okay hi everybody and um it's a pleasure to be here thank you very much to cdfi for the invitation so we're going to have a a bit of a panel discussion now um as Matt just talked about on the broad theme of the policy and Regulatory Frameworks um this is a pretty broad topic we've got a fantastic panel who'll each be bringing quite a different perspective to that so we're going to hear a little bit from each of the panelists um I'll ask the panelist a few questions and then we're going to open this up to the audience so I hope you have lots of questions policy and regulation is usually a theme that kind of gets people going but I invite you to ask our panel interesting and challenging questions um I know there's one or two of you in the audience who are guaranteed to do that so looking forward to that um I should introduce myself I've been sort of referenced a couple of times already um my name is Kate levik um I work for e3g which is a climate policy Think Tank based here in London also working internationally I'm the director there of finance and resilience and um I had the pleasure with Ben calot the um founder of cgf to um co-host the Secretariat for the transition plan task force which has also been referenced so that's been a fantastic collaboration if you followed the work of the task force you'll know that um It produced its disclosure framework work last October setting out what a good transition plan looked like and um I know a number of people here in the room like work directly on that I can see lots of of friends of TPT in the room as well um we've had sort of more than 150 organizations directly involved in the drafting of the TPT products and then more recently in April we set out the final technical products which included sort of final sexual guidance across 40 sectors and deep dived on seven different sectors and um a whole other docu set of documents as well um what we are looking to see now of course is what the UK will do to fulfill the commitment it made at cop 26 to regulate and require trans transition plan Disclosure by at the time listed companies and financial firms that got extended to all large companies in the latest green Finance strategy um and of course it's in hand we recently saw a publication within the treasury about um you know how this form is part of the overall Suite of um sustainability disclosures and where it sits alongside issb implementation and um other other aspects that we might hear about today but of course we're about to have a new government so you never quite know what the future will bring and that's partly what this panel is about it's about looking forward um it's a year with elections all over the world it's not just us here in the UK there's risk uncertainty opportunity in many locations and I think it's fair to say in the last few years we've seen this huge swell of Regulation and policy framework Works around environmental disclosure in particular which is obviously very close to the data and analytics theme today but also a rising backlash against those disclosures and against that thinking particularly from the US we have the US Securities and Exchange commission's disclosure will all currently held up in legal proceedings we've seen challenges on the basis of antitrust law um here in the UK we're starting to see antizero campaigning as part of our election in the EU we've had a pledge to reduce the amount of all these regulations by 25% so um you know the backlash is also starting to be in full swing so what the future holds will be some kind of synthesis of these different Trends but one thing we can also say is that we see increasing urgency for Action as we move towards 2030 we're seeing increasing climate impacts and we also I think even if you're in the backlash all around there's a general mood of a need for more directive government policy a stronger roow for the state for the for the government to set econom polic that will direct these things so I think those are all interesting Trends to watch as well so I will now stop talking that was my opportunity to Waffle I will introduce the panel so on my left we have um Emily McKenzie who's the technical director sorry on my left I have K Aon everyone's not sitting in might we have K Aon the head of policy and Partnerships at Oxford Net Zero I'm very pleased to welcome you K and then um we have Diana Carney who's a senior adviser from Beyond Net Zero Mark Manning principal an adviser for Regulatory Affairs at the IFRS Foundation among various other hats that he also wears um and then last but not least sorry I'm will McKenzie the technical director for the task force for nature related Financial disclosures um the tnf tnfd so um I will I guess ask our panel to give that opening remarks in the order in which they were sent and so it's not to confuse things any further so K would you like to start us off absolutely although I think it's only polite for nature to go first your original lineup was probably best um yeah I mean our our research at the University of Oxford shows an 11 fold increase in um this type of uh regulation where you could embed Net Zero standards so this kind of normative regulation whether that be disclosure procurement uh mandatory transition plans um claims or product standards um and what we found in our kind of initial stock take we're developing a policy monitor that tracks these regulations across um 37 jurisdictions globally and what we've found is that there's been an 11 fold increase in the last just few years on this type of policy developing and that comes with upsides and downsides of course the significant rampup of Regulation is welcome um by the business Community who has been calling for regulation to help them align the alphabet soup of Standards providing interoperability clear fair and coherent ground rules for the Net Zero economy um but it also comes with um challenges if that regulation is not coordinated and so we see significant differences of course between the EU and the SEC laws um but I think that there's a this kind of Patchwork of Regulation that is starting to drive ambition sort of overall towards the most ambitious jurisdictions because we have a globalized economy even if you know the SEC laws don't include scope 3 California is requiring scope 3 reporting and a lot of the very companies that would be um kind of looking at at both jurisdictions are instead just going for it we also see that regulation is kind of following this what we call a conveyor belt of adoption and the conveyor belt at the moment is not um is not Advanced as quickly as we we would need it to be if you think about the fact that disclosure was a voluntary process developed about 20 years ago and only now are we seeing about 50% of the world being covered by mandatory disclosure we need much faster pace of adoption but we're starting to see signs that that adoption is accelerating because whole governments are starting to develop framework legislation that then trickle down into the type of policies and and instruments that we'd be looking for um just as a final comment I think it's clear that new type of international coordination is needed to develop the interoperability that businesses are calling for so that they don't end up having to fill out different forms uh as we know that they do U from a financial perspective as well brilliant thank you so much K uh thank you well many of the things that I was going to say you said I know some of them I I I mean this this journey as you suggest we need this journey and I think the new model that we have of you know implementing these standards as voluntary standards kind of practicing them Consulting on them getting them there does enable uh policy makers to pick them up with relatively low risk but as you say we're not we're not moving fast enough on that um and I I personally right now I live in Canada um the issb is a case in point you know we attracted part of the issb you know to Canada you know there was an understanding that we would adopt the the the you know the um standards came out it took you know a year for us to say that we would strike a a committee to think about possibly adjusting these things for our economy uh and on what basis we needed to adjust them was extremely unclear but you know we're going to put it off we don't have to do our scope 3 for you know an extra year Etc so you the that is is not Haring right um because uh we all see that you know mandatory means people move faster uh and although one of I do a number of jobs one of them is to to advise beyond that zero which is General Atlantics climate fund uh I also work with EUR Asia group advising around policy and when you see the effect what you know the kind of horror that companies uh show in their eyes when the EU deforestation regulation comes up I mean that really matters they've got to do something they've got to do it quickly and likewise when you see the failure of of of water policy regulation and the kind of chaos that exists as we have sort of uh bits of you know regulation emerging at the last minute because the reason isn't any really strategic approach to water regulation globally or you know any jurisdiction globally you know these things matter obviously to companies I think all of us in this room probably believe in policy um that's my first point uh uh what you know as I say sort of in in in my uh you know principal activity is uh advising around the climate impact of potential Investments within a private Equity Fund so that is something that may not be relevant to of you the private markets uh we are in a sense we are responding to a policy we are an sfdr you know we we we focus on our article 9 fund which means sustainability is uh the key objective of the fund and as such you know we invest in climate Solutions in a sense we've got the easy bit we say okay we're going to invest in the stuff that we know is a solution for the climate um I think you know one of the big issues obviously is what Vanessa talked about which is the transition piece the brown to Green Piece we're we're not doing the brown to Green Piece we're doing the kind of Accelerated Green but within that you need Frameworks to help you understand where you get the biggest band for bug and this is a really complicated um in a sense what's complicated about it is three years ago when we started there was very little in the way of an accepted framework for determining what you know the sort of bang for buck piece you could more or less see what might be helping the climate but when you you think of the real calculations and how you how you assess that I think over the three years that I've been working with the team at uh General antic and systemic that supports us uh there's been you know there is Broad agreement as to what we're looking at and this is in the case of how to calculate avoided emissions when you are involved with um a climate solution uh and I think you know the methodologies are quite similar to the proposed methodologies for the um expected emissions reduction for example in in uh when the kind of brown to Green um transitions but but there's still nuances in that piece that different different firms do it in different ways and you can come up with very different numbers based on how you do your calculations even if you the center of your your your methodologies Remains the Same there are I'm not can go into details but you probably bore you to death but the the point is that there's this kind of almost you there's a desired level of precision but there's also has to always be a recognition that that Precision is is um we you know there's a level of uncertainty about it and particularly when you get to these enabling Solutions which we all know we need so it's not the direct product that's going to cause the uh avoided emissions but it's the software underneath it that enables it and trying to trace through those things so anyway what I would say is um you know the more we can develop and regularize these Frameworks and I think there are initiatives within you know private initiatives to try and come together on this but different firms you know they kind of cling to their thing and they've stated it last thing i' say is you know we we do that we focus on avoided emissions but we also require companies to decarbonize internally uh so we companies um must set and uh get approve their science-based targets now we all know that there are challenges with the science based targets um and and fulfilling them I think we need to have much more honest discussions around those and around Targets in general and the difference between setting a Target and meeting a Target and when you actually you know are deem to have failed uh and we also look last thing is we try to look at kind of system impact of what we're doing so it's not just these narrow you know how many products do we sell how much emissions does each product uh displaced but we try and look at um you know will this enable the transition is this a key underlying technology a general purpose technology that can enable the transition therefore is there a bigger bank for bug um we would always resist setting a an exact number for that bank for bug because of the uncertainty around it but um I think so you can't do I guess really what I'm saying is you can't do this without having some kind of Frameworks and methodologies that you are doing and I think the more that we can agree on those uh and you know in general the less the more that we can stop disagreeing in the climate space I think it would be extremely helpful both to internally and to the kind of perception out there of of of what we're trying to re achieve which of course is you know as rapid as possible decarbonization of our economies brilliant thank you I think that may have been the perfect um way to queue up the man from the if fors how are you going to bring us all together thank you very much indeed um great to be here and thanks so much for the opportunity so what I wanted to really um give a sense of is how with reference to some of what we've already heard the IFRS Foundation has been um taking forward this journey towards uh adoption of the standards I think uh you know we've all already heard that there is an urgency here we need to move quickly the fact that about a year ago now um just at the end of June last year uh the initial standards um IRS S1 and S2 were published that has laid a bit of a foundation really that we can that we can build on but we will only be able to build on that Foundation if the standards are indeed adopted and adopted in a consistent and comparable way internationally um and adopted quickly um so a big focus of the uh Foundation over the past over the past year has been around encouraging and supporting uh Global adoption of the standards and uh just last week actually uh we we published a little bit of an update on progress in that regard and taking the sort of glass half full um perspective here we do now have more than 20 jurisdictions on the journey um they're at different stages of that Journey some are uh at the point where they have uh announced an intention they've set out a ro map others are more um uh more fully into that implementation phase but um those 20 jurisdictions together account for um more than 50% of global GDP um they account for more than 40% of um market cap so we've got a pretty good base there I think that really sends quite a quite a strong signal it sets a good tone for uh adoption of the standards uh by others and the good news is also that there's quite a wide geographical spread here we've got um we we we we've got all the regions um represented to some extent and we uh have also got a good mix of advanced economies and Emerging Market uh developing economies among those that are are on the journey so I think there are some really quite encouraging signs there um just a bit of a uh an indication of the uh the country is on the journey uh so we've already heard Canada are on the journey even if baps not quite as far ahead e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e for