– Advertisement – The longtime television personality, who began his stint on the game show in 1984, publicly revealed in March 2019 that he suffered from stage IV pancreatic cancer.“Just like 50,000 other people in the United States each year, this week I was diagnosed with stage IV pancreatic cancer,” he announced in a YouTube video on March 6. “Now, normally the prognosis for this is not very encouraging, but I’m gonna fight this and I’m gonna keep working and with the love and support of my family and friends and with the help of your prayers also, I plan to beat the low survival rate statistics for this disease.”The ABC series thanked its fanbase for their support two days after Trebek’s announcement. “The outpouring of good wishes and support in response to Alex’s recent health news has been humbling and overwhelming,” the tweet read. “Please know that your messages are being conveyed to him and are deeply appreciated. From everyone at Jeopardy! – thank you.”Alex Trebek at the NAB Broadcasting Hall of Fame Awards in Las Vegas on April 9, 2018. Robb Cohen/Invision/AP/Shutterstock- Advertisement – Jeopardy host Alex Trebek died on Sunday, November 8, after a long battle with pancreatic cancer. He was 80.“Jeopardy! is saddened to share that Alex Trebek passed away peacefully at home early this morning, surrounded by family and friends. Thank you, Alex,” the game show’s official account tweeted on Sunday.- Advertisement – Nearly two months later, the Canada native told Good Morning America‘s Robin Roberts that he was doing his best to stay strong, despite his setbacks, which also included kidney stones and ruptured discs.“I’m used to dealing with pain,” he said in the interview, which aired on May 1, before admitting that it hasn’t been easy to remain optimistic. “But what I’m not used to dealing with is the surges that come on suddenly of deep, deep sadness and it brings tears to my eye. I’ve discovered in this whole episode, ladies and gentlemen, that I’m a bit of a wuss.”Trebek is survived by his wife, Jean Currivan, and their two children, Matthew, 30, and Emily, 27.- Advertisement –
Böhm warned of applying “superficial key figures” to identify sustainable companies without taking a closer look at the underlying operational business, for example.Speaking at the Institutional Autumn Summit, organised by Barbara Bertolini in Vienna, Böhm called on politicians to improve sustainability through good environmental, social and corporate governance legislation.The Commission is pursuing several sustainable finance measures as part of its efforts to deliver on climate change commitments.One of them is the development of a “taxonomy” to define what types of economic activity should be considered environmentally sustainable. EU regulators ESMA and EIOPA have separately been charged with delivering technical advice in relation to potential rules requiring sustainability risks to be integrated in investment decision-making. Christian Wolf, head of asset management at BVV, the €28bn pension fund for the German banking sector, was also critical of the EU’s approach.“What we do not need is legislation overtaking itself,” he said.Wolf pointed out that pension funds had to implement IORP II, the new EU pension fund directive, by mid-January 2019. Schemes had until 2023 before a full assessment of implementation could be carried out. However, the Commission’s proposals on sustainable finance brought additional pressure and less time, according to Wolf.“What pension funds need is long-term reliability of a regulatory framework and time to implement existing legislation,” he said.Local laws and delegated actsThe Commission has sought to amend the IORP II directive to allow for so-called ‘delegated acts’ legislation. The German pensions association, aba, has rejected this and questioned the Commission’s understanding of aspects of IORP II.Markus Zeilinger, founder and CEO of the Austrian €380m Fair-Finance provident fund, argued that some existing Austrian laws actually hindered sustainable investments.“Sustainability is not part of the regulatory framework and some of the investment decisions we are making could be questioned by the supervisor,” he said.And while he welcomed some of the EU’s proposals, he predicted that implementation would be flawed: “I am afraid of the Trojan horse that only brings additional costs and a need for more resources.”He called on the EU to create more transparency and access to databases for investors to make informed decisions.Defending the Commission’s efforts, Martin Koch, policy officer in its financial services department, told delegates that the EU was “only trying to create a system of reference” with the planned taxonomy.“We do not want to tell anyone what is supposed to be green and what is not,” he said.The taxonomy has been described as intended to be an “enabling tool” for investors. Koch added that creating more transparency in sustainability reporting and ratings, as well as checking existing regulatory frameworks for impediments to sustainable investing, were also high on the Commission’s list of priorities.Volker Weber, chairman of the board at the sustainable finance lobby group Forum Nachhaltige Geldanlagen, was sceptical about the taxonomy framework.“You have to judge products according to their own benchmarks and promises to check for greenwashing,” he said. Weber also called on the EU to better coordinate its efforts between the different sectors so as to avoid different regulatory frameworks clashing.In general, the panel said the Commission’s efforts pointed “in the right direction”, but all industry representatives were wary of how various EU bodies and authorities might implement the proposals or translate them into additional regulations. German and Austrian retirement providers are concerned that the European Commission’s (EC) efforts to promote sustainability in the capital markets will end in additional regulation and costs for pension funds, delegates at a conference in Vienna heard yesterday.Discussing the Commission’s proposals for sustainable finance, industry representatives warned of efforts that “might mean well but turn out not so good”.“What is happening at the moment is an attempt to shift some of this responsibility to institutional investors who will get the blame if a goal is not achieved,” said Christian Böhm, managing director of the Austrian €4.4bn APK pension fund. “When ESMA and EIOPA tell us what should be considered sustainable, I begin to shake with fear,” he added.