Minister likes independent NBS, but not governor

Governor Soskic is more politician than those in the policy work?

'Robin Hood' these inane comments of yours like this one, that tend to appear on anything to do with your supporting the government, make no sense.

Its simple - politicians from the governing parties want to change the law to make the National Bank Governor a political appointee and to remove any independence the National Bank has from politicians. Not only is this move dubious in Serbia and not in line with world practice, but it may be against the Serbian constitution.

The initial reason why they wanted to do this was to give Tabakovic a job, as she doesn't currently have one, due to the deal to give G17 the economic portfolios. But now most governing parties see that this is an opportunity to gain total direct control over the National Bank of Serbia.

I hope you are capable of understanding the issue properly now.

marko your response is rather typical - if you are going to argue a point, you would do well to understand what we are talking about here.

The British Chancellor of the Exchequer is the equivalent of the Minister of Finance in Serbia, so your first point is meaningless.

Secondly you failed to understand that standard practice in all of those countries is to appoint a non political expert to the job of National Bank Governor - ie not a senior official of a governing party like Tabakovic.

Thirdly you are obviously not familiar with the Serbian constitution and the controversial issue as to whether making the Governor and his team completely dependent on the government is in line with the constitution.

You also don't seem to understand that the National Bank governor is not responsible for the economy as a whole - setting interest rates (seemingly ineffective in Serbia anyway) and being able to intervene to prop up the nation's currency is not the same as setting economic policy - that responsibility falls upon the government.

By all means research the topic further and come back to me, but don't waste your time and mine if you aren't willing to read up about the issue.

Thanks for the job offer Marko, but no thanks. You might be used to getting others to do the heavy lifting, but if you want to debate a topic you are advised to find out for yourself what you're talking about.

What was your point? Did somebody say that the bank governor should have a job for life, or was that another one of your (self created) mistakes? Another 'mistake' - jobs for DS, Soskic is not a member of DS.
Yet another mistake was your not understanding the nature of my issue - that politicians should not be appointed by politicians to run institutions like the National Bank. Are you claiming that they do this in other countries? Are you supporting politicians being put at the National Bank and at the head of state companies, or are you like me, against that?

If as I suspect you agree with me then wasn't the real 'point' of your post just to be argumentative with me?

This issue is bigger than Soskic's performance...

Marko now that you have read up can you see how the current status of the National Bank Governor gives him a certain independence from the politicians? In all developed countries the system is similar - they all find ways to make it more difficult to remove the governor. In other words their systems function as such that the governor isn't removed every time there is a new government, that said governor is appointed for a fixed term (not 2 years).

In Serbia there is little independence from politicians no matter what one does, it seems as if you are supporting reducing / eliminating the Bank Governors independence.

I really don't understand your obsession with DS, which you mention in every post. Dinkic is not a member of DS and DS tried to remove him as G17/ URS leader by splitting his party. Dinkic was NOT hand picked by the President. He came as part of the coalition deal with SPS.

You think that Dinkic will be able to hand pick a governor? All reports suggest that Tabakovic from SNS will become govenor - that this law is only being changed because she was promised a senior job, but doesn't currently have one.

If you truly supported the independence of state institutions such as NBS, you would not want politicians to be able to establish direct control over the institution, which does contravene the constitution.

BG, your argument is silly. speaking to another posters "inane commentary" is typical

The legislature legislates, that is their constitutional duty and right. Furthermore as far as world standards the Chancellor of the Exchequer is appointed in the UK, The Governor of the Bank of Canada is appointed, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States is appointed. If I am not mistaken the President of the Bundesbank is also appointed.
The man is not entitled to a job for life. Two years ago he was appointed by the legislature. Regardless of the reasons, Serbia's economy has not exactly been satisfactory during his tenure and he is no longer acceptable to the new government. There is a new government because the old one was rejected by the legislature. It must be stunning for the DS that they will have to provide themselves with their own housing, and they do not have job security anymore. Perhaps if they governed better and chose their alliance partners better etc. they would not have all these new problems. Problems that the rest of the world faces every day.

BG, I was indeed mistaken of the role of the Chancellor, but the other appointments are inline with the role. I was also not aware that you are a self declared expert on the Serbian constitution. Perhaps when I am doing the research homework you prescribed when you ignored the breadth and width of my argument, jumping on a single mistake and missing the point entirely, I can pay you to consult me on the Serbian Constitution. This will not be a job for life, if it is unsatisfactory I may terminate your employment over the objections of Human Rights NGOs that also seem to be Constitutional experts and critics when the jobs of the DS are in question.

According to the constitution, passed under the last president, that is precisely what the National Assembly may do. As my oppinion is uniformed, so you say, lets let the constitution speak for itself

The national assembly choses and supervises the Governer of the bank of Serbia, who operates independently. In other words, they can pick whomever they chose, so long as that person works independently but at the same time under their supervision. No Human rights are being violated here BG.

BTW I don't understand how you don't see this as a political gift for the DS, Dinkic was hand picked by the president, and he is going to hand pick a Governor. If things don't turn around for the better, Nikolic can't blame the old government after he hired the old finance minister and let him pick a governor. The economy must either sink or swim, there is no one left to blame
Article 95

The National Bank of Serbia shall be a central bank of the Republic of Serbia, independent and subject to supervision by the National Assembly to which it accounts for its work.

The National Bank of Serbia shall be managed by the Governor elected by the National Assembly.

The Law on the National Bank of Serbia shall be enacted.

Yes Dinkic was hand picked by Nikolic. The SNS gave control of the economy to Dinkic et al if only they joined the government. Now Dinkic and Nikolic are working together and whether or not the new governer will be an SNS insider, or G17 (or whatever they are called this week) it is all the same - until the next government. The former Bank Governor is unsatisfactory to the legislature it is really that simple.

No of course it should not be dominated by politics but I assure you it always has been. Of course it should not be, but I fear there is no utopia where bankers and politicians are above conducting business behind closed doors. Just look at Geithner and this recent Libor saga. Do you think he ever would have been appointed if he were a whistleblower?

'Robin Hood' these inane comments of yours like this one, that tend to appear on anything to do with your supporting the government, make no sense.

Its simple - politicians from the governing parties want to change the law to make the National Bank Governor a political appointee and to remove any independence the National Bank has from politicians. Not only is this move dubious in Serbia and not in line with world practice, but it may be against the Serbian constitution.

The initial reason why they wanted to do this was to give Tabakovic a job, as she doesn't currently have one, due to the deal to give G17 the economic portfolios. But now most governing parties see that this is an opportunity to gain total direct control over the National Bank of Serbia.

I hope you are capable of understanding the issue properly now.

Governor Soskic is more politician than those in the policy work?

BG, your argument is silly. speaking to another posters "inane commentary" is typical

The legislature legislates, that is their constitutional duty and right. Furthermore as far as world standards the Chancellor of the Exchequer is appointed in the UK, The Governor of the Bank of Canada is appointed, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the United States is appointed. If I am not mistaken the President of the Bundesbank is also appointed.
The man is not entitled to a job for life. Two years ago he was appointed by the legislature. Regardless of the reasons, Serbia's economy has not exactly been satisfactory during his tenure and he is no longer acceptable to the new government. There is a new government because the old one was rejected by the legislature. It must be stunning for the DS that they will have to provide themselves with their own housing, and they do not have job security anymore. Perhaps if they governed better and chose their alliance partners better etc. they would not have all these new problems. Problems that the rest of the world faces every day.

marko your response is rather typical - if you are going to argue a point, you would do well to understand what we are talking about here.

The British Chancellor of the Exchequer is the equivalent of the Minister of Finance in Serbia, so your first point is meaningless.

Secondly you failed to understand that standard practice in all of those countries is to appoint a non political expert to the job of National Bank Governor - ie not a senior official of a governing party like Tabakovic.

Thirdly you are obviously not familiar with the Serbian constitution and the controversial issue as to whether making the Governor and his team completely dependent on the government is in line with the constitution.

You also don't seem to understand that the National Bank governor is not responsible for the economy as a whole - setting interest rates (seemingly ineffective in Serbia anyway) and being able to intervene to prop up the nation's currency is not the same as setting economic policy - that responsibility falls upon the government.

By all means research the topic further and come back to me, but don't waste your time and mine if you aren't willing to read up about the issue.

BG, I was indeed mistaken of the role of the Chancellor, but the other appointments are inline with the role. I was also not aware that you are a self declared expert on the Serbian constitution. Perhaps when I am doing the research homework you prescribed when you ignored the breadth and width of my argument, jumping on a single mistake and missing the point entirely, I can pay you to consult me on the Serbian Constitution. This will not be a job for life, if it is unsatisfactory I may terminate your employment over the objections of Human Rights NGOs that also seem to be Constitutional experts and critics when the jobs of the DS are in question.

Thanks for the job offer Marko, but no thanks. You might be used to getting others to do the heavy lifting, but if you want to debate a topic you are advised to find out for yourself what you're talking about.

What was your point? Did somebody say that the bank governor should have a job for life, or was that another one of your (self created) mistakes? Another 'mistake' - jobs for DS, Soskic is not a member of DS.
Yet another mistake was your not understanding the nature of my issue - that politicians should not be appointed by politicians to run institutions like the National Bank. Are you claiming that they do this in other countries? Are you supporting politicians being put at the National Bank and at the head of state companies, or are you like me, against that?

If as I suspect you agree with me then wasn't the real 'point' of your post just to be argumentative with me?

This issue is bigger than Soskic's performance...

According to the constitution, passed under the last president, that is precisely what the National Assembly may do. As my oppinion is uniformed, so you say, lets let the constitution speak for itself

The national assembly choses and supervises the Governer of the bank of Serbia, who operates independently. In other words, they can pick whomever they chose, so long as that person works independently but at the same time under their supervision. No Human rights are being violated here BG.

BTW I don't understand how you don't see this as a political gift for the DS, Dinkic was hand picked by the president, and he is going to hand pick a Governor. If things don't turn around for the better, Nikolic can't blame the old government after he hired the old finance minister and let him pick a governor. The economy must either sink or swim, there is no one left to blame
Article 95

The National Bank of Serbia shall be a central bank of the Republic of Serbia, independent and subject to supervision by the National Assembly to which it accounts for its work.

The National Bank of Serbia shall be managed by the Governor elected by the National Assembly.

The Law on the National Bank of Serbia shall be enacted.

Marko now that you have read up can you see how the current status of the National Bank Governor gives him a certain independence from the politicians? In all developed countries the system is similar - they all find ways to make it more difficult to remove the governor. In other words their systems function as such that the governor isn't removed every time there is a new government, that said governor is appointed for a fixed term (not 2 years).

In Serbia there is little independence from politicians no matter what one does, it seems as if you are supporting reducing / eliminating the Bank Governors independence.

I really don't understand your obsession with DS, which you mention in every post. Dinkic is not a member of DS and DS tried to remove him as G17/ URS leader by splitting his party. Dinkic was NOT hand picked by the President. He came as part of the coalition deal with SPS.

You think that Dinkic will be able to hand pick a governor? All reports suggest that Tabakovic from SNS will become govenor - that this law is only being changed because she was promised a senior job, but doesn't currently have one.

If you truly supported the independence of state institutions such as NBS, you would not want politicians to be able to establish direct control over the institution, which does contravene the constitution.

Yes Dinkic was hand picked by Nikolic. The SNS gave control of the economy to Dinkic et al if only they joined the government. Now Dinkic and Nikolic are working together and whether or not the new governer will be an SNS insider, or G17 (or whatever they are called this week) it is all the same - until the next government. The former Bank Governor is unsatisfactory to the legislature it is really that simple.

No of course it should not be dominated by politics but I assure you it always has been. Of course it should not be, but I fear there is no utopia where bankers and politicians are above conducting business behind closed doors. Just look at Geithner and this recent Libor saga. Do you think he ever would have been appointed if he were a whistleblower?