CBWCENTRAL BANK WATCHEROFFICIAL COMMUNICATION MONITOR
← BACK TO LIVE WIRE
Reserve Bank of AustraliaSpeechEN

Interview with Bloomberg Australia

SPEAKERBloomberg Australia

PUBLISHED20/02/2025, 02:15:00
EVENT / LOCATIONNot stated

Speech

Interview with Bloomberg Australia

Andrew Hauser

[

*

]

Deputy Governor

Sydney

–

20 February 2025

Video

Questioner

Such a rare treat to speak to you or to speak to anyone from the RBA, so we appreciate your

time. I think what that introduction sort of left out is the fervour we have felt, this nationwide

applause, sigh of relief. Do you feel like a bit of a rockstar this week?

Andrew

In terms of what? I didn’t hear the introduction. Do you mean in terms of the labour

data?

Questioner

No, in terms of the first rate cut in four years.

Andrew

Oh I see. Look, I mean, central bankers are probably not the people you want to invite to

your rave or your dinner party, to be absolutely honest. We are paid to worry, and we are paid to be

serious about the economy. So I wouldn’t say there was celebration in the RBA about this. We did

what we always do – we look at the data and try to form a view about where monetary policy should go.

Questioner

Was there consternation though? I do wonder in that room how hard was it to get to

consensus given that there are still data points that would support a hold? Perhaps in a different

environment?

Andrew

Well look, it’s interesting, isn’t it? I am sure you are reporting this – the

markets had formed a view that it was more or less a slam dunk that this would be a rate cut. The

debate in the room, as the Governor Michele Bullock said earlier this week, was more balanced and that

there was, as there always is, an exchange of views about the case for a hold and the case for a cut.

And as you say, there were factors on both sides. We reached clear consensus on the decision in the

end. But I think it would reassure you, and I hope it reassures markets too, that we are not sort of

saying – oh well, the answer’s already there, so we follow the market and we just do what

people are expecting – we look at the economics, and we make a decision.

Questioner

There is nothing pre-determined about this particular trajectory of this easing cycle,

for any central bank at the moment. It is interesting – we heard from the Treasurer that

inflation is in the rearview mirror. With a lot of the risks – be they global tariffs and

counter tariffs or election-year spending – do you think that’s going too far?

Andrew

The Treasurer can speak for himself. There’s been a great deal of positive news

about inflation in Australia. Just to remind you – and I know you know this – we adopted

a somewhat different strategy to tackling the inflation spike in Australia to other countries. We

raised interest rates to a level we thought that were restrictive, but we didn’t raise them to

the sorts of levels that other central banks had done, precisely because we wanted to protect the

gains in the labour market. And I think as you’ve been talking about earlier – labour data

out today show that the labour market in Australia has been incredibly strong. But inflation has also

come down as well. What we said in December is that we would form a view about whether we’ve

become sufficiently confident that inflation would come sustainably back to target – to the

midpoint of the target two and a half – to begin easing. We did reach that position of

sufficient confidence, but this is not a done deal yet. The underlying rate of inflation is still

3.2 per cent, which is slightly above the band. The headline rate of inflation is in the

band. And so although we’ve removed some of the restrictiveness that we had in policy, there is

still restrictiveness in the system, and we still need to see a bit more good news on inflation

coming back to that midpoint.

Questioner

And the jobs data was quite nuanced, right? Because even though unemployment ticked up,

even though we saw more full-time jobs than expected being added, participation is still really high.

The wages data this week showed further slowing. And does that tell you that some of that robustness

might start to fade in the coming months?

Andrew

And which bit of it shows you that it might fade?

Questioner

That we’re starting to see the signs of perhaps a little bit more vulnerability in

the labour market. And of course, Australia’s not the only one that’s dealing with that

scenario.

Andrew

It’s quite hard to see bad news in the latest employment data. They remain very

strong. I think the debate about the labour market is a slightly different one, which is although we

know employment has been growing strongly, inflation has been coming down. And as you say, wage

inflation has been coming down too. So, there’s a very lively debate about whether that

employment growth leaves us with less capacity in the labour market or a bit more. If there is a bit

more, then inflation will come down more quickly than we’re predicting. And that’ll be good

news because it will mean that we can adjust policy more rapidly. But we need to see more information

on that, I think, before we before we can be sure.

Questioner

How does a change in immigration numbers potentially affect that, particularly with the

labour market, but broader growth in general? Because we are expecting that regardless of who wins

this year’s election.

Andrew

So I tread into issues of migration with some tentativeness as a central banker. Obviously,

Australia for long periods of time has had a model of substantial immigration as part of its growth

model and it’s done very well out of that. In terms of the inflationary implications of

immigration, broadly speaking, our view is that it’s a wash. So, every person that comes into

the economy, in general, they increase the labour supply, which pushes down on inflation. But they

also have to purchase things and they have to consume things and they have to spend money, and that

increases demand. And broadly speaking – you can debate the details – those two effects

probably factor out, leaving inflation roughly where it would be otherwise.

Questioner

I do want to get your view on the property market. I know it’s not an RBA

topic, but it is a national obsession, of course.

Andrew

I’m a renter, I should say. That probably immediately puts me in the same category

– I’ve got nothing at stake here.

Questioner

But it is an ongoing problem, and it is something that feeds into the affordability and

the cost-of-living crisis. Is there a balance there? Is there a policy balance that you can see?

Andrew

Well, I think one of the quite encouraging bits of news in the latest decline in inflation is

that some of those metrics, whether it’s dwelling costs or rents, have started to come off

inflation in those two amounts. And that was one of the surprises in the undershoot of inflation that

we and the market both saw in those numbers. And so, there is some cooling there. I hesitate to say

that, you know, where this is going to leave us in two- or three-years’ time. And clearly there

are major structural challenges in the Australian housing market that I’m not going to wade

into. All we can do is, you know, take as an input our best read of what’s going on in the

housing market.

Questioner

Not two or three times, but two or three years in the future. But let’s look forward

to April. If I put it to you that the monthly CPI data that you get – maybe the two readings

beforehand – show that first quarter trimmed mean is going to come in under the forecasts from

this week, would that trigger a move?

Andrew

No single piece of data will ever trigger a cut or move. We get a lot of data in every month

from surveys, from hard data, from our liaison people that are out around the country talking to

businesses. And our job is to put all of that information into a hopper and form a view about the

outlook for inflation. Clearly, the inflation numbers are important. As you know, there are

challenges with using the monthly data in Australia because the monthly indicators are not even

called inflation numbers, they are partial reads on inflation. We only get a full,

100 per cent read on inflation once a quarter. That causes us to aim off a little bit from

the monthly numbers. But look, I mean if they come in weak, that will obviously be important for us.

And as I say, I won’t quite say what’s not to like here, but a world in which our forecasts

for inflation maybe being a little bit above on the basis of the market curve, if we get news on the

downside of that, that’s a cause for celebration.

Questioner

Do you envisage a challenge where rates stay the same – because there is, of

course, so much caution, uncertainty – inflation continues to come down and you get that de

facto financial tightening scenario? Is that a worry?

Andrew

Well, it’s interesting actually, because our forecast, which shows inflation stabilising

slightly above the midpoint, has got some interest. Point number one is that’s conditioned on

the market curve, which assumes that there will be three or four more cuts. But one of the pieces of

information that the Board reviewed before making its decision was an alternative version of that

forecast, which looked at what would happen if we held interest rates constant – which I think

is your question. And under that forecast – and we didn’t publish this, but I can tell you

this is what it looked like – under that forecast, inflation didn’t stop at 2.7, it

undershot the midpoint. Not by a lot, but by a little bit. And that factor alone was quite an

important input into the Board’s decision. So, holding interest rates constant would have led

inflation to undershoot, and that was an important part of our discussion.

Questioner

Where do you see the neutral rate at the moment? There’s a note out from CBA this

morning, modelling and coming out with it being around 2.9 per cent for the nominal

neutral.

Andrew

Well there’s a chart in the

Statement on Monetary Policy

that shows the

range of estimates of the neutral rate and it runs from something like 1 to 4. Now, three

percentage points of difference in such an important macroeconomic variable is pretty useless, to be

honest. It’s far, far too vague for us to put a great deal of weight on that. We show that

chart, I think to make two points. One is that it is very uncertain and if anyone ever tells you

– and I don’t think you’ll ever get a senior central banker to tell you I know what

neutral is going to be and it’s two point X or whatever – it shows how uncertain it is.

But what they all show as well is that we’re clearly restrictive. And there has been a debate

about that, too. You know, can you afford to cut interest rates if you don’t if you’re not

sure you’re clearly restrictive? We are sure we’re clearly restrictive, both before the

rate cut and now after it as well. But I would not want to put a number on it within that range.

Questioner

Do you feel that markets, investors are on the same page as what the RBA is putting out now?

Andrew

Well, no, but they never are. So let me let me clarify what I mean by that. I spent decades

of my life in financial markets and I very much value them – listening to them, talking to

them, being challenged by them – because markets, as you know, are not one view. There are many

views coming together to trade to get to a single outcome. And so we learn a great deal from speaking

with market participants and we learn a great deal from market prices. If you look at the interest

rate curve in Australia at the moment, you will see still priced several further cuts. And all we

were saying in our forecasts was that on our judgment, if you put that rate curve into our best guess

about the economy, inflation is probably going to be a little bit above target. And so we don’t

have the confidence that the market does that that number of cuts will bring inflation sustainably

down to target. But let me be clear, we could be wrong. And I know it’s sort of a crime for

central bankers to say we could be wrong, but I think we should be doing it more often. And in this

case, if we’re wrong and the labour market shows it has more capacity and inflation comes

through weaker, then policy will respond. So, I don’t think – I’m not abashed about

that point – clearly, the market currently thinks that there will be greater capacity in the

market. That’s not our central view, but it might be right. And if it is, we’ll learn from it.

Questioner

To that point, Governor Bullock says that she’s more of a glass half full person,

that you’re more of a glass half empty person.

Andrew

She said that?

Questioner

Yes, she did. She did quite recently. And I guess I put my question to you – as I

guess, you know, perhaps the resident pessimist, that’s how she’s characterising you

– what do you see as the biggest risks facing the economy?

Andrew

I’ll tell you why she said that, actually – because she was given the, you may

know this, by Phil Lowe when they handed over a cup that I think was his, which said glass half full.

And I thought it would be rather funny to get a cup that said glass half empty. She didn’t

actually think it was very funny. So I’m not quite sure about that. In terms of risk –

look, I mean, number one, I’m going to be boring, but I’m going to say it anyway. The focus

is still rigorously on inflation. There are risks in both directions to inflation; we’ve spent

most of the interview talking about that. We’re not going to somehow stop worrying about other

risks in preference to that. That’s our number one focus. We talked about the uncertainties

around the labour market and the possibility that there is greater capacity. That would be a good

risk to have, if it happens. We haven’t talked yet, I guess, about the global economy, and

perhaps that’s where you’re going. Obviously things are changing and I think in a number

– I’m sure you spend a lot of time talking about this on your show – anyone who

tells you they know how this is all going to shake down in the long run is wrong. We’re all

learning and things are moving very quickly. I think one of the important points I’d say is

actually that very uncertainty about trade policy and about outcomes in general globally, not

exclusively in Australia, may itself have an effect on activity in Australia. So, if you’re a

firm or if you’re a household planning to make an expenditure that in some way depends on a

certain outcome in the global economy and you know that – who knows what’s going to happen

in the next period – you might just wait. Now, waiting is very sensible for an individual, but

it could be really bad news for the economy. So, I think for me personally, one of the factors in the

decision this week was actually a sense that, look, maybe that pervasive uncertainty itself may have

some short-term depressing effect on activity. If you want to think about how the various initiatives

that are being mooted around tariffs and non-tariff trade policy are going to affect Australia,

there’s a huge range of outcomes – really huge. How big are the tariffs going to be? What

are they going to be faced on? Will there be retaliation? Will it be in the main economies that we

trade with, or will it not be? You plug those various uncertainties into a model and you can get

almost any outcome. It’s not good news for Australia if there’s a widespread depression in

global activity; that’s not what the financial markets currently expect to happen. But Australia

has thrived when the global economy has thrived and it’s struggled when it hasn’t. So, we

are very reliant on continued good global activity. The implications for inflation are less clear.

Normally, if you impair the supply side of the economy, you’d expect inflation to rise. However,

if it cuts demand, inflation may fall. So, although I think it’s pretty clear that tariffs

– if they push through and they have a material effect on global activity – it will

probably reduce activity in Australia, its impact on inflation is less clear. So, you know, everyone

is crunching through numbers. We have a section in our latest report that talks about various

scenarios. But the truth at the moment is you pay your money or you take your choice. We are waiting

to see how this evolves.

Questioner

Is it more of a broad global risk for you or is there still specific risk when it comes

to China? Because, you know, traditionally Australia’s growth has relied so much on the strength

of China. We know that they’re moving away from industrial production, from the property market.

That’s not going to improve meaningfully anytime soon. Does that have strong implications or are

we well diversified?

Andrew

It could do. I mean, I was talking about this with your colleague earlier. I think if you

look at Australia’s long history, Australia has actually been incredibly effective at responding

to the changing shape of demand in the global economy. You talk about traditionally our links with

China. Of course that’s true in recent years, but if you go back 20 years, 30 years,

50 years, 100 years, Australia’s actually specialised in a whole series of different

activities and done very well out of it, based on where the demand in the global economy is. If the

demand in the global economy moves on from steel being sold to China, then Australia will need to

think about adjusting in that respect. And as I said, I have some optimism actually – this is

not glass half empty – that Australia will respond to that in due course. But look, we are

keeping a very close eye on Chinese activity, as I know you are too. It’s been challenging in

China in recent years, with the demand growth and the adjustment in the property sector. One thing I

would say is I think that steel production and iron ore exports from Australia have held up

surprisingly well. Two or three years ago you could see all sorts of people drawing charts with big

lines going down – you know, peak steel is far behind us. Actually, demand for steel has held

up. And we have people in China, who are based in the Australian Embassy, that go around and talk to

a very wide range of Chinese businesses and thinkers and academics and policymakers. China’s

been quite clever about diversifying itself in its use of steel, away from the traditional uses and

towards, you know, in data centres, for example. I suppose we all go – AI means you’re

going to need a great deal more data centres that still need steel. So, the death of steel is

probably foretold a little bit too early sometimes. But look, if we have to adjust, we’ll have

to adjust.

Questioner

And before we go, given the confounding global circumstances and challenges, would you

rather be a central banker here in Australia or at the Bank of England?

Andrew

I’d rather be a central banker here, actually. It’s been a fantastic year so far.

And it was quite lively, back in the UK. I was at the centre of the LDI crisis a couple of years ago,

so a little bit of calm can be helpful. But this has been a huge privilege to come here. It’s

quite rare for non-nationals to be asked to be senior policymakers in the central bank, and I’ve

hugely enjoyed it. But it’s also a very important responsibility that we’ve all been given

to try and navigate Australia through this difficult set of circumstances. And the ability to live in

Australia, to live in Sydney and travel around this great country is brilliant, to be honest. And so

yes, I am glad – and hopefully Bloomberg doesn’t reach the UK, does it? Andrew Bailey

won’t be watching this, I’m sure. But if it does – sorry Andrew. But no, definitely

an upgrade trade.

VIEW ORIGINAL OFFICIAL SOURCE ↗