Recognising the need for industry to build capacity and develop best practices, the PRA has also established a Climate Financial Risk Forum, jointly with the FCA, to work with firms from across the financial system. TCFD: The path ahead Although the private sector has made rapid progress on reporting and risk management, more is required. Over the next few years, companies, their banks, insurers and investors must: 1. Increase the quantity and quality of disclosures; 2. Refine disclosure metrics to determine which ones are most decision-useful; 3. Spread knowledge on how to assess strategic resilience; and  7  Prudential Regulation Authority report on the impact of climate change on the UK banking sector: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk//media/boe/files/prudential-regulation/report/transition-in-thinking-the-impact-of-climate-change-on-the-uk-banking-sector.pdf 8 Available at: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/prudentialregulation/supervisorystatement/2019/ss319.pdf?la=en&hash=7BA9824BAC5FB313F42C00889D4E3A6104881C44. 5  All speeches are available online at www.bankofengland.co.uk/news/speeches  5  4. Consider how to disclose the extent to which portfolios are ready for the transition to net zero. Let me explain briefly what this means for the TCFD. First, we must work to increase the quantity and quality of disclosures by sharing best practice. Despite the increasing number of TCFD supporters, only a quarter of the companies surveyed disclosed information aligned with a fuller set – that is six or more – of the TCFD’s recommended disclosures.9 Three quarters of users of climate disclosures said that more information is needed on the financial impact of climate risks and the strategic resilience of firms. Progress in both quantity and quality is uneven across sectors.

Moreover, as loose or uneven fiscal moves or reckless legislative initiatives hindered the efficiency of the overall macroeconomic policy mix in Romania, the central bank openly voiced its concerns regarding the sustainability and impact on growth potential of such populist measures, triggering harsh criticism from their promoters. The global crisis proved once again that price stability cannot be achieved in the context of  financial instability, whose resolution calls for far more than monetary policy words and deeds and by far more knowledge and confidence. Austerity measures, the recession, slower-than-expected recovery, along with the view that the  banking sector alone is to be blamed for these misfortunes – even though in Romania, unlike elsewhere, no bail-outs were resorted to – created a mood that eroded the high prestige that the National Bank of Romania had enjoyed prior to the crisis. A reputation that had been earned thanks to a more transparent, flexible, effective policy and to a greater openness to the general public. We were not alone. That sentiment became mainstream across the globe, as well. Central bankers are nowadays cornered to deliver more in their countries, to actively punish the offenders of fiduciary and prove more empathic with debtors and, why not, more compliant and tolerant with populist measures that affect the financial sector and macroeconomic stability. Otherwise their independence would be put at risk, as it is already challenged by public representatives.