is to improve transparency, simplicity and consistency so that investors can understand the risks associated with securitisations. for simple, transparent and consistent securitisations, we are prepared to review whether post - crisis regulatory requirements for investors and originators are too onerous. that includes solvency ii, where we welcome a recalibration of capital requirements for such simple, transparent and consistent securitisations, particularly at longer maturities. the bis central bankers ’ speeches ongoing participation of insurers – a major source of long - term finance – in this debate will be key to achieving results. we have got to a stage now where the path to solvency ii is clear. we have come a long way from the uncertainty that has seemingly dominated the past few years. but we need to remain conscious of the new challenges and opportunities that are on our horizon. alongside the european process the wheels have been turning in the international space. a common set of global standards for systemically important insurers are being worked on as we speak. throughout the development of these standards, the bank of england will continue with its strong history of international engagement. we have made great strides in europe with solvency ii and we aim to ensure the complementarity of upcoming global standards with what we have achieved with solvency ii. continued interaction with the industry is an essential part of good policy making so i ’ d like to again thank you for your participation today. i hope that we can continue to work together towards achieving a policy outcome at all levels that fulfils our objectives and in turn ensures the stability, resilience and ultimately the prosperity of the insurance sector in the uk. bis central bankers ’ speeches

also be at work. for example, over the past thirty years investment has shifted from fixed assets towards intangibles – such as computer software, intellectual property, and research and development. this may have dampened the traditional investment accelerator. increases in demand are usually accelerated by increases in investment – higher demand boosts companies ’ profits, increasing their net worth and so allowing them to undertake further investment, as well as stimulating incomes and spending further. a wide range of analysis suggests that the shift towards intangibles has, however, dampened this effect, perhaps because intangible assets are less suitable for use as collateral than physical assets, such as property. the weakness in investment is of course linked to weak productivity. in the uk, while the most productive companies have continued to innovate, others have become slower at adopting those innovations. that has stalled diffusion of productivity gains through the economy ( chart 10 ). this shortfall in investment could reflect deeper causes such as inadequate competition, barriers to investment in knowledge - based capital and sub - optimal managerial practices. identifying the effect of increased uncertainty is complicated by the fact that it is usually accompanied by a tightening in financial conditions. in this regard, the pickup in uncertainty following the referendum on eu membership in the uk was unusual, as financial conditions eased, helped by a series of monetary and macro - financial policy measures taken by the bank of england. ‘ uncertainty, the economy and policy ’, speech given by mark carney, 30 june 2016, available at http : / / www. bankofengland. co. uk / publications / documents / speeches / 2016 / speech915. pdf. for individual firms, the standard variation of annual earnings was around 30 percentage points in the period before the crisis. see ‘ uncertain times ’, speech by ben broadbent at the wall street journal, 5 october 2016, available at http : / / www. bankofengland. co. uk / publications / documents / speeches / 2016 / speech929. pdf. for example, estimates by the bank for international settlements suggest that between 1990 and 2016, the investment rate in fixed assets declined from around 8 % to 3½ % of total assets, while the investment rate in intangible assets increased from around 7 % in 1990 to 10 % in 2016. various papers find evidence that intangibles investment is less responsive to changes in demand than investment in fixed assets. for example, masayuki ( 2015 ) estimates an accelerator