The finance minister claims that the rupee-parity issue was never discussed with the IMF. It is common knowledge that Pakistan went to the IMF because it was unable to finance a deficit of as low as one per cent on its external account. Payments had to be made out of the fast depleting reserves. This put pressure on the rupee and attempts by the State Bank to defend the rupee led to further depletion of foreign exchange reserves. There is no earthly reason to believe that discussions at the staff and board level kept mum on the issue. As a matter of fact, the access to the Extended Fund Facility is precisely because of what the IMF describes as “an inherently weak balance of payments position and chronic structural impediments”. Again, the IMF press release of September 4, 2013 emphasises that “Monetary and exchange rate policies should be geared to rebuilding external buffers”. What these buffers are and the mechanism to rebuild them becomes quite clear when we look at the prior actions, given out again by the IMF in a press briefing in Washington, DC by Gerry Rice, the IMF director of communications, on July 11, 2013. Among other things, the prior actions included “certain central bank actions”. One action, not hard to deduce from the exchange rate movement since the staff level agreement in July, was the end of the State Bank intervention in the market to support the rupee. The second would be confirmed on September 13 when the governor announces a tightening of the monetary policy.
In the IMF’s estimation, the real effective exchange rate should decline by 7.7 per cent during the programme period. This is only an indicator, not an agreed target, as the finance minister contends. But it does show the direction of change that the policy conditionality is likely to ensure. Does the finance minister dispute this direction of change? His view, that the speculators are the villain in the piece, is as bizarre as the view that the speculators did not manipulate the stock market to welcome the PML-N victory.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 13th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (8)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Got it right PT. The SBP has increased by 50 points the base rate. Now that private investment has been probably strangled to a negative position - minus RF for the biggies - one should see the two main human factor indices (jobs and inflation) deteriorate.
The SBP big chief came up with a pathetic set of reasons, almost like an accountant, certainly NOT like an economist. All the market pundits were proven wrong. What does this mean? Just one thing. Bad days lie ahead for the poor of this land we love. In sociological terms massive social tension, unrest and increasing crime.
@Khan:
The MEFP and the TMU are not intended for bed-time reading. They ARE technical documents and not easy reading.
You should read the staff report requesting the arrangement and in particular the staff appraisal at the end. But unless you are an economist it will still be heavy-going.
Yes, the IMF asked that the State Bank stop using it's reserves to prop up the rupee and asked us to buy foreign exchange instead. Not much, mind you, compared to what we were spending in a vain attempt to prevent depreciation.
When the economy is sinking, and sinking fast, and your "friends" around the world have deserted you (just like in 2008), you have to use drastic measures.
It is very easy for IMF to put condition without logical reason because they have no responsibility for outcomes in political terms. IMF represents the interest of developed countries and thus promotes their trade and investment. The economic theory is well understood among economist but most of the data for country like Pakistan is flawed for simple reason that 70 percent of economy is undocumented. So all economic numbers are just estimates.
Most of the problems are in supply of inputs to industry and agriculture. GOP should focus on those issues.
I would appreciate if one could look at the Memorandum of Economic and Financial Polices (MEFP) for 2013/14-2015/16, and Technical Memorandum of Understanding (TMU), available on MOF website. The very first prior action mentioned on page 17 of MEFP will help in understanding exchange rate movement. Specifically, the SBP was required to purchase US$ 125 million in net terms from 1st July to 15th August 2013. This restriction is bound to create excess demand for hot currency in the foreign exchange market. So the depreciation of the Rupee is not surprising. Another point to note is the highly technical nature of IMF documents. This seems a deliberate act of hiding information. For example, how may can understand the performance criteria, especially floor on net international reserves of the SBP.
Good economics is always good politics.
A good writer would first explain why IMF would like like to impose exchange rate restrictions.The only reason I can think of is to keep the domestic interest rates high and thus limit investment growth. It should not concern IMF because their loans are in dollar denominated and the interest they charge are predetermined. As far as rupee value it depends on oil prices and other international market prices that hardly anybody can predict. GOP would like to lower interest rates as soon as inflation comes down to spur growth. Would you care to explain?
Actually, Politicians are playing Economy with their politics...