Global banking regulators agree to prioritise climate risk work
The oversight body of the world's forum for banking regulators met on Monday to take stock of the committee's work on climate-related financial risks and agreed to prioritise efforts to understand financial risk implications of extreme weather events, the Bank for International Settlements said in a statement.
The agreement comes as policy makers and banking regulators on both sides of the Atlantic are debating the extent to which climate change should be embedded into central bank policy, a tussle analysts say is likely to shape central bank decision making around the world.
In Europe, rulemakers have doubled down on efforts to address climate-related risks, with the European Central Bank making management of climate risks a key priority; in the United States, efforts have been scaled back or shelved.
The group of central bank governors and heads of supervision, which make up the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, also said it will publish a voluntary disclosure framework on climate-related financial risks for jurisdictions to consider.
While the Basel Committee has no international authority or enforcement powers, its work on climate sets international standards which have a strong influence on national rulemaking.
Analysts say its thinking is more closely aligned to European and British regulators which are taking steps to integrate climate risks into supervisory expectations for banks than to those in the United States.
In recent years, the U.S. Federal Reserve has taken some steps to integrate climate change into its work through preliminary analysis and reports, but Chair Jerome Powell has repeatedly insisted the Fed has a limited role to play.
More recently, U.S. President Donald Trump and other climate-sceptic Republicans have led a backlash against policies linked to environmental, social and governance issues across government, from coal mining to electric vehicles and DEI.
In January, the Fed withdrew from, opens new tab the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS), a global body of central banks and regulators devoted to exploring ways to police climate risk in the financial system.
The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in March withdrew from a jointly agreed set of climate principles for large U.S. banks, calling the framework "overly burdensome and duplicative".
Law firm Mayer Brown said in April it expects the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") and Fed to withdraw from the joint climate principles in the near future.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
US halts weapons shipments to Ukraine over fears stockpiles are too low
The US is halting some shipments of weapons to Ukraine amid concerns that its own stockpiles have declined too much, officials said Tuesday, a setback for the country as it tries to fend off escalating attacks from Russia. Certain munitions were previously promised to Ukraine under the Biden administration to aid its defences during the more than three-year-old war. The pause reflects a new set of priorities under President Donald Trump and came after defence department officials scrutinised US stockpiles and raised concerns. 'This decision was made to put America's interests first following a review of our nation's military support and assistance to other countries across the globe,' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. 'The strength of the United States Armed Forces remains unquestioned – just ask Iran.' That was a reference to Trump recently ordering US missile strikes against nuclear sites in Iran. The Pentagon review determined that stocks were too low on some weapons previously pledged, so pending shipments of some items won't be sent, according to a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity to provide information that has not yet been made public. The defence department did not provide details on what specific weapons were being held back. 'America's military has never been more ready and more capable,' spokesperson Sean Parnell said, adding that the major tax cut and spending package moving through Congress 'ensures that our weapons and defence systems are modernised to protect against 21st century threats for generations to come.' The halt of some weapons from the US is a blow to Ukraine as Russia has recently launched some of its biggest aerial attacks of the war, in an escalating bombing campaign that has further dashed hopes for a breakthrough in peace efforts championed by Trump. Talks between the sides have ground to a halt. The US stoppage was first reported by Politico. To date, the US has provided Ukraine more than $66bn worth of weapons and military assistance since Russia invaded its neighbour in February 2022. Over the course of the war, the US has routinely pressed for allies to provide air defence systems to Ukraine. But many are reluctant to give up the hi-tech systems, particularly countries in eastern Europe that also feel threatened by Russia. Trump met with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the Nato summit last week and had left open the possibility of sending Kyiv more US-made Patriot air defence missile systems, acknowledging they would help the Ukrainian cause. 'They do want to have the antimissile missiles, OK, as they call them, the Patriots,' Trump said then. 'And we're going to see if we can make some available. We need them, too. We're supplying them to Israel, and they're very effective, 100% effective. Hard to believe how effective. They do want that more than any other thing.' Those comments reflect a change of thinking about providing weapons to Ukraine across the administration in recent months. In testimony before lawmakers in June, defence secretary Pete Hegseth said he had moved quickly to quash wasteful programmes and redirect funding to Trump's top objectives. Hegseth said a negotiated peace between Russia and Ukraine, which has been promoted for months by Trump, makes America look strong, even though Moscow is the aggressor in the conflict. He also said the defence budget includes hard choices and 'reflects the reality that Europe needs to step up more for the defence of its own continent. And President Trump deserves the credit for that.' The defense secretary told lawmakers last month that some US security spending for Ukraine was still in the pipeline, without providing details. But he said such assistance – which has been robust for the past two years – would be reduced.
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Starmer wins vote on UK welfare reform but suffers damaging rebellion
LONDON, July 1 (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Keir Starmer won a vote on his welfare plans on Tuesday at significant political cost as he suffered the biggest parliamentary rebellion of his premiership and was forced to back down on key parts of the package. After his lawmakers pushed him into a series of embarrassing U-turns to sharply scale back plans to cut benefits, lawmakers in the House of Commons gave their initial approval to a package of measures Starmer says are vital to securing the future of the welfare system. But the scale of the rebellion - with 49 Labour lawmakers voting against the reforms - underlined the prime minister's waning authority. A year after winning one of the largest parliamentary majorities in British history, Starmer has seen his personal approval ratings collapse and been forced into several policy reversals by his increasingly rebellious lawmakers. "It's been a bumpy time tonight," work and pensions minister Liz Kendall told reporters after a session of parliament when lawmakers took turns to mostly criticise the planned changes. "There are definitely lessons to learn from this process." Starmer came into office last year promising his big parliamentary majority would bring an end to the political chaos that defined much of the Conservative Party's 14 years in power. But the revolt over the welfare bill underlines the difficulty he has pushing through unpopular changes. In the run-up to the vote, ministers and party enforcers known as "whips" had been locked in frantic last-ditch lobbying of undecided members of parliament to try to win their backing. In a further concession to rebels about two hours before the vote, the government said it would not finalise changes in eligibility for a key benefit payment until a review into the welfare system had been completed. Paula Barker, a Labour member of parliament, called the attempt to pass the plans "the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen". In the end, the government suffered by far the biggest rebellion of Starmer's premiership, eclipsing the 16 members of parliament who opposed an infrastructure bill earlier this month. Mel Stride, the opposition Conservative Party finance policy chief, described Starmer's team as "a government that's lost control", only able to pass the legislation by having "ripped the heart of it out". Labour lawmaker Henry Tufnell said by agreeing to the concessions Starmer had shown "he's willing to take on board these criticisms that people have raised." Almost 90 disability and human rights groups before the vote urged lawmakers to vote down the legislation. The proposed reforms are designed to reduce the cost of Britain's growing welfare bill, which the government has described as economically indefensible and morally wrong. Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds the country's defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds ($137 billion) by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now. More than half of the rise in working-age disability claims since the COVID-19 pandemic relates to mental health conditions, opens new tab, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank. The government had initially hoped to save 5 billion pounds ($6.9 billion) a year by 2030 by tightening rules for people to receive disability and sickness benefits. But after the government conceded to pressure from its lawmakers, it said the new rules would now apply only to future applicants, not to the millions of existing claimants as had been proposed. Analysts estimated the savings would likely be closer to 2 billion pounds. It was not clear how the additional last-minute change would impact the hoped-for savings in the welfare reform package. Opposition politicians said the government would now have to raise taxes or cut government spending elsewhere to balance the public finances in the annual budget later this year. The government has said there would be no permanent increase in borrowing, but has declined to comment on possible tax rises. While Starmer is under no immediate threat, and the next election is not expected until 2029, his party now trails behind Nigel Farage's populist Reform UK in opinion polls. John Curtice, Britain's most respected pollster, said this week that Starmer was the most unpopular elected prime minister in modern British history, and that voters still did not know what he stood for a year after he was elected.
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Why govt's promise of 'biggest boost to affordable housing in a generation' may be overblown
Angela Rayner is set to announce plans to build 180,000 new social homes in the next decade, as the government seeks to "turn the tide on the housing crisis". It would be six times greater than the number of social homes built in the 10 years up to 2024 - and forms part of a drive to build 300,000 new social and affordable properties by 2035. The plan is backed by a £39bn investment announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in last month's spending review. 2:29 The deputy prime minister called on the social housing sector to "work together to turn the tide of the housing crisis", and said the investment was "the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation". "We are seizing this golden opportunity with both hands to transform this country by building the social and affordable homes we need, so we create a brighter future where families aren't trapped in temporary accommodation and young people are no longer locked out of a secure home," she said. Ms Rayner's target for social and affordable housing is part of a wider long-term plan - also due to be published on Wednesday - setting out how the government will build both more houses and improve housing standards. Here, Sky News looks at what the plan will mean for the country, how it compares to previous programmes, and how it could be affected by the increased cost of construction. 3:17 Crunching the numbers The £39bn 10-year Affordable Homes Programme is an ambitious investment in affordable housing, representing a real terms increase from the previous programme of over £1bn annually. However, claims of the "biggest boost in a generation" may be slightly overblown. When factoring in inflation, the annual investment of £3.9bn falls short of the equivalent £4.5bn annually from 2008 to 2011 under the previous Labour government. This was however a notably short-term uplift, and the sector will welcome the stability of the new settlement which secures funding for 10 years - compared with five years or fewer under previous programmes. The programme sets out to deliver 30,000 affordable homes per year on average, with at least 18,000 of those being for social rent, rather than other tenures such as shared ownership. This would be more than twice the number under the previous programme, which is estimated to have delivered about 8,000 homes annually for social rent by its completion. Similarly, however, it is fewer than were delivered by the previous Labour Affordable Homes Programme, which was over 30,000 a year from 2008 to 2011. A further challenge to the government's goal of a "generational" uplift is the increasing cost of building, meaning they may face diminishing returns on their investment. The previous Affordable Homes Programme initially aimed to deliver 180,000 homes, which was revised down significantly to between 110,000 and 130,000 due to increasing costs and delays. This government can expect to face a similar economic landscape, particularly with an ambition to deliver a greater share of socially rented homes - the most expensive type of affordable housing to build.
