from a prudential perspective. while ifrs disclosures focus on assessing the current financial position of an enterprise, basel ii disclosures are more forward - looking. given the different focus of accounting and prudential standard setters, it is to be expected that the disclosure requirements under the two standards differ in some respects. ifrs disclosures are made in the financial statements by all enterprises that prepare and submit financial statements. on the other hand, disclosures under pillar 3 are required to be made only by banks that are implementing basel ii. moreover, pillar 3 disclosures need not necessarily be made in the financial statements. ifrs and basel ii disclosures do, however, complement as well as supplement each other in several ways. both require corporates to provide information on their capital, the risks exposed to, and how these risks are managed. disclosures are required to be made " through the eyes of the management ". this enables the user of information to view and assess a firm in the same way its management would. disclosures under both ifrs and basel ii include a good mix of quantitative and qualitative aspects. consistent, comprehensive and comparable disclosures contribute to effective market discipline. ifrs and basel ii disclosures try to ensure that this goal is met. there is potential for achieving synergies in disclosures under ifrs and basel ii by defining risk parameters in a common way, and developing common processes and data collection methodologies. this could lead to a consistent basis for internal reporting to the management of the enterprise and external reporting to the supervisors or regulators and other stakeholders. challenges with ifrs and basel ii compliance with ifrs will assist banks to comply with certain aspects of basel ii. both ifrs and basel ii intend to leverage on market discipline by requiring the disclosure of certain information. basel ii encourages development of more refined approaches to the measurement of risks and greater transparency while ifrs strives to support broader and more sensitive recognition and disclosure of risks. through financial reporting, the management of banks and non - bank financial institutions provide their shareholders, potential investors and other stakeholders with the past results of the business being managed and supervised. these reports give more in - depth insight into the income statement, balance sheet and cashflow and therefore, help the users of these reports better understand and assess the financial performance of the business. the market participants base their investment decisions mainly on the financial reports, thus reinforcing the importance of providing adequate and accurate information. although financial reports are a

##ma ), which govern how lenders interact with retail borrowers that are in distress. firms must also follow the mortgage arrears resolution process ( marp ) when dealing with borrowers facing arrears. the marp process also requires alternative options if a restructure cannot be agreed or was not appropriate. there is a range of advice and support for those in arrears, including the money advice and budgeting service ( mabs ), the national mortgage arrears resolution service ( abhaile ) and a court mentor service to assist debtors faced with court proceedings. the government also introduced the personal insolvency act 2012, which introduced three debt resolution processes : a debt relief notice, a debt settlement arrangement and a personal insolvency the banking crisis – a decade on arrangement. the insolvency service was established in march 2013 as an independent statutory body. the government also introduced a national mortgage - to - rent scheme. there are also a number of other non - statutory organisations providing assistance to those in mortgage arrears. however, these protections, safety nets and restructuring options are not going to address the underlying problems if distressed borrowers do not engage with their lenders or the supports that are in place. in this context, it is noteworthy that : c. 44 % of pdh loans that are more than two years past due are more than five years past due ; c. 40 % of borrowers of pdh loans that are more two years past due are not engaging with their lenders ; more than half of loans that were more than four years past due at the end of 2016, were more than five years past due at the end of 2017 ; and more than 70 % of mortgages in arrears over five years are not engaging with their banksxiv & xv. recognising the individual distress these numbers represent, i would again urge anyone in arrears to engage with their lenders and / or the supports that are available. nonetheless, if we, economically and societally, want a functioning mortgage market, where secured lending is priced in a different way to unsecured, then that security must mean somethingxvi and banks, from both a commercial and a financial stability perspective must have a way of dealing with npls. sales have proved to be controversial, particularly for owner occupier loans. they are a legitimate and necessary approach for banks to address non - performing mortgage loans. to date,