Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: Right now, let's sit down to Bloomberg's Washington, DC Bureau.
Speaker 2: European Center Bank President Christine Leguard speaks exclusively with Bloomberg
Speaker 2: TV's Francine LACOI.
Speaker 1: Let's listen in.
Speaker 2: So your focus is on inflation, on data, is on Europe.
Speaker 2: Is there anything to be alarmed about what's happening in
Speaker 2: Europe economically?
Speaker 3: Well, first of all, very nice to be here with you, Fasin,
Speaker 3: and with all of you here. So what in my
Speaker 3: position as head of the European Central Bank, what I
Speaker 3: focus primarily on is prices, price stability, inflation and how
Speaker 3: it's evolving over the course of time.
Speaker 1: At the moment, we are not totally unhappy.
Speaker 3: With what we see because it looks very much that
Speaker 3: inflation is on the right track. Of these inflation you know,
Speaker 3: we come from very high numbers, as high on average
Speaker 3: for the whole of the UR area as ten point
Speaker 3: six percent, and the latest reading we had for the
Speaker 3: inflation in September was one point seven So you know,
Speaker 3: those those numbers are relatively reassuring. They are only a number,
Speaker 3: and we are not looking at one data point, as
Speaker 3: I have said repeatedly. We're looking at a lot of
Speaker 3: data to make sure that this disinflationary process continues to
Speaker 3: be to be well on track. But you know, we
Speaker 3: also have to be cautious, and you know, we cannot
Speaker 3: jump to conclusion that, Okay, done deal, we've broken the
Speaker 3: neck of inflation.
Speaker 1: No, And I think caution.
Speaker 3: Leads us to look at all the data that are
Speaker 3: coming in whichever form it takes, whether it's survey indicators
Speaker 3: as we had a lot of that in September, or
Speaker 3: whether they are more model derivated, as when we have
Speaker 3: projection exercises, and we will be looking at that and
Speaker 3: continue to be data dependent. But of course courses are
Speaker 3: not jumping to conclusions.
Speaker 2: So when you look at inflation, could it actually could
Speaker 2: you achieve your target a little bit earlier than expected?
Speaker 1: That would be my hope. You know, if.
Speaker 3: Our target is two percent medium term, and I'm absolutely
Speaker 3: confident that we will reach that target sustainably in the
Speaker 3: course of twenty twenty five, is it going to be
Speaker 3: early in twenty twenty five, is it going to be
Speaker 3: very late in twenty ten to twenty five. I think
Speaker 3: really will be determined by data, by the state of
Speaker 3: the economy, by energy prices, by the transmission. You know,
Speaker 3: we look at three components. We look essentially at inflation outlook,
Speaker 3: we look at underlying inflation, we look at transmission of.
Speaker 1: Our monetary policy.
Speaker 3: And on the basis of that sort of three pillar analysis,
Speaker 3: we can assess whether we are definitely on track. And
Speaker 3: when do you think it's a little bit sooner?
Speaker 2: I mean, so we of course have Bloomberg look at
Speaker 2: every single word.
Speaker 1: No, I know, so I'll be quite not.
Speaker 2: First quarter or second quarter? Or is it just too soon?
Speaker 3: I think it's too soon to say, because I wouldn't
Speaker 3: be loyal to our principle of data dependency if I
Speaker 3: was to tell you it's going to be on such
Speaker 3: time in the course of twenty five. I think we
Speaker 3: all governors of the Governing Council, and I'm sure you
Speaker 3: will be hearing lots of them in the next few
Speaker 3: days because they will be on air very much. I
Speaker 3: think we are all confident that twenty five is the
Speaker 3: year when we reach our target on a sustainable basis
Speaker 3: and with the medium term caveat that I have mentioned.
Speaker 3: But we have to be attentive to everything. We have
Speaker 3: energy prices that are low at the moment relative to
Speaker 3: where they could be. We have services going slightly down,
Speaker 3: but not much. We are still at three point nine
Speaker 3: percent in the last reading. And we have to pay
Speaker 3: attention to domestic inflation. That is the segment of inflation
Speaker 3: that is proving resistant.
Speaker 1: And domestic inflation is largely based on services.
Speaker 3: Services, It itself largely labor intensive, and we have to,
Speaker 3: as I said several times, we have to be very
Speaker 3: sharp in our analysis of the nexus between wages, profit
Speaker 3: and productivity. That three pillar platform will be very indicative
Speaker 3: of where services prices, which will inform domestic inflation.
Speaker 2: You can have a situation where not all inflation indicators
Speaker 2: fall at the same time in the next couple of months.
Speaker 2: Would you still feel comfortable if only some of them
Speaker 2: reach two percent with the trend going that way?
Speaker 3: You know, if you want to have an average of
Speaker 3: two percent, and you know that, for instance, the inflation
Speaker 3: of goods at the moment, at least based on the
Speaker 3: information we have is point four. By necessity, you will
Speaker 3: have other components of your inflation measurements which are higher
Speaker 3: than two percent. Because we think in terms of you know,
Speaker 3: average number based on the proportion of products services in
Speaker 3: the in the inflation basket, if you want to call
Speaker 3: it that way. So not all elements will have to
Speaker 3: be at two percent. We will need to have headline
Speaker 3: inflation at two percent. That's the target that we have
Speaker 3: set for ourselves. But when you have a point, I
Speaker 3: think is we need to be as granular as we
Speaker 3: can in the analysis of inflation of services because that
Speaker 3: is the one that is tricky and resistant, and we
Speaker 3: have to pay attention to what is sort of structural,
Speaker 3: what results from latest developments, What those latest developments indicate.
Speaker 3: Are those elements sort of what we call late commerce.
Speaker 3: For instance, if you think in terms of insurance, insurance
Speaker 3: generally is the premiums are renewed on an annual basis.
Speaker 3: Those are the ones that we call late commers, because
Speaker 3: they will increase their prices at the end of the year.
Speaker 3: We need to do the same analysis with wages. The
Speaker 3: beauty of Europe is that it is diverse, right, Okay.
Speaker 3: In some countries they renew the collective bargaining agreement on
Speaker 3: an annual basis, so there is a relative regularity in
Speaker 3: the increases.
Speaker 1: In other countries they.
Speaker 3: Will renew the collective bargaining agreement every.
Speaker 1: Two or three years, and there is a catch up element.
Speaker 3: So we have to really we have to do that
Speaker 3: granular analysis which will inform where it's coming from, how
Speaker 3: long it's been in the making, what is the catch
Speaker 3: up element about it, and how lasting it is.
Speaker 1: For the future.
Speaker 3: So we need to look at information from the past
Speaker 3: which is relatively stable, to see how it informs our
Speaker 3: assessment of the future.
Speaker 1: We do all that.
Speaker 2: So if you look at the economic blueprint that we're
Speaker 2: seeing for the moment in Europe, so inflation is coming down,
Speaker 2: wages are arising, the economy seems to be holding up,
Speaker 2: but what's happening with consumers?
Speaker 1: I would qualify one.
Speaker 3: I agree with you, maybe except on wages, because I
Speaker 3: think that wages is at a bit of a pivotal
Speaker 3: moment where and it goes back to my granular assessment.
Speaker 3: If you look at compensation per employee, it is beginning
Speaker 3: to go down a bit. If you look at negotiated wages,
Speaker 3: depending on whether you include the one off payment catching
Speaker 3: up or not. It's also moving in the direction of
Speaker 3: lower growth than what we have seen. So that leads
Speaker 3: us to think that this wage increase that could have
Speaker 3: led to second round inflation is probably beginning to abate now.
Speaker 3: But coming back to you, you consumer point that that's
Speaker 3: a really interesting.
Speaker 1: European phenomenon. I think our.
Speaker 3: Narrative, the narrative that we gave in September, which is
Speaker 3: the fact that recovery will be driven by consumption because
Speaker 3: the real income that households have or that corporates have
Speaker 3: to invest has improved over the course of time.
Speaker 1: That still holds.
Speaker 3: The timing of that is being extended. And the European
Speaker 3: consumers certainly in general, do not have the same propensity
Speaker 3: to consume.
Speaker 1: Than the US consumers.
Speaker 3: And it's often said that, oh, as long as the
Speaker 3: US consumers consume, the economy will do fine. The European
Speaker 3: consumers are not on the same page of active consumption,
Speaker 3: I would say, And if I look at Q two,
Speaker 3: consumption has actually gone down a bit, although real income
Speaker 3: disposable income had increased, and saving in Q two again
Speaker 3: had increased. So it's as if, on average, the European
Speaker 3: consumer was sitting there looking at his real income increasing,
Speaker 3: looking at the world out there, looking at the war
Speaker 3: at the doorstep of Europe, looking at developments in the
Speaker 3: Middle East, looking at the political uncertainty around and thinking well,
Speaker 3: I might be better off saving a bit more, and
Speaker 3: who knows, I might cut a good deal with my
Speaker 3: bank because the banks are still offering not generous, but
Speaker 3: possibly attractive rates for time deposits. Rather than consume, consume, consume.
Speaker 2: Do interest rate cuts help with that?
Speaker 1: Do they?
Speaker 2: Should they actually? Or is it transmission mechanism taking longer
Speaker 2: than expected?
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I think. I think gradually.
Speaker 3: Reduced interest rates are being transmitted, and our monetary policy
Speaker 3: is traveling to financing, to the activity, and ultimately to inflation.
Speaker 3: So it should It should the encourage spending, whether by
Speaker 3: we have consumption or investment. But on investment we're not
Speaker 3: seeing much at the moment.
Speaker 1: Either.
Speaker 2: Are you expecting it to pick up or are there
Speaker 2: are particularly weak countries that give you worries.
Speaker 3: There are countries that currently are not performing spectacularly.
Speaker 2: When are you expecting them to pick up again?
Speaker 3: Well, I think a revision of the business model and
Speaker 3: a collective endeavor to to to support the economy would
Speaker 3: be helpful, including you know, public spending.
Speaker 2: But there's no real sign of that coming in some
Speaker 2: of these countries.
Speaker 1: Well, Necessity Floire, I don't know how you translate.
Speaker 2: That necessity usually leads to something. The overarching point let
Speaker 2: me madame aguein when you look at monetary policy. So
Speaker 2: the markets really expect quite a lot of incremental interest
Speaker 2: rate cuts until April? Are they right?
Speaker 3: It's you know, it's their analysis. As I said, inflation
Speaker 3: dese inflation well on track? Have we broken the neck
Speaker 3: of inflation?
Speaker 1: Not yet?
Speaker 3: Should we jump to conclusion or should we not be
Speaker 3: a bit cautious and as data dependent as we have
Speaker 3: committed to be?
Speaker 1: I think is our determination.
Speaker 3: Markets have their own way of looking at things, and
Speaker 3: they you know they have They're playing with other people's money,
Speaker 3: and the more they make, the better, I guess.
Speaker 1: So my objective is price stability markets.
Speaker 2: I mean, markets could derail a bit of of of
Speaker 2: that if they mispriced things. Do you just ignore markets
Speaker 2: or do you try?
Speaker 3: And no no, I don't no, no, no, no, no, We
Speaker 3: don't ignore anyone. We look at what colleagues do around
Speaker 3: the world, what impact it has on us. By necessity,
Speaker 3: we have to factor in our models what markets anticipate
Speaker 3: in terms of rate curve and and but it's not
Speaker 3: to say that we are market dependent, far from it.
Speaker 3: But it's it's it's a component that we have to
Speaker 3: that we take into account.
Speaker 2: What would it take you to do fifty bases point cuts?
Speaker 1: I don't want to speculate.
Speaker 3: I think the I think for me, the direction of
Speaker 3: travel is clear and what what we have done, you know,
Speaker 3: starting in June is I think the sensible approach and
Speaker 3: one that we that should be continued with that caution
Speaker 3: element about it. Not jumping to the conclusion that, oh,
Speaker 3: because we've done twenty five, will do twenty five in
Speaker 3: each and every time. No, or because we think that
Speaker 3: it is going to be done or up this will
Speaker 3: do fifty. I think that's you know, that's not called
Speaker 3: for given how we are trying to really be solid
Speaker 3: in our analysis and be both data dependent but also
Speaker 3: applying judgment and trying to look forward.
Speaker 1: And we need.
Speaker 3: To scrutinize and be as granular as we can because
Speaker 3: we are getting closer to the point where hopefully the
Speaker 3: economic situation will be in the right equilibrium.
Speaker 1: But to jump to conclusions and to you know, you will.
Speaker 3: Have people the whole week saying, oh, it should be fifty,
Speaker 3: it should be twenty five inches. No direction of travel
Speaker 3: clear pace to be determined on the bays of backward
Speaker 3: and forward looking element, using the three criterias and applying judgment.
Speaker 3: I think that's how I see it. But it's a
Speaker 3: collective endeavor in Europe.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: I'm lucky to have plenty of very smart governors around
Speaker 3: the table and my executive board members.
Speaker 2: Everybody has a few everybody does have a view. When
Speaker 2: is the right time to start thinking about being less accompositive.
Speaker 2: I don't know how often you can ask about the
Speaker 2: neutral rate.
Speaker 3: It just gets very often and invariably. I don't know,
Speaker 3: because it's that it's not an elusive concept, but it's
Speaker 3: one that is first of all, pretty complicated to articulate,
Speaker 3: and that there is based on multiple factors including productivity, aging, the.
Speaker 1: Impact of climate change, and all the rest of it.
Speaker 3: So if you were to ask me today, where is it,
Speaker 3: the honest an sways, I don't know. I think fair
Speaker 3: to say and credit to the research of the CB,
Speaker 3: which is not the line adopted by either myself, the
Speaker 3: Executive Board or the Governing Council. But I think their
Speaker 3: conclusion is that it's going to be lower than where
Speaker 3: it is today, and it's probably going to be higher
Speaker 3: than where it was anticipated to have been prior to COVID,
Speaker 3: So anywhere in between.
Speaker 2: That's a big rains.
Speaker 3: I know it's a big range, but it's it's it's
Speaker 3: not like a mirage, but it's something that you can see,
Speaker 3: perceive and identify the closer you are to that element
Speaker 3: because it's you know, it's it's an equilibrium where you
Speaker 3: have the perfect economic conditions. Employment at at potential, growth
Speaker 3: at potential. We have to but we are not there
Speaker 3: for sure, and we are still restrictive and will continue
Speaker 3: to be for as long as it's needed to get
Speaker 3: to that point.
Speaker 2: I know that your mandate is on inflation, but we
Speaker 2: had the drug Ey Report of Competitiveness. It was pretty old.
Speaker 1: Drug is former presidency.
Speaker 2: So he comes into your ear, your fault. I mean
Speaker 2: he was pretty alarming actually in what Europe needs.
Speaker 3: No, I think that he was alarming in his diagnosis
Speaker 3: of where Europe is at, and I think I said
Speaker 3: he was. It was alarming and fail or just I
Speaker 3: forgot what I used, because I think that he has
Speaker 3: conducted in his position as retired President of the CB,
Speaker 3: retired governor of the Banca Italia, retired Prime Minister of Italy.
Speaker 3: He had this sort of paramount vision, holistic vision, if
Speaker 3: you will, of how Europe functions, what's missing, where are
Speaker 3: the gaps? And he had, you know, a great team
Speaker 3: of economists and other experts who helped him and fielded
Speaker 3: his considerations and thinking, which is why I think his
Speaker 3: diagnosis is severe, but just is suggestions for the future
Speaker 3: in terms of what needs to change, what needs to
Speaker 3: be done, what reforms must take place. This is not
Speaker 3: alarming or unless you say alarming, because he set the
Speaker 3: alarm bell saying now is the time to get on
Speaker 3: with it, please, And he's better equipped than anybody else
Speaker 3: to do that because he's been there, has done it,
Speaker 3: He's seen the procrastination in play in those European Leaders
Speaker 3: Council meetings, and I think he's I really like his report.
Speaker 3: I don't agree with everything that he says, and I
Speaker 3: think that our job now, and the job of the
Speaker 3: Commission and the job of the European leaders is to
Speaker 3: filter out what can be done expeditiously without bumping into
Speaker 3: resistance and obstacles and territorial wars and turf discussions, to
Speaker 3: move the needle and to make sure that both on productivity,
Speaker 3: whether there's a huge big lag on a better energy sovereignty,
Speaker 3: on the fluidity of a labor factor and capital there
Speaker 3: is real progress for my money. You know, in my position,
Speaker 3: I would want those three components to really be addressed
Speaker 3: because it would make a difference for the fact that
Speaker 3: we have against inflation.
Speaker 2: I mean, there are a couple of I guess concrete points.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: There's a huge cross border possible banking merger that could
Speaker 2: or couldn't happen. He mentioned, you know, the joint issuance
Speaker 2: of view bonds.
Speaker 3: What would make you know what he said on the
Speaker 3: latter point, because it's a controversial one. Yes, basically the
Speaker 3: issuance of European bonds. We did it once with COVID,
Speaker 3: and you have a whole bunch of European leaders who say,
Speaker 3: oh it was one shot deal with not never again.
Speaker 3: So it's a highly controversial element of his report, which
Speaker 3: is why it's being picked up by media and others.
Speaker 3: He himself said at the Brugal Institute, which is pretty
Speaker 3: thorough and deep into these matters, he said, you can
Speaker 3: read my report, take my report, move on with it
Speaker 3: and take ownership without that chapter, forget about the debt issue.
Speaker 3: And so if it's going to be a battle between
Speaker 3: the Nordic and the Southeast, and forget about that, but
Speaker 3: do the rest.
Speaker 1: I think he's right.
Speaker 2: Would you be in favor of bank consolidation to almost
Speaker 2: you know, signal that actually Europe means that two.
Speaker 3: Particular I think productivity is the key, the key battle,
Speaker 3: but it's not directly related to what we do. That
Speaker 3: what is directly related to what we do because of
Speaker 3: monetary policy transmission notably, and because of the financial stability,
Speaker 3: without which price stabilities will be an illusion is number
Speaker 3: one capital market union and banking union. Banking union. You
Speaker 3: can think of three pillars. Two have been built and
Speaker 3: the third one is missing. So that's what you know.
Speaker 3: The edis, which is the European Deposit Insurance Scheme does
Speaker 3: not exist yet, so every country is on its own
Speaker 3: and that needs to be addressed. My colleague archaem Nagel
Speaker 3: actually this morning committed a nice OpEd on that, and
Speaker 3: I'm delighted that he did. And capital market union, you
Speaker 3: know we have in some areas, you know, post market infrastructure,
Speaker 3: we have twenty seven different backbone that doesn't work or it.
Speaker 1: Does no, no, I shouldn't say it.
Speaker 3: Works, but it works. It is suboptimal by long by
Speaker 3: a long way. And one of the strength of the
Speaker 3: US market has to do with the capital market that
Speaker 3: is vibrant, deep, liquid, and I think much more easily
Speaker 3: accessible than it is in Europe.
Speaker 2: It is the I guess, the window for Europe to
Speaker 2: get its act together narrowing. I mean we also sit
Speaker 2: if you're a European between the US and China the IMF. Also,
Speaker 2: you could argue.
Speaker 1: That it's a strategic place.
Speaker 3: To be in as long as as long as it
Speaker 3: is solid and strong enough to stand with its own
Speaker 3: sovereignty and its ability to keep.
Speaker 1: The savings at home. That's one example.
Speaker 3: There is so much European savings that travel the world
Speaker 3: because they don't have an instrument or a market in
Speaker 3: which to invest.
Speaker 2: But what are you optimistic about going forward? I know
Speaker 2: there's you know, we talk a lot about terroriffs, we
Speaker 2: talk a lot about trade also being rebuilt now because
Speaker 2: of geopolitics instead of economic advantage. That must make it
Speaker 2: harder for Europe.
Speaker 3: Well, first of all, there is a lot of trade
Speaker 3: that takes place within Europe. It's not necessarily well accounted for,
Speaker 3: but there's a lot of good services movement within Europe
Speaker 3: that can be improved significantly. And you need to look
Speaker 3: at the LITA report in addition to the Drug Report
Speaker 3: and recall it a from a Prime minister as well
Speaker 3: makes the case for better European integration. Remove some of
Speaker 3: the obstacles, do away with some of these multiple licenses
Speaker 3: to operate, the prior authorization here, prior authorization there, and
Speaker 3: have a real integrated deep market one of the largest
Speaker 3: in the world. But we just we keep procrastinating about
Speaker 3: little boundaries everywhere. So that integration will increase, in my view,
Speaker 3: the trade that is within Europe, and I think it
Speaker 3: will also encourage investment in Europe because investors look at
Speaker 3: the general terms the tax regime, but they look first
Speaker 3: and foremost what is the market where will I sell?
Speaker 1: Is there? Deep? Is there?
Speaker 3: Deep and wide market? What scale can I get as
Speaker 3: a result of my investment. So I think that a
Speaker 3: lot is in our hands. I don't like restrictions to trade.
Speaker 3: I'm a former trade secretary for my country in France,
Speaker 3: and I just know how much trade can bring in
Speaker 3: terms of competition, in terms of added innovation, in terms
Speaker 3: of elasticity. I think trade is helpful, but the trade
Speaker 3: conditions have to be fair. They cannot be constantly subsidized
Speaker 3: in a very or pack and.
Speaker 1: Unfair way. I was going to.
Speaker 2: Ask you as so. We recently had in view with
Speaker 2: a US presidential candidate who said tariffs was his favorite word.
Speaker 2: I imagine because of also your background, former IMF, former
Speaker 2: trade minister, this is not your favorite word. What is
Speaker 2: your favorite word?
Speaker 3: I think fair trade is a key boost for growth,
Speaker 3: for employment, for innovation, for productivity, and I would say
Speaker 3: that it's something that we should not throw away because
Speaker 3: in any period of time where this country, the United States,
Speaker 3: has thrived, we're periods of trade, not periods of I'm
Speaker 3: going to retire behind my boundaries and play at home.
Speaker 2: I mean, there was a big UK media outlet that
Speaker 2: called the US economy the greatest economy on Earth? Right now?
Speaker 2: Would you agree with that? Where does it leave the
Speaker 2: rest of the world.
Speaker 3: I think it depends where you are on the social ladder.
Speaker 3: I think you have to go further than look at
Speaker 3: the you know, the sort of aggregate numbers are the
Speaker 3: average numbers. It depends on where you're on that line.
Speaker 3: If you are at the bottom of the ladder, if
Speaker 3: you are if you have a small job, not much
Speaker 3: by word of income. I'm not sure that you think
Speaker 3: of you being in the first and best economy in
Speaker 3: the world. So everything needs to be considered. But it's
Speaker 3: a case that the US, for instance, has very high productivity,
Speaker 3: has a very vibrant tech sector, and has had it
Speaker 3: for a long time, so it has capitalized on it
Speaker 3: since the beginning of the twenty first century, and that
Speaker 3: there is a lot of catch up taking place at
Speaker 3: the moment. But I think you cannot look at that
Speaker 3: in isolation. You have to look also at the people.
Speaker 3: And I think if you look at the genico efficient,
Speaker 3: which is probably not the best way to measure inequality,
Speaker 3: the US is not.
Speaker 1: Doing so well from that perspective.
Speaker 3: So it's also a question of spreading and distribution so
Speaker 3: that all people can benefit.
Speaker 1: Sorry I'm being political, Now forget it.
Speaker 2: Do you worry about central banks being political or being
Speaker 2: dragged into the political sphere.
Speaker 1: No, because I think there is a huge.
Speaker 3: Resistance to that in the decisions that we make, despite
Speaker 3: what is being suspected here or there.
Speaker 1: In any you know, place in the world.
Speaker 3: And I think for those central banks which have the
Speaker 3: privilege of independence either by virtue of the treaties or
Speaker 3: the tradition. It's critically important to hang on to it
Speaker 3: and to and to defend it because the credibility of
Speaker 3: an institution like a central bank really is a factor
Speaker 3: of how independent it is visibly the politics.
Speaker 1: And it's precious, It's very precious.
Speaker 2: But do you think that that you'll come under attack
Speaker 2: more not you personally, but just central banks. Donald Trump
Speaker 2: said J. Powell had the easiest job because it's a
Speaker 2: flip of a coin every every every month.
Speaker 1: He should come and visit us.
Speaker 3: And you know I have I have thousands of hard
Speaker 3: working people, economists, jurists, computer scientists, and I can assure
Speaker 3: you that they work super hard every day, not just
Speaker 3: once a month, and they are extremely conscientious and determined
Speaker 3: to really do the best job they can to deliver
Speaker 3: the right monetary policy and secure what is our common good,
Speaker 3: which is our currency. So we defend the euro, and
Speaker 3: we fight for the euro, just as the Fed defends
Speaker 3: the dollar. It's for the dollar. I'm sure I don't
Speaker 3: want to speak for J. Powell, but I'm sure that's
Speaker 3: how he sees his job.
Speaker 2: Where do you we're just kicking off imfrol banquet? What
Speaker 2: are you most looking forward.
Speaker 3: To, Oh, seeing my friends, that's the first one. And
Speaker 3: I'm not saying that just jokingly. I think that there
Speaker 3: is huge value in meeting people who are equally concerned,
Speaker 3: who have the common good at heart, and who will
Speaker 3: you know, inform each other of where they see things,
Speaker 3: what obstacles they are, how we can better cooperate. And
Speaker 3: it's some people say, oh, it's a big talking talking shop.
Speaker 1: Yeah, but it's better to chatchat than to World war,
Speaker 1: as Churchill would have said. And corporation.
Speaker 3: With the caveats, with the difficulties, with the temptation of
Speaker 3: protectionism and all the rest of it. But corporation is
Speaker 3: at the very center of keeping keeping some sanity in
Speaker 3: this world.
Speaker 2: I mean, the world is so complex. If there is
Speaker 2: only one thing that you would like to figure out
Speaker 2: this week, what would it be? One question?
Speaker 1: Peace?
Speaker 3: If you ask me one word, that's the one that
Speaker 3: I would use. Because when I was i'm f managing director,
Speaker 3: I have seen the destruction and the disaster that that
Speaker 3: war can bring about. And I have seen countries that
Speaker 3: have gone through programs that were just graduating from programs,
Speaker 3: falling back into poverty, into into economic.
Speaker 1: Disaster because of war. So yeah, the world as it is.
Speaker 3: If there was one thing that I could achieve because
Speaker 3: I have a magic sticket, would be peace.
Speaker 2: Do economics come into play?
Speaker 3: Though?
Speaker 2: It feels different this time.
Speaker 3: The war that we the wars that we have out there,
Speaker 3: and it's not just Ukraine and the Middle East, that
Speaker 3: many other theaters of operation like Sudan for instance, not
Speaker 3: much talked about. That bring uncertainty and that undermine the
Speaker 3: confidence that people have. We were talking about the European
Speaker 3: consumer being uncertain. I think, you know, the uncertainty is
Speaker 3: fueled by the lack of confidence.
Speaker 1: You know, what will the future be like.
Speaker 3: With those wars on the horizon and the political uncertainty
Speaker 3: about addressing them and resolving them.
Speaker 2: Christine Lager, thank you so much for your time today
Speaker 2: and we wish your successful IMF week.
Speaker 1: Thank you and to you two