The opportunity to question former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan about central bank intervention in the gold market was spectacularly fumbled today during Greenspan's appearance at the New Orleans Investment Conference.
Interviewing Greenspan, conference moderator Gary Alexander asked if the former Fed chairman was aware of efforts by central banks to suppress the price of gold by leasing the metal to bullion banks, which would sell the metal into the market.
"I'm not aware of anything" like that, Greenspan replied, though of course central bank gold leasing to suppress gold's price was famously a subject of Greenspan's testimony to Congress in July 1998, wherein he opposed legislation to regulate derivatives:
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/testi...98/19980724.htm
Greenspan told Congress then: "Nor can private counterparties restrict supplies of gold, another commodity whose derivatives are often traded over-the-counter, where central banks stand ready to lease gold in increasing quantities should the price rise."
Had Greenspan forgotten his testimony? After all, it was 16 years ago.
During a break in the interview, your secretary/treasurer urged Alexander to follow up with a question about that testimony -- and he did, but only to misquote it. Alexander asked Greenspan if he remembered testifying to Congress that "the Fed," not central banks generally, stood ready to buy gold, not lease it, to influence the price.
Greenspan replied that it was "not conceivable that I would have said that" -- and of course he never did.
The interview was doubly disappointing insofar as Alexander and the other conference panelists discussing issues with Greenspan today had been given, several days in advance, the very specific, detailed, and documented questions that have to be put to central bankers if their gold price suppression scheme is to be exposed, the first of those questions being about Greenspan's testimony on gold leasing:
http://gata.org/node/14606
So today's interview produced only Greenspan's assertion that he isn't aware of what he testified about to Congress in 1998. That's something, since it's so pathetic. But what an opportunity was lost.
