same way, savings contracts that are long - lived and provided by life insurers, and are often an individual ’ s primary pension provision, are critical financial services that are difficult to replace without unacceptable cost. there is therefore a common feature of banking and insurance in terms of continuity of access to critical financial services. the pra has the general objective of ensuring the safety and soundness of the firms under its regulation. safety and soundness is defined in terms of the resilience of the financial system, which in itself is closely linked to the access of users to critical financial services on a continuous basis. but for insurance we have a second objective, namely the protection of policyholders. why do we have a second objective for insurance? for me, the reason is that continuity of insurance protection – of risk transfer and long - term savings products – requires a greater assurance that the policyholder has access to their contract – in other words, it is quite contract specific, and in some cases those contracts are long - term in nature. for banks, depositors want continuity of access to funds, but they have less need of access to the exact contract – deposits can be moved. put another way, most of the underlying risks to banks arise from their assets, whereas for insurers they arise from liabilities and assets. so, we need somewhat different objectives for prudential supervision. the traditional model of supervision has been quite industry specific. the fsa regime introduced in 1997 created a single authority, but within the fsa the framework of rules bis central bankers ’ speeches applied to insurance supervision was unique to the industry. it is true that in the run - up to the start of the crisis, and for some time thereafter, the fsa mingled insurance and bank supervision in terms of its operating units, but i think that did not work effectively, and the fsa and now the pra moved to a clear distinction, with insurance supervision headed by julian adams. insurance supervision is a skill of its own, and while our supervisors do move roles between insurance and banking in both directions, we want to ensure that we have groups of truly expert insurance and banking supervisors. recently, we have taken a further step on insurance supervision by formalising two directorates, for general and life insurance, reporting to julian, and headed by chris moulder and andrew bulley respectively. chris and andrew bring a wealth of experience of insurance supervision and for chris auditing. alongside julian, chris and andrew is a

because they are least able to absorb income shocks ( honohan ( 2005 ) ). this crisis appears to have been no different. meanwhile, the crisis - induced narrowing of wealth inequalities has been at least partially reversed as asset prices have reflated rapidly over recent years. the occupy movement. they took up the baton for the 99 % in 2011. at least at first, occupy were treated with all of the seriousness of a local student protest. but rather remarkably occupy became a global outfit, albeit a rather loosely - fitting one. occupy touched a moral nerve among the many. the 1 % ers in davos had inequality as their main theme this year. in the words i used when addressing occupy in 2012, there is now a broader acceptance that “ they were right ” in their diagnosis ( haldane ( 2012 ) ). criticism of occupy today tends to focus not on their diagnosis, but on their lack of prescription for curing the ills of inequality. bill de blasio. he was elected mayor of new york in november 2013 on a signature theme of tackling widening inequality in the city. his campaign slogan was “ a tale of two cities ”. and this was no ordinary victory. bill de blasio won with a remarkable 73 % of the popular vote. and finally, thomas piketty. enough has already been said and written about a book bought by many, read by few and understood by even fewer ( piketty ( 2014 ) ). i am guilty on all three charges. i suspect never, in the field of human endeavour, has so bis central bankers ’ speeches simple a line chart done so much to fuel the debate among so many, not just in the salons of paris but in the starbucks of london and new york. suffice to say, the inequality issue seems unlikely to be a french fashion. it is a global public policy trend and a rising one. inequality is emerging after a half - century in the wilderness. the surprise may be that it has taken so long. it is well - known, from survey and experimental evidence, that a sense of “ fairness ” is a deeply - held and richly - valued psychological trait in humans ( bowles ( 2012 ) ). and if piketty is right, inequality trends are self - perpetuating as wealth begets wealth. economic and financial stability that naturally begs the question of whether anything should be done. on the face of it, this is not the business of a central