange rate market.... Interestingly, we saw an example of that in the Australian dollar during the summer. We haven't seen it in the Canadian dollar. The other is if, in the judgment of the governor—in the judgment of the bank—an excessive move has the potential to seriously undermine the economic prospects for the country.

I'll make one other point. Intervention is a joint decision. Intervention implicates the exchange fund account of the government, which is the property of the people of Canada, and so would be made jointly with the Minister of Finance.

4 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you.

I would say there's a cyclical element in Canada in calls for a monetary union or a fixed exchange rate or a North American common currency. They tend to become more intense when the dollar is extremely high or extremely low or extremely volatile.

I think it's fair to say that Quebec separatists always want a monetary union because it becomes easier to separate. But we have other respected people today calling for a monetary union.

My question for you, very quickly, is this. It seems to me that Europe is not North America and that the notion that we would have a North American common currency called an “amero” is totally out to lunch. I wonder whether you'd agree with that.

4 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

It's a big question, so I welcome it being asked again.

Very quickly, I agree with the point, and I would love to go through the reasons why I agree with the point, but in the interests of time, I'll pass to the chair.

4 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Rob Merrifield

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Monsieur Crête. You have seven minutes.

4 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Carney.

I want to thank you for that substantial presentation. I believe some ministers would do well to follow your lead in terms of the presentation you made. However, that does not mean that we agree with everything you said.

In your presentation, for example, you said:

The Bank's role in financial stability is at the heart of our legislative mandate to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada.

Given the current reality in Canada, with the surge in energy prices, there are, in a way—although you probably would not put it this way—two economies in Canada: the western economy, where there is a significant inflationary trend, and the central economy, in Québec and Ontario, whose situation is completely different.

Do other mechanisms need to be developed for there to be appropriate consideration given to these two sides, which may seem contradictory?

4 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

Thank you for that question.

If I understood you correctly, you are talking, in a way, about a two-tiered economy—a manufacturing economy, on the one hand, and an energy economy, on the other. It is absolutely fundamental that the Bank of Canada manage monetary policy for the Canadian economy as a whole. In order to do that, it closely follows the different sectors of our economy. I am well acquainted with the problems in the manufacturing sector, and particularly the forest industry in Canada. I know CEOs and individuals who work for these companies. Indeed, I have just met with representatives of forestry workers.

We look at the details, but we manage the two economies together.

4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

I understand. I would like to come back to the question of volatility, because business is telling us it's very difficult to predict what the dollar's value will be when the time comes to sign contracts. I asked your predecessor, when the dollar was worth 85¢, at what point it becomes more costly to manage volatility, when you have an independent Canadian currency.

However, I would rather ask you to tell me what elements of volatility require special consideration to ensure there is no negative impact on the economy.

4:05 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

I would like to repeat one important point. The recent volatility of the Canadian dollar cannot only be explained by the fundamentals. That is very clear, as I stated in my answer to Mr. McCallum. The best thing the Bank of Canada can do is manage the inflation rate and try to ensure that it is low, stable and predictable. Trying to attain that goal is the most useful thing the Bank of Canada can do to reduce that volatility. As I said in my answer to the last question, it is important that the Bank of Canada continue to talk about and raise awareness of that particular point and its goal of stability.

4:05 p.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

That's fine, but how can that be achieved? If more Canadians understood all the fine points, we might indeed end up with better results and all the different factors would adjust in a more nuanced fashion. But how can we achieve that?

4:05 p.m.

Adviser to the Governor, Bank of Canada

Mark Carney

That's a very good question. First of all, we have to attend meetings such as this one, and discuss these points with Members of Parliament and Canadians. That is one of the responsibilities of the Governor of the Bank of Canada. His job, in a sense, is to explain to Canadians what our inflation control framework is all about. That is very important.

In my opinion, it is important to realize that it is difficult for people to understand a policy that is too complex. People may think about inflation one day, but not the next. They may think of it one year, but not the next. Our policy is simple: we are aiming for a low, stable and predictable rate of inflation of 2 per cent annually, year after year. I am talking about the overall consumer price index. It is important to have a simple, clear and effective policy. And, everything points to the fact that our policy has been meeting those objectives for the last 15 years.