German
Bundestag, September 18, 2020, Plenarprotokoll 19/177, pp. 22262-22263.
Right
honorable Herr President. Right honorable ladies and gentlemen.
So
as to anticipate: It is not for me to question the independence of the ECB. It
however, first, may not interfere in the rights of others and, second, must
guarantee the proportionality of its means of action and thus keep an eye on
the extensive effects of its doings.
In
regards interference in the rights of others. In that the German Bundesbank, charged
by the ECB, collects negative interest and ultimately pays over the earnings to
the state, that practically works as a tax. For that reason, Professor Elicker,
in his brief of February 2020, spoke in this relation of a “mechanism which in
its effects is equivalent to a special tax”. That is the mechanism which is
here being implemented. To parliament alone, however, is given the taxation
authority. We ought not to hand over this right.
In regards proportionality. Professor Knops in his opinion of October 2019 wrote of the efficacy of negative interest - I cite: The ECB's measures violate the subsidiarity principle (Art. 5, para. 5, EU Treaty) and the fundamental of proportionality (Art. 5, para. 4, EU Treaty).
In
evaluating the proportionality of the ECB’s measures, the following points are
especially to be considered:
Zero
and negative interest, regarded in economic terms, is absolutely absurd. No one
with a healthy common sense would give money to anyone knowing that he is
guaranteed to get back less.
It
would be more sensible to keep the money under the pillow.
Negative
interest has two effects on banks: First, it depresses the overall interest
level. The danger thereby increases that the interest received by the banks no
longer covers the risks. Second, negative interest robs banks of capital so
that they are less in a position to take on risk.
That
altogether endangers the financial stability of Germany. Ostensible solutions
like associations of liability and synthetic bonds only disguise the situation,
yet do not solve the problem.
Lisa Paus (Greens): Complete
rubbish! You should read Frau Schnabel for once!
We
all know: Low interest leads to mis-allocations of capital [Kapitalfehllenkungen]. It produces
bubbles which later burst and produce great economic damage – for example:
Spain.
Too
low interest misleads to the taking up of more credit than is healthy. In Germany
at the end of 2019, there were on hand 330,000 so-called zombie firms; the
Creditreform [debt collection agency] presently speaks of 550,000 zombie firms.
That is a firm which, without new credit, is no longer in a position to
survive. According to the Creditreform, their number, as a consequence of the
lockdown effects, can still climb to 700,000 to 800,000. The sword of Damocles
is poised over Germany’s financial sector.
Not
only are savers negatively affected by low interest but naturally also
insurance companies and pension funds and thus practically all citizens. Too
low interest removes the interest rate pressure from the market with the result
that, first, economic efficiency declines and, second, the purchase of firms is
facilitated; that means: Business concentration.
Overall,
it is established that negative interest by means of uneconomic resource
allocation produces economic weakness.
Ladies
and gentlemen, I am of the opinion: The ECB policy interferes immoderately in
the rights of the parliament and that its policy is disproportionate. We must
do something to oppose that; for example, in which we in common consider whether
we do not reimburse the negative interest.
Thank
you.
[trans: tem]
