s support. the requisite convergence of supervisory practices needs to become a reality very soon. i know that eiopa is making this a priority. incidentally, the three - year review of the european supervisory authorities ( esas ), is underway. following a public consultation proposed by the european commission, the draft legislation looks to strengthen the authorities ’ and chiefly eiopa ’ s role and powers without calling into question the existing architecture. this should support the goal of increased convergence in supervisory practices, which should in turn promote improved effectiveness. accordingly, the proposal represents a positive step forward for europe. however, a close eye should be kept on the place given to national supervisors, especially regarding the question of internal models and supervisory colleges. they should remain within the national supervisors ’ realm of competence, while eiopa ’ s mediation role is essential and should be reinforced, especially with regard to cross - border issues. however, this is incompatible with assuming responsibility for validating national internal models. as for the eiopa role on cross - border cases and its guidance for national supervisors that some member states would favour, such exchanges could take place within dedicated coordination platforms. beyond regulatory adaptation, the challenges ahead relate to technological and environmental changes, which are new and yet crucial matters for attention for insurers, regulators and supervisors. insurance players, of all sizes and risk exposures, are facing the digital revolution, which is inescapable as the developments in other business sectors such as travel, tourism or catering show. to remain competitive in terms of customer relationships, insurers will need to raise their customer experience to the highest levels. this will require them to fundamentally review their processes, tools and information systems. it also calls for an upgrade of their human resources policies. the risks associated with the digital revolution are numerous, but i would like to stress the bigger risk associated with procrastination. this risk seems particularly important to me and it will be an essential focus of attention for supervisors. the digital revolution has other ramifications that require the attention of supervisors. one of them is the increasing inclusion of insurance products within package deals. this is particularly the case for affinity insurance products. these often involve the multiplication of intermediaries in the value chain. this phenomenon can blur responsibilities and the intrinsic economic value of these products, and we are therefore vigilant as consumer protection is especially important in a strengthened european regulatory framework for product governance ( via the insurance distribution directive in particular ). another

/ savings insurance contracts ( flat tax ), the possibility of changing credit insurance contracts annually ( loi hamon / amendement bourquin ), and the creation of a specific prudential status for french pension funds. the new pacte bill should bring about further changes that seek to promote long - term investment in equity, including a reform of the french life long - term insurance product ( also known as eurocroissance ). in addition, at international and european level significant regulatory developments are also in the making. at the international level, the iais work on systemic insurers and the international capital standard ( or ics ) has recently made significant strides. as you know, as part of its post - crisis action plan, the iais developed in 2013 an identification method for systemic risks, reviewed in 2016. this led to the identification of nine global systemically important insurers, to which specific measures are applied ( increased supervision, specific management plans, chiefly for liquidity, recovery and resolution, and a capital add - on measure, currently postponed to 2022 ). given the recognised shortcomings of the methodology, including weak factual basis, the fsb asked the iais to review it with three key focuses : developing an activities - based approach supplementing the entitybased approach, which itself will be reviewed in order to correct deficiencies. a new framework is hence being developed which will make it possible to reconcile an activitiesbased and an entities - based approach, to better capture relevant risks and systemic undertakings. in the meantime, the list of global systemic insurers will remain frozen for 2019 and could be suspended beyond and until 2022, so that enough experience is gained with the new approach. regarding the international capital standard, which aims to develop an international capital standard in order to be able to establish a comparable basis in terms of prudential requirements for all international groups, recent progress was made in kuala lumpur in november 2017 which should lead to, by the end of 2019, a version called “ ics 2. 0 ” that will be used as a reference in international supervision colleges, for a transitory period of five years. during this timeframe, each internationally active insurance group will have to ensure a compulsory and confidential five - year monitoring period based on the ics, after which this standard is expected to become effective. now, i will turn to ifrs17 : it would be unreasonable to apply the new ifrs17 accounting framework right