Skip to main content

Steadying hand: On RBI's monetary statement (.hindu )

By holding policy rates, the RBI shifts focus to the government to give a fillip to growth

The Reserve Bank of India’s Monetary Policy Committee has since inception retained its unwavering focus on its primary remit: the preservation of price stability. It follows then that the central bank’s rate-setting panel opted to leave benchmark interest rates unchanged and retain a neutral stance to achieve the medium-term target of keeping Consumer Price Index inflation close to 4% on a durable basis, while supporting growth. Spelling out the rationale for the decision, the MPC felt that with global crude oil prices having “firmed up further” amid a pick-up in demand and tighter supplies in the wake of OPEC’s production cuts, the threat of upward pressure on accelerating inflation has increased appreciably. Add to this the uncertainty posed by the prospects of weaker-than-anticipated kharif crop output and the impact this may have on food prices, and the concerns agitating policymakers will be evident. There are also the not-so-small matters of farm loan waivers by States that could roil the quality of public spending and exert price pressures — as well as the question of when States may decide to implement their own salary and allowance increases in the wake of the Centre’s Seventh Pay Commission implementation.

As the statement accompanying the rate decision points out, CPI inflation has risen by around two percentage points since the MPC’s last meeting in August: from 1.46% in June 2017, to a provisional 3.36% in August. The RBI’s September survey of household inflation expectations too has shown in qualitative responses a marked uptick in the proportion of respondents expecting the general price level to increase by more than the current rate. The welter of domestic pressure points on prices has also coincided with, in the MPC’s words, “an escalation of global geo-political uncertainty and heightened volatility in financial markets due to the U.S. Fed’s plans of balance sheet unwinding and the risk of normalisation by the European Central Bank.” In the face of such a “juxtaposition of risks” to the outlook for price stability, the overwhelming majority of the MPC’s six members saw little choice but to hold rates; there was a solitary dissent vote for a 25 basis points cut. The RBI’s policymakers simultaneously raised their inflation projection for the second half of the current fiscal to a 4.2-4.6% range and cut the estimate for real Gross Value Added growth this year to 6.7%, from the August forecast of 7.3%. Reiterating the urgent imperative to “reinvigorate investment activity” to spur growth, the MPC has laid the onus squarely on the government’s shoulders: from suggesting the recapitalisation of stressed state-owned lenders, to calling for further simplification of the GST regime and urging that stalled public sector investment projects be restarted. The baton has been passed and now it is for the Centre to do the running.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i