Bruno Colmant, former CEO at Degroof Petercam. Photo: Degroof Petercam.
bruno-colmant-degroof-petercam.jpg

Bruno Colmant, former CEO at Degroof Petercam, spoke in Luxembourg this week as a member of Belgium’s Royal Academy. Addressing an audience of bankers and real estate professionals he laid out his views on the impact of increased public spending linked to fighting “systemic risks” in Europe. “We are closer to a communist state than to a free market economy.”

Colmant, who ran Degroof Petercam for seven years and stepped down a year ago to hand over the reigns to Hugo Lasat, expressed fears common to the American right in raising alarm over changes in today’s society such as surging public spending on challenges such as the green transition, claiming this will compel us to turn away from the free market.

The coming years, he said, will bring about the end of “so-called neo-liberalism” and lead to the role of government, minimised by political consensus for decades, increasing along with the size of government budgets. “We will see that our welfare will decrease, and we will see that the role of government will increase.” Colmant pointed to Belgium and France having already seen their public budget exceed half of their GDP. “That would have been unthinkable 15 years ago, 20 years ago.”

“I do not see the size of the government in the GDP declining in the coming years,” said Colmant, speaking at an EY event. “It is there to remain so we are closer to a communist state than to a free market economy.” 

Colmant is a current member of the Royal Academy of Belgium. He voluntarily left Degroof Petercam in May 2022 but continues to collaborate with the bank “through his views and economic analyses he will share at the bank’s events as a guest,” according to the bank’s website.

Fighting systemic risks

Government is being increasingly called on to fight huge issues, he said, including ecological issues. “We know that these are systemic risks that have to be fought with all parties being involved.”

Companies, organisations and individuals, he said, will have to give up part of their wealth to the government “one way or another” in order to fund spending on dealing with such risks.

The low-interest environment that recently ended “the Great Moderation” that started with the US policy decision to start fighting inflation nearly 40 years ago. But really the driving force for deflation or falling prices was globalisation. “We could find cheaper labour elsewhere in the world, cheaper sources of capital or of savings.”

No return to normal

But things have changed. Inflation has returned for various reasons, including deglobalisation. “We will not come back to the times before the Ukraine war or five years ago,” he said.

Current increased interest rates may not last beyond the fight to bring inflation under control. “Central banks will be extremely cautious to keep high interest rates, because the only solution to absorb the huge level of public debt is to have negative real interest rates.”

In 20 years of interest rates between -2 to -3%, the excess of public debt could be absorbed. “That would be a nice way to solve the debt issue that we are facing,” he said, adding that it would be good for asset prices, real estate, equity prices, bond prices. “The bad news will be for savers — bank savers.”

The money to tackle the public debt will have to come from somewhere. “I do think that the money will come from bank deposits that will be channelled through the bank balance sheet towards the financing of public debt.”

Boon for crypto

While some people may support government spending on things like the environment, others may not. Ever since Bitcoin was first devised, the technology was seen as a way to avoid arbitrary confiscation. While crypto in Europe is more regulated now that the EU’s Market in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation has been passed, crypto still technically, at least, offers this refuge.

“We can expect some kind of bank nationalisation or, put in other words, banks will be forced to channel bank deposits towards the financing of government.” Worse still for savers, the government will avoid paying market rate for their own debts. “Since they want to borrow at a negative interest, it means that the remuneration of bank deposits will remain negative after inflation, that’s for sure.”

Colmant termed this “financial repression”. “It means that sometimes governments are forcing banks to remunerate households, company savings, at negative interest rates.”

“If it’s bad for savers, it’s good for people who take on the risks, people investing into real estate or equity markets,” he said. “The prudent savers will be penalised. The people who take on risk will at some point in time be remunerated.”

Related articles on Investment Officer Luxembourg:

 

Author(s)
Categories
Access
Limited
Article type
Article
FD Article
No