October 29, 2014
Sir, you write that “BoE encourages insurers to be weather resistant” October 29. And it all almost reads like a sophisticated April Fools’ Day joke.
You argue: “While markets are meant to incorporate a variety of opinions, high regulatory standards are needed to stop a casual attitude to climate change becoming a competitive advantage”… and so it is “encouraging that the Bank of England is determined to be on the front foot”
“Encouraging”? After what regulators, not being able to contain their hubris, thinking themselves capable of being the risk managers for all banks, recently, with their credit risk weighted equity requirements, did to the financial system?
Should we understand this means that the Financial Times believes regulators can come up with not only better insurance standards than the market, but also that such regulatory meddling would not risk produce some extremely risky unexpected consequences?
FT who are you? Why do you not change your name, to the Regulatory Times?