This is not only my opinion and the opinion of the Riksbank, it is also shared by the International Monetary Fund. In its Article IV review of Sweden's economy in 2016, the IMF concluded that the foreign currency reserve should not be smaller than it is now. The European Central Bank, ECB, has also recently issued an opinion recommending that Sweden should not reduce the size of its foreign currency reserve below the current level. 10  The foreign currency reserve should be paid for by the banks The cost – or insurance premium – of having a liquidity insurance in the form of a foreign currency reserve is at present charged to the Riksbank’s earnings and central government finances and is calculated at around SEK 400-500 million a year. This is, of course, a lot of money, but calculated per inhabitant per year the insurance premium is only SEK 40-50. This corresponds to around two cups of coffee or half of a cinema ticket. Moreover, it is actually a cost that could well be transferred to the banks, which are the primary beneficiaries of such an insurance. One could say – to take it to an extreme – that tax-payers currently subsidise the banks by almost half a billion a 9 The Government’s draft referral to the Council on Legislation (in Swedish):  http://www.regeringen.se/494cc9/contentassets/c34c52bc62904b2984784e2b94f1e6aa/riksbankensfinansiella-oberoende-och-balansrakning-utkast-till-lagradsremiss The Riksbank’s consultation response: http://www.riksbank.se/en/Press-and-published/PressReleases/2017/Important-to-have-sufficient-foreign-currency-reserve-rapidly-available-in-a-crisis/ Other public authorities’ consultation responses regarding the foreign currency reserve can be found here (in Swedish): http://www.fi.se/sv/publicerat/remissvar/2017/remissvar-pa-utkast-till-lagradsremiss-riksbankensfinansiella-oberoende-och-balansrakning/ and https://www.riksgalden.se/globalassets/dokument_sve/om_riksgalden/remissvar/2017/riksbankens-finansiellaoberoende-och-balansraekning-remissvar.pdf 10 ECB (2017).

It is essential for the financial sector to manage climate-related risks, while at the same time, support the economic transition. This means financial institutions have to internalize climate considerations into their business operations and risk management framework and offer financial products and services to help business transition especially in the high-emission and vulnerable sectors without disrupting the economy and leaving someone behind. However, there is no denying that financial sector has substantial gaps and challenges to overcome in order to achieve such goals, particularly on the risk management perspective. Financial sector resilience would be undermined by the climate-related risks without appropriate measures in a timely manner. Thus, central banks and financial regulators have a crucial role in building capacity and facilitating guidelines and tools needed for climate-related and environmental risks. The first step should be providing concrete expectation and guidance for financial industry to uplift their business operations, risk management, and disclosure that align with international standards. Simultaneously, the infrastructures and common tools for climate risk management such as climate scenario analysis, stress test, and climate-related data  1/2  BIS - Central bankers' speeches  must be put in place to create an enabling ecosystem where financial institutions and regulators could assess and monitor the risks effectively. Ladies and Gentlemen, Looking ahead, it is thus inevitable that our regulatory and supervisory frameworks should take into account sustainability and climate-related factors. The conduct of prudential framework in this new landscape will arguably be the most difficult task as it is relatively new and still evolving.