Should monetary policy be targeted?

Unconventional monetary policies are often criticised for creating money without any control at all of how the money created is used: it is injected into the economy without any targeting of its use. We have to fine-tune this analysis. Let us take the example of quantitative easing where the central bank buys government bonds. 1 - The country’s government finances public spending by issuing government bonds, and the central bank buys these government bonds against money creation; this operation is equivalent to "helicopter money": direct financing of public spending by money creation; 2 – The holders of government bonds (banks, institutional investors) sell them against money created by the central bank. Their behaviour may be affected by the increase in the weight of this money held: additional credit for banks, additional purchases of equities and corporate bonds for institutional investors. 3 - Is there then a problem if there is a need to finance spending or a particular investment (in renewable energies, spending linked to environmental standards)? We do not believe so, for: If this is an investment made by the government, it can be monetised by quantitative easing, as we saw above; If this is a private, profitable investment, it can be financed by bank credit, and by the sale of government bonds by banks under quantitative easing; it can be financed in the bond market and by the sale of government bonds by institutional investors under quantitative easing. So we cannot see any financing problem or any need to create new mechanisms (we have discussed a specialised bank financed by money creation , etc.) to finance new necessary investments.