(Bloomberg) -- Two months of silence from Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey have left anyone guessing the timing of a crucial change in interest rates with not much to go on.
By the time of the next decision, the UK central-bank chief won’t have spoken publicly for more than 10 weeks. Barring a single-sentence statement after the June rate meeting, that’s his longest period without communicating in over four years as governor.
A blackout period during Britain’s six-week election campaign is the main explanation, though economists observe that he and other swing voters on the Monetary Policy Committee could have opted to speak out since then.
After volatile economic data in recent weeks, including faster-than-anticipated inflation numbers, the sense of radio silence is all the more consequential before a decision on whether to cut rates that investors judge to be on a knife edge.
“It is funny that Bailey hasn’t spoken yet,” said Tomasz Wieladek, chief European economist at T. Rowe Price and a former BOE official advising policymakers. “There’s going to be a cut in either August or September, but it’s hard to pin it down.”
Unlike peers in the US and the euro zone, Bailey has played down the importance of spoon-feeding signals to investors. But the BOE’s approach to messaging has been criticized by former US Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke, and a false start to rate hikes back in 2021 has bred persisting scrutiny of the governor’s tactics.
The MPC entered another quiet period on Friday before the Aug. 1 decision. By then, Bailey will not have spoken since May 21.
While four others on the nine-member committee have communicated following the July 4 election, most were already seen as being in the hawkish or dovish camps, revealing little that investors did not know already.
Dan Hanson, chief UK economist at Bloomberg Economics, said that it’s surprising that policy makers haven’t sought to provide more guidance, not least after recent data.
“It’s meant we’ve placed a lot of weight on the June minutes to gauge what could happen next month, but it’s far from clear that’s the right benchmark,” he said. “It’s very hard to have a strong conviction about what the BOE will do.”
The upcoming decision could be a pivotal turning point. Bailey must decide whether to support two rate-setters already pushing for cuts, or continue to side with hawks warning that underlying price pressures still pose a danger.
The judgment not to reduce borrowing costs in June was “finely balanced” for some, according to minutes of that meeting. That fueled speculation of a move in August, though traders now see only a 40% chance of that after data showed lingering inflation pressures.
Hawks have dominated recent communications. While Bailey is seen as likely to have been among those close to cutting rates in June, Jonathan Haskel and Catherine Mann recently signaled reluctance to loosen policy too soon.
Chief Economist Huw Pill struck a more balanced approach, but still warned that the timing of a move is an “open question.”
“The more important thing was the Pill speech,” said Wieladek. “We should put more emphasis on the Pill speech precisely because Andrew Bailey hasn’t spoken.”
Markets have also not heard from the BOE’s three deputy governors — Clare Lombardelli, Dave Ramsden and Sarah Breeden — whose support may be key for a cut. Lombardelli, who took office this month, is in charge of compiling forecasts.
Bailey would normally have spoken at two set-piece events postponed by the election. One is his regular testimony to Parliament’s Treasury Committee, delayed by the process to choose a new panel. The other is the Mansion House speech, where the governor normally addresses London’s finance industry, typically in June or July.
The difficulty of reading BOE intentions isn’t a new problem. Policymakers confused investors when it started 14 back-to-back rate hikes to stamp out inflation, surprising markets first by holding policy steady in November 2021 and then by raising borrowing costs the next month.
Another long silence from policymakers between December 2021 and February 2022 also raised eyebrows, as investors tried to judge when the second hike would arrive.
In response to criticism, Bailey has said that it’s not the MPC’s job “to steer markets day-by-day and week-by-week.”
Jagjit Chadha, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, largely agrees, saying that “markets can be a little bit needy.”
Other central-bank peers have been more explicit, but with mixed results. The Fed was forced to pare back dot-plot projections pointing to rate cuts.
The European Central Bank made such a strong pledge to lower borrowing costs in June that it ended up delivering on that only reluctantly — just after data showed a pickup in inflation. Policymakers have now opted for vague signaling before their September decision.
For Neil Mehta, a portfolio manager at RBC BlueBay AM, there’s actually a distinct silver lining to Bailey’s lack of communication. He finds the result is actually greater clarity than would otherwise be the case.
“When Bailey talks, he actually confuses the market more,” he said. “When you consider the last six months of rates decisions, if you had just looked at the data and not listened to any of the MPC speeches, you’d have got it right.”
©2024 Bloomberg L.P.