&w=3840&q=100)
G20 watchdog outlines climate risk plan but halts further policy work
The US has withdrawn from multiple groups dedicated to exploring how flooding and wildfires and big climate-related policy shifts could impact financial stability.
In its medium-term plan, the G20's Financial Stability Board pledged to step up coordination and data sharing on climate-related financial risk.
However, it said while progress had been made to integrate climate risks into financial systems, some of its members, who include central bank governors and ministers, were keen to pause further climate work.
"While many members feel there is a need for more work, some members feel that the work completed to date is sufficient," the FSB said in an update to its 2021 climate roadmap delivered to G20 finance ministers meeting in South Africa.
"Going forward, the FSB will ... make determinations about what projects, if any, it will undertake." US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent would not attend the G20 meeting, Reuters reported last week. The United States is due to head the G20 group, which it helped found in the aftermath of the global financial crisis, next year.
The FSB said it would continue to consider climate-related topics each year and would focus on its role as a coordinator of international work on climate risks.
The watchdog said it did not have plans to do any more significant policy work on integrating climate-related financial risks into its supervisory and regulatory work. Work on this topic is ongoing at many of its member institutions, it said.
The Brussels-based think tank Finance Watch said a lack of reference to concrete regulatory measures needed to address climate risks was a sharp retreat from the G20's original ambition and a moment of multilateral backsliding.
"It confirms what we've been hearing since the G20 Plenary in Madrid (in June): the FSB is backing down under pressure, especially from the US," it said in a statement.
"If the G20 endorses this shift, we risk locking in a fragmented response. That weakens incentives for lagging jurisdictions (and) reduces multilateral pressure to act," its head of research and advocacy, Julia Symon, added.
Earlier this year, the FSB published work on the usefulness of transition plans for financial stability and in 2024 presented a stocktake of supervisory and regulatory work on nature-related financial risks.
"Rather than identifying such vulnerabilities a priority for further work, the FSB will leave that decision up to its annual work programme process," the FSB said in the report.
The report detailed progress made since 2023 by international standard setters and global banking regulators.
It also set out efforts to provide forward-looking data to help banks and companies quantify economic losses from climate shocks such as heatwaves.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's order to end birthright citizenship still blocked as federal lawsuits press forward
Former President Donald Trump's attempt to revoke birthright citizenship for children of undocumented immigrants remains blocked, as federal court rulings hold firm and legal challenges continue nationwide. Despite a recent Supreme Court decision impacting immigration policy, lower courts have kept injunctions in place, preventing the controversial order from taking effect for now. read more Hannah Liu, 26, of Washington, holds up a sign in support of birthright citizenship, May 15, 2025, outside of the Supreme Court in Washington. File image/ AP President Donald Trump's attempt to abolish birthright citizenship for the offspring of illegal immigrants likely stay stalled, as an injunction from one court went into effect Friday and another appeared to follow suit. US District Judge Joseph LaPlante of New Hampshire had postponed his own ruling to allow the Trump administration to appeal, but with no appeals filed in the last week, his order took effect. Cody Wofsy, the ACLU attorney representing children who would be affected by Trump's restrictions, said, 'The judge's order protects every single child whose citizenship was called into question by this illegal executive order,' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He also added, 'The government has not appealed and has not sought emergency relief so this injunction is now in effect everywhere in the country.' The Trump administration may still appeal or request that LaPlante's order be restricted but the move to abolish birthright citizenship for children of illegal or temporary residents of the United States cannot go into force for the time being. The Justice Department did not respond to a message seeking comment. In the meanwhile, over a dozen states argued before a judge in Boston that Trump's birthright citizenship order is clearly unlawful and that it jeopardises millions of dollars for necessary services. The case is anticipated to quickly return before the nation's top court. They asked US District Judge Leo Sorokin to consider either keeping in place the nationwide injunction he granted earlier or consider a request from the government either to narrow the scope of that order or stay it altogether. Sorokin, located in Boston, did not immediately rule but seemed inclined to side with the states. Lawyers for the government had argued Sorokin should narrow the reach of his earlier ruling granting a preliminary injunction, arguing it should be 'tailored to the States' purported financial injuries.' LaPlante issued the ruling last week prohibiting Trump's executive order from taking effect nationwide in a new class-action lawsuit, and a Maryland-based judge said this week that she would do the same if an appeals court signed off. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The justices ruled last month that lower courts generally can't issue nationwide injunctions, but it didn't rule out other court orders that could have nationwide effects, including in class-action lawsuits and those brought by states. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the underlying citizenship order is constitutional.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
Terrorists vanish and probes stay ‘inconclusive': Pakistan sees ‘no link' as investigation stalls in familiar fog
Pakistan says its probe into the April 22 Pahalgam attack that killed 26 civilians remains inconclusive, even as the US designates the suspected group, The Resistance Front, as a terrorist proxy of Lashkar-e-Taiba. Islamabad denies any current links and accuses India of politicising terror listings. read more Pakistan on Friday said that its investigation into the April 22 killing of 26 civilians in India's Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam remains inconclusive even as the United States designated the suspected group behind the killings a global terrorist entity. Pakistan's foreign office's statement added to a pattern of stalled probes and denied links, even as the international community points fingers at groups long linked to Pakistan's militant networks. The group in question- The Resistance Front (TRF) also known as Kashmir Resistance was formally blacklisted by the US on Thursday as a 'foreign terrorist organisation' and a 'specially designated global terrorist.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In a statement issued by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, it was acknowledged that TRF claimed responsibility for the terror attack that claimed the lives of 26 people and triggered the 4-day military escalation between India and Pakistan. In light of this, the US accorded the group as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) and Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT). Pakistan's foreign ministry rejected the allegations, stating that any link between TRF and LeT 'belies ground realities' and insisting that LeT was 'a defunct group' that had already been banned in Pakistan. 'Pakistan has a zero-tolerance policy for militancy,' the statement said, while acknowledging that investigations into the Pahalgam attack remain inconclusive. The ministry also claimed Pakistan had dismantled all relevant organisations, prosecuted their leaders, and de-radicalised their cadres. At the same time, it accused India of manipulating such global terror designations to drive 'anti-Pakistan propaganda'. Indian authorities, however, maintain that TRF is simply LeT by another name, and was directly responsible for the coordinated and brutal assault in April. They argued that the group's quick claim of responsibility — later deleted — was consistent with a longstanding pattern where militant outfits try to obscure operational footprints while receiving support from across the border. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The April attack sparked heavy fighting between nuclear-armed neighbours India and Pakistan in the latest escalation of a decades-old rivalry. New Delhi blamed the attack on Pakistan, which denied responsibility while calling for a neutral investigation. Washington's TRF designation signals support for New Delhi Michael Kugelman, a Washington-based South Asia analyst and writer for Foreign Policy magazine, said in designating TRF, 'Washington is flagging its concern about the terrorist attack that provoked the recent India-Pakistan conflict, and siding with New Delhi's view that the group is linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba." He added: 'This can be a shot in the arm for a U.S.-India relationship looking to rebound after a few tough months." On May 7, Indian jets bombed sites across the border that New Delhi described as 'terrorist infrastructure,' setting off an exchange of attacks between the two countries by fighter jets, missiles, drones, and artillery that killed dozens until a ceasefire on May 10. The ceasefire was first announced by Trump on social media after Washington held talks with both sides, but India has differed with Trump's claims that it resulted from his intervention and his threats to sever trade talks. India's position has been that New Delhi and Islamabad must resolve their problems directly and with no outside involvement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India is an increasingly important U.S. partner in Washington's effort to counter China's rising influence in Asia, while Pakistan is a U.S. ally. Both Hindu-majority India and Islamic Pakistan claim Muslim-majority Kashmir in full while ruling only parts of the Himalayan territory, over which they have also fought wars. With inputs from agencies
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
11 minutes ago
- First Post
IMF flags trade tensions as key risk to global growth ahead of July forecast
The IMF warned on Friday that risks related to trade tensions continue to cloud the global economic outlook and uncertainty remains high despite some increased trade and improved financial conditions. read more The International Monetary Fund (IMF) on Friday warned that trade tensions continue to pose risks to the global economic outlook, even as financial conditions improve and inflation shows signs of easing. IMF First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath said the Fund would update its global growth forecast later in July, taking into account recent front-loading of trade ahead of tariff hikes, trade diversion patterns, improved financial conditions, and ongoing disinflation. In April, the IMF had cut its 2025 global growth forecast by 0.5 percentage points to 2.8%, citing the impact of U.S. tariffs at 100-year highs and escalating trade disputes. The Fund also reduced its projection for 2024 by 0.3 percentage points to 3%. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Economists now anticipate a modest upward revision in the upcoming July forecast. Gopinath told finance officials from the Group of 20 major economies who met this week in South Africa that trade tensions continued to complicate the economic outlook. 'While we will update our global forecast at the end of July, downside risks continue to dominate the outlook and uncertainty remains high,' she said, in a text of her remarks. She urged countries to resolve trade tensions and implement policy changes to address underlying domestic imbalances, including scaling back fiscal outlays and putting debt on a sustainable path. Gopinath also underscored the need for monetary policy officials to carefully calibrate their decisions to specific circumstances in their countries, and stressed the need to protect central bank independence. This was a key theme in the G20 communique released by finance officials. Gopinath said capital flows to emerging markets and developing economies remained sluggish, but resilient, in the face of increased policy uncertainty and market volatility. For many borrowers, financing conditions remained tight. For countries with unsustainable debt, proactive moves were essential, Gopinath said, repeating the IMF's call for timely and efficient debt restructuring mechanisms. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD More work was needed on that issue, including allowing middle-income countries to access the G20's Common Framework for Debt Restructuring, she said. With inputs from agencies
