form of seminars and roundtable discussions. in all these areas, i want firms at the gateway to be engaging with modern, efficient, and streamlined processes. however, we do have an ask of you. we need to hear from you on where unnecessary frictions remain, and where industry would welcome further engagement or guidance. please continue to provide us with your feedback and suggestions, either directly when engaging via regulatory transactions, or with your supervisors, or through our annual firm feedback survey [ 12 ], or by continuing to feed in through industry bodies like our hosts today. we also need to hear from you to understand how firms are adapting to a changing environment, and what this might mean for our regulatory relationship. this facilitates an honest two - way conversation between regulator and firm, ensuring that we continue to operate a regulatory landscape that forward looking. beyond guidance and metrics, the way in which we use data is pivotal to ensure operational effectiveness. last year during a speech at uk finance [ 13 ] i spoke about being in the foothills of a new digital era. as the industry responds to developments such as artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and new business models such as banking as a service, we will make sure our approach to authorising transactions related to any of that adapts as necessary, and that we accommodate novel and innovative solutions without causing delays. back to our ask of you, i will take this opportunity to emphasise that data remains an area of focus for the pra. the submission of complete, timely, and accurate regulatory information, whether as part of an authorisation application or for ongoing supervision, is what allows us to function effectively. we welcome any feedback on how we can further clarify what we need. but ultimately it is down to firms to make sure they have the systems and controls required to give us the necessary information. if they can ’ t, well that ’ s a problem they need to fix, rather than expect we will wave things through. we won ’ t. senior managers & certification regime earlier, i referenced the on - going review of the senior managers & certification regime ( smcr ), and i want to touch on this now, as i know many of you will have engaged with our discussion paper about it earlier this year [ 14 ]. in december 2022, the government announced, as part of the edinburgh reforms, that his majesty ’ s treasury ( hmt ), the fca, and the pra would review the senior managers regime. we received over 90

’ s right, the questions for monetary policy makers become harder : namely, when, where and by how much will productivity growth eventually pick up? what ’ s the likely impact on potential supply? as it happens the projections in the february inflation report do project a pick up in supply over the next few years, but that reflects improved labour availability rather an assumption that there is an ict led productivity miracle in the making. but we could easily be wrong. given recent experience, there is clearly some risk of undue pessimism, though it has to be said that past policy errors have more often been the result of too much optimism. one thing is for sure : we can ’ t afford to sit back and wait for the data to tell us the answer. by the time we have that degree of certainty policy will have moved on. so productivity will remain a key issue for us over the coming years. conclusion which brings me to my final challenge for policy makers : how to handle uncertainty in taking and presenting policy decisions. the mpc has met this challenge head on from the beginning. within the discipline imposed by a shared inflation target, the committee has been very open both about uncertainty and about the disagreement that is likely to go with it. published mpc forecasts have explored rather than glossed over risks and uncertainties. the individual accountability of mpc members reduces the incentive to search for consensus. mpc members have always voiced their different views in public, and while this basu, s, fernald, j g, oulton, n, and srinivasan, s ( 2003 ), ‘ the case of missing productivity growth : or, does information technology explain why productivity accelerated in the united states but not the united kingdom? ’, forthcoming in gertler, m and rogoff, k ( eds ) nber macroeconomic annual 2003, mit press. available from the nber website : www. nber. org. is not without risk to the clarity of the message, and has occasionally led to an uncomfortable personalising of decisions, i see it as an inherent part of system not a quirk of particular personalities. the big prize is long term credibility, and nowadays there is no credibility without openness. this is what gives the present framework the flexibility to respond to changing circumstances, and allows members of the mpc to change their minds in the light of experience. and in an uncertain world this openness to learning is a precondition for success under any