Paul A. Slattery outlines the keys to successful impromptu public speaking. Ad hoc speaking situations are a common occurrence in professional settings, and the mere prospect of delivering a speech at short notice can be nerve-racking for many of us. However, there is no need to dread this. By employing specific techniques, you can deliver a successful presentation at any time. Be prepared to sound spontaneous Your goal is to sound spontaneous while articulating your ideas in an organised manner, making an impact on your audience. Although being fresh and spontaneous is desirable, simply ‘winging it’ should never be your approach. Achieving a balance of ‘organised improvisation’ and appearing natural without following a script requires preparation. The rule of three The ‘Rule of Three’ is an excellent starting point. It can be adapted to suit any topic and is based on the concept that we are more likely to remember a list of three items or ideas. You can use the Rule of Three to structure your presentation and deliver a solid argument, even with barely any time to prepare. Select the three most important aspects to concentrate on, such as “Three necessary measures to undertake….” The Rule of Three is exemplified in another recommended communication model: ‘Be Brief. Be Bright. Be Gone.’ This philosophy was introduced by Jay Frost and David Currier in their book of the same name. The idea was originally intended for aspiring pharmaceutical sales representatives, but it can be universally applied. To succeed in sales, it is essential to comprehend and implement these three principles: Be brief — Keep your sales pitches short and to the point. Be bright — Understand your product and its context. Be gone — Respect your customer’s time. Be brief Keep in mind that simplicity is key to effective communication. Start by defining the reason for the presentation and providing the relevant facts. Tell your audience only what they need to know – not everything you know. Be ready to answer their questions and maintain a positive attitude in your communication. Consider using the BLUF methodology. BLUF stands for Bottom Line Up Front and is a concise communication practice in which critical information is presented first. It is commonly used in the US military to ensure precision and impact. Think of BLUF as an inverted pyramid providing a simplified version of the message. It is applicable not only in military writing and journalism but also in business presentations. Be bright As a starting point, understand your situation and its context. You should also aim to create a bright impression by engaging in eye contact and, when feasible, firmly shake hands. Try maintaining a confident posture by standing tall. Make sure to convey openness and receptiveness by uncrossing your arms and legs. A sincere smile can go a long way in creating a connection. When speaking, project your voice into the room to ensure everyone can hear you clearly. Speak with confidence to convey your expertise and captivate your listeners. In other words, project your executive presence. Be gone Once you have conveyed your message, it is important to conclude promptly, respecting people’s time and avoiding unnecessary follow-up. Showing consideration for others’ schedules and minimising complexity are vital in any professional communication. There is no need to dread presenting at short notice. Being ready will assist you in delivering concise and compelling presentations. By practising the approaches mentioned here, you can deliver successful impromptu speeches, sound spontaneous and leave a lasting impression on your audience. Paul A. Slattery is the founder and Managing Director of NxtGEN Executive Presence

How do employers attract and retain Gen Z? Full-blown member David Boyd explains The oldest members of Gen Z are now 26, only a few years out of university, an experience shaped by an abrupt shift to online learning, disrupted exams and prohibited socialising. Then the introduction of remote work put individuals’ priorities into perspective. So what does this mean for Gen Z in the workforce? Great Place to Work identified that Gen Z are the largest generation, 32 percent of the global population. By the year 2030, the number of Gen Z employees is anticipated to triple. While they are educated, skilled, socially conscious and resilient, their full potential is as yet unknown. Having grown up with evolving technology, they are more adaptable to change and accepting of efficiencies at work. Additionally, Gen Z want to work for an organisation that sees them as an individual, not a number. As this generation loves learning and puts diversity and inclusion first, a company’s culture can be their first non-negotiable factor in applying for a job. Forget the generalisation that all of Gen Z are “quiet quitters” because what they really want is transparency, action on diversity, and social and environmental responsibility from an organisation that will support their career development. Generation X and Millennial employers should be mindful of Gen Z’s use of anonymous review websites and social media platforms to assess organisational culture. Therefore, organisations should consider if their digital platforms feature people from diverse backgrounds and show support for LGBTQ+ communities, and their online presence is authentic, showcasing their values. Gen Z are said to be the most selective generation, who will change jobs and employers for better opportunities and value alignment. They pay close attention to the types of interview questions asked, particularly if the interviewer is empathetic towards their happiness in the role and good cultural fit. Some people hold the misconception that what Gen Z want at work is a Google-style lounge area and activities but what they really want is holistic benefits, particularly flexibility. Gen Z have experienced working remotely and so are keen to optimise their time outside work to meet their commitments and achieve ambitions. They are unwilling to compromise their vision to fit into a culture that does not fulfil their expectation to live outside working hours. Of course, flexibility includes more than just flexible working hours; it means internal mobility through acquiring a new skill or role. It is unlikely that Gen Z will settle in one role for the duration of their career without the opportunity for growth and development. A study by LinkedIn found that 40 percent of Gen Z are willing to accept a pay cut for a role that offers better career development. A further 70 percent had experienced a career awakening, initiated by the pandemic. Symptoms included boredom, a craving for more work-life-balance and the desire for a job aligned with their passions. Organisations that strive to attract and retain Gen Z should commit to making a strong initial connection with employees, utilise technology for efficiencies, take action on social and environmental global issues, and provide support for employees’ personal and career development. David Boyd is a Graduate Consultant at Grant Thornton in Northern Ireland

Andrea Dermody explains how organisations can develop a culture of belonging where employees can thrive Do you remember a time when you weren’t picked for a team? Or a time when you felt like the ‘other’, the ‘only’, in a group? Do you remember how that felt? These feelings relate to your sense of belonging, your fundamental human need for connection and affinity with others. Over the last few years, we have seen the narrative around diversity and inclusion expand to include equity and belonging, ‘DEIB’ for short. But what does the ‘belonging’ element mean? The dictionary defines belonging as “a feeling of being happy or comfortable as part of a particular group and having a good relationship with the other members of the group because they welcome you and accept you”. According to research by Coqual, a non-profit think tank, a sense of belonging at work is rooted in four elements: Being seen for your unique contributions; Feeling connected to your co-workers; Being supported in your daily work and career development; and Being proud of your organisation’s values and purpose. The research found that employees with high belonging scores also have high engagement scores, higher retention scores, greater loyalty to their organisation and are more likely to recommend their company as a good place to work. When individuals feel a genuine connection to their organisation and their colleagues, they are more likely to contribute their unique skills, ideas and perspectives. This is critically important as 72 percent of European employees report feeling disengaged from their workplace. Might a culture of belonging address this challenge? Creating a culture of belonging How do we build belonging? Belonging is in the little things and, according to Geoffrey L. Cohen in Belonging – The Science of Creating Connection and Bridging Divides, “slight adjustments in the way we interact with people in our daily lives can do much to nurture belonging”. Here are some of the strategies that work: Lead from the top by acknowledging that the objective of the organisation is to create a culture where DEIB is part of how you do business every day and tying its achievement to reward and the promotion of leaders. Spotlight diverse role models to overcome the challenge described by Amy Edmondson in The Fearless Organisation as “when no one at the top of the organisation looks like you, it can make it harder for you to feel you belong”. Be respectfully curious. Don’t assume that what gives you a sense of belonging is the same for everyone. Ask questions and actively listen to learn who people are and what makes them feel they belong. Develop your leaders to understand the difference between diversity, inclusion, equity and belonging and their role as culture shapers and carriers. Build psychological safety by promoting a culture where everyone feels comfortable speaking up, taking risks and celebrating the learning acquired from mistakes. Belonging does not exist in isolation from the other components of DEIB. Organisations need to take a balanced score card approach to build capability, accountability and action across all four areas, regardless of how they label this work. When employees feel they belong, they are more likely to thrive and contribute their best work. Organisations that get this right will reap the benefits of a diverse, engaged and high-performing workforce. Andrea Dermody is the founder of D&I advisory consultancy Dermody  

Leaving work to go on holiday can be stressful. Moira Dunne outlines how to prepare effectively so you can really enjoy your break The week before we go on holiday is often the busiest of the year. We become super-productive as we crack through our ‘To Do’ list to clear tasks before we leave. The hard deadline of that final day provides a sharp focus. This helps us stay on track and avoid the usual distractions. I bet you don’t take an extended coffee break on the afternoon before your holiday! Here are three key tips to optimise your last week at work before your holiday. 1. Prioritise, prioritise, prioritise Most people I know have more work to do than they have time to do it. It is important to prioritise every week, but particularly the week before you finish up. Consider the work you have to do and decide: What is important (high priority) and what is nice to have (low priority)? What needs to be done this week, and what can be pushed out? What can be handed over to someone else? The looming deadline of a holiday helps us act more assertively. We can’t say yes to everything as we won’t be at the desk to complete it. So, we negotiate priorities and deadlines because we have no choice. 2. Capture everything In the final days before your holiday, you will be really on top of your workload. Capture everything now so that you get the benefit when you return. Update all your project plans and task lists. This frees your brain to help you switch off quickly. It also helps you get back up to speed when you return refreshed and relaxed from your holiday. 3. Plan the first week back Capitalise on that high-focus period before your break by planning your first days back in the office before you finish up. You may want to ease back into work with a low-key schedule or hit the ground running with some key meetings. Either way, planning ahead will help you switch off during your time off, so you can really rest and recharge. Moira Dunne is a Productivity Consultant and founder of beproductive.ie  

Jean Evans explores how the language women use at work can adversely affect their career prospects and how they can change it The way women use language can sometimes be perceived as undermining their confidence. It’s something women have been conditioned to do and it’s a part of how they communicate. No matter how expert, qualified or senior a woman is in the workplace, the consequences are the same. They are often unaware of the negative impact using self-defeating language can have on their career progression and professional life. Confidence and how women (and men) are perceived is often subliminal and imperceptible. Confident people get promotions, access to projects, support, financing and so much more. So, what happens when a woman is not confident at work? What happens when she undermines herself consistently without even realising it? What happens when her choice of words expresses a lack of self-belief or imposter complex? The result is that she may be turned down for a new job, passed over for a promotion, not given access to projects, or financial support ... the list goes on. Several factors can contribute to this perception: Hedging: Women tend to use more hedging language or qualifiers in their speech, such as “I think”, “maybe” or “sort of” to soften their statements or appear less assertive. This can create an impression of uncertainty or lack of confidence along with a need for validation from others. Apologising: Women often apologise more frequently than men, even when it may not be necessary. Apologising unnecessarily can give the impression that a woman lacks confidence in her opinions or actions. Politeness: Women are often socialised to be more polite and accommodating in their speech. While politeness is generally valued, it can sometimes be perceived as a lack of assertiveness or confidence. Upward inflection: Women sometimes use upward inflection, or ‘uptalk’, at the end of their sentences, making statements sound like questions. This can make them seem as if they are doubting themselves and seeking outward validation. Minimising achievements: Women often downplay their accomplishments or use self-deprecating humour to avoid appearing boastful. While this may be a way to navigate social norms, it can also inadvertently undermine their perceived confidence in their achievements. Minimising the intrusion: This often shows up as “I’m just ...” The word ‘just’ is heavily tied to point 2 in this list – apologising for intruding on someone by email, phone, etc. It’s important to note that these linguistic behaviours are not inherently indicative of a lack of confidence. No matter how expert she may be in her field, any woman may still fall into these linguistics patterns. They can be influenced by societal expectations and unconscious bias. But the fact is that every time this undermining language is used, women lose out. What’s the antidote? Firstly, it’s about women becoming aware of how they speak and write. My advice is that, if you can engage a coach or have a trusted bestie, mention this to them and ask them to highlight any linguistic tendencies that may not be serving you. After a few goes, you will become aware of when you’re doing it and then you can start redefining your speaking habits to back up just how confident and able you actually are. I had a coaching client recently who used the word ‘just’ a lot. I asked her to reread her emails before sending them and to catch herself whenever this word popped up. She texted me back the very next day to say her confidence had shot up exponentially because of this seemingly minor change. She hadn’t even noticed until then how she had been apologising for almost everything! And that was her first step towards a really positive change. Jean Evans is Networking Architect at NetworkMe

Tim Bicknell explores how to unlock the potential of innovation as a positive force for business growth Innovation, that elusive force propelling organisations forward, has become the ultimate strategic imperative in our fast-moving and sometimes chaotic business landscape. But what does it take to forge a culture of innovation? The answer lies, not just in visionary leadership and cutting-edge technology, but also in the delicate and skilled work of transforming teams and businesses into hotbeds of creative brilliance. 1. Leadership as catalyst Leadership commitment is the bedrock upon which a culture of innovation is built. Those at the top of the organisation must prioritise and actively support innovation initiatives, signalling to all the value placed on creativity and smart risk-taking. They must build an environment in which experimentation is encouraged, providing resources and dedicated time for visionary pursuits. Through personal example and unwavering support, leaders can pave the way for a culture that embraces, nourishes and rewards innovative thinking. 2. Rewarding the brave: A culture of risk-taking At the heart of innovation lies the spirit of audacious risk-taking. Organisations must, not only encourage, but also reward those who dare to dream big and venture into uncharted territory. Empowering employees to propose daring ideas, while embracing failure as a stepping-stone to success, creates an environment in which considered risk-taking can thrive. By recognising and incentivising risk-takers, regardless of the outcome, organisations send a clear message that innovative thinking is both cherished and actively encouraged. 3. Fostering cross-functional collaboration Innovation flourishes where cross-functional collaboration is supported. Organisations must shatter the silos that breed stagnation and nurture an environment in which diverse perspectives converge, birthing a breeding ground for creativity and ground-breaking solutions. By creating platforms that encourage individuals from various backgrounds to collaborate, exchange ideas and harness collective expertise, organisations can tap into a wellspring of knowledge and insight, fuelling the innovation process. 4. A learning mindset for continuous growth A culture of innovation thrives on the relentless pursuit of knowledge and growth. Organisations must provide pathways for employees to enhance skills, acquire new knowledge and stay attuned to emerging trends and technologies. Through immersive training programmes, workshops and mentorship, organisations not only arm individuals with the tools for innovation, but also showcase their commitment to personal and professional development. By nurturing a culture of lifelong learning, organisations unleash the creative spirit of their teams, enabling them to adapt and thrive in the face of an ever-changing market landscape. 5. Nurturing a culture of open communication Effective communication and a continuing, open exchange of ideas can support a culture of innovation. Organisations need to construct channels and platforms that foster a seamless flow of ideas across all levels. Regular brainstorming sessions, idea-sharing platforms and innovation forums become the lifeblood of a culture that thrives on open dialogue. Leaders must be seen to be receptive – actively listening to employee suggestions and providing constructive feedback. It is through this culture of open communication and inclusivity that organisations can unlock the creative potential within their teams. 6. Unleashing the power of diversity and inclusion Diversity and inclusion form the bedrock upon which innovation stands tall. Teams comprised of individuals with different skill sets and expertise challenge conventional thinking, leading to fresh ideas and ground-breaking solutions. Organisations must actively seek diversity and foster an inclusive environment in which all voices can be heard and valued. By embracing diverse perspectives, experiences and backgrounds, organisations can effectively foster a culture of innovative brilliance. Cultivating a culture of innovation within a team and business requires a multifaceted approach. Organisations unlock the potential for creative breakthroughs by: prioritising visionary leadership; embracing risk-taking; fostering collaboration and open communication; promoting continuous learning; and nurturing diversity. When these critical success factors are woven into the DNA of an organisation, innovation becomes a driving force, propelling their teams and business towards sustainable growth and success. Tim Bicknell is Managing Director of Deep Cove

Our Chartered Star 2023 winner Peter Gillen tells us about his work helping companies to reach their sustainability goals and gives us his take on sustainable finance  Peter Gillen, a sustainability manager in Grant Thornton’s Financial Services Advisory Department, was recently named Chartered Star 2023, an annual designation recognising outstanding work in support of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).   Run in partnership with One Young World and Chartered Accountants Worldwide, the aim of the annual Chartered Star competition is to celebrate the difference-makers in the profession who are helping to combat the climate crisis by bringing real, positive change to their workplaces and communities.  A graduate of Trinity College Dublin, Gillen grew up in Dundrum and began his career training with PwC before his passion for sustainability led him to join the Sustainability Team at Grant Thornton in 2021. As Chartered Star 2023, Gillen will attend One Young World Summit, representing Chartered Accountants Ireland and Chartered Accountants Worldwide, in Belfast in October. Here, he tells Accountancy Ireland about his interest in sustainability and gives us his take on ongoing developments in sustainable finance globally. Tell us about your decision to become a Chartered Accountant? What attracted you to the profession? When I was younger, particularly in the lead-up to the CAO application process in sixth year, family and friends told me accountancy was one of those qualifications that would allow me to work in any sector anywhere in the world. This has come to pass in my career so far as I’ve had the opportunity to work in Europe and the US as well as here in Ireland. Travel, in general, is one of the best ways I have found in my own life to learn from others. That’s why attending One Young World Summit later this year is so exciting to me. There will be so many people from many different countries, and we will have the opportunity to learn from both our shared experiences and different perspectives. What is it that initially sparked your interest in sustainability? I’ve always had an interest in sustainability and was frustrated by the slow pace of progress in the last decade or so. During the pandemic, when everyone had more time to reflect, I reconsidered the direction of my career and decided I would try to merge my training in financial services with my passion for sustainability. It was really about finding ways to use my knowledge to bring about real change and help companies on their sustainability journey. Chartered Accountants in general are uniquely placed to be right at the heart of sustainability discussions, and to deliver concrete plans to transition to a greener economy. There isn’t a medium- to large-sized organisation in the world that doesn’t employ a Chartered Accountant and we are uniquely placed to support ESG efforts, because of our problem-solving and analytical skill sets, our ability to take a step back and see the bigger picture, and lastly being able to apply our learnings from financial reporting to the impending sustainability reporting requirements, which will be applicable to companies over the next few years. What do you see as the greatest sustainability-related threats and challenges of our time? In terms of threats, it’s the classic, “the wants of the few outweigh the needs of the many”. Those in power – the few – often have self-interest in mind and their actions can have a disproportionate impact on others – the many. Those who have the power to influence real change are sometimes reluctant to do so. A classic example here is the large oil companies, or sometimes political leaders. Chartered Accountants working in leadership positions in large corporations really do have an important role to play in leading the way and convincing their stakeholders to tackle the climate crisis, not just for the planet but also for their companies’ long-term viability. For me, it comes down to collaboration, both nationally and internationally. Humankind is the single greatest determinant of the fate of our planet. We have the power to save our planet from becoming an uninhabitable place.  The challenge is trying to unite a large group to focus on one shared goal. History has shown us how difficult this can be, but also that it is possible and that it is often at times of catastrophic crisis that we unite. One example is the European Union, which was born in the aftermath of World War II. I’m confident that this time we can unite before it’s too late and introduce sufficient measures to address the issue. What is your take on current progress on Ireland’s Climate Action Plan? I think we have made a lot of progress, but we still have a long, long way to go. There are challenges but there is also immense opportunity for a country like Ireland. In particular, we have a unique opportunity to harness our coastline for the purposes of renewable energy – wind and wave, for example – and become a net exporter of energy instead of relying on imported fossil fuel-based energy sources. Reaching Ireland’s climate targets isn’t just about government action, though. Every single person has a role to play. For example, we have all become too reliant on convenience and this mindset needs to change. We need to learn to repair the goods we have where we can, instead of automatically replacing them – thinking differently about the lifespan of the items we own and the waste we generate. Tell us about Grant Thornton’s sustainability team and your role in it. I am a sustainability manager within our Financial Services Advisory Department. Our team helps our clients navigate all of the new environmental, social and governance (ESG) rules and regulations the EU and other regulatory bodies are bringing out. The world has really woken up to the climate crisis, so our work is evolving on a daily basis as legislators and regulators work to promote the transition to a greener economy. We help our clients to understand these requirements and the roadmap they need to put in place to meet them. My biggest career goal is to continue to help companies to support the UN SDGs, primarily by supporting SDG 13 Climate Action, because, for me, climate change is, without a doubt, the biggest challenge of our time. What do you think of the progress made by the European Commission thus far in progressing the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive? I’m optimistic about the progress they have made so far. The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), the European body drafting these standards, delivered their first set of draft standards to the European Commission last November. In order to ensure companies can implement these new standards, Mairead McGuinness, European Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and the Capital Markets Union, has asked EFRAG to prioritise efforts on capacity-building, basically providing the relevant companies with a support function to help them implement the standards. As a result, EFRAG is pausing the roll-out of sector-specific standards for now, which I can understand given the circumstances. It’s important that companies are given sufficient support so that they may implement the sector-agnostic standards appropriately before moving forward with the sector-specific standards. What does it mean to you to be named Chartered Star 2023? It was an honour to win it and something I wouldn’t have thought possible all those years ago when I started my career in accountancy. The list of past winners is so impressive. To be chosen this year is a privilege and I have a responsibility as Chartered Star 2023 to continue the high standard in everything I do. Ultimately, I hope to continue to work towards the achievement of the UN’s SDGs for many years to come both in my personal life and through my career.

Sustainability is often seen as the domain of large corporates but SMEs have the collective potential to be more powerful players. Sheila Killian explains why Social and environmental sustainability is often seen as more relevant to big multinational companies (MNCs) than to SMEs, small-to medium enterprises employing no more than 250 people. MNCs are more likely to have a sustainability strategy, and resources for its implementation, monitoring, reporting and communication.  They are more likely to report externally, integrating their reporting across sustainability and financial activities, and to be scored by ESG rating agencies.  This does not mean that MNCs carry all the responsibility or should reap all the benefits, however.  SMEs are enormously impactful in aggregate and have a huge amount to gain by getting involved. So, why and how should they engage? The potential impact of SMEs on sustainability SMEs have a massive collective impact. In Ireland, they account for seven jobs in 10. While large companies are commonly exporters, SMEs tend to serve their local region.  In terms of where people live, work, shop and spend their leisure time, smaller enterprises dominate. This amplifies both their responsibility, and the opportunities open to them. Because SMEs are embedded in their communities, they often make a huge contribution socially without realising it. This may lie less in strategy than in values.  David O’Mahony of O’Mahony’s Booksellers Ltd, a long-established independent bookshop in the south-west, sums up the position: “It’s only when you really think about it and put all the things together that you realise that there’s a lot more going on … [in corporate responsibility and sustainability] … than we would have probably realised ourselves.”  O’Mahony’s enjoys high social capital locally, gained through understated good work for the community and environment, derived from values and a sense of neighbourliness rather than from formal reporting.  Why SMEs do not report Despite this implicit moral accountability, many SME owners do not think about reporting externally on their sustainability. This is often because they don’t see the value to be gained. Compared with MNCs, there is much less separation between ownership and management/control in SMEs.  Therefore, the need for both internal and external reporting is reduced because the main shareholders are already intimate with what is going on in the business, and employees are closer to the leadership.  Unless the business is considering raising external finance, there is little need to consider how potential investors might perceive it, and if there is a perception that customers are not interested in sustainability activities, these will not be reported.  It seems to come naturally to SMEs to be community-oriented, however, often because they are family-owned, and such behaviour reflects the origins and values of the family.  Such firms tend not to have formal, written codes of conduct, but instead propagate the personal values of their owners, who do not consider that a separate, published set of values and reporting on their social and environmental activities is necessary for business. Why SMEs should report One reason for SMEs to begin some form of sustainability reporting is so that they can compete with MNCs locally to attract and retain talented employees.  The labour market is tight, remote working has shifted the power balance, and younger generations are more focused on sustainability.  Increasingly, SMEs are framing their sustainability credentials more clearly, and connecting them with their employer brand so that they can attract the talent they need.  There is also a consumer angle. The challenge posed by behemoth online retailers to small, local bricks-and-mortar businesses is now well-rehearsed.  A small, independent business, like a bookshop, needs to clarify and articulate its values and personal touch as a competitive advantage.  This ‘personality’ needs to be communicated externally if it is to reach the right customers effectively. Sustainability reporting can convey a sense of what the company is all about, its values and purpose – its ‘soul’. A third reason, particularly applicable to SMEs operating in the business-to-business sphere, is that reporting on strong sustainability metrics confers an advantage in entering the supply chains of larger firms.  If, for instance, an MNC is moving towards zero-carbon, it is likely to require smaller companies in its supply chain to be also on that journey.  A fourth reason to report is the internal value to be gained from paying attention to sustainability. Measuring, reporting and constructing a narrative around social and environmental values will improve the culture of the business, and pave the way to greater innovation.  Hotel Doolin in County Clare is an example of a small business that tells its sustainability story effectively. It has shortened its supply chain by buying local produce.  The hotel harvests rainwater, it has eliminated single-use plastics, and uses environmentally low-impact energy and heating. It became Ireland’s first carbon-neutral hotel in 2019, under the Green Hospitality Programme, ahead of many larger competitors.  The business also promotes social sustainability, employing refugees, supporting local community groups and actively seeks to be a good employer. This has enhanced its reputation not only locally but nationwide.  Partnering with not-for-profits Smaller companies that are ambitious in terms of sustainability targets will inevitably want to achieve things that are beyond their capacity.  If, for example, a business decides to work on the water quality in the area in which it operates, it may lack in-house expertise, jeopardising its credibility with the local community. One solution may be a partnership with a not-for-profit organisation (NFP). NFPs often have the expertise to tackle social and environmental issues but lack the resources, whereas companies may have resources (money) but lack the knowledge. A partnership can achieve sustainability goals if the match is right.  The NFP needs to be operating in the area in which the company wants to make progress, and the company needs to align with the NFP’s approach to society and the environment.  Mutual respect and consultation are key. At worst, a partnership can be seen as a ‘fig leaf’ for the SME and can undermine the legitimacy of the NFP. At best, it can be truly impactful for all involved. SMEs’ supply chain responsibilities  MNCs are famously held responsible for the working conditions in which their goods are produced by companies in their supply chains. Scandals, including the sweatshop labour exposed in the 1990s to the Rana Plaza garment factory collapse in Bangladesh in 2013, have forced companies such as Nike, Gap and Nestlé to change their practices.  Bad practices persist today, however, even where goods are produced close to home. In 2020, for example, it was revealed that online vendor BooHoo was selling clothes made in extremely poor working conditions in Leicester in the UK.  For a small, independent retailer, this means that, unless it takes steps to assure itself of the origin of the goods it sells, the risk remains that all or some element/s of those goods may have been produced in sweatshop conditions.  Smaller firms may lack resources to monitor conditions in their suppliers’ factories. Nor are they likely to have the requisite buying power to impose a code of conduct on their suppliers. So, what can they do about the conditions under which the goods they sell are produced? The International Labour Organization has clarified that a firm has responsibility as far up the supply chain as it has ‘reasonable influence’.  Large firms can leverage direct buying power to positively impact supplier. Starbucks works with its coffee producers to bring them up to higher social and environmental sustainability standards, for example.  A small trader is, however, limited to choosing suppliers wisely, and using their influence when feasible, perhaps working with other firms in the sector. The key differences between the supply chain responsibility of MNCs and SMEs, then, relate to power and influence. This principle also applies to other areas of sustainability. More power means more responsibility and the potential to make a positive impact.  SMEs need to address all the key issues of fair pricing, employee welfare, human rights and environmental impact within their own operations and – as far as possible – outside of them, bearing in mind their levels of resources and power.  The key questions here are: “Are we doing all we reasonably can to achieve sustainable practice?” and “Are we seeking to improve?”  Sometimes, acting in concert with other SMEs, can achieve more. The outcome may not be perfection, but honest efforts in the right direction will carry collective weight.  Sustainability and the SME advantage While corporate sustainability is often seen as the domain of MNCs, SMEs – because of their numbers and connection with, and impact on, society – are potentially more important players.  Many SMEs do not report their sustainability policies for several reasons, including informality, time and resource pressures, unfamiliarity with reporting standards and frameworks, or because a strong internal locus of value and ethical behaviour is already vested in their owners and leaders.  However, SMEs generally have high levels of engagement with their local communities and implement sustainability on an intuitive basis, drawing on leaders’ personal values. Reporting these efforts can bring significant advantages externally and internally.  Despite a lack of resources relative to larger companies, the key to building sustainable value for SMEs lies in making the best choices that are within their power at a given time. Sheila Killian is Associate Professor at Kemmy Business School, University of Limerick, and author of Doing Good Business: How to Build Sustainable Value

As this year’s annual LGBTQ+ celebration begins, we talk to six BALANCE members about their experiences in life and work As Pride celebrations kick off all over the world this month, six members of BALANCE, the Institute’s LGBTQ+ Allies network group, tell us about their experiences and what employers can do to support true equality.  Eimer Proctor Senior Manager When I first came out, Pride felt like a celebration and a safe space to be myself. Over the years, I’ve come to appreciate that this is not always possible, but I respect the path that has been forged by others to get us where we are today. During Pride 2023, I will remember those who lost their lives and stand in solidarity with my LGBTQ+ community around the world who still face persecution and continue to fight for their right to be who they are. It’s eight years since Ireland achieved marriage equality, and yet it was only in January 2020 that the law in Northern Ireland finally caught up. Given our current political situation in Northern Ireland, it’s unlikely that we will see any further advancements in LGBTQ+ rights and equality in the near future.  I find this very concerning given the rise in hate crimes, conversion therapy and anti-trans rhetoric in the media. It is up to everyone to help end discrimination for the LGBTQ+ community and promote equality.  There has been some great progress in recent years concerning diversity and inclusion in the workplace, but there is still work to be done to protect LGBTQ+ employees and at the heart of this is education.  Employers can introduce diversity and inclusion policies and practices, for example appoint diversity champions and work with employees to help them understand the appropriate language they should use in the workspace. Liaising with employees in the LGBTQ+ community and their allies is vital to understanding the obstacles the members of this community face every day. This, in turn, facilitates a greater understanding of how and why diversity and inclusion policies can directly impact business.  Those employees will, in time, become more comfortable to be themselves within their workplace, as they navigate the corporate world with the full support of their employer. Having these policies in place will also help to attract talented candidates, who will be carefully considering organisations with a strong commitment to diversity and inclusion.  Conor Hudson Finance Director It’s a general perception that Pride means ‘celebration’ and ‘party’. And, yes, this is a part of Pride – a platform to be yourself and express yourself, but still people are also joining Pride to ‘protest’ and it is important to remember that Pride started as a protest. Equality for LGBTQ+ colleagues in the workplace isn’t about sticking up a rainbow flag at the start of June.  Last year, in my organisation, a colleague and I launched an LGBTQ+ Employee Resource Group (ERG) with the intention of discussing Pride. While the initial reaction was positive, one response we received was, “We support LGBTQ+ rights; why do we still need to talk about Pride?” This remark justified why we needed an ERG – to increase visibility and offer a safe space to LGBTQ+ colleagues and colleagues with LGBTQ+ family. It is important for employees to feel part of an open and inclusive workplace from day one and allyship helps support this.  One of the actions we have taken to demonstrate visible allyship is to create MS Teams backgrounds and badges to highlight that this person identifies as an ally. We have found these a useful tool during recruitment and first introductions.  Allyship and open workplaces not only positively impact LGBTQ+ colleagues but can also support colleagues with LGBTQ+ friends and family.  Creating safe spaces for allies is equally important. They can’t be expected to know all the answers and they should be able to ask genuine questions without being judged. This culture not only creates open environments for LGBTQ+ colleagues, but also for other intersectional aspects of diversity. Hugo Slevin Head of Function Pride is a great day for us as an LGBTQ+ community, along with our allies, to come together and show unity, and strengthen through open visibility. It is always around this time of year that we start hearing the same question, “Why do we still have Pride?”, but I think it remains such an important day as shown by events over the past 12 months. First, we continue to witness attacks against our community members in ever-increasing numbers. Attacks across Europe are currently at a 10-year high and recent media coverage in Ireland has again brought this sharply into focus.  As a community, we should be able to feel safe in expressing and being who we are. Pride is very much our time to come together and have a platform to vocalise and display these concerns. We have also witnessed attempts to control the narrative on gay rights across the globe. Of significant concern has been what appears to be a regressing of rights in parts of the US, where this downward trend seems set to continue.  Even in Ireland, we have seen attacks on libraries and the cancelling of drag events in the last 12 months. Pride is the time of year during which our voices can be heard, and we stand against deliberate attempts to silence our community. Finally, Pride is fun! The streets of Dublin come alive – there is a real sense of occasion and happiness in the air. We get to walk the streets, dance and celebrate with our family, friends and co-workers. Jonathan Totterdell Major Programmes, Financial Services Pride in 2023 means a day of visibility and courage for both the progress we have made and the long path ahead for LGBTQ+ people around the world.  Recent events such as anti-LGBTQ+ Bills being passed in Florida and – closer to home, the rise of the far right and their anti-LGBTQ+ rhetoric – remind us that progress can be rolled back quickly, and it is imperative that those who live in relative safety can make some noise for those who can’t, without fear of repercussions. Over the past decade, I think we have seen some huge successes with gay marriage, a more open culture and a focus by corporates among Ireland to bring diversity, equity and inclusion (DE&I) to the C-suite. The financial services sector has been making really impressive strides. While there is a business case for DE&I, and many studies have shown that it leads to improved return on investment, I would like to see corporates in Ireland mature on this front, continue to grow their social consciousness, and see DE&I as a positive without the need to prove its financial return. Employers are expected to be ‘all in’ on DE&I in 2023, having the uncomfortable conversations that sometimes come with this topic, appointing champions and including DE&I as part of their leadership ethos. Inclusion is key on the DE&I agenda. You can have a diverse workforce, but without active inclusion, you will be missing a vital ingredient.  One thing I practice is to try to make sure everyone gets a chance to speak up at meetings and contribute ideas and viewpoints to decision-making. When people feel comfortable, they will be able to communicate their ideas more effectively.  Padraig Kilkenny Finance Manager For me, Pride is first and foremost a celebration. It is also an opportunity to reflect on the struggles for equality, not only in our own country, but for LGBTQ+ people across the world.  There is no doubt that Ireland has made considerable progress in terms of LGBTQ+ rights and fostering greater equality in recent years. Landmark victories such as the 2015 Marriage Equality Referendum and gender recognition legislation have increased visibility and acceptance across Irish society.  The Ireland of today reflects a society that embraces diversity and supports LGBTQ+ rights. This has never been more evident than at Chartered Accountants Ireland with initiatives such as the BALANCE network and, more generally, with its support for diversity and inclusivity initiatives. Personally, I am fortunate that I have never felt discriminated against in the workplace, but this is not to say that discrimination does not exist. What I have found helpful in my career is having LGBTQ+ representation at senior levels of the organisation and feeling that I have support from my colleagues and leadership.  I think this support can come in many forms from the highest levels where diversity and inclusion form part of the organisation’s strategy, values and by extension its culture, to more practical efforts, such as establishing and enforcing inclusive policies that protect LGBTQ+ employees from discrimination in areas like recruitment, promotion and benefits. Effective allyship is more than just having policies and strategies in place. It is about supporting and advocating for the rights, well-being and inclusion of LGBTQ+ employees.  Everyone should understand and challenge their own biases through education and listen to LGBTQ+ colleagues, valuing their experiences, and amplifying their voices and perspectives in discussions and decision-making processes.  Pride is a great marker in the calendar for employers to stop and reflect where they are on this journey to foster and support real equality across the board. Áine Crotty Audit and Outsourcing Manager As a leader of a team in my workplace, I believe in the power of people and the true potential that is inside each and every one of my colleagues regardless of their gender, age, sexual orientation, etc.  Therefore, being an ally to my LGBTQ+ colleagues is important to me because it supports them in reaching their full potential.  Non-LGBTQ+ professionals need to be aware of their actions and any potential bias they might have – without the awareness, there cannot be any action or change.  I would recommend attending events such as those organised by BALANCE so you can become aware of the issues your LGBTQ+ colleagues are facing.  There are also some fantastic resources and training out there about unconscious bias that will enable you to change the language you use or how you perceive and treat your colleagues.  After awareness comes accountability. As a non-LGBTQ+ professional, hold yourself accountable to making your work environment a more inclusive place for your colleagues. Make a commitment to yourself and others to change how you act with your LGBTQ+ colleagues for the better. Become an ally and be open and proud of that fact. Letting your colleagues know that you are an ally, and that you fully support them, can make them feel more comfortable in the workplace and allow them to speak more freely about any issues or discrimination they might be facing. It is widely known and accepted that culture comes from the tone at the top. Leaders, whether it be partners or senior executive management team members, need to bring DE&I to the forefront of their agenda. They need to live and breathe what they believe in and what they are trying to achieve for their employees. They need to lead by example and visibly demonstrate their belief in equality for all.

In the face of rising business costs, practitioners must ensure that more SMEs avail of the Small Company Administrative Rescue Process in the months ahead, writes Graham Kenny In 1990, the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein led a ground force invasion into Kuwait. This war was to serve as an unlikely catalyst for a radical overhaul of corporate restructuring in Ireland. It set in train a clear evolutionary lineage to the Small Company Administrative Rescue Process (SCARP) recently enacted under the Companies (Rescue Process for Small and Micro Companies) Act 2021. To understand this evolution, it is important to consider what actually happened in 1990. The economic effects of the invasion of Kuwait had immediate and dire consequences for Ireland.  Up to 70 percent of Larry Goodman’s Anglo Irish Beef Group exports were sent to Iraq and its customers went into immediate default.   Faced with the collapse of one of the largest employers in the State, the then Taoiseach Charles J. Haughey hastily recalled the Dáil from its summer recess and passed the Companies (Amendment) Act in August 1990.  This piece of legislation introduced examinership into the Irish statute books and, for the first time, permitted protection from creditors and the subsequent write-off of company debts.  Over the past two decades, I have been involved in many of the seminal cases of examinership across a range of sectors, including the first Supreme Court hearing of an examinership (In Re Gallium Limited [2009] IESC 2009). My experience is that examinership has served as an essential corporate restructuring tool, saving thousands of jobs through schemes of arrangement. Often, however, the costs associated with such restructuring have been cited as a disincentive for smaller companies to use the process. As a result, examinership has notionally remained the preserve of larger companies. The genesis of SCARP In February 2020, COVID-19 reached Ireland and had a devastating effect on many small businesses. In response to the threat of another financial crisis, SCARP came into force in December 2021.  This new Act is based largely on the examinership model, but notably does not require an application to court for its commencement.  Like examinership, the idea behind SCARP was to give companies breathing space from their creditors in order to implement a restructuring plan, which ordinarily included the write-off of a portion of creditors’ debts.  Before discussing the necessary role SCARP will have to play in the coming months, it is important to first undertake a brief overview of the salient features of this new corporate restructuring tool.  Who can apply? The Companies (Rescue Process for Small and Micro Companies) Act 2021 is aimed at protecting ‘small’ and ‘micro’ companies.  Small companies are defined as having an annual turnover of up to €12 million, a balance sheet of up to €6 million and up to 50 employees.  Micro companies are defined as having a turnover of up to €700,000, a balance sheet not exceeding €350,000 and up to 10 employees.  How does a company prepare for SCARP? The first step a company should take in considering the SCARP process is that the directors should prepare a statement of affairs in accordance with section 558B(4) of the Act.  The statement of affairs is accompanied by a statutory declaration that is then given to a Process Advisor. What is a Process Advisor? The Process Advisor is ordinarily an experienced insolvency practitioner who will attempt to restructure the company’s debts. It may be noted that the company’s auditor or accountant cannot act as its Process Advisor.  The Process Advisor will review the company’s statement of affairs and other financial information (as set out in Section 558C(4)) and then outline their determination as to whether the company has a “reasonable prospect of survival”.  It is important to note that a Process Advisor does not take executive powers and that the board of the company maintains full control. The Process Advisor’s fees are subject to super-preferential status over all other creditor claims. How does the rescue process commence? If the Process Advisor determines that the company does have a reasonable prospect of survival, then they will confirm this in writing to the directors of the company.  Section 558D(2) sets out that, within seven days of receipt of such confirmation, the directors shall convene a board meeting to consider whether the appointment of a Process Advisor is appropriate.  Section 558K compels the Process Advisor to notify employees, creditors and the Revenue Commissioners within five days of their appointment.  Section 558O states that creditors must acknowledge receipt of such notice within seven days and further information regarding their claim within 14 days. Can a creditor opt out of the rescue process? Section 558L provides a list of potential excludable debts. This list includes the Revenue Commissioners.  Notably, the holders of such excludable debts have 14 days to notify the Process Advisor of their intention to be excluded from the rescue plan. Such creditors must give reasons for their decision to opt out.  From anecdotal evidence, it appears that the Revenue Commissioners is largely supportive of the process and generally determined to opt in. What is a Rescue Plan? Section 558Q sets out the matters that must be incorporated into any Rescue Plan. These include: a statement of affairs; the likely outcome for creditors on a winding-up or receivership; the effect of the plan on each creditor; the reasons why the plan is fair and equitable; and  details of the Process Advisor’s remuneration. How is the Rescue Plan approved? Section 558T puts the onus on the Process Advisor to call a meeting of members and creditors as soon as is practicable after preparing the Rescue Plan.  Section 558T(4) requires that such meetings shall be fixed for a date no later than 49 days after the date on which the Process Advisor was appointed.  It is important to note that creditors must be give seven days’ notice of such meetings, so in reality the meetings must be convened no later than day 42. Section 558Y(4) sets out that a Rescue Plan shall be deemed to have been accepted by a meeting of members or creditors when 60 percent in number, representing a majority in value of the claims represented at that meeting, have voted in favour. Section 558Y(5) sets out that the Rescue Plan shall be binding on members and creditors where at least one class of impaired creditor accepts the plan and, furthermore, that 21 days have passed from the date of filing of the notice of approval in the relevant court office and no objection is filed in accordance with section 558ZC. Section 558Z requires that creditors are given notice of such approval within 48 hours. It is important to note that under section 558ZB, the Rescue Plan will not become binding on members and creditors until 21 days have elapsed from the filing of the notice of approval. What does it mean for a Process Advisor to “certify” certain liabilities?  Like examinership, the Process Advisor is given the power under section 558ZAA to certify company liabilities.  This certification means that such liabilities are treated as expenses of the Rescue Plan and therefore give such creditors a preferential status.  This provision is often used as an incentive to encourage creditors to continue to trade with the company while a Rescue Plan is formulated.  The future of SCARP Corporate restructuring requires a fine balance between competing corporate interests, employee rights and duties to creditors.  An unfortunate consequence of this complexity is that the rules governing such restructuring, whether under examinership or SCARP, can be convoluted and sometimes confusing.  But this fact alone should not deter practitioners from seeking appropriate advice and permitting struggling companies from reaping the benefits of this multifaceted legislation.  The low number of companies availing of SCARP thus far is bewildering. I would suggest that one of the main reasons for this sluggish start is simply the unfamiliarity of practitioners with the process.  The well-worn path of liquidation is regrettably often proffered by advisors before a full consideration of SCARP (or indeed examinership) is properly undertaken.  I think the main reason SCARP has not taken hold, however, is down to the extensive supports and debt warehousing that has been offered by the State.  In my experience, entrepreneurial directors live in the moment and dream of a brighter future. Directors can be reluctant to focus on the dark clouds on the horizon and are often instead consumed with an arguably unrealistic optimism. A report published by the Revenue Commissioners in March 2023 highlighted that 13,000 businesses have been expelled from the tax warehousing scheme for non-compliance and are now facing a 10 percent penalty charge.  Perhaps more worryingly, the same report shows that about 63,000 businesses still had a combined €2.2 billion tax debt in the warehousing scheme. This report also revealed that such debts owed by businesses in the scheme ranged from 19,000 businesses owing less than €100 to 6,400 owing more than €50,000. Jobs and livelihoods at stake Behind all of these abstract statistics, it is important to remember that these businesses employ 400,000 people who, in turn, have families to support.  In the face of both cost-of-living and housing crises, it appears inevitable that any rise in corporate insolvency rates would have a devastating impact on countless families within the next two years.  In light of these stark numbers, it is incumbent on practitioners across Ireland to seek the appropriate advice from corporate restructuring specialists when consulted by companies in this quagmire of historical debt.  The sooner this advice is sought and considered, the more realistic the company’s chances of survival will be. SCARP offers a vital lifeline to many struggling companies, and in the coming months, it needs to become a standard go-to option for practitioners and  their clients.  Graham Kenny is a Partner in the Dispute Resolution and Litigation Practice Group at Eversheds-Sutherland LLP

The roadmap for the EU Commission’s milestone Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive is taking shape and now is the time to start preparing for a brave new era in non-financial reporting, writes Conor Holland With the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) now approved by the European Council, entities in the EU must begin to invest significant time and resources in preparing for the advent of a new era in non-financial reporting, which places the public disclosure of environmental, social affairs and governance matters (ESG) matters on a par with financial information. Under the CSRD, entities will have to disclose much more sustainability-related information about their business models, strategy and supply chains than they have to date. They will also need to report ESG information in a standardised format that can be assured by an independent third party. For those charged with governance, the CSRD will bring further augmented requirements. Audit committees will need to oversee new reporting processes and monitor the effectiveness of systems and controls setup. They will also have enhanced responsibilities. Along with monitoring an entity’s ESG reporting process, and evaluating the integrity of the sustainability information reported by that entity, audit committees will need to: Monitor the effectiveness of the entity’s internal quality control and risk management systems and internal audit functions; Monitor the assurance of annual and consolidated sustainability reporting; Inform the entity’s administrative or supervisory body of the outcome of the assurance of sustainability reporting; and Review and monitor the independence of the assurance provider. The CSRD stipulates the requirement for limited assurance over the reported information. However, it also includes the option for assurance requirements to evolve to reasonable assurance at a later stage. The EU estimates that 49,000 companies across the EU will fall under the requirements of the new CSRD Directive, compared to the 11,600 companies that currently have reporting obligations. The EU has confirmed that the implementation of the CSRD will take place in three stages: 1 January 2024 for companies already subject to the non-financial reporting directive (reporting in 2025 for the financial year 2024); 1 January 2025 for large companies that are not presently subject to the non-financial reporting directive (reporting in 2026 for the financial year 2025); 1 January 2026 for listed SMEs, small and non-complex credit institutions, and captive insurance undertakings (reporting in 2027 for the financial year 2026). A large undertaking is defined as an entity that exceeds at least two of the following criteria: A net turnover of €40 million A balance sheet total of €20 million 250 employees on average over the financial year The final text of the CSRD has also set timelines for when the Commission should adopt further delegated acts on reporting standards, with 30 June 2023 set as the date by which the Commission should adopt delegated acts specifying the information that undertakings will be required to report. European Financial Reporting Advisory Group In tandem, the European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG) is working on a first set of draft sustainability reporting standards (ESRS). These draft standards will be ready for consideration by the Commission once the Parliament and Council have agreed a legislative text. The current draft standards provide an outline as to the depth and breadth of what entities will be required to report. Significantly, the ESRS should be considered as analogous to accountancy standards—with detailed disclosure requirements (qualitative and quantitative), a conceptual framework and associated application guidance. Readers should take note—the ESRS are much more than a handful of metrics supplementary to the financial statements. They represent a step change in what corporate reporting entails, moving non-financial information toward an equilibrium with financial information. Moreover, the reporting boundaries would be based on financial statements but expanded significantly for the upstream and downstream value chain, meaning an entity would need to capture material sustainability matters that are connected to the entity by its direct or indirect business relationships, regardless of its level of control over them. While the standards and associated requirements are now largely finalised, in early November 2022, EFRAG published a revised iteration to the draft ESRS, introducing certain changes to the original draft standards. While the broad requirements and content remain largely the same, some notable changes include: Structure of the reporting areas has been aligned with TCFD (Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures) and ISSB (International Sustainability Standards Board) standards – specifically, the ESRS will be tailored around “governance”, “strategy”, “management of impacts, risks and opportunities”, and “metrics and targets”. Definition of financial materiality is now more closely aligned to ISSB standards. Impact materiality is more commensurate with the GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) definition of impact materiality. Time horizons are now just a recommendation; entities may deviate and would disclose their entity-specific time horizons used. Incorporation of one governance standard into the cross-cutting standard requirements on the reporting area of governance. Slight reduction in the number of data points required within the disclosure requirements. ESRS and international standards By adopting double materiality principles, the proposed ESRS consider a wider range of stakeholders than IFRS® Sustainability Disclosure Standards or the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published proposal. Instead, they aim to meet public policy objectives as well as meeting the needs of capital markets. It is the ISSB’s aim to create a global baseline for sustainability reporting standards that allows local standard setters to add additional requirements (building blocks), rather than face a coexistence of multiple separate frameworks. The CSRD requires EFRAG to take account of global standard-setting initiatives to the greatest extent possible. In this regard, EFRAG has published a comparison with the ISSB’s proposals and committed to joining an ISSB working group to drive global alignment. However, in the short term, entities and investors may potentially have to deal with three sets of sustainability reporting standards in setting up their reporting processes, controls, and governance. Key differences The proposed ESRS list detailed disclosure requirements for all ESG topics. The proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards would also require disclosure in relation to all relevant ESG topics, but the ISSB has to date only prepared a detailed exposure draft on climate, asking preparers to consider general requirements and other sources of information to report on other sustainability topics. The SEC focused on climate in its recent proposal. The proposed ESRS are more prescriptive, and the number of disclosure requirements significantly exceeds those in the proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards. Whereas the proposed IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards are intended to focus on the information needs of capital markets, ESRS also aim to address the policy objectives of the EU by addressing wider stakeholder needs. Given the significance of the directive—and the remaining time to get ready for it—entities should now start preparing for its implementation. It is important that entities develop plans to understand the full extent of the CSRD requirements, and the implications for their reporting infrastructure. As such, they should take some immediate steps to prepare, and consider: Performing a gap analysis—i.e. what the entity reports today, contrasted with what will be required under the CSRD. This is a useful exercise to inform entities on where resources should be directed, including how management identify sustainability-related information, and what KPIs they will be required to report on. Undertaking a ‘double materiality’ analysis to identify what topics would be considered material from an impact and financial perspective—as required under the CSRD. Get ‘assurance ready’—entities will need to be comfortable that processes and controls exist to support ESG information, and that the information can ultimately be assured. The Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive represents a fundamental change in the nature of corporate reporting—the time to act is now and the first deadline is closing in.

Brendan O’Hora reports on the findings of the 2022 All-Member Survey Research is conducted to discover new information or reach a new understanding of something, so the Institute’s biennial membership survey is crucial. These have been two years of significant change, and as a membership organisation, it has never been more important for us to act on the findings in a comprehensive, targeted way for the benefit of 31,000 members globally.  The survey was conducted in May and June with over 1,800 members by independent research agency, Coyne Research. This level of participation helps us to build a very accurate picture of the member experience and is much appreciated. It allows us to make the most of this opportunity to check in with members, and to ascertain how we will respond and act on the findings.  This year, we also conducted qualitative research via eight focus groups. This exercise gave us a deeper understanding of member sentiment and reinforced that we are operating in very unusual times.  The operating environment The pandemic may be in retreat, but its effects persist. An ongoing adjustment to hybrid working, declining levels of resilience after extended periods of pressure, and changing priorities among younger members, many of whom qualified or spent their early years in a virtual environment, have had an impact. Compounding this are growing cost-of-living pressures.  The top challenge emerging from the survey for businesses was, unsurprisingly, the competition for talent, up significantly on 2020. Following this is inflationary pressure and increased labour costs. What is resonating with members  Looking at our membership as a whole, the qualification is very highly regarded and a source of great pride. The letters mean a lot to our members, and that pride also extends to the robustness and quality of the education provided.  In reviewing the findings, Bernie Coyne at Coyne Research noted that members are broadly positive about the way the Institute has responded over the last two years to the pandemic.  She said: “As in previous years, members were invited to rate a range of services, based on their experience and degree of satisfaction, with sentiment remaining consistent. Over seven in 10 members rated the webinars and online CPD options as good, with a 20 percent increase in those who experienced them since 2020. The range of specialist qualifications was also rated highly, as was Accountancy Ireland magazine, the weekly Tax News circular, and the knowledge hubs on the Institute’s website.”  The research also pointed to an increase in the number of members who have communicated with the Institute by phone and email since 2020. Roughly seven in 10 rate their experience in communicating positively. While there was strong uptake of the virtual alternatives on offer during the pandemic, there is confidence in returning to face-to-face events. Indeed, the research points to a desire, particularly among younger members, to engage and learn about how they can make their membership work for them and derive the greatest value from it.  Consistent with many of our peers globally, we have seen drops in key member metrics, such as satisfaction and relevance as well as likelihood to recommend the qualification. While, unsurprising, given these unusual times, it is an important alert for the Institute that is already prompting action.   How we are responding to the findings In a changed external environment, and armed with considerable insights, our challenge now is to reposition how we engage with members, with a particular focus on younger members at the start of their career, to optimise their experience of the profession. We are working closely with the Chartered Accountants Student Society of Ireland (CASSI) and the Young Professionals Committee in so doing.  Our members are some of the strongest advocates for the profession, and, at a time when there is a continuing shortage of qualified accountants, it is incumbent upon us to ensure the membership experience is a positive, rewarding, and relevant one for these most important advocates.  One of the ways we will be doing this in the coming weeks and months will be through a campaign to put the tools into members’ hands to make their membership work for them. It will feature real members speaking about how they’ve made the most of their membership and will be accompanied by an updated member section on the website to help users better access and understand what is available, from membership details to Continuing Professional Development, conferences, social events, and supports. Our focus is on giving more control of their experience to our members, so that this experience can be tailored and made to work for the individual.   In closing, I want to return to a theme I touched on at the outset—resilience in the face of sustained pressure. One-in-two respondents reported that COVID had a negative impact on their mental health, compared to 2020. Younger members were less likely to be aware of the Institute’s member support service CA Support, and we will be working to increase awareness of this important resource.  Brendan O'Hora is Director, Members, at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Jennifer Nickerson left a successful career in Dublin to co-found a whiskey distillery in rural Tipperary. She tells Accountancy Ireland about her inspiration, ambitions and lessons learned along the way When Jennifer Nickerson co-founded Tipperary Boutique Distillery in 2014, the Aberdeen-born Chartered Accountant had already risen through the ranks at KPMG in Dublin to become an associate director in the tax department just seven years after joining as a trainee. Tipperary Boutique Distillery is now exporting worldwide and employs seven people in south Tipperary with further plans for expansion. Here, Nickerson tells us about what inspired her move into entrepreneurship and her experiences establishing and growing a small business with global reach. Q: Tell us about your life and career prior to co-founding Tipperary Boutique Distillery—what prompted you to become a Chartered Accountant? I grew up in Scotland and my dad, Stuart, was a master distiller. He managed and worked as a consultant for some of Scotland’s best scotch producers, such as Glenfiddich, Balvenie and William Grant & Sons. You could say I grew up in the industry. I loved it, especially the passion the people working in it had. I went to college in Edinburgh for six years, studying Veterinary Medicine initially and then switching to Accountancy. I decided I didn’t want to work outside in the cold and wet.  I wanted to work in an office and I had this perception that a job in accountancy would be “nine-to-five”.  I was wrong about that, but after meeting my husband Liam and moving to Ireland to train, I found I really enjoyed the problem-solving aspect of the work. Numbers make sense. There is a “right answer” and that can be very satisfying.  I worked in the tax department at KPMG and did a lot of advisory work. The hours were long but there was great camaraderie and that makes for a really nice working environment. Q: So you had settled into this new career in Dublin and you were enjoying it. What prompted you to up sticks and move to rural Ireland to set up a whiskey distillery? I married a farmer—but I did tell him that I wouldn’t be moving to Tipperary unless there was work there that would interest me as much as what I was doing with KPMG in Dublin. We talked it through and my dad had already mentioned during a visit to Ballindoney, Liam’s family farm near Clonmel, that it would be the ideal setting for a whiskey distillery. We could grow grain, we had the land to build a distillery on, there was good quality water in Tipperary and good conditions for maturing whiskey as it’s a little bit warmer than Scotland. He really just mentioned it in passing, but it struck a chord. I’d had lots of experience putting together business plans and I was lucky that Liam had a steady job working for the county council. It was a calculated risk and we could afford to do it, so we went for it. Q: What was your vision for Tipperary Boutique Distillery starting out in 2014? Ultimately, we wanted to produce a world-class whiskey from grain to glass here on Ballindoney Farm.  We knew we had everything we needed, but we also knew it would take time, because distilleries are expensive and there is also the cost of laying down spirit for at least three years before it can be sold as whiskey. It wasn’t until 2020 that we finally had the funding raised, the facility built and the equipment installed to open our own distillery. We had started outsourcing Irish whiskey casks from other distilleries cut to bottling strength with water from our farm and released our very first expression way back in March, 2015.  After that, we started taking our own grain from the farm, having it malted and distilled by my dad at other facilities. Now, we are able to do everything apart from malting here in our own distillery. We grow our own grain, we mill, we mash, we ferment, we distill, we mature and we bottle here on the farm.  Q: Tell us about your markets? What countries do you sell to and where do you have the healthiest trade? We sell into Belgium, France, Canada, into several states in the US, and a little in Korea and Singapore. We were selling to Russia, but obviously not any more, and we were in discussions with distributors in Ukraine and Poland, but the impact of the war has scuppered both. Germany is our biggest market, Italy is great, and Belgium is a surprisingly steady little market as well.  In Ireland, we sell online ourselves at tipperarydistillery.ie and through Irishmalts.com, James J Fox, The Celtic Whiskey Shop, and through local retailers around the country. Q: What was it like moving from a successful career as a tax advisor in a Big 4 environment into the cut and thrust of entrepreneurship? Was it a good experience? It was massively humbling to be honest, but also incredibly rewarding. At the start, I did miss having colleagues to talk to and bounce ideas off. I really felt I was on my own and it took me a while to find my feet. My background in accountancy definitely helped a lot with the ‘form filing’—understanding bills and applying for licenses, things like that. At the same time, there were lots of things I didn’t know about, like where to get a barcode or source seals for bottles. It was a massive learning curve. Q: What are the most important lessons you have learned so far running your own business? I had no idea starting out how vitally important sales are. That sounds like a ridiculous statement, but it took a long time for me to shift my mindset away from numbers and deadlines to just getting out there and going after sales.  What I know now is that you can’t give up. It’s no good just sending out an email to a potential customer and waiting for them to come back to you. You have to keep trying and telling literally everyone you can how great your product is and why. That can be really hard because it’s very different to sitting in front of a computer as an accountant and working to a deadline. You have to be willing and able to stand up on a stage and say, “this is what we’re doing, we’re amazing and our product is the best”.  There is a theory that 80 percent of all sales in any business come from 20 percent of costumers. Based on my own experience, I’d have to agree with that. There’s really no point in chasing one-off sales. It’s far more important to focus on valued relationships than driving around trying to get a bottle into every bar in the country. On the other side of the coin, you have to chase your bills just as much. If you’re not getting paid, you’re in trouble. Q: How has the COVID-19 pandemic and the more recent war in Ukraine affected your business and how have you responded? As soon as the Pandemic hit, our orders from overseas plummeted. We had two pallets due to go to a distributor in a country that was very badly impacted by the pandemic and they ended up having to wait six months to take delivery. Irish people are brilliant though. They started buying more Irish whiskey during the pandemic and that really saved our business. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had a massive impact as well, because it caused major supply chain issues for us and other producers. We had to change our glass suppliers, and we had really big delays with cork supplies, the capsules for the top of the bottle seals, cardboard for packaging deliveries—you name it, everything was disrupted. Most of our suppliers I tried to keep, because we have good relationships with them and that’s really important in business. We were also probably lucky that we are quite a small operation, so we have been able to adapt more quickly than bigger producers. Q: The Irish whiskey industry has grown enormously in recent years—do you think there is room for further growth and what are your own plans from here? When we started back in 2014, there were something like six craft distilleries in Ireland, but by the time our own distillery was up-and-running in 2020, the number had risen to around 40.  The market grew so much in that time. There is a lot more competition now and a lot more diversity in the sector, but there are also a lot more customers buying Irish whiskey in Ireland and overseas. I think there is still scope for some growth in the market. Forty distilleries sounds like a lot, but Scotland has around 100. What we are seeing is that, as the market matures, there is less focus on cost and greater focus on quality. Each producer has to know their niche and communicate it well to the marketplace. For Tipperary Boutique Distillery, our plan now is to continue to sell in Europe, and expand our presence in America and Asia. We want to continue to grow sustainably and one day—hopefully soon—open our own visitor centre at our distillery here on Ballindoney Farm.

Wavering over support for Ukraine’s defence against Russia is not an option. The stakes are too high for Europe’s stability and unity, writes Judy Dempsey Russia’s war against Ukraine is approaching its tenth month. Despite Russian President Vladimir Putin’s original aim of conquering Ukraine within days after his 24 February invasion, Russian troops have been forced to withdraw from strategic areas in eastern Ukraine.  It’s too difficult to speculate how and when this war will end, but there is already a sense of war fatigue among some governments and political parties in Europe and the United States—ignoring the fact that Russia has been escalating this war over the past few months and Ukraine must continue to fight for its independence. There is even some suggestion that Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky should be persuaded to negotiate with Putin.  This would be a mistake.  Understandably, several EU countries—especially the Baltic States, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia—do not trust Putin’s intentions. They want Ukraine to continue regaining occupied territory and then negotiate from a position of strength. This kind of victory for Ukraine would have several outcomes for the region and the EU. A Ukrainian victory could deter Russia from spreading its military and political influence in Moldova, Georgia and Armenia. Such a victory would be a fillip to pro-European political movements in these countries.  As for Belarus, there is little chance that the political future of Alexander Lukashenka, who has imprisoned many Belarussians since their failed uprising over two years ago and repressed any kind of opposition, would survive.   A Ukrainian defeat, on the other hand, could encourage the Kremlin to extend its influence over Eastern Europe and consolidate Lukashenka’s regime which would, in the short-term, increase his grip on power. In the long term, this ‘stability’ based on repression would lead to instability.  In short, a victory by Ukraine could increase the stability of Eastern Europe. A Russian victory would lead to instability in the region. As for the EU, a return to Russia exerting its political and economic influence over Eastern Europe would have several consequences.  First, it would lead to new divisions on the European continent.  Second, as many EU countries have taken in Ukrainians, an unstable Eastern Europe would lead to new flows of refugees. Populist movements could exploit such a development.  Third, it would lead to deeper divisions inside the EU. The Central European countries would oppose any negotiations that would allow Putin to save face. Germany and France might be tempted to restore relations with the Kremlin—indeed, neither Berlin nor Paris have called unambiguously for Ukraine to win this war.  Fourth, given these differences, it is hard to see how the EU could ever agree to a strong and united foreign, security and defence policy. Russia’s war against Ukraine has exposed the level of distrust between the Central European and big EU member states. Small EU countries matter. Perhaps, for example, Ireland, Finland and Denmark, could form coalitions of the willing with the Central Europeans to maintain political, military and economic support for Ukraine.  Wavering over support for Ukraine is not an option. The stakes are too high for Europe’s stability and unity. Judy Dempsey is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe and Editor-in-Chief of Strategic Europe

Attracting, retaining and upskilling their people will be a top priority for Ireland’s chief financial officers in 2023. Colin Kerr reports As Irish businesses approach another year of uncertainty, Ireland’s chief financial officers (CFOs) are looking to workforce upskilling as a major “investment opportunity” in the 12 months ahead. The latest Deloitte CFO survey benchmarked the sentiment of 1,151 CFOs in 15 countries in Europe. Published in mid-November, the bi-annual survey sought the views of 75 senior finance executives in Irish business, in sectors ranging from construction, healthcare, and manufacturing, to retail, tourism and transport.  Seventy-two percent said upskilling was a major priority for them currently, while 96 percent identified attracting and retaining skilled talent as one of the biggest risks they would face in 2023. “This outweighs their assessment of other risks, such as the economic outlook for Ireland, the geopolitical outlook, supply chain logistics, and cyber risk,” said Danny Gaffney, Partner, Deloitte Ireland. “The survey also highlighted the point that a lot of CFOs are recognising the multiple benefits of upskilling at a macro level. As Irish businesses upskill their teams, it creates capacity within those teams and CFOs see the importance of that given the constrained talent market.” Businesses in Ireland are refocusing their workforce policies and planning talent attraction and retention, according to Deloitte’s findings. Eighty-five percent are looking at rolling out flexible working patterns, while 69 percent are reviewing their reward offering.  Sixty-eight percent, meanwhile, are investing in wellbeing and assistance programmes, and 59 percent are investing in sustainability initiatives, such as measures to reduce their carbon footprint. “Wellbeing and assistance programmes are actually getting leveraged to a greater degree. Going back to the hybrid discussion, the usual supports that are available onsite are not always available when you are working in a hybrid environment,” said Gaffney. “Having in place good wellbeing and assistance programmes is very useful to organisations in the hybrid environment where CFOs and their teams are not as well-connected as they would be onsite.” Gaffney advised that CFOs put a clear strategy in place when considering how best to upskill their team. “What we need are practical solutions where team members continue in their roles and can upskill around the working day, either in person or online,” he said. “At Deloitte, we are working with clients to help them meet this challenge, including an increasing focus on digital technologies. Personally, I would encourage CFOs to look at training as a better use of their internal capital than focusing on external resources, as a means to allow them to do some of the challenging things they are not doing at present.” The pursuit of digital finance strategies is one of the challenges facing CFOs. Upskilling existing employees can help to meet this challenge. “Getting upskilling right is essential. If you don’t get it right, it falls by the wayside and the business, the CFO and the internal teams all lose out as a result,” said Gaffney. “The biggest trap CFOs can fall into is making upskilling too complicated. The three pillars I would identify are: Show, Support, Assess. CFOs need to be sure the people on their teams are getting the specific training and development they need.” Communication is equally important, as is commitment, according to Gaffney. “It is a two-way street and both the CFO and their team need to be open, upfront and honest in advance of committing to training and upskilling,” he said.  “The business needs to understand the team motive and the individual team members, who are being upskilled, need to understand the business motive behind the process. Commitment is also key because—if we are talking about businesses trying to generate capability to create business value going forward—they need to be committed to ensuring the right conditions are in place for their teams to excel during and after the upskilling.” The growing trend towards hybrid working among businesses in Ireland offers its own potential opportunities. “Remote and online training is much more commonplace now than it was two or three years ago,” said Gaffney.  “With hybrid working, the big challenge a lot of businesses and organisations have faced, and continue to face, concerns connectivity. They can say, ‘we mandate you to be in the office on particular days each week,’ and that can lead to a reaction that may be very negative.  “On the other hand, there are workplaces that are more employee-led in terms of when people are required to come into the office. The challenge in this scenario is that these employees can feel disconnected from the organisation.  “Training is a brilliant way to make people feel connected. When training is made available to me through work, I feel that I am valued and more aligned to my role. This is because I can see that both my organisation and I understand what it takes for me to be successful.” The foremost challenge for many organisations is their CFO’s capacity to “absorb costs”, both new and existing, Gaffney said. “Rates of inflation will remain higher for a longer period of time, as the cost of debt rises and the appetite for risk declines, and organic growth is more of a focus for the CFOs over merger and acquisition (M&A) activity. “Reducing M&A activity may seem like something CFOs would look to do, but they should look at longer-term investments to mitigate current risks.”

The worse the market sentiment, the better the profit opportunities and, right now, UK equities may represent “the trade of the decade”. Cormac Lucey explains why Diversity is regarded as an unambiguously good thing nowadays. Imagine the reaction you might get if you were to try to assert the contrary among your family or in your social group. But, for all that diversity is pushed and advocated, it can also sometimes be woefully lacking in our public discourse.  More than eyebrows may be raised if somebody states their support for Donald Trump or the UK’s decision to exit the European Union. But, in 2016, millions of sensible people voted for Trump and for Brexit.  Is it not odd that today their viewpoint is so universally dismissed? While being contrary is generally regarded as a negative social habit, it can pay rich dividends from an investment perspective: the worse the market sentiment is, the better the profit opportunities.  This is the credo of contrarian investing. Nathan Rothschild, a 19th-century British financier and member of the Rothschild banking family, is credited with saying that “the time to buy is when there’s blood in the streets”.  Brexit is widely regarded by “right-thinking people” as a self-inflicted wound. A June 2022 analysis by John Springford for the European Centre for Reform concluded that the UK economy had substantially underperformed post-Brexit compared to how it might have fared if the British public had not voted to leave the EU.  UK gross domestic product was 5.2 percent lower than it would have been if the UK had remained in the EU; investment was 13.7 percent lower; and goods trade was down 13.6 percent.  Since then, Boris Johnson has given way as Prime Minister to Liz Truss, and she has been replaced by Rishi Sunak. And there was that snap financial crisis triggered by Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini-budget.  The UK has seldom looked so bad.  There isn’t exactly blood running on the streets, but it is pretty bombed out as a popular investment destination. That’s one reason why Rob Arnott, Chair of Research Affiliates, has argued that UK equities represent “the trade of the decade”. He states that “UK equities offer one of the most attractive risk-return trade-offs, priced to earn a return a notch higher than emerging market equities with significantly lower volatility”.  In essence, Arnott follows the Warren Buffett dictum about the equities market: “in the short-term, the market is a popularity contest; in the long-term, it is a weighing machine”.  As investor holding periods stretch out beyond five years, realised investor returns increasingly become a function of the price paid. So, while very expensive stocks can become even more expensive over a few years, as more time passes, they will increasingly struggle to generate strong returns.  Conversely, if you buy a deeply discounted asset (such as UK value stocks today), they may not initially show a great return but, over time, they should. In fact, with an asset this deeply discounted, there’s every chance it will outperform even in the short-term.  Arnott wrote his piece in early 2021 when he argued that, among the major equity markets, UK stocks were trading in the cheapest quintile of their historical norms based on both price-to-book and price-to-five-year average cash-flow ratios and in the bottom third, based on price-to-five-year average sales ratio. His previous big call—to invest in emerging market value stocks in 2016—generated returns of 80 percent in its first two years. Since announcing this trade of the decade, UK value stocks have risen by over 20 percent while the S&P index is marginally lower than it was, and the Nasdaq has dropped by over 20 percent.  Sometimes diversity of thought isn’t so bad after all. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Developments at the United Nation’s 27th climate conference will have far-reaching implications for financial professionals and businesses worldwide. Susan Rossney digs into the details COP27, the international climate summit, concluded on 20 November after two weeks of negotiations. While last year’s COP saw the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation announce an International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), this year had less reporting-specific news.  One headline was the commitment by CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project) to incorporate ISSB’s IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures Standard into its global environmental disclosure platform—another step towards greater comparability and coherence of global standards and reporting. On a macro level, though, COPs have a huge importance for businesses worldwide. ‘COPs’—Conferences of the Parties—are summits attended by the nearly 200 countries which have signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).  At COPs, these countries discuss their existing efforts and future plans to deal with climate change and its effects. Any new agreements made at COP tend to be named after the host city, e.g. the ‘Paris Agreement’ (2015), the ‘Glasgow Climate Pact’ (2021). This year we have the ‘Sharm el-Sheikh Implementation Plan’, named after the Egyptian city in which it took place. This plan set up a new loss and damage fund for vulnerable countries most severely impacted by the effects of unpreventable climate change (floods, drought, desertification, and land loss due to rising sea-levels). The inclusion was a landmark moment in global climate politics as it acknowledged that the world’s richer countries—and biggest carbon emitters—are responsible to the developing world for the harm caused by global warming. How to finance this loss and damage, specifically how finance would be channelled to the developing world, was a dominant and contentious topic at COP27. The scale of the finance required is truly enormous. At least $2 trillion a year will be needed by developing countries to enable them to transition from fossil fuels, invest in renewable energy and other low-carbon technology, and cope with the impacts of extreme weather. The final figure is likely to be multiples of that. Although COPs have been criticised as political talking shops, divorced from the lived experience of most citizens and businesses, they have a considerable impact. Close to 200 countries gathering to debate a global response to climate change keeps alive an issue that affects all citizens, albeit not equally.  It restates the importance of holding global warming to the levels agreed upon at the Paris Agreement—i.e. well below 2°C and preferably 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels (we are currently at 1.1–1.2°C). What is decided at COP filters down to organisations through legislation and policy, like Europe’s ‘Fit for 55’ package, Ireland’s Climate Action Plans and sectoral targets, and through investors’ continued demands for projects that are aligned to climate targets to meet their own portfolio requirements.  Ireland will come under continued pressure from the EU to act on measures such as developing our renewable energy and tackling our carbon emissions. Changes are required across all sectors, and all businesses, including SMEs, will have to make changes. Accountants, as their trusted advisers, will need the knowledge to help businesses adapt and thrive in this new reality.   Susan Rossney is Sustainability Officer at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Moves underway globally to reform the audit process should reduce the likelihood of corporate collapses and internal fraud, writes Paul Kilduff Whenever there is a sudden company collapse, a shocking fraud or a financial scandal, the details make the front pages of the newspapers and news sites, and the shareholders and the public rightly ask: ‘And where was audit?’ Work is presently underway to address this vital question. In the US, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) oversees the audits of public companies in order to protect investors. There are quality control standards in place covering personnel, ethics, engagement performance and client acceptance, but the chair of the PCAOB accepts that these are outdated and do not adequately promote audit quality.  The PCAOB’s plan is to close the gaps by updating the rules for how firms should police their audit work. It recently issued its 2022–2026 Strategic Plan for public comment, so these planned developments will take time. In the UK, the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) develops and maintains auditing and assurance standards. The most recent annual report from the FRC on the quality of audit in the UK found that 33 percent of all audits reviewed needed improvement. This was an unacceptably high number of audits, according to the accounting watchdog. Of the 147 audits inspected by the FRC, 41 required ‘further improvements’ and seven needed ‘significant changes’.  The Institute of Internal Auditors believes the FRC findings underline the need for urgent audit reform and robust measures designed to increase audit quality. One solution is to put the FRC audit regulator on a statutory footing with enough new legal powers to do its job effectively. Sadly, the problem of audit quality remains, and it has impacted the work of the auditor for years. High-profile scandals When Nick Leeson single-handedly destroyed Barings Bank, I was an internal audit manager with HSBC in London. My first reaction was one of relief that the calamitous events had not occurred at our bank. My second reaction was one of concern that the bank’s internal audit team and external auditors in Singapore had not discovered the £869 million trading loss hidden by Leeson. Leeson outfoxed audit. When internal audit arrived from the London head office, he met them on the chaotic trading floor of SIMEX, he told them he was very busy, and he avoided the office and all meetings with the auditors. When external audit from a Big 4 firm asked him for a confirmation for a large bogus option trade, Leeson manufactured the confirmation from a page of headed bank notepaper, using scissors, glue, and a photocopier. The audit team was none the wiser as to his deceit. Wirecard AG, a Munich-based electronic payments provider, once valued at €24 billion, went kaput in 2020. The accounts of this listed company included a bank deposit in Singapore of €1.9 billion, which simply did not exist. The Financial Times reported that, instead of obtaining confirmation of the deposit directly from the bank, the auditors relied on documents and screenshots provided by a third-party trustee and by Wirecard staff.  This audit failure happened not once, but at three successive year-ends from 2016 to 2018. I qualified as an ACA many years ago, but even then, obtaining independent confirmation of bank deposits was covered in day one of audit training. The head of the German financial watchdog BaFin was critical of the audit work performed and said the Wirecard scandal was ‘a complete disaster’, adding: ‘It starts with looking at a complete failure of senior management and it goes on to the scores of auditors who couldn’t dig up the truth.’ In the UK, there are recent examples of previously robust companies, which had been audited by leading UK accounting firms, suddenly failing. The demise of retail chain BHS, travel agency Thomas Cook and construction giant Carillion had a major impact on the UK economy, costing the taxpayer millions. The Institute of Internal Auditors believes that stronger governance and audit can help to prevent such collapses occurring in the future, protecting jobs, pensions, investors and incomes. Necessary reform The necessary improvements to audit must deliver on several fronts. The audit profession must ensure that it attracts capable individuals with strong product knowledge, an inquiring mindset, and a character strong enough to deal with any management obstruction.  The improved audit approach must be documented in revised policies and procedures, which must be ingrained in audit work. Quality Assurance functions must be set up or enhanced in firms to ensure standards are met. The cost of implementing these audit reforms must be reasonable to bear, whether the auditor is in an internal audit function, a Big 4 audit firm or a small audit firm with a more limited budget. There is an expectation that audit reform must use all available technology to improve the quality and scope of audit work. In the past, audit sampling may have been acceptable, but with advanced Computer Assisted Audit Techniques (CAATs), 100 percent auditing is the likely optimal solution. Global audit reform must also consider the changing nature of work, and the associated risks. Few auditors thought three years ago that so many employees would now be working on a hybrid basis, relying on remote systems access for client verification, payments processing and other critical tasks.  When reform does arrive, there should be international convergence, so that the audit quality rules in the US, UK and other jurisdictions are consistent and align with international standards, thereby avoiding unnecessary differences and costly duplication that could weaken audit effectiveness.  In the meantime, accountancy bodies are providing new guidance to members.  New guidance  In the UK, the Institute of Accountants in England and Wales recently reported on the significant resources devoted to fraud-related activities within audit firms. It also acknowledged the public perception that auditors can and should be doing much more to deter and detect fraud and to prevent the unexpected failure of large companies due to fraud. It was Lord Justice Lopes who famously summed up the auditor’s duty in the case of Kingston Cotton Mills Co., where the company directors had fraudulently overstated the value of stock, by proclaiming: ‘An auditor is not bound to be a detective. He is a watchdog, but not a bloodhound.’  Lopes opined that the auditor cannot be liable for any wrongdoings they had no reason to suspect were taking place, but that landmark legal judgement was handed down in 1896. The expectation placed on both internal and external auditors is significantly higher today.  The auditor is not specifically expected to search out any fraud or deception in their audit, but if there are warning signs that all is not well, the auditor must investigate these to reach a satisfactory conclusion regarding the audit opinion.  While writing my latest banking book, I researched the case of Joseph Jett, a former bond trader with Kidder Peabody in New York, who created $350 million of phantom trading profits on the bank’s computer systems.  The subsequent post-mortem report stated that the internal auditors learnt that Jett had booked billions of dollars of unusual transactions, but no auditor followed up on this anomaly. The auditor had to explain his work in court, as audit workpapers were produced with hand-written annotations without evidence of action. This is not a situation any auditor would wish to defend.  I also came across Sir Allen Stanford and his Stanford Financial Group, based in Antigua, which was later revealed to be a giant Ponzi scheme. His bank at the time had a value of $8 billion, but it was audited by a small Antiguan audit firm with just ten staff. This should never have been acceptable. When corporate disaster does strike, it is easy to point the finger at the auditor, but this is often unfair. Every auditor comes to work with the intention of doing a good job. The aim of audit reform is to assist and guide the auditor in their work, rather than to make their work more onerous. The global audit reform process is underway, and it must deliver improvements to reduce the likelihood of further high-profile corporate disasters, which damage the reputation of the auditor. In the meantime, the auditor at large would do well to maintain a healthy sense of scepticism.  Paul Kilduff B.Comm FCA is an author and banker, who has worked with HSBC, Bank of Ireland, Bank of America, Barclays and Citibank. His eighth book, Stupid Bankers: The World’s Worst Banking Disasters Revealed, is available exclusively on Amazon UK in paperback and Kindle format

Irish Government finances are in surplus and Ireland’s debt-to-GDP ratio has stabilised, so why are there calls for higher taxes? asks Dr Brian Keegan It’s hard to avoid concern fatigue setting in. What with the war in Ukraine, the cost-of-living crisis, the continued Northern political stalemate, multiple dire warnings amplified at COP27 over climate change and another possible COVID-19 surge—the list of concerns seems particularly endless at the moment.   Some time ago, the commentator Marc Coleman projected that population growth—and, by implication, skills growth—would drive prosperity in Ireland. Coleman’s ideas have been given additional credence by the current situation in the UK. Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s November budget looks towards an extended period of economic stagnation. British productivity has not grown in line with government spending in recent years. In the moribund British economy, there is a record low level of people out of work while the number of job vacancies is at a record high.   There is a straightforward, one-to-one relationship between economic growth and the growth in tax yield, which permits more government spending without further borrowing. When the growth in gross domestic product (GDP) stalls, so too do the tax figures.   In his book The Best is Yet to Come, Coleman pointed out some of the links between more workers, growth and greater resources for public services and benefits. Though the timing was unfortunate (the book was published just months before the 2008 financial crisis), Ireland is now indeed in a better place, at least economically, than it has been for many years. Government finances are in surplus and the debt-to-GDP ratio, at around 50 percent, is back under control.   Unlike the British situation where a Budget bordering on the austere was required to meet existing public spending commitments, without an intolerably high borrowing requirement, the recent Irish Budget took a cost-of-living crisis in its stride, with grant aid against soaring energy bills for households and businesses alike being met through current tax receipts. Nevertheless, a narrative has emerged that the burden of taxation in Ireland will have to increase.   Why this should be the case is not always specified. There are unquestionably problems with housing, health, and education, but it does not automatically follow that these problems arise from underinvestment. At the time of writing, close to half a billion euros set aside in 2022 for local authority housing remains unspent. This points to management or capacity problems, not funding challenges.   The much-heralded report of the Commission on Taxation and Welfare has not had a huge impact on the political debate. This may be because it presents solutions in search of a problem. As research from the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has pointed out, “its work was not framed around any specific shortfall in funding that needed to be filled. Instead, it was guided by a broad intention to generate additional revenue”.   Even government politicians, who are rarely scathing about the output of an expert group, which the government itself commissioned, were dismissive of the recommendations. Clearly, there are some areas of the economy where additional tax funding will be required, if not immediately, in the medium-term.   Unless there is an unforeseen level of immigration of people of working age, the ratio of workers to pensioners is going in the wrong direction. Climate change management, ironically being driven more by energy security concerns than global altruism, will come with a price tag. The sustained high corporation tax take may have peaked. In Britain, the urgent need for higher taxation has been unanswerable. In Ireland, there needs to be a clear business case for any form of new or additional taxation. We have enough to be concerned about without the prospect of unnecessary taxes. Dr Brian Keegan is Director of Advocacy and Voice at Chartered Accountants Ireland

Chartered Accountant Eamonn Hughes is playing a leading role in Bank of Ireland’s Responsible and Sustainable Business Strategy. Hughes tells Accountancy Ireland about the four-year plan and his goals as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer  Before joining Bank of Ireland Group in February as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer, Chartered Accountant Eamonn Hughes had a longstanding career as a sell-side market analyst with more than 25 years’ experience in capital markets and domestic banking.  Having worked most recently with Goodbody, the stockbroking firm, as Irish Banks and Insurance Sector Analyst and, before that, Head of Research, Hughes also had a clear view of the swift rise in environmental, social and governance (ESG) to the top of the financial agenda worldwide. “I could see that ESG was becoming hugely important in capital markets and the financial sector. The climate crisis, in particular, is a critical threat, but also a significant opportunity,” said Hughes. “For our planet, there is no Plan B, but the discussion about sustainability is not just about climate change. It is also about creating a more sustainable business model. Our vision at Bank of Ireland is to be the national champion in Ireland, to use our balance sheet and resources to drive positive change for a better, fairer society and improve the environment. “This gives me a very strong framework to think about my role, because, if we can deliver on our ESG strategy, we can ultimately deliver a more sustainable business model for all stakeholders and positive returns for investors. “The ESG agenda also involves regulators, so disclosure and risk management are very important—and there are reporting frameworks in place, but they are evolving very quickly. This is one of the challenges we face and is also why transparency and the availability of clear data is so important.  “With my background in capital markets, I can clearly see the mobilisation in capital, and I think the banking sector has a very obvious supporting role to play in society’s sustainability transition.” Investing in tomorrow Bank of Ireland published its Responsible and Sustainable Business Strategy in March 2021, a year before Hughes joined the group.  Bank of Ireland’s four-year Investing in Tomorrow strategy set out its own goals to support the green transition, alongside two additional pillars: enabling colleagues to thrive; and enhancing customers’ financial wellbeing. The Investing in Tomorrow green transition pillar included the setting of science-based targets aligning the bank’s lending portfolios with the Paris Agreement. The international treaty on climate change, adopted in 2015 at COP 21, set out a goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. “Data is key across all three pillars, because reporting is essentially an output of what we are doing in support of climate change, colleagues, customers and the organisation as a whole,” said Hughes. “We need to focus on how we interact with our stakeholders internally and externally and, in my role, investors are obviously a key priority. As investors now have to produce more disclosures themselves, they will need to engage more with us in terms of what we are doing on our own ESG journey.” Clear reporting strategy How Bank of Ireland communicates with, and reports to, stakeholders on the progress of its ESG strategy is a priority for Hughes in his role as Chief Sustainability and Investor Relations Officer. “Ultimately, we need to explain how we are meeting the targets set out in our strategy, and it is incumbent upon us to develop the capacity and skill sets we need to support reporting and strategy delivery,” he said. “My role is to support in delivering across all three pillars, which involves a lot of data-gathering internally, particularly from a regulatory and reporting perspective.” Detailed progress reports on ESG will now be a core part of Bank of Ireland’s annual reporting cycle. “We need to be able to demonstrate clearly that we are creating a sustainable business strategy, enabling colleagues to thrive in the organisation and enhancing financial well-being among customers, in addition to supporting the sustainable transition,” said Hughes. “Transparency is hugely important. There are a lot of differentials in this space, so we need to standardise our reporting; to be able to explain clearly and cohesively what we are doing and why.” Commercialisation is becoming increasingly important as Bank of Ireland continues to implement Investing in Tomorrow, Hughes said. “Like many banks, we are in the commercialisation phase of our ESG strategy with the creation of sustainable finance solutions for, and increasing engagement with, customers. We are supporting and incentivising customers through competitive rates to buy or build an energy efficient home or to retrofit their home or business to make it more energy efficient.” Sustainable finance fund Bank of Ireland recently announced a €3 billion increase in its Sustainable Finance Fund, which will bring it to €5 billion by 2024. The fund covers green propositions, including mortgages, home improvement loans and business  loans.  Bank of Ireland’s inaugural standalone Responsible and Sustainable Business Report, published in June, tracked the progress of its ESG strategy in 2021. More than €1.8 billion in mortgages, home improvement loans and business loans had been drawn down from the Sustainable Finance Fund by the end of the year, the report stated. Thirty-five percent of all mortgages provided by the bank in 2021 were green, rising to 48 percent in the first half of 2022.  Bank of Ireland was also the largest provider of wholesale finance for electric vehicles in 2021, providing finance to 13 of the 15 car manufacturer franchises. The publication of the Responsible and Sustainable Business Report marked a significant “step-change in the tracking and transparency” of the bank’s ESG reporting, Hughes noted.  “Our stakeholders—including customers, shareholders, and regulators—are demanding far greater transparency as to how we are meeting our ESG commitments,” he said. “This report provides insight into our strategic approach, appraisal of our progress to achieve our purpose, and information on the key focus areas we plan to progress in the years ahead. Being clear on ESG, and showing how you are delivering what you sign up to, is now a commercial imperative for all lenders, including Bank of Ireland.” Science-based targets Bank of Ireland has also committed to setting science-based targets across portfolios and operations to align lending practice with the low carbon ambitions set out in the Paris Agreement. “We completed two successful green bond issuances in 2021, raising €1.25 billion with the capital used to finance green buildings, renewable energy projects and clean transportation,” said Hughes. “Thirty-five per cent of the mortgages we provided in 2021 were green and we have also launched a green mortgage product in the UK.” Bank of Ireland is providing finance for the development of at least 750 megawatts of renewable wind capacity across the island of Ireland. The bank is also in the process of decarbonising its own operations—reducing absolute emissions by 88 percent between 2011 and 2021. Social and governance Although supporting the green agenda is a major part of Investing in Tomorrow, the strategy also sets goals for investing in colleagues and enhancing customers’ financial wellbeing. “We recognise the supporting role we can play in Ireland’s response to the climate crisis, but the ‘S’ and ‘G’ are equally important when we consider ESG,” Hughes said. “We have a strategy to improve the financial wellbeing of our customers and to foster a financially inclusive society.” Bank of Ireland was, Hughes said, supporting customers to become more financially confident, while also working to simplify processes, so that the “financially marginalised have easier access to banking services.” Financial health and inclusion  Bank of Ireland is one of 28 banks around the world that have signed the Commitment to Financial Health and Inclusion published in December 2021 under the United Nations Principles for Responsible Banking (PRB). A first-of-its-kind initiative aimed at promoting universal financial inclusion and health in the banking sector, its launch closely followed the publication of the UN’s PRB Collective Progress Report. The report identified financial inclusion as the third most pressing sustainability challenge facing signatory banks, behind climate mitigation and adaptation. “This UN initiative is particularly important in an environment in which we have a cost-of-living crisis and customers are facing major challenges in the medium- to long-term. The question for us is, ‘how can we deliver this particular skill set and support our customers at a time when they really need it?’” said Hughes. Bank of Ireland is also helping customers to “live more sustainably” with the recent announcement of the roll out of bio-sourced debit and credit cards. Launched in October, the initiative will over time replace all plastic debit and credit cards issued by the bank, to help support the reduction of single-use plastic. “If we are to live in a more sustainable way, we need to do things differently, including through our everyday banking. The introduction of bio-sourced cards is a very practical way we can help our customers to reduce their environmental footprint,” Hughes said. “As a bank, we are working very closely with our customers on the sustainability transition. As they deliver, we deliver. It is a symbiotic relationship and an exciting place to be.”  

Martin Moloney, Secretary General of the International Organisation of Securities Commissions, outlines his priorities for the year ahead Irishman Martin Moloney is Secretary General of the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). Headquartered in Madrid, Spain, the international body brings together the world’s securities regulators and is recognised as the standard setter for the securities sector worldwide. IOSCO develops, implements, and promotes adherence to internationally recognised standards for securities regulation, working closely with the G20 and the Financial Stability Board (FSB) on global regulatory reform. Accountancy Ireland sat down with Moloney to discuss his goals, priorities, and concerns for the year ahead. Q: What are the biggest risks facing investors around the world right now and how is IOSCO working with securities regulatory agencies to address these risks? The risks that investors face never really change. There are some fundamentals. You can hire the wrong advisers, you can pay them too much, you can choose the wrong times to get in or out of markets, and you can invest in the wrong things. These risks are the core risks for investors, and they have been for as long as financial markets have existed. The difficulty is that financial markets are constantly changing. New asset classes like crypto are emerging, and there are new ways in which intermediaries work on your behalf, but also earn fees for themselves. This creates new risks for investors. Also, as we saw from recent events in the UK, markets can go into sudden periods of stress and crash. We do our best, working with others, to try to make markets as resilient as they can be, to ensure that these episodes are few and far between insofar as we can. These are the big issues facing us currently. Really, it all comes down to integrity—being able to trust the price you see when you invest in the markets and ensuring that you are not being fooled by people who are trying to cheat you out of your money. Q: You have described the rise of cryptocurrency as an area fraught with risk, requiring “a lot of work” on the part of regulators. Can you tell us more? There is no doubt in my mind that we have reached a turning point in relation to crypto. This is not because of the so-called ‘Crypto Winter’. The value of crypto might go up or down, but that is not really the issue. The point that we all have to observe and recognise is that crypto has survived and has continued to survive over a number of years. It is reasonable to assume that it is not going away and, therefore, it has to be regulated. I am delighted to say that, since I have joined IOSCO, the organisation has moved forward with its policy in this area and is now very quickly developing a set of guidelines for the market on how different jurisdictions should regulate crypto and the common standards they should aim to achieve in doing so. We are seeing a number of regions, notably the United States and Europe, now moving towards developing legal frameworks. I have no doubt that this is far from the end of the matter, however—it is just the beginning. Crypto is going to evolve and change as people get on top of the technology and new opportunities emerge. The most important thing we must all keep an eye on here is the outcome for the investor. In the first years of crypto, a huge number of people lost money through fraud. Other people, who may not even have been aware of it, lost money through market manipulation, insider trading and various other dubious activities we know well. Very often, this has been driven by conflicts of interest. If you dig down into the principles articulated by IOSCO for financial markets many years ago, you will find us warning against many of the phenomena we are now seeing in crypto markets. Theft does not change. It might happen in a different location, but theft is still theft. Bad management is still bad management, no matter where it happens. It is up to us to re-articulate these very simple, but really important, ideas and explain how they can apply in the crypto space. It is also important for the crypto sector itself to come up with good solutions and technologically enabled solutions, so that its work can be supervised and that it can reach the same standard of regulation as the rest of the financial sector. There are a number of individuals, I think, within the crypto sector who have come to understand that they need to move positively towards a strong regulatory framework in order to bottom out their businesses and remain stable. If we do not start to see self-regulation within the crypto sector, then I think we will see more jurisdictions banning crypto. It is just not sustainable over the medium term to try to avoid the regulatory frameworks that apply to everyone else. It is one thing to see yourself as a different asset class. It’s quite another to see yourself as an entirely different industry when you are effectively doing the same thing. Q: So, you do believe that cryptocurrency has a long-term future provided that there is robust regulation in place across the board? I think there is some potential for this asset class, but it is going to become more challenging. I don’t have a crystal ball, so I try not to predict the future. I see some very interesting new products developing in the decentralised finance space, and I wonder if this is ultimately where crypto is going to go. We are all used to a simple model in which you get quite non-functional assets like Bitcoin being traded and people making money primarily out of the bubbles in Bitcoin. The use cases for crypto continue to be worked on extensively, however. So, every time you have one of those bubbles, what is actually happening is that money is being raised to allow people to invest in new potential use cases. There are now so many use cases that have come and gone, and failed ideas that have been touted and promoted, you could be forgiven for thinking that there are no use cases left for crypto—but that is probably wrong. I think people will continue trying to figure out good use cases for crypto. I don’t think it’s going away any time soon. Q: You have spoken recently about the greenwashing risk facing securities regulators—what can be done to address this? We put out a couple of reports in 2021 where we looked at the greenwashing issue in great detail, listing the different ways in which this phenomenon occurs. We had to acknowledge, however, that it is not just about ‘evil intent’. Activity that might be described as greenwashing often happens, because the market structures needed to adequately support sustainable finance are not yet in place. Sometimes, you do get people who are frankly trying to fool investors by issuing misleading information, but, equally, the markets as they stand are just not built for sustainable financing. Having identified the problem and having asked the industry to work as hard as possible to reduce the amount of greenwashing that now exists, we have had to acknowledge that the system itself needs to change. Regulators have to do it, governments have to do it, standard-setters have to do it—to create a better system to achieve true sustainable finance. If, for example, I am proposing an investment that has a strong impact in terms of reducing carbon emissions, I should get a better price on the market and a better investment price for that security than someone who comes to market with a security for a carbon-emitting project. We want the market to be sensitive to the environmental impact of different proposals, companies and products. They must have access to information that is reliable; that has been independently audited; and that brokers can bring together to compare stocks from different parts of the world and determine differential pricing based on their impact on the environment. Getting all of this right would be an incredibly hard job, so we have broken the job down into a number of elements. We will be progressively working on putting these building blocks in place over the next couple of years, in order to make sure that the process can be regulated and that people who don’t do the right thing can be held to account on the basis that they could have done the right thing and chose not to. Q: As the move to establish standards for environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting gathers pace, what is your take on the current efforts underway? We have a very close relationship with the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). We effectively oversee its work and, if we like what it is doing, we will endorse its standards, and recommend those standards to individual regulatory securities agencies around the world, so that these jurisdictions can adopt the standards as they see fit. The fundamental issue we are all facing is that a sustainable financial marketplace has to be a global marketplace. If you have fragmentation and you don’t have the same information sets available in different parts of the world, you cannot have a true comparison between different securities, and capital cannot flow to the best projects. It is no good for anyone if Europe is pristine, while the rest of the world is working in a different way. What happens in the Amazonian rainforest matters to all of us. Capital, therefore, has to flow from those places where it is abundant, such as Europe and North America, to locations in which the opportunities exist to do the right thing. What IOSCO has said to the countries we work with around the world is, “do this any way you want, but use the ISSB standards as a baseline and build your own approach on that foundation”. Put simply, you can do all you want in the ESG space, but unless we have a common core, we cannot create a global financial market that will bring about any real change. Q: Can you tell us about the work you are doing with the Financial Stability Board in relation to investment funds? This is a very big project for us. Investment funds are a crucial mechanism all around the world for people to get access to markets on a collective basis, but they can have a concerning impact on markets in periods of crisis. We have been doing work in this area since 2016. We have done a lot already, but there is more to do. A major focus for us next year will be trying to make sure that the kind of funds both ordinary individual investors and the more risk-averse institutional investors choose are safe in a crisis. We are trying to ensure that, if you are investing in a product that is riskier, it will be clear to you that it is more difficult to get your money out of it; that these kinds of investment funds are not the equivalent of a bank account. This is a typical example of what we do, but there are lots of others. We do a lot of work on cyber-resilience, and we are also very interested in the change in the behaviour of retail investors and their vulnerability to scams. One of the problems we face at the moment is that, while technology has made it easy or cheap for people to invest in the markets, it has also made it easy or cheap for fraudsters to get at many thousands of people. We need to figure out better and better ways to stop these fraudsters and prevent them in their designs. About Martin Moloney Prior to joining IOSCO as Secretary General in September 2021, Martin Moloney was Director General of the Jersey Financial Services Commission and, before that, he worked as a Special Adviser on Risk and Regulation to the Central Bank of Ireland, where he served for 16 years, previously heading up the Markets Policy, Markets Supervision, and Legal and Finance Divisions. Moloney began his early career working in industry with Barclays Bank and Bank of Ireland in London, before returning to Ireland to work with the Department of Justice, Department of Finance, the Irish Competition Authority. Born in Dublin, he has a master’s degrees in Business Law and Economic Policy, both from Trinity College Dublin.