that they have sufficient capital and appropriate funding structures, amongst other responsibilities, not least, appropriate governance structures bis central bankers ’ speeches in carrying out these tasks the central bank has undertaken significant changes in recent years with our new regulatory, risk based approach to supervision introduced by my predecessor matthew elderfield and the management team. the now familiar - to - you prism approach underpins our practice of micro - prudential supervision. as you know, this approach segments the firms we regulate by measuring the potential impact of their failure and engaging accordingly. we focus our resources on the areas of greater relevance and try to ensure the risks therein are mitigated as appropriate. that involves ensuring that regulations are complied with, but there are few better ways to raise our hackles than to call this supervision glorified box - ticking, as was done recently by a commentator. we certainly give ourselves higher goals than routine compliance checks. we devote time and effort to understand deeply the firms ’ business models. we put great stress on forward - looking assessments rather than snapshots of past situations, looking for the exercise of supervisory judgment throughout our engagement with regulated entities, and we constantly review our actions to make sure they achieve satisfactory outcomes, and don ’ t just satisfy internal metrics. this is why we put great store in the remedial programs that we ask of you and monitor energetically their implementation however, business models evolve, international regulatory standards develop, and responsive supervision is not static. the procedures and processes that are in place today may need to be revised so that they are relevant tomorrow. for supervision to be successful it must continually adapt and change to new environments and activities, and as part of this you can expect that our engagement with your firms will evolve. a number of forces are at play in this regard. the first is the reports on the observance of standards and codes ( rosc ) review that we asked the imf to conduct. the imf has examined our markets, funds and banking supervisory practice in the light of international standards put forward by iosco and the basel committee on banking supervision. i expect the final report of the imf will be published shortly and we will take on board their recommendations, as applicable to the organisation. we have also launched a review of our prism engagement model in which a few of you have been invited to participate. our reviewers are to report to the bank ’ s commission early next year about potential areas for development or amendment in our current engagement model. it is

, new client asset rules will come into effect next year. we will continue to work to enhance our consumer protection framework at a domestic, european and international level. this will include renewing our attention to the sme lending sector, where we will be conducting a review of our code, as well as a review of compliance with the ccma and following through on our sales incentives, pensions and property insurance claims reviews. sales channels will remain an area of focus for us ( including dealing with those intermediaries who have not been engaging with us or fail to meet our authorisation standards ), as will bedding down a robust regulatory regime for debt management firms. whether one looks to the ( at - times confusing ) array of options for consumers in key staple areas ( witness for example the position on health insurance, where vhi ’ s anticipated application for authorisation would give us full coverage of this market for the first time ), the challenges faced by consumers in understanding the implications of long term pension investments in these uncertain times or key european initiatives such as the payment accounts directive, it is clear that our consumer protection mandate is a live issue of relevance to citizens ’ daily lives. conclusion our regulatory agenda continues to be a full and challenging one. the continuing developments at european and international level will ensure we have a full schedule for 2014, notwithstanding the issues at home. i am keenly aware of the importance of a level playing field for your firms. some of your activities are mobile and the irish regulator cannot go it alone to make up for issues that arose in the past. but equally ireland will not align itself with every piece of domestic regulation in europe that appears more favourable to the financial industry. your regulator works under the watchful eyes of the country and heightened international standards and reviews. past failures are still very much with us. and the last few months have uncovered new instances of ill - advised underwriting and debatable provisioning judgments, ineffective internal and external auditing or follow - up to such auditing, and weak governance in areas across all of the financial sector that remain still too frequent for comfort or complacency. bis central bankers ’ speeches each instance works against the rebuilding of the public trust that you work hard to foster. the knock - on effect of new failures on costs, reputations, and the country, would be severe. hence our renewed commitment to the high standard of supervision introduced by my predecessor. i am confident that with it, the central bank is on the right