Supporting the diverse and intersectional experiences of individuals within the LGBTQIA+ and Ability communities is a must for employers in today’s workplace Making it in today’s professional world isn’t always easy, but some people have extra obstacles to overcome.  Mark Scully, FCA, founder of Braver Coaching & Consulting said that, as a neurodivergent person who was undiagnosed for some time, he had faced significant challenges at work as he “attributed all the fault” to himself for tasks he felt he could not do to the same level as his colleagues.  “That seriously impacted my mental health—I was kicking myself for not being able to do these tasks like everyone else,” Scully explained.  “I was continuously working harder or longer, trying to compensate, until I burnt out—and because I didn’t know I was neurodivergent, I was engaging in a lot of masking and compensation strategies in order to make the workplace more tolerable.  “Once I did find out that I am autistic, I was afraid to let people know because I didn’t know how they would take it or thought they would not believe me and would question my credibility.” A state of isolation With little to no talk of neurodiversity in the workplace at the time, Scully found himself feeling isolated and fearing what people may say if they found out. “I couldn’t see anyone there whom I could relate to as being neurodivergent. Of course, there are lots of famous, high-profile people who are neurodivergent— but I couldn’t relate to them. So, I felt very alone and didn’t feel like there was anyone I could turn to for help,” Scully said. Sensory differences also made work difficult for Scully, as he has hypersensitive hearing and found himself straining to understand what was being said at times.  “I was genuinely in fear of going to client lunches due to the noise levels in some places. I would struggle to hear anything at the table,” he said.  “Other issues included not understanding workplace norms or ‘unwritten rules’ and trying to understand what people were looking for or what their expectations of me might be, so I just assumed I had to be perfect. This all had a big impact on me, and I found it very challenging.” Despite these challenges, Scully followed an impressive career path as a qualified barrister, Chartered Accountant and Chartered Tax Advisor, who had ascended to director level in a Big Four practice by the time he was diagnosed with autism. “It was a big relief being diagnosed,” he said, “finally, I could have some compassion for myself and know that there are areas I’m not going to be as good as everyone else in. However, there are other areas I’m incredibly good at. It is just about focusing on the strengths and asking for help in other areas. I’m in a really good place now.” Removing fear from the conversation Feeling safe enough to ask for help or understanding from colleagues and managers is crucial, said Scully, as “fear needs to be removed from the conversation”.  “I was afraid to let anyone know I was neurodivergent, because I didn’t know how it would be accepted and, in that vacuum, I had built it up so much in my head,” he said.  “But when I did let people know, there was no bad reaction, and it was actually received well, but I didn’t know this in advance, and it makes you start fearing the worst. We need to talk about it so neurodivergent people know that they have support in the workplace and feel safe to ask for help.  “Managers may be terrified of saying the wrong thing, so while training on language is useful, it’s also important for them to know that it’s okay to make mistakes in one-on-one conversations as long as they have the right intention. It’s much better to talk about this and make mistakes than not talk about it all.  “Talk, engage and be curious. Nobody is expected to be an expert in somebody else’s neurodivergence, it’s totally unique to them. So, managers and HR people should learn about what neurodivergence means for that particular person by talking to them.  “They should look past the label and get to understand the person, their particular needs and their strengths as everyone is unique. It’s all about starting the conversation.  Following his own diagnosis, Scully went on to found Braver Coaching and Consulting (gobraver.com) to promote neurodiversity in Irish workplaces and provide executive coaching to young professionals, both neurotypical and neurodivergent. Organisation-wide benefits of neuro-inclusion Scully said that, by providing training and making the necessary accommodations, employers could help to improve mental health for neurodivergent people, delivering organisation-wide benefits.  “If people feel like they’re working in a place that accepts them, and they don’t have to engage in masking or compensation strategies each day, it will have such a benefit for their mental health, in my opinion,” he said.  “If an organisation is not talking about neuro-inclusion, then it is not serious about mental health.   “By taking steps to be more inclusive, companies should see increased employee retention and productivity, and there is substantial funding available to support employees with disabilities.” From a bottom-line return-on-investment perspective, it makes sense to have a culture of neuro-inclusion, Scully said.  “Learning how to be a neuro-inclusive manager just results in better managers for everyone, full stop. It’s also the right thing to do, from a reputational perspective, because graduates are looking at employers that they may potentially work for and they are very well-informed about diversity.  “In the battle for talent, neuro-inclusive workplaces will entice the exceptionally bright and wonderful graduates who can offer a diverse range of thought, creativity and strength.”   Celebrating love, acceptance and diversity Jaimie Dower, Executive Director, Audit Quality Programme at EY, agrees with Scully that employer support for all employees with diverse experiences, is crucial. As a transgender woman who has struggled with identity, Dower acknowledged the important role EY, her employer, had played in being “vocally and visibly an ally and advocate for LGBTQ+ inclusion for a long time”. “As an employee with 30 years’ experience with the firm, this was a source of immense pride for me,” Dower said.  “To work for a firm that acknowledges and celebrates love, acceptance and diversity really makes a difference.  “Work isn’t and shouldn’t be the most important part of our lives, but it is a place where we spend a huge amount of time, so the relationships and experiences we have there are key to our emotional and physical wellbeing.  “The knowledge that I work somewhere that people are free to be, and to bring their authentic selves to work, really matters.” Dower, who initially tried to keep her “authentic self a secret from all but closest family” decided to come out during the COVID-19 lockdown.  She received immediate support from work colleagues, but the process was not without challenge.  “As I started to navigate conversations with HR, our DE&I team and my friends and colleagues, I started to realise that the firm’s commitment to LGBTQ+ inclusion was not just lip service or pinkwashing, it was a genuine part of the culture of the firm and its people,” she said.  “Despite this, there are very distinct challenges I faced, which employers need to be conscious of.  “The first one was how to tell people. It’s important to allow people the space to work this out and to acknowledge that there is no ‘right’ way; no one-size-fits-all answer. I had support in planning those conversations. Clear boundaries and guidelines  “It is really important that there are clear boundaries with regard to what any individual wants to share. I didn’t want to be—and, emotionally, couldn’t have coped with being—a walking ‘Transgender 101’ class for everyone.  “It was important for that to be acknowledged. Another challenge was that I never anticipated the number of times I would need to update my name, gender marker and picture. What seems like a simple ask can sometimes become mired in a morass of procedure. There has to be a way to make this simpler. “The issue most people will be aware of is around bathrooms and it’s hard to explain how much mental and emotional space such a small thing now occupies in my life. It’s a consideration every time I go outside the door and the important thing is that employers are very clear in their policies and transparent on this.” The EY Executive Director said that there had been tough days but also “so much joy and positivity, including being able to assist in the refresh of EY Ireland’s Gender Identity, Expression and Transition Guidelines”.  And while her personal journey is not complete, Dower said she feels privileged to work for a firm where she is free to be herself—something which should be the norm. “We all have to work together to combat homophobia, biphobia and transphobia and to actively ensure acceptance and understanding in everything we do,” she said.  “Employers should consider ensuring that there are guidelines to cover discrimination of all sorts, and everyone should respect the pronouns of transgender or non-binary colleagues or friends. That’s just one conscious mindful step that can make someone feel respected, included and valued. “Any organisation that flies a flag that says ‘you can be yourself here’ is going to attract the best candidates and get the most from them.” This article has been produced in collaboration with BALANCE, Chartered Accountants Ireland’s LGBTQIA+ networking group, and the Institute’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee. To find out more about their work or how to get involved, contact Karin Lanigan, Head of Members Experience, tel: +353 1 637 7331, email: Karin.Lanigan@charteredaccountants.ie.

Stephen Prendiville explains how smart and responsible investment in infrastructure can have a transformative effect on societies With Ireland’s population set to swell to 5.7 million by 2040, we have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to use infrastructural planning to support a better future for all. So says Stephen Prendiville, FCA, Infrastructure and Real Estate Advisory Partner and Sustainable Infrastructure Leader at Deloitte Ireland. “New homes, jobs and amenities will be needed to meet both basic needs and deliver a good quality of life for all, and infrastructure is critical,” Prendiville says.  “We have a once-in-a-generation infrastructure investment requirement, and we need to deliver it in a manner aligned with criteria that will make it good for all.” As Prendiville sees it, smart and responsible investment in infrastructure can have a transformative effect on societies. “It’s about looking at infrastructural spend from the perspective of wider potential benefits, rather than just the ‘money lens’, and encouraging governments to improve how they prioritise infrastructure and support dialogue between key stakeholders to create a more sustainable economy and society,” he says. Sustainable infrastructure: early start In his work today with public and private sector clients, Prendiville’s focus is on ensuring we deliver our collective infrastructure requirements to reach climate neutrality by 2050 and improve society for future generations. His own interest in infrastructural planning emerged early in his career when he was training as a Chartered Accountant with KPMG in Dublin. “I owe my start to Michele Connolly at KPMG who gave me my first taste of infrastructure back in the 2000s,” Prendiville says. “I worked on some of the biggest projects in the country at the time, including our road network and the first iteration of Metro North. Then, like many towards the end of the noughties, we left Ireland after the financial crash and moved to Canada. It was there I got my first real experience of sustainable development in a live environment.”  Prendiville would remain in Canada for close to a decade, working with big cities, including Toronto, Vancouver, Edmonton and Montreal, to deliver sustainability and resilient infrastructure goals.  “I was working with cities and municipalities utilising public transport to improve citizens’ lives and livelihoods by creating opportunities to bolster economic development and tackle social deprivation,” he says. “A lot of professionals working in infrastructure are driven by the tangible impact they can have, whether that relates to hospitals, schools, renewable energy or transport, but it wasn’t until the introduction of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2016 that I really had a solid framework for understanding sustainability in the context of infrastructure.”  The United Nations’ 17 SDGs (see panel on pg. 43) form the framework for achieving a better and more sustainable future for all by 2030. The 17 goals are interconnected—one cannot be achieved at the expense of another. “Looked at in totality, the SDGs are about advancing a wider sustainable outcome from a societal perspective,” Prendiville says. “If we’re going to challenge ourselves to deliver sustainable infrastructure, we have to always ask ourselves, ‘what am I not thinking about here in the context of what this project is?’ “It’s very easy to look at a wind farm solely as a clean energy project, for example. More than likely, it could offer other opportunities linked to the SDGs in the context of jobs, skills, biodiversity and habitat. That’s really where the concept of ‘infrastructure for good’ comes in.”  Infrastructure for good The Infrastructure for Good report was published in 2023 by Economist Impact with support from Deloitte and Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability in the US. The barometer benchmarked the capacity of 30 countries to sustainably deliver infrastructure addressing social, economic and environmental needs, across five pillars: Governance and planning. Sustainable financing and investment. Social and community impact. Economic benefits and empowerment. Environmental sustainability and resilience.  Among the 30 countries analysed, Canada and the UK performed best. The barometer revealed, however, that—while most countries prioritise governance and planning—the financing and execution of infrastructure projects is often insufficient to deliver positive social outcomes.  “Ireland placed sixth in the barometer, which is a good result, but we fell down in the area of community engagement and benefit realisation at a localised level,” Prendiville says. “This is really about the idea that a project is narrowly defined relatively early and, while the community is allowed to contribute to the public consultation, it is not necessarily involved in co-creating the solution, nor is the solution delivering additional community benefits.   “An example might be a new bypass delivered by a department: the benefits case for the bypass will be that it’s going to remove a certain number of vehicles from a town centre, improving quality of life for the community. “The flipside is that there will be no money for the town to actually grab the opportunity the new bypass presents and realise potential benefits. They will get the road, but their local authority will have to come up with the rest themselves. “That won’t necessarily happen though, because the local authority might have several other priorities they need to deliver. So, doing what’s needed to unlock those benefits might fall by the wayside.  “Put simply, when we define a project’s goals too early, and to the delivery agent’s mandate, we miss out on the opportunity to realise the full breadth of benefits that might exist. “The opportunity for Ireland is to be the standout country in getting this right and doing this better in the context of an infrastructure for good framework.” Once-in-a-generation opportunity The roll-out of Project Ireland 2040, the Government’s national planning and capital expenditure strategy, marked an important milestone in Ireland’s sustainable planning policy, Prendiville says.  Launched in 2018, Project Ireland committed €165 billion in capital investment to fund vital infrastructure in areas such as housing, transport, education, enterprise and climate action at a time of significant population growth. More recently, The Programme for Government 2025, published in January, recommitted to the Climate Action Plan goal of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, as well as fast-tracking planning for offshore wind development and increasing home retrofitting targets in the years ahead. “I take a lot of heart from the Programme for Government,” Prendiville says. “I think we have transitioned in terms of our thinking. We’re no longer asking, ‘what do we need to do?’ We know we need to act. “We know that, in the world around us, we have a fundamentally changing economy and disrupted economic model.  “As a country, we need to strengthen our infrastructure to support changes on the global stage and we have a social requirement to build sustainable infrastructure for a growing population. “We need to think in terms of proactive decarbonisation, housing and new communities, the new economic models, sectors and industries we need for our workforce, and our participation in Europe and on the global stage from the perspective of foreign direct investment. “We already know probably 90 percent of what we need to do, and now it’s about moving forward bravely with our execution–and the social license to undertake this generational build programme shouldn’t be taken for granted.   “We owe it to the future generations to get it done as fast as possible, but, ultimately, to get it done well so that it lasts the test of time.” Interview by Elaine O’Regan  

The Financial Reporting Council’s updated guidance on going concern reporting offers a more comprehensive framework for assessing risk in an era of heightened uncertainty, writes Aisling Treacy In today’s dynamic business environment, economic volatility and market disruptions have heightened the focus on “going concern” in financial reporting.  In the UK, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) plays a key role in setting standards and regulations. The FRC has updated its guidance on the Going Concern Basis of Accounting and Related Reporting (including Solvency and Liquidity Risks) (the Guidance), replacing the 2016 edition with immediate effect.  This update reflects the evolving business environment and provides a more focused framework for UK companies, building upon the 2016 edition used by directors across many jurisdictions, including Ireland.  The Guidance calls for greater transparency and more detailed risk disclosures, especially around solvency and liquidity challenges.  Directors should adopt a forward-looking approach, assessing current and future risks to ensure companies are prepared for uncertainties, while maintaining trust with investors and stakeholders. Guidance overview The Guidance builds upon the previous 2016 edition, expanding its scope to provide a more comprehensive framework for directors.  It is intended for all UK companies, excluding small and micro-entities, and includes companies adhering to the UK Corporate Governance Code. The Guidance consolidates various UK company law requirements, accounting and auditing standards, listing rules, the UK Corporate Governance Code and other relevant regulations.  It aims to help directors assess their company’s ability to continue as a going concern and ensure that any material uncertainties are appropriately disclosed. Disclosures should be proportional to the company’s risk profile, helping maintain transparency and supporting investor confidence. The following section outlines the key updates to the Guidance.  Key Guidance updates Focus on material uncertainties  The Guidance places greater emphasis on identifying and disclosing material uncertainties that could affect a company’s ability to continue as a going concern.  Directors should assess both immediate and emerging risks and outline strategies to mitigate them.  The Guidance integrates solvency and liquidity risks into material uncertainty disclosures for the first time, reflecting their importance to a company’s viability.  If doubt arises about the going concern assumption, directors must disclose related risks in line with the “true and fair view” requirement. For the first time, the FRC recognises four potential scenarios regarding the going concern basis of accounting. Previously, the Guidance outlined three:  No material uncertainty. Material uncertainty with appropriate disclosure. The going concern basis of accounting is not appropriate.  The updated Guidance introduces a fourth scenario where the going concern assumption is appropriate and there are no material uncertainties, but significant judgement was required to reach this conclusion.  Graphic 2 below outlines the decision-making process, highlighting the fourth scenario.  Broader view on solvency and liquidity  The Guidance broadens the focus on solvency and liquidity risks. Solvency refers to the company’s ability to meet its long-term obligations, focusing on business sustainability and capital maintenance.  In contrast, liquidity concerns the availability of cash and other resources needed to fund day-to-day operations.  Directors are encouraged to assess both aspects to identify potential risks and aim to manage cash flow effectively.  Forward-looking approach A more forward-looking approach is encouraged in assessing a company’s going concern status. This involves developing detailed financial forecasts and testing a range of scenarios, from normal to extreme worst-case conditions.  Techniques such as stress testing, sensitivity analysis and reverse stress testing can help evaluate potential adverse conditions such as economic downturns, inflation, interest rates and geopolitical events.  For example, management may simulate the impact of an economic recession, sudden regulatory change or a disruption to the supply chain, to assess how these events could affect the company’s ability to continue operating.  This proactive approach may help companies prepare for potential challenges and better position themselves to navigate uncertainty.  Revised approaches to materiality and disclosure placement   The Guidance introduces detailed changes to materiality and disclosure placement. Directors are encouraged to clearly explain the assumptions, methodologies and significant judgements in their going concern assessment.  For example, if uncertainty exists over meeting debt obligations due to fluctuating interest rates, directors should outline assumptions about future cash flow projections, liquidity risk assessments and judgements regarding financing.  Disclosures should be proportionate to material uncertainties, particularly those related to financial and liquidity positions. This means focusing on significant uncertainties, such as refinancing debt or sales downturn, while avoiding over-disclosure of less significant risk.  Directors should consider the placement of disclosures to facilitate effective communication. Grouping similar disclosures reduces duplication and highlights linkages. Cross-referencing ensures key information is accessible and demonstrates consistency throughout the annual report.  Broader applicability and group considerations  The Guidance applies to a wider range of companies, including those adhering to the UK Corporate Governance Code.  Directors of subsidiary companies should assess the ability of parent companies or fellow subsidiaries to provide support for the going concern basis, considering group arrangements such as cross-guarantees or cash pooling, which can expose subsidiaries to additional risks.  Subsidiaries should disclose significant judgements about the support they receive from parent companies or fellow subsidiaries and the risks associated with group-wide going concern assessments. Auditors’ responsibilities  The Guidance affects auditors by defining their role in evaluating the going concern assumption.  Auditors must assess whether the directors’ assumptions align with accounting standards and are adequately supported by disclosures.  If material uncertainties are not sufficiently addressed, they should challenge the directors’ judgements and ensure that material uncertainties are disclosed. What these changes mean for management 1. Strategic decision-making  The Guidance calls for a more strategic approach to going concern assessments. Management should integrate short-term liquidity and long-term sustainability assessments into strategic and risk management processes. Directors should consider future risks, including planned investments, economic changes and market conditions. 2. Communication and reporting Clear and transparent communication is a key focus. Companies should now disclose material uncertainties regarding going concern in a more detailed and accessible way. The company’s narrative regarding its financial health and strategic direction should align with the going concern assessment to ensure that investors and other stakeholders have confidence in the company’s prospects. 3. Risk management and scenario planning The Guidance emphasises scenario analysis and stress testing, requiring management to develop flexible risk management strategies. Simulating extreme events, such as recessions or supply chain disruptions, helps companies understand vulnerabilities.  Questions directors may ask of management  The following questions may help guide the navigation of the Guidance. While directors may have asked some of these questions in the past, the expanded Guidance encourages them to consider a wider range of factors.  Is the standard 12-month assessment period appropriate, or do we need a longer assessment period? Have we considered all material risks, including market volatility, regulatory changes and reputational risks? What significant judgements were applied in determining the going concern basis, and how are these disclosed? Have we assessed the impact of potential future disruptions, such as geopolitical risks and supply chain challenges, and incorporated forward-looking scenarios and stress tests to evaluate their effect on viability? Are financial forecasts and plans sufficiently robust to withstand adverse scenarios? Do we have access to sufficient liquidity and financing options in a crisis or downturn? Is the board engaged in the going concern process and actively reviewing the assumptions and conclusions? Have we documented the going concern process in a manner that is transparent? Is the audit committee involved in reviewing the going concern conclusion, ensuring that all material risks have been adequately assessed and disclosed? Are we effectively communicating our going concern assessment and related risks to stakeholders?  A more robust and transparent future The updates signal a shift towards more transparent, forward-looking financial reporting, responding to the changing risk landscape, including geopolitical and economic factors.  With the transition from the 2016 Guidance to the 2025 framework, directors are encouraged to apply this modernised and robust approach to going concern reporting.  The updated Guidance offers a clearer and more comprehensive framework for assessing risk in an era of heightened uncertainty.  Directors are encouraged to take this opportunity to strengthen their strategic approach, ensuring their companies are better prepared to face future challenges and adapt to an evolving risk environment.  Aisling Treacy is a Director with KPMG Ireland 

Fastcom Managing Director Lorraine Gribbons, FCA, reflects on her journey from auditing to leading a regional business, championing gender equity in leadership and the challenge of achieving work-life balance in the fast-moving telecoms industry I became Managing Director of Fastcom over eight years ago, bringing with me my background in Chartered Accountancy and a deep-rooted passion for driving business growth.  My foundation as a Chartered Accountant, with its emphasis on strategic thinking, attention to detail and problem-solving, proved instrumental as I transitioned into the telecoms sector.  Although I hadn’t initially envisioned a future in this industry, I found myself increasingly drawn to the challenge of scaling a regional business on a national level.  This challenge became my mission: how to expand Fastcom’s footprint across Ireland while remaining true to our Sligo roots.  I am very proud of the company’s achievements. Under my leadership, Fastcom has grown into one of Ireland’s most flexible telecoms providers, built on a foundation of innovation, regional pride and dedicated commitment to customer care.  My focus is on positioning the company as one of Ireland’s top technology leaders—not just in terms of the services we offer, but also in how we lead, innovate and support our people.  This includes continuing to break barriers—for women in leadership, regional businesses and anyone who dares to grow beyond what’s expected.  Robust career pathway As far back as I can remember, accountancy was what I wanted to do. I’m not sure where that came from, but it was always on my radar as the route I wanted to take and the qualification I would ultimately achieve.  I attended school in Sligo and then went on to study Business, Economics and Social Studies at Trinity College Dublin.  I had worked in an accountancy practice in Sligo in the summer following my first year at college and then went on to complete a summer work placement organised by Trinity after my third year, in the audit department of KPMG in Dublin.  This experience gave me great insight into what the trainee programme would be like and I started my training contract with KPMG after completing my degree the following year.  Qualifying as a Chartered Accountant gave me excellent education and training, providing valuable insight into business operations and a robust pathway for career progression and opportunities.  Once my training contract was completed, I decided to move back west to Sligo, where I worked as an Audit Manager with Gilroy Gannon for over 10 years before transitioning into industry with Fastcom. I became the company’s Managing Director soon after the move.  Women in leadership: moving beyond the exception Moving from the world of finance and accounting into telecoms, I’ve worked in two industries where women in leadership were once the exception, not the norm.  I’ve seen some progress in gender equity over the years, but it is slow, and there is definitely room for improvement.  I recall my accountancy training days, when many of the more junior staff members were female, but the senior roles were nearly always male-dominated. There are certainly more women at the top table now, and the conversations are evolving, but there’s still work to be done.  I would love to see more women in senior roles across all industries, as well as increased support at key transition points in a woman’s career, such as returning from maternity leave or aspiring to leadership.  Family responsibilities also play a part in the progress of gender equity, as balancing these with an evolving career can be a challenge.  Helping others reach their potential Mentoring and networking have played a huge role in my career, even if not always in formal ways.  I have been fortunate to have had people whom I could look to for mentorship; they have given me honest feedback and encouragement when I’ve needed it most at all stages of my career. Just as importantly, I’ve always believed in helping others reach their full potential in their own careers, wherever and whenever I can.  Networking, too, has opened unexpected doors, whether through industry events, local business groups, education sessions or informal chats over coffee.  The moving target of work-life balance Work-life balance is a bit of a moving target, isn’t it?  For me, it’s not about getting it right every day as I don’t think that’s possible. Some weeks are more work-intensive, while others allow for space to recharge.  My biggest challenge is switching off, as I find this very difficult to navigate.  When running your own business, you’re fully invested, and this sometimes spills over into downtime. For me, it does depend on what’s happening at work and how pressing any issues might be.  It’s something I know I always have to keep working on and be very conscious of.  As great as technology is, especially when working in a technical industry, the ability to disconnect from your phone and emails is vital during personal time.  I have learned over the years that rest is just as important as work for long-term success. You need to be able to refuel yourself to keep going and bring your best to the business.  With three children, my own “rest time” is still busy, but it’s  great for distracting me from the office and what’s going on at work.  Learning from your own team Over the years, I have found real value in professional development programmes, leadership courses and peer learning. Sometimes, though, the most impactful learning comes from within your own team.  Listening, collaborating and remaining open to diverse perspectives has enabled me to grow and develop personally.  I am always reading a wide variety of business materials and books to gather ideas for Fastcom and for myself personally, so that I can continue to thrive. Interview by Liz Riley  

Is the environmental, social and governance movement in decline? We ask three of our Chartered Stars, each recognised for their outstanding work in support of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, for their take on the future of ESG Evan O’Donnell Chartered Star 2024 Accountant with Avery Dennison   As a Chartered Accountant, I view the future of sustainability through both a financial and ethical lens.  Sustainability is increasingly becoming a key pillar of business strategies, and I believe that over the next decade, it will shift even more from a niche concern to a mainstream priority.  Companies and governments will need to integrate sustainability into their financial reporting, with transparent disclosures on environmental, social and governance (ESG) metrics becoming standard practice.  The rise of green bonds, sustainable investing and carbon accounting will drive capital towards businesses that align with sustainability goals, creating a clear incentive for corporations to adopt responsible practices. Looking ahead, I hope to see a world in which sustainability is embedded in every financial decision.  Businesses should not only focus on reducing their environmental footprint but also consider the social equity and long-term resilience of their operations.  This shift will require a redefinition of value, where profit is measured alongside positive social and environmental impact, creating a more balanced approach to growth. The current transitional period in geopolitics presents challenges, however. With some countries backtracking on sustainability efforts, there is a risk of fragmentation in global initiatives.  While international collaboration is essential, the rise of protectionist policies and divergent priorities may hinder the overall progress of global sustainability targets.  As a result, I expect businesses to face increasing pressure to navigate this geopolitical uncertainty, balancing national interests with global sustainability standards. In the future, we will likely see greater local innovation in sustainability, with businesses and governments in different regions leading by example.  While there are challenges ahead, however, the growing recognition of the financial value of sustainable practices gives me hope that we will continue to move towards a more sustainable and inclusive future. Peter Gillen Chartered Star 2023 Sustainability Reporting Manager with AIB   In the future, I hope to see further consolidation of global sustainability reporting standards to simplify implementation for companies. While progress is being made, however, challenges remain. Existing EU legislation, such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) and EU taxonomy for sustainable activities, continue to evolve. At the same time, new measures are emerging, such as China’s recently introduced corporate sustainability reporting standards.  Continued global engagement on consolidating these is critical to encourage more companies to report against these standards. Given recent geopolitical shifts and the decision by some nations to scale back their sustainability efforts, I was initially concerned all the progress made would be undone.  However, European companies increasingly recognise the “business” rationale for sustainability, no longer viewing it simply as altruism.  Even companies outside the CSRD’s scope should still see the benefits of managing climate risks, such as rising temperatures and sea levels.  This isn’t about pandering to a “woke” environmental, social and governance (ESG) agenda, it is about ensuring the long-term viability of one’s business. Despite the recent wave of anti-ESG sentiment, there are some who are refusing to accept calls for ESG to be omitted from investment decision-making.  In the UK, for example, the People’s Pension (one of the UK’s largest pension funds) recently moved £28 billion in assets from the US asset manager, State Street, noting that it wished to prioritise sustainability, active stewardship and long-term value creation for its near seven million members.  It remains to be seen whether other funds will follow suit.  I hope funding for pro-ESG funds continues to grow; not for political reasons, but to protect the financial futures of those whose pensions and savings are managed through funds.  It will also be interesting to observe whether asset managers continue to support ESG publicly or remain silent to avoid criticism (i.e. greenhushing). Fiona Hanafin Chartered Star 2022 Associate Director, Sustainability Advisory, Grant Thornton Sustainability is evolving from being viewed merely as a compliance requirement or ‘tick box’ exercise to a strategic driver of long-term business success.  I believe businesses that are proactive in addressing sustainability-related risks will gain a competitive advantage and thrive in an uncertain world.  Climate change continues to intensify at home and abroad, and businesses need to identify and address their individual physical and transition risks.  We’ve seen how extreme weather and floods can damage infrastructure and disrupt supply chains while shifting regulations create uncertainty.  To address these risks and build resilience, companies should adopt sustainable practices within their operations and integrate sustainability into their core values and decision-making processes.  Future-focused businesses that adopt sustainability, including social considerations within their strategy, will benefit from greater appeal among talented employees and environmentally conscious consumers. I hope business leaders across Ireland and Europe continue to embrace sustainability as a driver of growth and innovation. There are opportunities to be seized by reducing carbon footprints, adopting green technologies, diversifying supply chains and prioritising responsible stewardship.  Despite all the noise (regulatory and political), the fundamentals of sustainability have not changed. We are living beyond our means; our society needs to change.  Although the sustainability agenda has faced setbacks in some regions due to regulatory and political backlash, the global trend towards adopting sustainability initiatives and reporting continues to progress.  Investment in the energy transition remains strong, cand despite the proposed delay to the introduction of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive in the European Union, many companies are collecting data to ensure the availability of decision-making information.  Those aiming for long-term success will recognise that the broader global momentum driving sustainability is fuelled by market demand and risk mitigation.  With a well-informed sustainability strategy, businesses can protect their bottom line while making a positive global impact.

The Trump-Putin relationship is forcing NATO and the EU to shift from a competitive relationship to a strategic, collaborative mindset, writes Judy Dempsey In the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasions of Ukraine, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) and the European Union have both been forced to reassess their fundamental strategic roles as guardians of Europe as they explore collaborative responses to the crisis.  The real catalyst for this strategic shift is the actions of US President Donald Trump, rather than those of Russian President Vladimir Putin.  Trump has shaken Europe, challenging its long-held belief that the US would always provide a protective umbrella. During his first term as US President, Trump criticised NATO’s European allies for underspending on defence, underscoring a perceived inequity in burden-sharing within the alliance.  Now, he has signalled his willingness to consider withdrawing the US from NATO altogether, questioning the reliability of Article 5, which commits the military alliance to defending any member country under attack.  Not anymore, Trump says—if they have not spent enough on their security. Weakened US support for NATO, or a complete exit from the alliance, would leave the EU vulnerable.   The decades-long transatlantic relationship would be dangerously undermined—a goal of successive Russian leaders.  Trump is doing Putin’s bidding by putting Ukraine’s sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity on the negotiating table. In doing so, the US President has ignored how Russia has repeatedly broken the ceasefire Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky agreed to in March.  With this major shift in American foreign policy, NATO and the EU, including neutral countries such as Austria and Ireland, must move fast in several ways.  First, the Europeans cannot wait for Trump to weaken his commitment to the alliance. Major NATO and EU countries—Britain, France, Germany and Poland—need to form coalitions of the willing to prepare for an eventual withdrawal of the US from NATO.  NATO’s European ‘caucus’ needs to be strengthened, military capabilities assessed and the expenditure required to compensate for a potential US exit assessed. That won’t be easy, and it will be costly. Second, the EU Commission wants member states to embrace serious defence ambitions, another costly task, requiring time and clear communication with voters.  In the meantime, there is no reason the EU and NATO cannot share capabilities under the special “Berlin Plus” arrangements, giving the EU access to NATO assets and planning capabilities if the alliance is not militarily involved. Such a partnership could serve as a foundation for an EU-led coalition of the willing for Ukraine. Third, in light of the ongoing conflict, it’s crucial for the EU and NATO to increase their military, economic and political support for Ukraine.  NATO’s European members could take over from the US leadership of the Ramstein forum, known as the Ukraine Defence Contact Group. Established in 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine, its 50 countries provide military support to Ukraine.  Finally, Germany and other countries are discussing Europe’s nuclear powers with France and the UK. This would have been unthinkable a few months ago, demonstrating just how much Trump’s relationship with Putin is upending the transatlantic relationship. Judy Dempsey is Nonresident Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe *Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column published in the April/May 2025 issue of Accountancy Ireland are the author’s own. The views of contributors to Accountancy Ireland may differ from official Institute policies and do not reflect the views of Chartered Accountants Ireland, its Council, its committees or the editor.