Davos 2010: The G20 and the IMF
January 29, 2010 2:53pm
by Chris Giles
In a recent speech, Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England railed against the inconsistencies of national recovery strategies, saying that, “a present there is no political mechanism for achieving that consistency”.
While he praised the G20 process so far, he added:
“Looking further ahead, the legitimacy and leadership of the G20 would be enhanced if it were seen as representing views of other countries too. That could be achieved if the G20 were to metamorphose into a Governing Council for the IMF, and at the same time acquire a procedure for voting on decisions.”
In an interview with the FT, which will be in tomorrow’s paper, I asked Dominique Strauss Kahn, IMF managing director, whether he supported this as a potential governance reform for his institution. Yes, wholeheartedly, he said. Such a structure would give the self-appointed G20 more legitimacy, he added, and allow the IMF to work with the G20 without complaints from non-member countries that they have no say in the process. It would also end the distinction between the permanent IMF Board and the International Monetary and Financial Committee, the Fund’s governing body.
So it is clear where DSK wants IMF reform to go. Will it happen? Fund reform is never quick and he had as little idea as the rest of us.
January 29, 2010 2:53pm
by Chris Giles
In a recent speech, Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England railed against the inconsistencies of national recovery strategies, saying that, “a present there is no political mechanism for achieving that consistency”.
While he praised the G20 process so far, he added:
“Looking further ahead, the legitimacy and leadership of the G20 would be enhanced if it were seen as representing views of other countries too. That could be achieved if the G20 were to metamorphose into a Governing Council for the IMF, and at the same time acquire a procedure for voting on decisions.”
In an interview with the FT, which will be in tomorrow’s paper, I asked Dominique Strauss Kahn, IMF managing director, whether he supported this as a potential governance reform for his institution. Yes, wholeheartedly, he said. Such a structure would give the self-appointed G20 more legitimacy, he added, and allow the IMF to work with the G20 without complaints from non-member countries that they have no say in the process. It would also end the distinction between the permanent IMF Board and the International Monetary and Financial Committee, the Fund’s governing body.
So it is clear where DSK wants IMF reform to go. Will it happen? Fund reform is never quick and he had as little idea as the rest of us.