SPECULATION over how long Mark Carney would remain at the head of the Bank of England reached fever pitch yesterday.
From a UK perspective, the stakes were high.
Last night, after a day of intense rumour and seemingly far more conciliatory tones toward Mr Carney from Prime Minister Theresa May than at the Conservative Party conference, the Bank Governor revealed he would stay but only until June 2019.
This is one year longer than the initial five years to which he committed. However, he is leaving two years earlier than he would if he served for the normal eight-year term of Bank of England governors.
Mr Carney has, somewhat bafflingly at times, proved a controversial figure for the Brexiters, merely by stating the economic realities of the UK’s situation in an objective and independent manner, as is his job. In response to what appeared to be a less-than-ringing endorsement of monetary policy last month from Mrs May, Mr Carney has rightly hammered home the importance of the Bank’s independence at a time when the pound is already under great pressure.
Some hard-line Brexiters might be pleased Mr Carney, a high-profile voice of reason in the run-up to and in the aftermath of the June 23 vote to exit the EU, is leaving in summer 2019 rather than 2021. These people may also like having Mr Carney around to blame meantime, if things do not go their way.
So there is probably something for everyone in Mr Carney’s departure date for a Conservative Party that appears far from united on what Brexit should mean.
However, the absolutely crucial thing is the Bank Governor will be in place for the full two-year formal EU exit negotiation period, which will start with the triggering of Article 50. Mrs May has promised to trigger Article 50 by the end of March 2017.
Given the political disarray in the wake of the Brexit vote, and continuing lack of clarity over what Mrs May and her Government actually want Brexit to mean, such stability at the head of the Bank of England is absolutely crucial.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here