british writer charles dickens is credited with creating some of the world's best-known fictional characters. hope over 2000 that matter scattered throughout is 14.5 published novels. american authors journalists and politicians often refer to situations as being mckenzie and. jenny hartley emeritus professor in london has published three books on charles dickens or the most recent one need a very short introduction by oxford press. we asked professor hartley to tell us about accomplishments including his two trips to the united states in 1842 and in 1867.

simi good morning. i'm david wessel director of the hutchens center on monetary policy. i'm very pleased to welcome mark carney to our virtual stage today. extraordinary is an overused word but mark carney's career qualifies for sure. if you look at his resume you would think he was 96 years old. he was torn in portsmouth and northwest territory in canada which i mention only because google search shows its perseverance as an undergraduate degree from harvard a ph.d. from oxford and spent 13 years at goldman sachs and the canadian government including five years with the bank of canada during the global financial crisis and because that wasn't challenging enough

he became director of the bank of england from 2013 to 2020 during the whole rex at thing. he's an adviser to the british prime minister the u.n. special envoy for climate action vice chair albert dell asset management mentioned as a future candidate for the prime ministership of canada and he's only 56 and not going to deal with his collegiate career. mark has decided he would write one book in his life. it's called "value(s)" building a better world for all and it's really several hooks and one. the history of money and what markets can and can't do well a primer on climate change and what to do on it lessons on leadership. i'm probably one of a few people that read all 20 paragraphs of the g7 communiqué that came out over the weekend. mark carney's look at the background briefing on every one

of those chapters so we are happy to be with this mark and if you want to ask a question text it to -- and i'll try to get to some. i thought we would start with a very evocative and interesting title of your book which is "value(s)" with an emphasis around the s and you talk about the tension between values which is a market determined something or other and values which has to do with our moral being. i wonder if you talk a little bit about what we'd do with by putting those together what does it tell us about how we should run societies and its market driven but not market control. >> first of all thank you david and thanks for having me and thanks tube brookings for putting on this event and all the great work that you do. i'm a huge consumer of years and

beneficiary and expect to over decades. we read the g7 communiqué and i'm not sure if anyone else did that many people will be affected by what's in that communiqué. thank you for going straight to the title because the parentheses is there because the values between -- goes in both. on the one hand you have circumstance and i'm simplifying but in the run-up to the financial crisis, the underlying values that's a part free market functioning and this goes back to adam smith and political philosophers and in the end it was recognize that there's a role for regulation but there's a rule for other institutions

which are customs and rules. we have lost some of that. that is one of the contributory factors to the financial crisis. this relationship between value and values is what i described to michael pinto which is the market with aspects of societies of the efforts to bring in certain elements of activity where their charitable activities voluntary, i can go on but bringing them into the right system and in that process depending on the activity in the process there can be a corrosion of the values to the incentives. that's not the core element of the book. the third aspect is when values

can deliver societal values in other words the market values and really what i'm getting at here is the example and i'm sure we'll have a chance to talk about it of climate change. as we move out of that trade-off and is almost bread in bone and me but to a hierarchy they are certain object is which become a focal point and we are moving to that position of sustainability. then the market performed with the right tools will be the driver. there's a lot in the book but it captures those elements and using the experience of the crisis that i went through and others on this webinar have been a over the past of the -- over

the past 10 or 15 years. sara are we too far towards the market or too far towards the moral imperative of it? >> i think we were definitely too far to the market during the global financial crisis and it was an era and i'm making an overstatement but it's a cognitive capture a vet if he will wear the market failure was to create a new market. again since this is brookings i can use the shorthand and say we had and complain -- incomplete market system. there are a lot of fundamental assumptions that go into that which most of which don't exist in those circumstances. you also had and this is the

real balance. you had a belief that it has nothing to tell the market other than to learn the lessons of the market. there was the claim that lean approach of central banking and light touch approach is and regulations and other aspects that were there and the reassurance of the market must have it right or something like sub-prime wouldn't happen as opposed to what happens in that event. we deftly had the pendulum wrong. i think in the case of something like sustainability the issues of climate change if the market

failure that can be picked with the market so that's something we are more comfortable with. i would argue over the years but it's also a tragedy of the rise -- we are discounting the future quite heavily and it's a clear and present danger in terms of physical risk. it's too late to take into account so the question is how do we change that? in the end that's a question the small p political question which until we get to that moment the market isn't going to be a service of that you nor regulators. let me take the opportunity to say this which is what we very clearly dead in setting up with mike bloomberg is really private

sector process. as opposed to climate related and it's not a standard but a recommendation. it discloses not just the current carbon footprints but what is the risk of not what might they do about it? this is just to provide information to the market to make a market decision because some people thought it was an issue and some people did make it an issue. some thought government would ultimately act and therefore this wouldn't ultimately end up in the price or the price in a reasonable -- now that shift is not to the same degree in every country but there's a lot of moment to them around this.

countries say it's a legislative objective. even though it's canadian dollars is a lot of money. so easy that shift but the long way of answering your question in terms of the values that those values in the end are determined by society and that process but if you do and this is where i spend a lot of time with people who are very focused on the environment. they tend to far to heavily discount the market and underestimate the power of the market if it is focused on finding solutions to an issue even one as big as monetary. >> i want to get back to climate change that i want to talk about

the nature of money first and particularly your thoughts on the fixation that a lot of people have with cryptocurrency and what the potential risks are. i know the g7 is warming up to the idea of central banking and a liquid state's settlement asset and so forth than they seem to be down on any rush to stable coin like facebook formerly known as lever until we get a better regulatory name. put cryptocurrency into perspective for somewhere you think it's going on what we should do to make sure it has more positive than negative aspects. >> so yes let's take a step back. in this time of proto-competing

currencies the effort which is called the m. now instead of libra which is a staple of bitcoin which most people know but it's a crypto instrument which is backed one-to-one ideally. by the way this is a key point. liability big risk-free liabilities in u.s. dollars is -- i can think of one place that provides that called the federal reserve but i can't think of anywhere else in and by definition you have some mismatch and history shows the bank of amsterdam being an example in the book where the temptation with the bank of amsterdam was.

and ultimately how credible is that commitment? >> ultimately banned up not just writing the mismatch but people realize that bills have risk associated with them. so that a real concern and that's one of them which is in the end the new ceo or new treasurer ultimately will stretch money for nothing type approach. in the end why wouldn't you just have a single bank if you're going to have a stable coin why wouldn't you have your own stable coin which would be a digital currency and other forms which his account based.

the context of what's happening we have currency competition basically so a series of crypto assets of varying degrees and varying purposes and most of them are not money. they might use them for payment but some of the most interesting are the ones that are specific. some of them more wholesale and getting efficiencies in their in a way that serves a role. it's a legitimate question whether it's a possibility. some are trying to play that role. i think in the end the central banks get to position where they solve that issue but we will see. it has to be said and we have

seen examples in recent weeks like bitcoin. it's called cillizza finance is called ransomware. that's not a gap we necessarily want to close so anyway you get the point. and these are questions of the values of the value of money. we need something that's resilient and transparent and we also need an adjustment mechanism. for example the gold standard in that talk about the gold standard in the book and you are student of that i know ultimately fell by too much weight on the adjustment of labor. so where'd i think it's headed? i think they are more likely to

be -- based and likely hopefully i should say those digital currency's will become linkages to the cross-border payments. most people won't see this cbbc because it's from a bank or a tech company. we will still have a lot of inside money created by those financial institutions. but they are probably will be in parallel native currencies for specific applications that are legitimate better use by a subset of users and interoperability will have to be established there. >> an account a central currency will have two talk to the bank

to bank will have a digital account. >> exactly and what's interesting is the more banks that have those accounts and by the way a more confident in the uk and other places but it could be the instagram wallet. it could be a think tank company and they need to have that account as well. there's no settlement risk. in this case if the bank of england. >> at the vantage of that is the competition. >> its efficiency and it is as i understand it and i'm not the one doing the program but you focus attention on being

programmable for smart contract and other applications which are potentially very attractive and contingent contracts in effect adding efficiencies to the system. like much in this area it's pretty nascent. >> will we be would be a currency last society in a decade or so? >> you think of the people you know and you are suggesting i am younger than i am i am 56. i said when i was governor in the uk we will continue to banknotes as long as people want them. we have got a few decades. >> let's turn to climate. your basic argument is if we are serious about this being climate

change and you think we are increasingly serious about it that there is a growing political consensus that doing nothing or doing what we have done so far would be a huge mistake and a disservice to our children and grandchildren. your main argument if i get it right is you want to bring climate risk into the heart of financial decision-making so tell me how that happens. how do you get companies and banks and insurance companies and consumers to fully internalize the cost of our behavior which is contributing to the greenhouse gas. >> one of the keys organizing principles for this is netzero so what as happened with climate change is it's been understood for a long time that we can't

stabilize the temperature whether it's the 1.5 degrees or three degrees. we can't stabilize at until we get to netzero emissions and that's carbon emissions. netzero means any omission that exists because it's not just human activity. those are removed so there is some net process and the two obvious net processes, one is for us while they are growing so once you get to the height you are a wash and carbon capture and storage. those are the two most obvious

ways so you have to get emissions way down in order to net out and the point is the temperature is a function of the carbon in the atmosphere. jurgen icing principle now is netzero go where 130 countries and counting would say netzer is our objective and even meeting on climate this november is a netzero cost. china has made its got commitment in we are trying to get a few other economies in their but it's organized netzero if you are a company or financial institution the question is can you operate in jurisdictions and what is your plan for netzero? you can have a plan which is my plan -- their three options. one is i don't have a plan

because i don't think this is credible or that it will happen for whatever reason and it may be some issues with stakeholders and employees and you may be surprised. the second is i don't think i can get to netzero and i'm going to run off my business. you could legitimately say i'm going to seize certain activities over 15 or 20 years. what most companies seem to be thinking is i'm putting in place a plan and buy it 2030 will be at this point. now you have a financial system which is getting that information related to this but it's not the same as netzero but related. so you have this information and you are judging companies in

terms of whether they likely do have a plan. are they going to be competitive in a world of netzero is not a rising price on carbon and environmental regulation and more and more competition from low-carbon technologies. that is a decision point that will influence company value. ..

it is a huge amount of money can adding to net zero. now, if i may to build this out scenarios it's critical in building the system and the incentives i want to invest in a company who may have high emissions today who make up for the next few years giving capitol those are going to come down over time. what we want to avoid is on the surface satisfying to the binary approach which there

are green assets and brown assets. get rid of all of the brown and go to the green. that is not a transition. that will not get us to where we need to go we need the automakers so the core of the system gets its emissions down for quickly pick up on that. when i noted on twitter i was going to be talking to you, i got some people you probably heard from yourself. i company like brookfield were you involved in a lot of investing. it's also investing and possible infrastructure. what is the role of the big institutional investor? you are suggesting not investing is a mistake because it does not get them the resources to make the

transition. >> made his entire situation specific. that's part of the 70 trillion you bring 600 billion to get to the 70 trillion level. large alternative asset manager. what we are doing as we map our carbon footprint. we have decarbonization we have a specific strategy which i very much participate in which is to help accelerate the transition for companies specific transition strategy. also addressing the overall footprint of the 600 billion of assets. it's one of the biggest renewable power generators in the world. it's 20 gigawatts in chicago

and new york in terms of scale of generation it's a huge amount. so the judgment what is the value of the pipelines go through these pipelines which is extends its life the eye would save the last thing had not been mainstreamed in the capitol market. but it is moving from two mainstream very quickly. which is going to enhance the value of certain

infrastructure assets within jurisdictions that is the lowest carbon solution for period of time one of the lowest and it can be extended for reasons. part of thinking about to finish the simplistic thing which is what we're trying trying to avoid for the system as a whole that is hypocritical, no it's not. it is an energy transition we have to make judgments, others will make the transition could happen sooner will deal with all accordingly. as you mentioned earlier canada has moved isn't that

going to create some issues and be difficult for canadians to feel like this is great we are doing our part in the u.s. is getting it is a growing one and trade policy as you suggest this judgment that it is often expressed it could be a candidate of the u.s. it could be a candidate of the u.s. and china i think, maybe i will answer it in terms of how we think the policy might go. the first is its relatively

small tradable products for which it's paid big issues. some politically motivated one the second thing is what is being openly talked about is the carver border adjustment mechanisms. the europeans are launching an initiative talk about it. the easy way when the u.s. does not have a carbon price then you move into a world of shadow carbon. which is harder to map and is the equivalent of my omission standard on the price of

carbon. the other route is product standards. having components of the product standard of certain quality. my personal view cutting it short is kind of over the next couple of years it's more likely to land on the product side does not seem likely to happen in the foreseeable future despite the economic benefits going down that route. >> i have to say this was made in a way limited amount of carbon emissions. that actually will not be an assertion. it is again part of the

disclosure standards and others is the ability to map that. carbon that's delivered to -- steel to the ports here. >> what about china and india? we can't fix this problem without them. they say oh great used up all the carbon capacity to industrialize the island to restrain our the chinese talk a good game but they're still taught coal plants. indians got all kinds of issues. when you talk to them how do you read them. how do they play in this world? >> it is incredibly important and decisive 195 countries are

equal but some are more equal than others. china and canada clearly. [laughter] how do i read them? couple things about the chinese. they have it pretty explicitly taken the view that being a low carbon having a low carbon industries or being leaders in industries that allow low carbon as a fundamental driver and competitiveness. there is a big economic motivation to their push toward net zero. that is first. and then i think a lot of other economic major powers so this is reinforcing the market in some respects. the second thing is that the

chinese, the chinese just started to ship. so they said it will peak : 2025 and begin to manage it's all very fuzzy to be clear. but it is that impression on coal. which is the key ending. the objective is advance accounting by 2030 and 2040 emergent link. the extent to which the global we collectively the

development of alternatives is critical including canada can as part of the solution for that. going to think that through. i think china's, artist of the largest admit or i will be essential and more straightforward. it's a complicated place to govern. it is a federal structure. and the scale of ambition is enormous. enormous growth opportunities.

pretty beat up on indian terms of what actually will happen on the ground. not least in the economics the number of solutions we made a mistake we left this issue very late. and so the scale of what needs to be done is enormous. you can pick canada we've got huge changes. that is true for virtually every country. >> sometimes a question of the role of central banks. in the uk the bank of england has pretty broad supervisory responsibilities. concluding insurance companies which the federal reserve has. maybe this should be their

portfolio bond purchases. the role of the central bank they don't fully understand the role of the supervisors to pointed out at such an important issue we have to use every tool that we have. >> you have summarized it well. and for those who do not follow on daily basis the bank of england received, my successors received three letters. which said policy committee which is the macro prudential

committee and the predental supervisory committee takes into account what you do. and it's consistent with the legal framework. as a secondary or supplementary you take into account. what the bank of england is doing and i would recommend if people are interested you search on that they've come out with a discussion paper consultation paper to take climate change into account. 6% of the corporate bond market that could set a standard a de facto standard depending on how they do things. these are the kind of things you should do. this is not just the current policy in the uk it is legislative so it's the policy

that you two have to take into account. now, go over to the u.s. where it is the current government policy. the principal in general is one of market neutrality. when you go in the market you try to buy across the curb. but you are getting the portfolio balance where you buy or lend collateral with them once you meet that credit standard you're more or less. this is putting another overlay on top of it. which my personal view is you need that grounding that the

bank of england has there is a requirement for them to take into account the policies i can't member the exact language. i can assure you it's stuffed full of lawyers they get it wrong that is incorporated. that does not exist for the fed. you end up with different central banks doing different things. they are correct in what they are doing. it is the nature of the institution. i do think by the way, some of the people around us is, the

bank is reading in the new responsibilities. the bank of england could not be clearer. >> someone from cannot read the question asking, how do we operationalize your recommendations with the values in economic decision-making. you make the point that when the society decides to do something, then the market is a good way or a way to make it happen. the predicate is society has to decide if it's important enough. i think the question it's asking is how do we make sure policymakers in the society do that? >> that is part of the reason the book is so long. it actually goes through, if you go chapter 16 which goes

to country policy but it's in that leadership chapter other aspects, these are examples of how you do it. so let's give three quick ones. one of the values that's important for market functioning is some sense of responsibility of senior managers. responsibilities not just for themselves but for their institutions and for that system. how do you invent that in the book? it's an alignment of compensation holding back notices and when those can be called back and under what circumstances? it is something like the senior managers regime refined explicitly responsible part i am not responsible for everything at the people who work for me do. i am responsible to make sure i train them that they gave them the tools so i have the support, if i don't do that in the uk i am on the hook for

that. and terms of sustainability part of the way we do it from countries setting up climate stress testing, scenario analysis does supervisory requirements we have, that gets you thinking as senior manager as a board member, what does my portfolio look like if the country does what it says it wants to do is how to get to net zero. i might want to take that risk but ancient informed of that risk. nobody knew the answer to that question a few years ago. people were discovering the answer. and then around resilience, it's another one of the values the book emphasized. to be honest which is something i said earlier which is this is may be a little more for public officials, getting into the habit of planning for failure.

don't spend the whole time telling yourself we will get through think about what you do in the event a large systemic bank is frozen for a period of time because of a successful cyber attack. how do you keep the system function? what is the backup? what you do in that case? that is part of the rule of building resilience. these are examples basically of how you embed it. it's not sitting around holding hands thing let's be better people and everything will come. the book is anything but that. and just to be clear and the end these are valuables about economic prosperity. i am an economist after all. >> economist and veteran

thinker has on for a moment. i think there are some concerns we have a very aggressive fit response to the pandemic which worked out extraordinarily well. the forecast people were making it march of 2020 and where we are today. i will chalk this up as a job well done for monetary authorities. but now there is a growing angst that may be we get a little too much. we are at risk of pushing inflation up beyond our objectives. i sort of wonder how you look at the world particularly given what we see in monetary policy. >> look, i think the prospect the last months very short-term here.

where it has been a well telegraphed the transitory measures have had to push things up. and then focus on i think there are signs inflation will be of so if you were dropped into see david next week and you're looking forward there are signs in the labor market in terms of supply shortages. it's a little more than a short term. there is a reasonable reason to expect sustained momentum. it's also to the uncertainties of covid variant and all of that.

effect of inflation being above target for longer than the makeup of the past issue, i think the balance of race is headed in that direction. >> starts to lapse into and on. >> if you decide to add to the federal reserve to your central bank i'll put you on the side of the spectrum. mark, i think one of the things that struck me as i read the book is it's actually very comforting because you describe some ways and he does this earlier in our conversation. ways that do not require us to give up electricity you

describe how we can get from here to there. he made the point earlier it's going to be hard because we waited too long. when you look at the political system in the united states, when you look at the polarization, when you look at what the uk has been through, you look at the rise of populace in france and germany, when you look at israeli democracy i just wonder how you reconcile relatively upbeat view found well-meaning thoughtful policymakers to get us to a better place when we were determined to prevent that from happening. >> so couple of suggestions on the specific issue as it does put a premium on measures to

green measures. that measures that have immediate payback in terms of jobs and economic growth. one of you would not get in the room you are in, you are in washington's your keeping the cold in. they are incredible the desire for home records and all of that and the need for that to their reductions. has very high multipliers and

have tangible benefits that create jobs. in parallel because of the political dynamics winning enough for it to be credible the advantage of the investment in the plans and other things. it's not going be 2030 is not

that explicit seems like gm and out for him already gotten the message anyway. we need to push on a little bit more. for doing things further out that spur investment that it's credible and predictable. again i sound like a central banker. something i worked out with janet yellen before she found something better to do. are going to have to rely on this is going to sound risky there is some tangible payoff to these measures. i think the last point is it may be interesting. let's assume for the purposes of this discussion eight change in administration with

more skeptical in the republican party runs the two houses and the presidency. if the facts on the ground are an economy that it hears said this may be more direct by that point. that would be in my head as the benevolence have some payback at that point so the benefit of continuing and the last point what we said about china earlier this is one of the competition points with china. there's no question. is going to be as big as digital both from an economic opportunity but from a geostrategic influence perspective. so we will see. >> i guess i am asking you, governor for the bank of

england, you were very outspoken and you talk about why in the book about what would be the economic risk if britain you got some grief for speaking out. and yet despite all of the elite things not a great idea. the public motive to do it and the british government, the current british government certainly upheld that part of the bargain. i am just wondering, but the ability. >> i'm sorry i thought i was trying to give you a path that i start from a position, the premise of the questions is exactly right.

there's a 70% to be more precise. they work for parties is aggressive on climate than the current government. it's a pretty big consensus. things are being legislated. in mapping that into giving people what they really want which is jobs and progress, that is your job. the stop start is a risk. asteroids been in that position on climate. it doesn't matter, i guess it brings it back to what i try to write in the book.

one of the things we are cautioned at the bank don't pile capitol so high it's good we had that pushback that we took it seriously. the sustainability that is sustainable and all sense. it is not a sustainable. >> there's a few minutes left.

if you have to draw a couple conclusions from your chapter on leadership to people who are young or aspiring leaders, one of the most important lessons you have learned in these incredibly important roles. i mentioned it earlier and one is humility. so what could go wrong and prepare for it. so that aspect of humility. there is a more positive aspect which is if you will, i certainly have a lot of good fortune to end up in the roles i have. and there is more good fortune. don't take yourself that seriously and remember your responsibility will you are there to improve the place and leave it better.

there is a basic point which is increasingly understood that as the leader you are setting goals and catalyzing action. you are not leading and part of the way to get people to follow is to be fully engaged in how to solve the issue. it's not just about having diverse voices at the table. they really are part of making a decision. even when the decision does not go their way they understand get behind it. that is a learned skill that may be inherent for some people. but it is really important to be able to do that. and it does take more time but

it is far more effective over time and far more satisfying for everyone involved. i appreciate your time for meeting in person a hole of your book but i can only hold my kyndell i can't hold it up as i said it's almost an encyclopedia. i think there are individual chapters i would go back and read when these things are in the news. that makes it a very valuable resource. again, thank you for your time. look forward to your next act. [laughter] thank you very much. >> weekends on cspan2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday you will find events and people on american history tv. on sunday, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. it is television for serious readers.

learn, discover, explore. weekends on cspan2. sunday, c-span series january 6 views from the house continue. three more members of congress share stories of what they saw, heard and experienced that day. including democrat dean phillips of minnesota. >> at that very moment when the capitol police officer took cover i stood up at the back of the gallery on the second level mezzanine representative from arizona was objecting to the state of electors and at that moment i shouted out at the top of my lungs, this is because of you i screamed it. >> this is because of you. >> i think i was representing four years of angst, anxiety

and anger. many saw this are coming from a mile away. i think i represented probably millions of americans. at that very moment to the entire country including myself recognize the frizzell the fragility of democracy. i do not like to violate it. but i do not regret it. it was what i was feeling peers four years of pent up anxiety about what was transpiring right in front of our eyes. >> the speaker from democrat of maryland and republican brian fitzpatrick of pennsylvania. january 6 views from the house sunday night at ten eastern on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the c-span radio app. >> it is my distinct pleasure to welcome you all to the official l