As the recently appointed Vice-Chair of the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), Sue Lloyd will play a key role in paving the way for a “global baseline” for reliable ESG investment criteria. Elaine O’Regan talks to the New Zealand-born former IASB Vice-Chair about what lies ahead in her new role.  Prior to taking up your role with the ISSB, you were Vice-Chair of the International Accounting Standards Board for six years. Looking back on it, what do you see as your most significant achievements in that role? Completing the international IFRS Standard for insurance contracts was definitely a high point, and also chairing the IFRS Interpretations Committee from 2017 to 2022, and making it more responsive. What does your appointment as Vice-Chair of the International Sustainability Standards Board mean to you professionally? How important do you think the work of the ISSB will be, and your role in it? I see this appointment as a really exciting opportunity for me professionally. Corporate reporting is at a real turning point where we are embracing the need for the broadest set of information about sustainability, risks and opportunities to help investors make informed decisions. I am really excited and honoured to be part of that process. The ISSB has a pivotal role to play in bringing more comparability and quality to reporting on sustainability risks around the world and building a more efficient system, both for the preparers, providing the information, and also for the investors consuming them. One of my key roles as Vice-Chair of the Board is to bring to bear the standard-setting approach of the IASB. My technical skills from that world, and my knowledge of financial reporting, will help me to bring that rigor to sustainability reporting for investors. How will the ISSB’s approach to standard-setting emulate or differ from that of the IASB? How will the two bodies coalesce and work together in the future? There will be a lot of similarity with the IASB, particularly in relation to due process and the thoroughness in which we approach our work. The ISSB wants to be really inclusive and build on the viewpoints of our stakeholders. We have that in common with the IASB. Obviously, the subject matter is different. Sustainability is a more nascent area of reporting, so we will have to work more closely with our ecosystem and really work with assurers and specialists in sustainability to build this new infrastructure for reporting. The ISSB is a sister board to the IASB, and that is great because it means we are part of the same foundation. It gives us the unique ability to sit together and work out the package of information we are asking for to meet investor needs, and to make sure that the reporting and the financial statements fit well together. When the IFRS talks about the ISSB establishing a “global baseline of sustainability standards” what does this mean, and why is it important for the ESG agenda globally? When we talk about a global baseline, what we really want to do is establish a set of disclosures that are sufficient to meet the needs of investors—to enable them to understand how sustainability, risks and opportunities affect the value of a company’s shares and its debt.  We want to provide a ‘set of information’ on companies around the world so that investors can make decisions based on consistent and comparable data. That is really what a global baseline means. It will happen in practice through a combination of two different mechanisms. One will be adoption or incorporation into the regulation in different countries, so that it becomes part of the mandatory reporting system for jurisdictions, in the same way that the IASB’s accounting standards have been mandated by jurisdictions around the world.  Complementing this, we expect there to be a lot of voluntary application of the standards, separate to the regulatory element, because this is a good way for preparers to understand what information is relevant to meet investor needs.   Tell us about the ISSB’s four core pillars – governance, strategy, risk management and metrics. How relevant is each one in the context of your overall mission? Our overall objective is to make sure that investors have the information they need to understand the effects of sustainability risks and opportunities on enterprise values, share price and the value of a company’s debt.  Our pillars are the prism we use to gather sustainability information from four different perspectives. One is how a company governs its risks, and how it is managing those risks and building them into its business strategy. We also look at the metrics they use to assess where they are now, to set their targets for the future and measure their progress in meeting their targets. This ‘package of information’ is designed to meet the investor’s needs, and, importantly, it is designed to encourage companies to think about how they govern and manage risks. How will the work of the ISSB support and help investors in respect of good environmental, social and governance (ESG) practice? What other ‘ESG stakeholders’ will benefit from your work? We know that there are different parties who are interested in information about sustainability, not just investors. We want to facilitate the provision of information to all of them. We want to make this an efficient reporting system for public policy purposes and for broader stakeholder groups beyond investors, for example. One of the aspects that we are focusing on here is what we call the “building block” approach.   This means that, when we are building our requirements, we have investors’ needs in mind, but we also want to make sure that others can add specific investor requirements onto our disclosures to meet broader needs. If we can avoid the need to have one set of disclosures for investors and a completely separate set for broader stakeholders, it is more efficient for those preparing the information. Tell us about the first draft ISSB standards, published in April. What do these draft standards provide for, how is the consultation process progressing and what will the next steps be? There are two documents. The first is the General Requirements Exposure Draft, which sets out the overarching requirements for what should be provided for in sustainability reporting.  It asks companies to provide information about all of their significant sustainability risks and opportunities relevant to enterprise value assessment.  It also sets out some other general ideas—for example, the fact that you should be able to understand how this information relates to the financial statements and the proposal that this information be provided at the same time as the financial statements. The second document is the Climate Exposure Draft, which sets out what specific disclosures should be provided by a company about climate risks and opportunity. This means that, if a company using the General Requirements Exposure Draft identifies climate risks and opportunities as a “significant” sustainability-related risk and opportunity, they can turn to the Climate Exposure Draft to find out what disclosures to provide.  That document is asking for information about the physical risks of climate change the company is exposed to—flood risk, for example—but also opportunities arising from climate change. If a company has developed a product, which may become more popular because of climate change, investors may want to hear about that as much as they would climate-related risk.  These drafts are out for comment until 29 July, 2022. Once we get the feedback, we will decide what we need to adjust, what we can keep as is, and then we will move on to the final requirements. How do you foresee the “roadmap” of additional draft standards rolling out beyond these first two? What standards are next on the agenda for consultation and what is the anticipated timeline for their introduction? Our next step will be to ask our stakeholders what they think we should prioritise after the General Requirements Exposure Draft and Climate Exposure Draft documents are approved.  We only have so much time, and the same is true for our stakeholders, so it is important to us to ascertain where the greatest needs lie. In other words, it is really up to the stakeholders to decide what we work on next. How will the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) build on work already carried out by the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB)? Our four core pillars (governance, strategy, risk management and metrics) are taken straight from TCFD recommendations, and they form the backbone of the proposals we have out for comment.  We have incorporated their structure and the climate disclosures included in the TCFD have been incorporated into our Climate Exposure Draft. We have built on SASB materials in two ways. Industry-based requirements in the appendix to the Climate Exposure Draft are taken from SASB’s industry-based standards.  We took the climate-related metrics and included those in the Climate Exposure Draft as part of the mandatory climate disclosures.  We are asking stakeholders to use SASB guidance to help them meet their disclosure requirements in the General Requirements Exposure Draft up until the time we draft more specific disclosure requirements of our own. How do you foresee the ISSB working alongside, and collaborating with, other standard-setting and regulatory bodies and initiatives like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG)? Having our proposals out for comment at the same time as the SEC and EFRAG proposals means that we have a unique opportunity to compare and contrast these different proposals and bring as much commonality as we can to our requirements. In an ideal world, we want to work together to build this global baseline and ensure as much consistency as possible with the SEC, EFRAG, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and others.  We have a Working Group tasked with doing so with the US, Europe and also China, Japan and the UK. We are encouraging our stakeholders to write to the SEC and to let the commission know if they think that the global baseline is important.  The GRI is also very important and is a really good example of the ‘building block’ process that I described earlier.  We have a Memorandum of Understanding with GRI. One of our aims is to work together to form a global baseline we both agree on to meet investor needs and to encourage GRI to add the additional pieces of information to meet the broader information needs.

The FRC has issued FRED 80 Draft amendments to FRS 100 Application of Financial Reporting Requirements Application Guidance The Interpretation of Equivalence. This Financial Reporting Exposure Draft proposes to update the Application Guidance to FRS 100 to reflect changes to company law and decisions on equivalence further to the UK’s exit from the European Union. The objective of FRS 100 is to set out the applicable financial reporting framework for entities preparing financial statements in accordance with legislation, regulations or accounting standards applicable in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland.   Comments on FRED 80 are requested by 26 August 2022.

Derek Mernagh FCA is originally from Wexford and now lives in San Francisco where he arrived via stints living and working in Germany and Australia.  Where did you grow up and where do you live now? I'm originally from Enniscorthy, County Wexford and now I live in San Francisco. Tell us why you chose to become a Chartered Accountant and how you got here? It seemed like a good idea at the time! That was back when I was in my final year of college at Trinity College Dublin where there were the “milk rounds” that came by. I quickly realised that working for one of the Big 4 accounting firms would be a great way to start my career.  What do you value most about your membership of the profession and how do you think those benefits can be used to support the economy and society? It has opened up so many doors for me. I’ve had the chance to work in four countries (Ireland, Australia, Germany, and now the USA). I’ve found accountants are more valued than ever, and it’s only getting stronger. Accountants have a unique perspective within companies, and there are few roles that need to interact across functions the way we do.    You are living in San Francisco; can you tell us a bit what life is like there for you professionally and personally. It’s a great place to live. The thing I appreciate most is the weather. You can count on settled weather most of the year and be outside. And I’ve really gotten into the Californian wines. Having Napa valley nearby is so handy and the Cabernets are my personal favourite. Work opportunity is as good here for accountants as anywhere in the world. It’s fast paced and things change quickly so it’s not for the faint hearted. But the rewards when it works out (like taking a company public) can make it worth the extra effort.    Where is the first place you will go abroad now that we can travel again? Other than getting back to Ireland more often, I’d like to explore more of Mexico since it’s so close by, and I haven’t had a chance to visit too many places there. Then Central America after that.    And finally, Derek, if you weren’t an accountant, what do you think you would you be/have been? I’ve always been really into all things aviation so I would like to have been a pilot on long haul routes where I could travel and visit cities. If I got tired of the travel then I’d be happy serving (and tasting) wine.    Derek Mernagh is VP Corporate Controller at Motive, San Francisco.  

In developments this week, Accountancy Europe has written a letter to the European Commission's Commissioner Mairead McGuinness on the development of purposeful and effective European sustainability reporting standards and IAASA has published its annual Profile of the Profession for 2021 which presents an overview of the Prescribed Accountancy Bodies’ members and students and includes statistics about regulatory and monitoring activities. Read more on these and other developments that may be of interest to members below. Financial Reporting EFRAG has published a Draft Letter on the IFRS Interpretation Committee's Tentative Agenda Decisions in the final phase of implementing IFRS 17 Insurance Contracts and seeks constituents' views on the letter. The IFRS Interpretations Committee have issued its April 2022 update which includes the details of its recent meeting on 20th April. The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) has published new research, in conjunction with the UK Anti-Slavery Commissioner and Lancaster University, which has identified significant shortcomings in the quality of companies’ modern slavery reporting. Auditing IFAC has published “Audit Fees Survey 2022: Understanding Audit and Non-Audit Service Fees, 2013-2020”. As part of its ongoing consultation in relation to the proposed amendments to ISA (UK) 600, the FRC has invited stakeholders to its upcoming webinar on 4th May and virtual roundtables on 11th and 12th May The FRC has made changes to its Publication Policies for the Audit Enforcement Procedure (AEP) and the Accountancy and Actuarial Schemes (the Schemes). Sustainability Accountancy Europe has written a letter to the European Commission's Commissioner Mairead McGuinness on the development of purposeful and effective European sustainability reporting standards. Anti-Money Laundering and Sanctions FATF has recently published its first report on the state of effectiveness and compliance with the FATF standards. It gives a comprehensive overview of the state of global efforts to tackle money laundering, terrorist and proliferation financing. It states that the non-financial sector, including accountants generally have a poor understanding of risks from money laundering and terrorist financing and struggle to mitigate them. There are also some harsh conclusions on systems to monitor and enforce transparency in beneficial ownership. Fscom, a UK compliance firm, has recently published a handbook entitled “AML in Crypto Handbook“ which is a short introduction to Anti-Money Laundering in the context of cryptoassets. Their aim is to provide a beginner’s insight to cryptoassets from the point of view of an AML professional. The handbook is free to download from their website. The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) recently conducted a review of financial crime controls in “challenger“  banks. Broadly speaking such banks are a sub-sector of retail banks which aim to reduce the market concentration of traditional high street banks through the use of technology and more up-to-date IT systems and some of them are online-only banks. The review found there is a need to improve how such banks  assess financial crime risk. Some are failing to adequately check their customers’ income and occupation, and, in some instances, challenger banks did not have financial crime risk assessments in place for their customers. You can read the press release here and the finding of the multi firm review here. The House of Commons library has recently published a research briefing entitled “Sanctions against Russia”. In it the briefing deals with the UK Sanctions regime prior to 2022, what prompted fresh sanctions, what sanctions the UK is imposing, co -ordinating with allies and the imposition of secondary sanctions. Readers should go to the website of the Workplace Relations Commission to read about information for Ukrainian Nationals on employment rights in Ireland. There is information on the website on employment law rights in Ireland in the Ukrainian language and the Russian language. The European Banking Authority (EBA) recently published a statement addressed to both financial institutions and supervisors to ensure they make every effort to provide access for Ukrainian refugees to at least basic financial products and services. They also set out how AML/CFT guidelines should apply .You can read details of the statement here. Members are reminded that you can locate further detailed information on sanctions generally on the Institute’s dedicated sanctions page which is being regularly updated at the moment. Other Areas of Interest Minister Robert Troy announced on 28 April 2022 that the “interim period” introduced under the Companies (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Covid-19) Act 2020 (“2020 Act”) has been further extended to 31 December 2022. It had been due to expire on 30 April 2022. The 2020 Act among other provisions made it possible for company meetings, for example AGMs and EGMs, class meetings and scheme meetings to be held virtually. It also increased the period of company examinership to 150 days and increased the threshold at which a company is deemed unable to pay its debts to €50,000. The Minister said this is likely to be the final extension but also noted that work is ongoing to put virtual AGMs and general meetings on a permanent statutory footing. The European Data Protection supervisor (EDPS) recently published his Annual Report 2021 - you can read the press release here and the executive summary here. The report covers a huge amount including an overview of the EDPS’ supervisory activities such as the supervision of Europol and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. In one of its news items on the annual report the EDPS refers to its’ work on international transfers of personal data; on COVID-19; on the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice; as well as the EDPS' legislative consultations and technology monitoring activities. Late last year the Central Bank gave notice of its intention to establish a Climate Risk and Sustainable Finance Forum. In recent days it has published a call for interest to the forum. You can read the press release here. The forum will be consultative and will meet twice a year, with the inaugural meeting taking place on 29 June 2022. It is looking for expressions of interest from the likes of financial sector representative bodies, financial sector participants (firms), experts on climate change. Selection criteria are set out in the call for interest and you can complete the expression of interest form here. The Central Bank Director General of Financial conduct recently addressed an Institute of Banking/Compliance Institute seminar on “The importance of effective governance, culture, and agility in a changing environment". She spoke about topics including the Central Bank’s strategic approach, standards and the enhanced Individual Accountability Framework, Structural changes in the Irish retail banking sector and Sustainable finance and the risks of greenwashing. You can read her remarks here. The Dept of Finance (DOF) this week launched Ireland’s first Women in Finance Charter. The Charter is open to all financial services firms operating in Ireland and signatories commit their organisations to improving the number of women in management and board level positions to achieve better gender balance and a more inclusive working environment. You can read the press release here and see the current list of signatories to the Charter. DOF has also recently published its Economic Insights – Spring 2022 which provides analysis and insights on topical economic issues and developments. You can download here. IAASA has published its annual Profile of the Profession for 2021 which presents an overview of the Prescribed Accountancy Bodies’ (PABs) members and students and includes statistics about regulatory and monitoring activities. The Charity Commission for Northern Ireland has issued some useful information on the Charities Act (Northern Ireland) 2022. Readers may be interested in the recent publication of the Consumer Rights Bill 2022. This new draft legislation will bring about a number of positive changes for consumers and for the first time, consumer protections will be extended to digital goods and services so that consumers are protected when they use cloud services or buy downloadable or streamed goods and services, including games, films, music and software. The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission has welcomed the publication of the bill and you can read more about it on their website here where you will also find a link to the draft legislation. National Standards Authority of Ireland is Ireland’s official standards body under the auspices of DETE. It recently launched its new strategy for 2022-2026 – Innovating to Shape a Safer, Better, and Sustainable Future. The strategy is stated to give priority to Climate Action and Sustainability; to Digital Transformation; to Construction, with a particular focus on housing; and to Medical Technology. You can download the strategic plan here . In other FCA news, the CEO recently delivered a speech on the critical issues in financial regulation: The FCA's perspective. He mentioned issues such as the war in Ukraine, economic, social and governance (ESG) reforms, diversity and inclusion, accountability and performance and innovation and crypto. You can read the speech here. For further technical information and updates please visit the Technical Hub on the Institute website. 

The Financial Reporting Council (FRC) has published a new Audit Firm Governance Code for the Big Four audit firms and firms that audit FTSE-350 companies and significant numbers of public interest entities (PIEs).   The new Code is a result of the findings of a monitoring programme undertaken by the FRC which identified scope to further strengthen its oversight and governance and to align the provisions of the Code with Operational Separation for the Big Four firms.   It separates the roles of the board chair and senior partner/chief executive, clarifies the role played by partnership boards in holding management to account and introduces criteria for board composition, reinforcing the position of independent non-executives within audit firms. For the largest audit firms, it sets out a clearer distinction between the role of Independent Non-Executives (INEs) and Audit Non-Executives (ANEs). The new Code also more closely aligns with the UK Corporate Governance Code, emphasising the importance of long-term sustainability, culture and employee engagement.

Members of Chartered Accountants Ireland are annually required to confirm that they are aware of their “obligations as set out in the Code of Ethics for members”. Accounting firms are required to indicate in their annual return whether they have “taken steps to ensure that all Principals, Employees and Subcontractors fully comply with the Institute’s Code of Ethics for Members”. A glance at the Regulation section of Accountancy Ireland reveals that non-compliance with the Code of Ethics is a frequent finding leading to disciplinary action against an individual member or firm. So how do you ensure you and all in the firm are familiar with the obligations as set out in the Code of Ethics? While reading the Code of Ethics is a good starting point, the current version is a long read at 202 pages, 261 if you include the obligations applying to insolvency practitioners. Recent research and engagement with accounting professionals on ethics has consistently identified training and illustrative case studies as the preferred supports for increasing familiarisation with the Code of Ethics. Professional accountants have expressed a preference for real-life examples and case studies which allow them to consider ethical dilemmas in a practical way, relevant to their own experience. The recent publication of five sets of ethical dilemmas case studies by the Consultative Committee of Accounting Bodies (CCAB), of which Chartered Accountants Ireland is a member, is a welcome response to this need. The case studies, which are applicable in both UK and Ireland, illustrate how the Code of Ethics can be applied by members working in business, not-for-profits, the public sector, public practice, and as non-executive directors. Each set contains several case studies tailored to reflect ethical dilemmas that can arise in the course of their professional work. They are designed to outline key principles and processes that can be considered when attempting to identify, evaluate and address ethical threats in line with the Code of Ethics. While more than one set of case studies may be relevant to an individual member, members in practice will appreciate the case studies exploring a range of ethical dilemmas tailored for professional accountants in public practice. This set explores the following ethical dilemmas: Case Study 1 explores the dilemma faced by a manager in relation to a very competent junior member of staff whose personal circumstances require her to take regular absences from work. This is having a negative impact on her colleagues, who are vocal about being overworked. Like other case studies in the set, it works through the dilemma in a structured manner, consistent with the conceptual framework outlined in the Code of Ethics, to: consider which of the five fundamental principles (integrity, confidentiality, professional behaviour, objectivity, professional competence and due care) are under threat; consider the relevant facts, which also involves seeking out information rather than solely relying on the information presented prima facie; identify affected parties, including considering the culture and reputation of the firm; determine who should be involved in the resolution and whether to consult with a colleague, external expert, or other trusted advisor; determine a possible course of action and implement, with the advice to document the steps taken in resolving the dilemma in case your ethical judgement is challenged in the future. Case Study 2 presents a dilemma faced by a partner in a three-partner firm. He discovers a client is not recording certain cash sales in their accounts. The case study examines the practical considerations including how to communicate the issue with the client and possible actions to take if the client is not receptive to the news. The commentary includes an outline of a thought process that prioritises the reputation of the firm, the five fundamental principles of the Code of Ethics, and relevant laws and regulations, to decide on the best advice for the client. This case also highlights the importance of considering legal reporting obligations, particularly in relation to anti-money laundering legislation and fraud. Case Study 3 tackles an ethical dilemma facing a sole practitioner who loses a local small business client (Company A) and is subsequently approached to help a local competitor of Company A (Company B) make an offer to buy their former client. This dilemma is compounded by the fact that Company A is struggling financially but this is not common knowledge. Also, the sole practitioner is acting as an alternate/continuity provider for another local sole practitioner, who is convalescing after a medical treatment. Company B is a client of the other practitioner. This case is a good example of how there can be several dimensions to an ethical dilemma, and the benefits of having a structured process in addressing such dilemmas. In Case Study 4, an accountant is advising a medium-sized group on a range of improvements to its operations and systems. After identifying a range of issues and preparing a report estimating the costs, the accountant becomes aware that the director with whom they are liaising has significantly understated these in a separate report to the board. The director does not share the accountant’s report with the board. This case requires consideration of to whom the accountant owes their fiduciary duty, and how they might discharge their duties and effectively manage their professional relationship with the client. Case Study 5 outlines a scenario in which a trainee accountant in a firm has been tasked with completing some complicated work within a very tight deadline in the lead-up to them taking study leave. While there are lessons to be learned for both parties, the case highlights that certain behaviour, which itself may be unethical, may give rise to further unethical behaviour directly impacting the quality of work for clients. In Case Study 6, a three-partner firm has a large audit client to whom it also provides non-audit services. There are substantial fees outstanding from the client and significant going-concern issues arise. Several issues are explored in this case, including that the audit planning section was not appropriately reviewed, that key information was missed, and that there is pressure to provide the bank with a clean audit opinion so it can extend the company’s overdraft facility. This is a situation in which more than one set of ethical obligations require consideration, in this case the Code of Ethics and the Ethical Standards for Auditors. Case Study 7 addresses suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations (NOCLAR), including bribery and cover-up of breaches of environmental laws and regulations, and considers any legal reporting obligations for the firm. The case highlights real issues that can arise, including dealing with pressure from clients to disregard any suspicions of noncompliance, desire to disassociate from illegal or unethical activity, deciding whether to override client confidentiality and report suspicions to the appropriate authorities, and balancing duties to the client with the public interest with safeguarding the reputation of the firm. CCAB’s Ethical Dilemma Case Studies provide an interesting and illuminating way to engage with the Code of Ethics while also increasing awareness of some threats to ethical conduct that can arise in an accountancy firm. Members are encouraged to use, read and apply them, and they can also be used by firms and/or training providers provided they are appropriately referenced. The case studies and other resources that can assist members in considering ethical dilemmas can be found on the Chartered Accountants Ireland Ethics Resource Centre. Níall Fitzgerald FCA Head of Ethics & Governance at Chartered Accountants Ireland

In this week’s sustainability/ESG bulletin, we bring details of Cabinet’s approval of Ireland’s new Circular Economy Bill. Also covered are EU developments, the release of sustainability-related strategies in both the Republic and Northern Ireland, technical updates, and a link to listen back to our interview with Sustainability Expert Rosie Dunscombe. In the news Ireland’s Circular Economy Bill receives Cabinet approval  In what has been described as a landmark Bill that will introduce world-leading moves to reduce waste and influence behaviour, the Circular Economy Bill received Cabinet approval this week. The new legislation will underpin Ireland’s shift from a ‘take-make-waste’ linear model to a more sustainable pattern of production and consumption that will instead minimise waste to help significantly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Click here for details of the Bill, particularly what it will mean for businesses. EU Commission to empower consumers for the green transition The EU has also taken action on the circular economy this week. The European Commission is proposing new consumer rights and a ban on greenwashing. It announced proposals to amend the Consumer Rights Directive to oblige traders to provide consumers with information on the durability and reparability of products, and is also proposing several amendments to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD). The rules will strengthen consumer protection against untrustworthy or false environmental claims, banning ‘greenwashing’ (a form of corporate misrepresentation where a company will present a green public image and publicise green initiatives that are false or misleading) and banning practices misleading consumers about the durability of a product.  Sustainability-related strategies Sustainability-related strategies were in the news last week in both Ireland and Northern Ireland: The first ever Further Education and Training (FET) Green Skills Summit in Ireland took place last week, led by SOLAS, the Further Education and Training Authority in collaboration with Education and Training Boards Ireland (ETBI). The summit addressed the green economy as an area of opportunity, and pointed to the key challenge of upskilling and reskilling for changes to existing roles. Speaking at the summit, Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science Simon Harris described it is “an important step in our response to the challenge of climate change and the targets we have set for ourselves at a national level.”   Northern Ireland’s first overarching Environment Strategy was given approval by Northern Ireland’s Environment Minister Edwin Poots . The strategy sets out Northern Ireland’s environmental priorities for the coming decades and forms part of the Executive’s Green Growth agenda. Commenting, Minister Poots said the Strategy “will provide a coherent response to the global challenges of biodiversity loss and climate change.” The draft strategy, which will have to be formally approved by an incoming Executive before it can be published, can be found here.   Technical Updates The European Commission’s advisory Platform on Sustainable Finance has published its final report on how to bring investments in line with four environmental priorities of the EU’s taxonomy of green investments which are: Ensuring a sustainable use of water and marine resources Protecting and restoring biodiversity and ecosystems Transitioning to a circular economy; and Preventing and controlling pollution. Recommendations made in the report include giving a green label to activities that meet specific environmental criteria (additional criteria are expected to be recommended by the Platform in May). The Commission is expected to publish a Delegated Act later this year.   The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) has launched a consultation on its first two proposed standards. One sets out general sustainability-related disclosure requirements and the other specifies climate-related disclosure requirements. Find out more here.   Our colleagues in Professional Accounting tell us that the IFRS Foundation and Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) have announced a collaboration agreement under which their respective standard-setting boards, the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) and the Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB), will seek to coordinate their work programmes and standard-setting activities. Resources ESG? Sustainability? ISBB? Net zero? Drowning in the ‘alphabet soup’ of sustainability terminology? You’re not alone! Listen back to our ‘Ask the Expert’ short interview that took place on Wednesday 30 March to hear Rosie Dunscombe FCA explain the key terms you're likely to hear as a finance professional.   British technology firm Dyson has reportedly created headphones designed to help people avoid polluted air in cities. The headphones come with a visor that delivers filtered air and were created in response to growing concerns about air and sound pollution in urban areas. The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimates that nine in 10 people globally breathe air that exceeds its guidelines on pollutant limits, and approx. 100 million people in Europe are said to be exposed to long-term noise exposure above its recommended level.     You can find information, guidance and supports to help members understand sustainability and meet the challenges it presents in our online Sustainability Centre.   

Julia Rowan answers your management, leadership, and team development questions. I try to be a good leader to my team – I coach, give feedback, help them develop new skills, etc. A few things have happened at company level (e.g. policy changes, unpopular decisions, team members not getting a promotion), and I feel I am getting the blame. As a result, there’s a lot of negative talk about the company, and the spark has gone out of the team. How do I get it back? Leaders often find themselves working very hard to defend, explain, and compensate for organisational issues over which they have no control. You have done a lot of good legwork here, and now you need to trust yourself. Lean into the discomfort, acknowledge the difficulty, offer support and put the ball back in your team members’ court.  For example, if somebody talks about “crazy promotion decisions” you might say, “I’m sorry you did not get that role. How can I help you be successful next time?”  Or, if someone talks about “stupid policies”, you might say something like, “It’s tough when these things don’t make sense. Is there something I can do to help?”   The critical thing here is to catch the moment of the criticism and change your response from explanation to acknowledgement. This is easy to write but hard to do, and you will kick yourself more than once as you realise you’ve launched into an explanation. One day you’ll stop doing it – and your team will feel heard. You might consider respectfully bringing the issue up with the team: “I feel that some organisational issues are impinging on our motivation. At our next meeting, should we talk about how we get our mojo back?” Listen to each person and ask the team how they want to move on. My guess is that the team will have arrived at that point themselves. I am pretty good at my job, but my manager micro-manages me. Nothing can be complete without her checking it. She makes irrelevant changes to my work, and even internal documents are drafted and redrafted. Apart from the frustration, it takes up huge time. How can I get her to back off? There are a lot of ways to answer this: we could look at your performance, the pressure your manager is under from their boss and your manager’s personality.  We could say that trying to change other people is generally a waste of time. The only person you can change is yourself, meaning you need to decide to live with, address or leave the situation.  Suppose you want to address the situation. Try to see beyond your manager’s behaviour and look at her intention: what is she trying to achieve? What hopes and fears lie beyond her behaviour? What does her behaviour tell you about what is important? Connect her behaviour with her intention and use it. For example, when she delegates work to you, explore what is important to her (accuracy, completeness, speed, etc.). Then let her know that you have heard her concerns and priorities. My read of this situation is that she is concerned about being (seen to be) good enough. You should ask yourself how you can usefully connect with and ease those concerns.  Julia Rowan is Principal Consultant at Performance Matters, a leadership and team development consultancy. To send a question to Julia, email julia@performancematters.ie.

SMEs hit hard by the pandemic must now grapple with the economic fall-out of the war in Ukraine, signalling fresh uncertainty for the year ahead, so what’s the best plan of action? COVID-19 lockdowns, global supply chain disruption, inflationary pressure – and now the economic fallout from the Russian invasion of Ukraine.  The headwinds facing Ireland’s small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) show no signs of easing as we enter the third quarter of 2022. Even as the year began, the imminent winding down of Government supports for COVID-hit businesses was already prompting speculation of a spike in insolvencies just around the corner. Now, Gabriel Makhlouf, Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland, has called on a “patient” approach from policymakers and creditors to help ensure that “unnecessary liquidations of viable SMEs are avoided over the coming months.” Speaking at a recent event in Dublin co-hosted by the Central Bank of Ireland, Economic and Social Research Institute, and the European Investment Bank, Makhlouf pointed to the need to “channel distressed but viable businesses towards restructuring opportunities and unviable businesses towards liquidation.” Uncertain outlook For those SMEs in the sectors hit hardest by the pandemic, the fresh economic turmoil sparked by the Ukraine invasion will be a cause for concern. “The outlook right now for SMEs generally in Ireland is very hard to determine,” said Neil McDonnell, Chief Executive of the Irish SME Association (ISME). “It will vary considerably from sector to sector, but after two bad years for hospitality and tourism due to the pandemic, the war in Ukraine is likely to mean volumes will remain low into the summer.”  Pandemic-related insolvencies have yet to spike. Research released by PwC in February found that Government support had saved at least 4,500 Irish companies from going bust during the pandemic, representing an average of 50 companies per week during the period. Insolvency rates are likely to rise in the months ahead, however, as pandemic supports are withdrawn from businesses with significant debts, and PwC estimates that there is a debt overhang of at least €10 billion among Ireland’s SMEs, made up of warehoused revenue debt, loans in forbearance, supplier debt, landlords, rates and general utilities.  “Government supports have to end at some point. We realise this, but it will be accompanied by a significant uptick in insolvencies. This is natural and to be expected, since 2020 and 2021 both had lower levels of insolvency than 2019,” said Neil McDonnell. “Aside from hard macroeconomics, however, we can’t ignore the element of sentiment in how businesses will cope. This is the third year in a row of bad news.” Confidence in the market Before taking on his current role as Managing Partner of Grant Thornton Ireland, Michael McAteer led the firm’s advisory services offering, specialising insolvency and corporate recovery. “What I’ve learned is that you really cannot underestimate the importance of confidence in the market,” said McAteer. “If we go back to 2008 – the start of the last recession – or to 2000, when the Dotcom Bubble burst, we can see that, when confidence is lacking, the pendulum can swing very quickly. “If you’d asked me a few weeks ago, before the Ukraine invasion, what lay ahead for the Irish economy this year, I would have been much more optimistic than I am now. “Yes, we were going to see some companies struggling once COVID-19 supports were withdrawn, particularly those that hadn’t kept up with changes in the marketplace that occurred during the pandemic, such as the shift to online retail – but, overall, I would have been confident. Now, it is harder to judge.” Government supports Neil McDonnell welcomed the recent introduction of the Companies (Rescue Process for Small and Micro Companies) Act 2021, which provides for a new dedicated rescue process for small companies. Introduced last December by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the legislation provides for a new simplified restructuring process for viable small companies in difficulty. The Small Company Administrative Rescue Process (SCARP) is a more cost-effective alternative to the existing restructuring and rescue mechanisms available to SMEs, who can initiate the process themselves without the need for Court approval. “We lobbied hard for the Small Company Administrative Rescue Process legislation. The key to keeping costs down is that it avoids the necessity for parties to ‘lawyer up’ at the start of the insolvency process,” said McDonnell. “Its efficacy now will be down to the extent to which creditors engage with it and, of course, it has yet to be tested in the courts. We hope creditors will engage positively with it.” McDonnell said further government measures would be needed to help distressed SMEs in the months ahead. “We already see that SMEs are risk-averse at least as far as demand for debt is concerned. Now is the time we should be looking at the tax system to incentivise small businesses,” he said.  “Our Capital Gains Tax (CGT) rate is ridiculously high, and is losing the Exchequer potential yield. Our marginal rate cut-off must be increased to offset wage increases.  “Other supports, such as the Key Employee Engagement Programme (KEEP) and the Research and Development (R&D) Tax Credit need substantial reform to make them usable for the SME sector.” Advice for SMEs For businesses facing into a challenging trading period in the months ahead, Michael McAteer advised a proactive approach. “The advice I give everyone is to try to avoid ‘being in’ the distressed part of the business. By that, I mean: don’t wait until everything goes wrong.  “Deal with what’s in front of you – the current set of circumstances and how it is impacting your business today.  “Ask yourself: what do I need to do to protect my business in this uncertain climate, and do I have a plan A, B and C, depending on how things might play out? “Once you have your playbook, you need to communicate it – and I really can’t overstate how important the communication is.  “Talk to your bank, your suppliers, creditors, and your employees. Sometimes, we can be poor at communicating with our stakeholders. We think that if we keep the head down and keep plugging away, it will be grand.  “By taking time to communicate your plans and telling your stakeholders ‘here’s what we intend to do if A, B or C happens,’ you will bring more confidence into those relationships and that can have a really positive impact on the outlook for your business. “Your bank, your creditors and suppliers are more likely to think: ‘These people know their business. They know what they’re doing.’ If something does go wrong, they know that there is already a plan in place to deal with it.” Role of accountants Accountants and financial advisors will have an important role to play in the months ahead as distressed SMEs seek advice on the best way forward. “We are about to experience levels of inflation we have not seen since the 1980s. This will force businesses to address their cost base and prices,” said Neil McDonnell. “My advice to SMEs would be: talk to your customers, to your bank, and your accountant. Your accountant is not just there for your annual returns. They are a source of business expertise, and businesses should be willing to pay for this professional advice. No business will experience an issue their accountant will not have not come across before.” As inflation rises, SMEs are also likely to see an increase in the number of employees seeking pay increases, McDonnell added. “Anticipate those conversations, if they haven’t occurred already,” he said. “Any conversation about wages is a good time to address efficiency and productivity – is there more your business could be doing to operate more efficiently, for example, thereby mitigating inbound cost increases?”

The war in Ukraine will profoundly impact the defensive stance of the EU’s neutral countries. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine is changing Europe in ways the Kremlin did not build into its calculations when it sought to conquer its western neighbour.  NATO, the EU and the United States are united in their agreement over an unprecedented, punitive package of sanctions against Russia.  Individual NATO members are sending lethal weapons to Ukraine. NATO, which has boosted its defences in Poland, the Baltic States and Romania, has ruled out a no-fly zone over Ukraine. It fears retaliation from Putin, even the threat of a nuclear strike. Meanwhile, Europe has opened its doors to refugees. No more squabbling over who to admit or how many numbers will flow into each country compared to 2015, when former German Chancellor Angela Merkel gave shelter to over one million Syrian refugees fleeing the war. Germany has thrown away its ‘rule book’. The belief that wandel durch handel (change through trade) would bring Russia closer to Europe is over.  Social Democrat Chancellor Olaf Scholz has reached a Zeitenwende — a turning point — not only regarding Russia, but domestically as well. German defence spending has risen to two percent of gross domestic product, equivalent to about €100 billion a year. The anti-American and pacifist wings in Scholz’s party are also toeing the new line — for now. As for the EU, its foreign policy chief, Josip Borrell, said the bloc would send weapons to Ukraine. What a turnaround for a soft power organisation built on a peace project. This may see the EU transition from a soft power provider to a hard power player as it now urgently reassesses its security and defence stance.  This is where the neutral countries of Ireland, Finland, Sweden, Austria and Malta face challenging debates and decisions. All have signed up to the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy. With the exception of Denmark and Malta, they are participants in the EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), aimed at increasing defence cooperation among the member states. They benefit from the decades-long US policy of guaranteeing the security umbrella for its NATO allies in Europe. Somehow, the neutral countries are having their cake and eating it too, but for how much longer? Russia’s attack on Ukraine changes everything about the future role of Europe’s security and defence policy. This was confirmed during the informal summit of EU leaders in Versailles in March. Europe has to take defence seriously.  Neutral Finland and Sweden already cooperate very closely with NATO. Russia’s invasion is leading to intense debates about whether both should now join the organisation.  As for Ireland? The war in Ukraine is linked to the security of all of Europe, forcing neutral countries to confront the reasons for their continued neutrality.  Maintaining neutrality at a time when Europe’s security architecture and the post-Cold War era is being threatened is no longer a luxury monopolised by pacifists, or those who link neutrality to sovereignty. It is about providing security to Europe’s citizens and how to do it collectively.  Taoiseach Micheál Martin has said discussions about military neutrality are for another day. Neutrality, he said, “is not in any shape or form hindering what needs to be done and what has to be done in respect of Ukraine”.  Neale Richmond, Fine Gael TD, has described the neutrality policy as “morally degenerate,” calling for a “long-overdue, serious and realistic conversation” about it.  Tánaiste Leo Varadkar has attempted to straddle both sides here. “This does require us to think about our security policy,” he has said. “I don’t see us applying to join NATO, but I do see us getting more involved in European defence.” Martin did later concede: “The order has been turned upside down by President Putin.” Neutral Ireland – and the rest of the EU – now must draw the consequences. Judy Dempsey is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at Carnegie Europe and Editor-in-Chief of Strategic Europe.

As we cautiously return to the office, many leaders are considering afresh the changes they made to their management style during the pandemic. Four members outline how their organisation, team, and leadership outlook has changed since March 2020. Gareth Gallagher  Managing Director at Sacyr Concessions  The biggest challenge over the last two years was having to continue operating our assets fully in as safe a way as possible for our staff and the public, and we had to allow anyone who could work from home to work from home.  The government deemed keeping the toll roads safe and operational an essential service, so many of our staff had to work on site. Because of this, we had to continuously do risk assessments to keep our team safe and comply with public health guidelines, such as shift change patterns and fitting out internal structures in vehicles.  Now, though, the staff that had been able to work remotely have started coming back to the office a few days a week. It is nice to have physical meetings with people again, but everyone must remain flexible. There could be times when more face-to-face meetings are required.  The last two years have made it clear to people what is important to them, and that is why flexibility and a hybrid model is more important for job satisfaction than they might have been previously. The hybrid model gives people more autonomy over time and has been proven to work, but the last few years have also emphasised that in-person meetings are more efficient for certain work requirements.  Above all, the pandemic emphasised that communication is critical, and it has probably made me more conscious that I need to check in with people on a more regular basis.  Larissa Feeney  CEO and founder at accountantonline.ie The pandemic coincided with a period of rapid growth in our business. We were in the middle of hiring key staff and implementing new practice management software and about to launch other initiatives when COVID-19 struck, and the future suddenly looked very uncertain.  Fortunately, we already had quite an embedded blend of hybrid and fully remote models in place since 2018, so the move to being fully remote was technically straightforward.  Although we have an office presence in Dublin, Derry and Donegal, over 80 percent of our teams now work fully remotely, and the remainder almost all work hybrid.  The move to almost fully remote working came about by necessity but is hugely positive in many ways for us. I’ve learned that working from home does not suit everyone, and it is undoubtedly the case that regular, daily contact is essential across the teams.  I was concerned that remote staff would miss out on showcasing their talents, and people would become overlooked for promotion and development. However, we are working hard to avoid that with coaching, leadership training and career planning, which has had a positive impact on the visibility of talent development. We have hired an additional 20 people in the last two years. It is still strange but becoming much more normal for me to work with so many people I have not met in person yet. This year, we have planned a series of in-person meetings throughout the country for staff to meet in peer groups, and in May, we will have one larger gathering with all staff for the first time in two years.  Since March 2020, I have supplemented my communication style by scheduling skip level one-to-one video meetings with all individuals so that I can hear staff feedback. I have found that to be a great benefit in understanding their challenges, ideas and suggestions for improvement.  Working life might be easier if we all worked under the same roof, but there are significant personal benefits and cost and time saving to working remotely. Derek Mernagh VP Corporate Controller at KeepTruckin I am a Corporate Controller leading an accounting organisation based in the San Francisco area of the US. I went from sitting in-office with my team five days a week in early 2020 to now managing my team remotely in a matter of days.  I never imagined how the work culture I had gotten used to would change so drastically. I would have thought, at the time, that doing my job remotely would not be possible.  I changed jobs last year and have never met any of my current team in person. This has been a considerable change to adapt to, as I had been so used to in-person management and felt that knowing the team in person helped build stronger working relationships and trust.  Also, the dynamic of meetings was more open and transparent, as everyone had met each other in person, and I felt people were more comfortable in sharing their opinions. Building that connection with the team is more challenging in a remote environment, but I have learned to adapt.  We meet more often because we feel we should check-in due to the work from home environment, but this brings some challenges. “Zoom fatigue” is a real thing.  I try to check-in with my team using direct messages or group channels on collaborative tools like Slack to ask how they are and how things are going. I also have monthly team meetings that we try to make more light in content, so the team can get to know each other better.   There are advantages with the current work schedule that my team and I appreciate, such as no commute time, but finding a hybrid solution for the future where some connection is possible will be a perfect balance.  Una Rooney Corporate Accounting Manager at Allstate Northern Ireland In my company, we have always had the option of remote working; however, it was not often invoked. Since the pandemic, they have now adopted a hybrid working environment which I feel has created an innovative and energised work environment across all locations in Northern Ireland and America. Would I have answered this in the same way in June 2020? I’m unsure. Through the pandemic, we had enforced a work-from-home model. This presented challenges as an organisation and management group in finance, such as onboarding, ensuring people took leave, keeping employee engagement, maintaining a high standard of deliverables, and retaining relationships virtually.  In hindsight, as an already global team with team members in Chicago, we were achieving what we thought were challenges daily. We initially took more time and effort to think outside the traditional corporate box to adapt. I did become more deliberate in my actions and aimed to be seen as much as possible so the team could practice what I was preaching. I ensured I was taking breaks, upskilling remotely and always available for a call.  We did bingo, escape rooms, virtual team lunch, and breakfast for stateside members as a team. These activities were required to ensure collaboration and inclusivity since casual coffees and lunches were no longer on the table.  I know this kind of engagement isn’t for everyone but by providing a non-busy period, we were able to look after staff mental health while helping integrate new starts and build up relationships with other team members and myself as manager.  By building up this rapport and respect virtually, I felt we saw the deliverables and standards being maintained. Team members were open to asking questions, and I kept an open-door policy to ensure communication was still prevalent. We all made a forced change. Before, I was an office worker and never thought of hybrid as an option. Now, the working world is evolving and, if used correctly, can bring a highly-motivated and highly-productive finance team globally. 

Overdone stimulus at the height of the pandemic, supply chain disruption and Russia’s Ukraine invasion are all fuelling spiralling inflation. Central banks need to work harder to find the economic sweet spot, writes Cormac Lucey. Two years ago, as COVID-19 was first running rampant worldwide, our economic authorities resolved to prevent the resulting shutdowns from turning into economic depression by unleashing an unparalleled level of economic stimulus.  In the UK, the budget deficit shot up to 15 percent of GDP. In Ireland, the deficit approached 10 percent of modified gross national income. This fiscal support was accompanied by strong monetary stimulus.  Whereas UK broad money grew by six percent in the two years to June 2019, it rose by 22 percent in the two years to June 2021. The equivalent figures for the Eurozone were nine and 18 percent, respectively.  While a medical nightmare was unfolding for our health services from March 2020, from an equity investor’s perspective, the 18 months that followed represented a sweet spot, as authorities stuffed economic stimulus into their economies and asset prices were the first beneficiaries.  Since April 2020, UK stock prices (as represented by the FT 100 index) have risen by over 35 percent, while Irish shares (Iseq index) have jumped by over 40 percent. What’s bad for Main Street is often good for Wall Street.  Now, as the COVID-19 threat recedes, this threatens to go into sharp reverse. What’s good for Main Street risks being bad for Wall Street.  Sharp rises in inflation across the developed world are forcing central banks into withdrawing monetary stimulus and pushing interest rate increases. What lies behind this sudden burst in inflation?  First, levels of policy stimulus were overdone in some parts of the world. Whereas the growth in two-year money supply figures referenced above was nine percent in the Eurozone and 16 percent in the UK, it was 25 percent in the US. Guess who has the biggest inflation problem?  It is also notable that there is little or no marked inflation problem in South-East Asia, where the COVID-19-induced increase in money supply was minimal.  Second, supply chain problems, especially energy, have contributed significantly to recent inflation readings. Eurozone inflation in the 12 months to January was 5.1 percent. Excluding energy, it would have been just 2.6 percent.  Sharply rising energy prices are a symptom of the West shutting down conventional carbon-based sources of supply before alternative sources are ready to take up the slack.  This shortage has been aggravated by sanctions imposed on Russia following its invasion of Ukraine. Over time, we should expect supply chain problems to be fixed and higher energy prices to be their own cure, suppressing demand and allowing for price stabilisation and reductions. The financial sweet spot of two years ago risks becoming a sour spot as central bankers rush to restore their credibility in the face of ever-higher inflation readings.  Jerome Powell, Chair of the US Federal Reserve, said recently, “The [Federal Open Market] Committee is determined to take the measures necessary to restore price stability. The American economy is very strong and well-positioned to handle tighter monetary policy.’’  Well, over fifty years ago, the then-Chair of the Federal Reserve, William McChesney Martin, said the central bank’s job was to “take away the punch bowl just when the party gets going.” His successors may not just have to take away the punch bowl, but also shove partygoers into a cold shower. There is a real danger that an already slowing US economy could be pushed into a recession by aggressive central bank tightening. Europe would be unlikely to escape the resulting economic fallout.  Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland.