|
|
The debate about policy should take place within the ECB – not in public and not via the media. But this will also mean changing the philosophy of the one-voice principle. Not only is it important to have the plurality of views reflected in decision-making; it is equally important that all views can be heard in the argument.
Providing minutes, as the US Federal Open Market Committee does, would achieve this. The experience of the FOMC shows that it is indeed possible to have an expansive, contentious and multifaceted discussion in the process but then take a consensus decision.
Publishing the minutes has several advantages. First, it would give dissenting members a voice in the process, weakening the need for them to communicate individually on the outside. It would acknowledge the fact that governing council members feel accountable to their national constituencies.
Second, it might make ECB decisions more effective as financial markets would better understand the views of the policy makers. Setting out the variety of views is a very powerful tool for central banks because it allows markets to gauge their reactions better. This is particularly important in periods of high uncertainty and crisis.
Third, such an approach would show that the ECB and Bundesbank are not so far apart. The Bundesbank tends to take a long-term view while the ECB focuses on fighting the current crisis. Much of the friction between the two stems from this difference. Minutes could help make that difference explicit and thus help build bridges.
The crisis is changing Europe and the euro. The ECB is playing a key role in this transformation. Having a variety of views can be a strength; embracing and giving a voice to this variety will make the ECB stronger and improve its credibility. And it will be important for resolving the ongoing conflict between the ECB and the Bundesbank. It is time to defuse this conflict, for the sake of both institutions and for Europe.