Newsletter November 2012 - Society of Actuaries in Ireland

Newsletter

CONTENTS Page

Fellowship Ceremony and theSociety’s New Image 1

Celebrating 40 Years 2-6

Sovereign Annuities 7

Round Table Discussion on Reserving for Solvency II 8

Climate Change, Resource Depletion,Limits to Growth and the FinancialSystem 9

How to Make your Money last all ofyour Life and how Policymakers can Help 10-11

Health Care - At What Cost? 12

Embedding Stress Testing as partof an integrated Risk ManagementFramework 13

Test Achats - Impact on General Insurance 14-15

Professionalism Course for ExperiencedStudents 15

SAI Golf Newsletter, November 2012 16-17

Student News 18-19

Back Page 20

FellowshipCeremonyThe President, Paul O’Faherty, presented newqualifiers with their FSAI parchments at aceremony in the Royal College of Physiciansof Ireland on 11th October 2012.

From Back L – R

(Back Row) Ruaidhry McCaughey, GerardBarry, Patrick Meghen, John Fennelly

(Next Row) John Mulvihill, Aidan Redmond,Aidan Murphy, Conor O’Brien, David Kelly

(Next Row) James Hannon, Catherine Curran,Eamon Comerford, Sarah Hyland, MarieBradley, Dermot Mannion

(Front Row) Donal Murphy, AdreannaLeonard, Paul O’Faherty, SAI President; and Rachel Lynch

Welcome to our new look ( fullcolour!) Newsletter – with this andthe re-launch of our website wehave now completed the move tothe Society’s new image. I wouldlike to thank all involved and, inparticular, the CommunicationsCommittee for their enormouswork in planning this change andgetting everything in place in timefor our 40th anniversary. I wouldlike to thank Frances Kehoe who has edited this Newsletter for many years and welcome Kevin Manning as our new editor-in-chief.

Photographs from our 40thCelebrations are on the next fewpages and I hope you will enjoy“Reeling in the Years” which isposted on our website atwww.actuaries.ie/Events/PastEvents

In the article on the next page,which is based on my speech atour 40th anniversary celebrationon 8th November, I look backover the Society’s first 40 yearsand look forward to the next 40!

Paul O’FahertySAI President

The Society’s New Image

NO

VEM

BER

2012

Daichead Bliain ag Fás – Forty Years A-GrowingThe stated aims of 17 men - and yesthey were all men - who founded theSociety of Actuaries in Ireland 40 yearsago were:

“to act as a forum for matters of interest to the actuarial profession andto express the views of the professionon matters of more general interest”

If the past is a foreign country, then it’sno surprise that the Ireland, into whichthe Society was born, did things very,very differently.

Back then, you could still drive yourFord Capri down Grafton Street.Drinking Black Tower was the zenith ofcontinental sophistication. And curlywurlys were on their first incarnation.

On a more serious note, by 1972 inflation had already reached 9%, andin the years to follow would climb to20%. As a nation, our income per headwas just 60% of the European average.And it was only in 1972 that womenno longer had to leave their jobs whenthey got married.

The pace of change – technological,political, social, and cultural – has beenamazing over the years.

In 1972 the HP35 was cutting edgetechnology. This was the first pocketcalculator that could do more than just add, subtract, multiply or divide. This was very important to any selfrespecting actuary - we have alwaysloved hard sums! And it was a snip atonly $2,200 in current money terms.But the phone in your pocket or purseright now is nearly 1,000,000 timesmore powerful.

Thanks to advances in medical andpharmaceutical research, a child bornin Ireland today can expect to live eightyears longer than if she were born in1972. And a person retiring today canexpect to enjoy nearly five extra yearsof retirement.

As actuaries, we tend to focus on thechallenges associated with people livinglonger. But we should never forget theblessing it truly is.

So how has our profession fared overthe past 40 years? And how well have

we realised the aims of the originalfounders? Ultimately, it is for others tojudge how well we have delivered, andare delivering, on these aims.

But in making that judgment, the keyrole actuaries play in Irish financial andeconomic life should be taken fully intoaccount. We have serious responsibilitieswhich we have never taken lightly. Wehave, I believe, discharged our dutiescreditably. Though, as always, with thebenefit of hindsight there are things wecould have done better.

In any case, as we move forward managing risk is now at the core ofnational and corporate decision-making.Risk is the new black!

As the “risk professionals”, actuaries areready to play a major role in this brave,new, risk-aware world. Increasingly, weare being asked to play that role. Andincreasingly, we are ready to play it.

It is difficult to consider the role ofactuaries as risk professionals withouttouching on two topics of particularcurrent relevance – topics for whichunderstanding and managing complexrisks are key challenges.

Firstly, even in the midst of our immediate, short-term problems, wecannot afford to ignore the medium-term retirement crisis that looms ahead.The recent Actuarial Review of theSocial Insurance Fund has raised seriousquestions about the sustainability of the state pension. This compounds thealready well-flagged concerns aboutoccupational pension adequacy andcoverage. Serious reform of both pillarsis not just necessary, but essential. The debate must start now, while westill have time.

Secondly, the Solvency II project, which has dominated the insuranceagenda for years, is uncertain. Political support has waned. Its scope is being questioned. There is no clearimplementation timeline.

Coming after all the energy andresources Solvency II has already consumed, this is a huge disappoint-ment. Few could argue convincinglythat our existing Solvency I standardmeets the needs of an increasingly

sophisticated market. If this uncertaintypersists much longer it may be necessary for Ireland to contemplate an interim system that more accuratelyreflects underlying risks. Delivering onSolvency II would be far better.

Our profession has come a long way in40 years. There are now 644 actuariesworking in Ireland - that’s a yearlygrowth rate of just over 9% -9.39%actually - sorry, I couldn’t resist the twodecimal places!

In fact Ireland now has the highestnumber of actuaries per capita in theworld. I guess you can’t have too muchof a good thing! This is thanks in nosmall way to the vibrant internationalinsurance presence in the IFSC.

Finally, I was delighted that 10 of theoriginal founders of the Society joinedus for the 40th birthday celebration.They were:

Joe Byrne, Adrian Daly, Peter Delany,Brian Duncan, David Kingston, Paddy Maher, Michael O’Mahony, Piers Segrave-Daly, John White and Bob Willis.

Gentlemen thank you again for yourcontribution to our profession.

Paul O’FahertySAI President

Pg 2 Society of Actuaries in Ireland | NOVEMBER 2012

NOVEMBER 2012 | Society of Actuaries in Ireland Pg 3

SAI Celebrating 40 Years!

Paul O’Faherty, SAI President, addressing members and guests at the 40th Anniversary Celebrations on 8th Nov. 2012

Left to right: Bob Willis, John White, Joe Byrne, Brian Duncan, Piers Segrave-Daly, Paddy Maher, David Kingston, Adrian Daly, Michael O’Mahony and Peter Delany.

SAI Founding Members at the Society’s 40th Celebration

The Society was founded by17 actuaries on 3rd May1972 in the Russell Hotel, St. Stephen’s Green, Dublin.

The 17 Founding Members were:

William A. Honohan - deceasedRobert P. WillisCecil Ross - deceasedGeoffrey Rowe - deceasedBrian S. Reddin - deceasedBernard Harberd - deceasedJoseph ByrnePatrick J. MaherMichael Robinson - deceasedPiers Segrave-DalyR. Peter DelanyT. David KingstonMichael O’MahonyBrian DuncanJohn WhiteAdrian D. DalyBrendan Hayes – deceased


John White, Peter Delany, Jonathan Goold Karel Goossens and Paul O'Faherty

Micheal Brennan, Anne Maher, Patrick Maher, Paul Kenny Colm Guiry, Elena McIlroy De La Rosa, Padraic O'Malley

Patrick Burke and Rachel Ingle Pol O'Briain, Siobhan Gaidiner, Rafay Khan, Dave Kavanagh


Catherine McBride and Tracy Gilbert

Karl Alexander and George McCutcheon

SAI 2012 Council

Liam Quigley, Sean O'Donovan, Kevin Reynolds

Gerry Hassett and Dermot Corry Paul O'Faherty and John Corrigan


Sinead Clarke and Miriam Sweeney Kate McEvoy, Greg Murphy, Annemarie Nestor, Bella Daniels

Antoinette O’Faherty, Micheál O’Briain, Maurice Whyms Conor O’Neill and Jerry Moriarty

Caroline Barlow and Pat Healy Members toasting their guests

Sovereign Annuities The first CPD meeting after the summer break brought together a large gathering of actuaries and lawyers for a joint meeting between the SAI and the Association of PensionLawyers in Ireland (APLI) to discuss sovereign annuities.

Keith Burns kicked off the meeting by providing some background on the topic. The concept of sovereign annuities was first proposed in late2009 by the IAPF and SAI, the objectivebeing to ensure fairer balance betweenpensioners and active/deferred membersin defined benefit pension scheme andthereby improving scheme sustainability.Described as a “warts and all” solution,it was recognised that sovereign annuities were not a solution to longterm pension policy issues.

Keith went on to explain that unlikeguaranteed annuities, the paymentsunder sovereign annuities are linkeddirectly to payments of a specifiedbond. If payments from the bond arereduced or don’t occur, payment of the sovereign annuity can stop.

Sovereign annuities can be on a “buyin” basis, where the sovereign annuitybecomes an asset of the scheme; or a'buy out” basis, where it is owned bythe member and the member bears the credit risk. Keith then illustrated theimpact of holding sovereign annuitieson schemes through a couple ofnumerical examples. These highlightedthe greater credit risk that the schemetakes on, the greater the cover is foractive/deferred members.

The issue of valuing sovereign annuitiesonly arises for those on a ”buy in” basiswhere they must be valued for theActuarial Funding Certificate or AnnualStatement by the scheme actuary. The actuarial guidance from thePensions Board either is to value boththe sovereign annuity and pension inpayment on current market basis which will be equal and matching, oralternatively, to omit pensions in payment and the annuity from bothsides of the balance sheet.

Keith went on to describe how schemescan invest in sovereign bonds directlyrather than sovereign annuities and stillavail of the funding standard reduction. To do this, a scheme must formallyresolve to purchase sovereign annuitieson a wind up and review this decision

on an annual basis. Trustees also need to take advice on this strategyand communicate it to members andunions. The complex rules by whichsovereign bonds are to be valued for schemes were described. This complexity may mean this option is not a popular one.

Keith concluded with some generalissues including the difficult decisionsfacing trustees; the potential reputationrisk for pension industry and actuariesas advisors; what we should assumebond yields will look like at the end of a typical funding proposal term and the suggestion that there may be betteroptions available to address schemesustainability and equity.

Sandra Rockett took the helm to discuss the investment case for sovereign annuities and highlightedsome investment issues trustees mayneed to consider in the future. Theinvestment decision is not one that can be made by just looking at risk and reward, as it is overlaid withresponsibility to consider best interestsof all scheme members. It is also likelythat the decision will need to be madein conjunction with the employer. Ineach case there is no perfect solutionand each solution needs to be assessedby reference to the specific details ofthe individual scheme.

The issue of what the return on Irishsovereign bonds would be for sovereign annuities was posed. TheNTMA have said that future issues willreflect prevailing market conditions.Sandra suggested a yield pickup mightbe expected to incentivise allocation ofcapital to the state over a long period.

The price of sovereign annuities isunknown as they have yet to belaunched but it is thought that this will be closely correlated with theunderlying investment as the life company is not taking on investmentrisk. The definition of return was considered for both schemes in windup and on-going schemes.

Sandra balanced the discussion oninvestment returns by highlighting thethree key investment risks of sovereignannuities: default, concentration andliquidity. In assessing default risk,trustees need to consider the ability of a specific sovereign to meet its responsibilities. Sandra suggested that

this cannot be deciphered from yieldsalone as these can be distorted by riskpremia that are more related to currency convertibility. In discussingconcentration risk, she interestinglypointed out the fall in domestic debtfrom 78% to 21% in Irish pensionfunds from 1998 to 2011 has not been mirrored by other peripherals.The question of whether there is justone true counterparty for all sovereigndebt in Europe was also posed.

Sandra also touched on factors to consider when determining aninvestment strategy for a scheme.These include the cost facing thescheme sponsor, the strength of theemployer covenant and balancing benefit levels with benefit security. In deciding between sovereign annuities or bonds, trustees need toconsider the funding position of thescheme; the future of the scheme; andthe need for liquidity.

Philip Smith from Arthur Cox and theAPLI opened his section of this eveningwith a bold statement that potentiallyno one would use sovereign annuities.Philip looked at sovereign annuitiesfrom a trustee’s perspective includingwhether they should be used; if so,when; the duties of the trustees; andthe risks. It was questioned whether asovereign annuity was fit for purpose toprovide a pension given pension is anincome for life. The audience was alsoasked the difficult question whetherany of them buy one for their mother.

Philip reminded trustees of their dutiesto act as a prudent business person andto act in the members’ best financialinterest. The risk was highlighted thatmembers could potentially claim againsttrustees citing mal-administration,breach of trust or loss. The issue of ifand when sovereign annuities shouldbe used was explored with some interesting examples. These led to the conclusion that the decision wasscheme and situation dependent. A cautionary note was added as historyshows that courts are less likely to punish conservative decisions.

The evening concluded with a largenumber of questions and commentsincluding some on Personal InsolvencyPayment Schemes, risks faced byTrustees and potential changes toscheme priority rules.

Sinéad Carty


Round table discussion on Reserving for Solvency IIOn Monday 10 September 2012, the Society was delighted to welcomeSusan Dreksler, non-life actuary in PWC who also chairs the Solvency IITechnical Provisions General InsuranceWorking Party, and Jerome Kirk, Headof Actuarial Services within Lloyd'sMarket Reserving & Capital department,to present on the topic of Solvency IITechnical Provisions.

Susan Dreksler started with an introduction to the working party whichshe chairs and some of their mainobjectives which are around education,raising awareness and providing helpfulinsight into Solvency II Technical Provisions. At the moment the workingparty is focusing on bringing peopletogether to talk about the areas whereSolvency II is vague with the goal ofbuilding a consensus view.

The first topic was premium provision,which is probably one of the biggestchanges for general insurers underSolvency II as it now requires companies to project future cashflowsfrom the unexpired risk allowing forpremiums, claim indemnity costs andexpenses on a best estimate basis.

A lively debate was sparked on thistopic by looking at the main challengesaround:

• The claims liability (underwritingversus accident year, which lossratio to use, payment patternsregarding reinsurance).

• Data granularity and allocationissues, noting that there is apotentially contentious issue ofwhether it is fair to allow for fullinvestment management expenseswhen only crediting risk free rates of return.

• Expense Allocations, noting thechallenges in understanding howexpenses should be allocated andraising an even more fundamentalquestion of whether expenseallocations really fit into theactuarial function.

Jerome Kirk then moved onto thetopic of validation and in particularwhat should be validated, when and by whom? He talked briefly aboutbootstrapping and how this could beused to support the assessment of back

testing results. However as with all methods there are some pitfalls. In particular, Jerome noted that bootstrapping is not a perfect methodand may require validation itself, andthat it normally results in shifting themean to replicate the best estimate.

The topic was then open to the floorwith some interesting points raisedaround data validation:

• Do insurers’ current validationprocesses need to be improvedunder Solvency II?

• Where should the validation sit? For example, should it sit within theactuarial function (noting potentialissues with a function validatingitself), or within a different functionsuch as risk management or internalaudit?

• Is it possible to have a standardvalidation process for all companies?

• Do companies need to get better atdocumenting things?

Susan then presented the next topic on binary events, starting with the definition from Groupe Consultatif:

“Best Estimate is the average of all possible scenarios. Some weight has to be given to losses with low probabilitybut high cost – we call these BinaryEvents. Examples of binary events include the occurrence of a new type of latentclaims or a change in legislation impacting claims payment retrospectivelyor a high inflation environment.”

Susan mentioned that binary events are probably the things you haven’tseen before in your data and hence are difficult to allow for. She also notedthat there is little or no reference anywhere in the Solvency II directive to binary events. In fact QIS5 was generous and assumed you werealready allowing for them. It is clearthat even though there are mixed viewson how to allow for binary events thatit is an issue that can’t be ignored andthat companies will have to justify whatthey’ve done.

Susan then invited comments from thefloor which prompted an interestingdiscussion with a variety of opinionsexpressed. Part of the audience felt

that binary events should be ignored in calculating technical provisions, asotherwise a best estiamte would notreally be a “best estimate”. An allowancefor binary events could perhaps bemade in the capital requirementsinstead. Others suggested that benchmarking was a good approach,however Susan warned that care was needed in choosing what tobenchmark against.

Others felt that there should be moreguidance on this topic suggesting thatthere should ultimately be consistencybetween insurers. For the final topic,reinsurance, Jerome moved on to saythat under Solvency II there is arequirement for a separate calculationof gross and net of reinsurance technical provisions on a cashflowbasis. He noted that, even though there are already a lot of hurdles toovercome on the gross calculation, thereinsurance calculation introduces evenmore uncertainty, with companiesneeding to allow for considerationssuch as possible settlement delays anddisputes. A simple but widespreadapproach for calculating reinsuranceseparately would be to use net to grossratios. Jerome then raised a challenging question: if you are not using a stochastic approach how good will the numbers be?

After a survey of the audience, Jeromefound that no one is using stochasticmodels for reinsurance. Jerome thenleft the audience with the open question of whether the reason thatstochastic models are not being widely used is that companies have notyet got to this topic under Solvency IIor whether it felt that stochastic calculation were just not required for reinsurance.

After a very informative and thoughtprovoking meeting I think it is fair tosay that it was felt there was still a longway to go in achieving a consensus onsome of the Solvency II topics.

Ger Bradley then closed the meetingon behalf of the Society by thankingJerome and Susan for the excellentpresentation and the audience for theirsignificant feedback.

Sarah Byrne


Climate Change, Resource Depletion, Limits toGrowth and the Financial SystemOliver Bettis from the UK Profession’sResource and Environment memberinterest group, gave an informative talkentitled ‘Resource and EnvironmentalLimits to Economic Growth’ atlunchtime on Friday 21st September.

The presentation focused on economicgrowth, in particular the environmentalimpacts of the rapid growth over thelast couple of hundred years. Alongwith the benefits of this growth forsociety, there has also been a downside, in particular the changes inour environment and depletion ofresources. Oliver asked whetherimproved technology and the skills of actuaries can help to manage thedownside of economic growth.

Oliver began by introducing the term“Anthropocene World” that describesthe world we currently live in, wherehuman actions have now influencedthe earth’s ecosystem. The world’s population and GDP had remained relatively stable over the years until theIndustrial Revolution began around1750. Since then both population andGDP have significantly increased.

Oliver pointed out that as the worldeconomy grew, there have been “bads”that have increased together with the benefits of economic growth.Healthcare, education, sanitation, housing and technology are a few ofthe “goods” that have improved withthe developing economy. While these“goods” have improved the lives ofmost people, there has also been anincrease in the “bads” such as the highcarbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere.

Some of our vital resources are beingseriously depleted as the economygrows. We are still highly dependent on fossil fuels, with very little energycoming from renewable and hydroelectric sources but oil discoverieshave decreased dramatically in the lastcouple of decades. Not only are fossilfuels appearing to reach a limit, Oliveroutlined a number of areas in whichscientists believe there is the potentialfor humanity to significant impact ourenvironment. These are:

- Climate Change

- Ocean Acidification

- Stratosphere Ozone Depletion

- Nitrogen Cycle

- Phosphorus Cycle

- Global Freshwater Use

- Change in Land Use

- Biodiversity loss

- Atmospheric Aerosol loading

- Chemical Pollution

Of these, the earth has already reachedhazardous levels for Climate Change,the Nitrogen Cycle and BiodiversityLoss. For example, carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere have reachedthe highest level ever. The temperaturein the atmosphere is highly correlatedwith the carbon dioxide level, leadingto increased temperatures. Along withthis, the ice caps are melting at anincreased rate leading to a rising sealevel.

Climate change, loss of biodiversity, oildepletion etc. can all be attributed toincreased consumption by humans as aresult of the exponential growth of thepopulation and the global economysince the 1700s. Oliver pointed outgrowth may not always be for the best,whether on an individuals’ waistline orin the global economy! There is a limitto growth and we need to considerwhat will happen when we reach thatlimit. Will technological progress facilitate an increase in the earth’scapacity to sustain further economicgrowth? Will the economy growbeyond the earth’s capability to sustainit and then fall to a ‘steady state’? Willboth the economy and the earth’scapacity to sustain it collapse together?Will there be an energy/environmentalcrunch?

Some argue that technology can solvethis problem for us. If so, we need tostart developing that technology nowwith huge investment needed to develop new technologies.

Oliver also discussed the concept ofGross Domestic Product as an economicgrowth indicator. We have seen richcountries grow enormously in GDPterms while poorer countries struggleto improve healthcare, education, sanitation and housing. Once these

basic material needs are met, increasedGDP has little effect on life satisfaction.Should governments aim for a stablelevel of GDP and focus on people’shappiness rather than continuedgrowth?

Actuaries’ skills in understanding riskand uncertainty, exponential growth,scientific methodology and our abilityto base decisions on data, all whilemaintaining a prudential overviewmean that actuaries could be an important factor in helping to resolvemany of these issues. In light of thisthere has been a “Wider Fields” member interest group set up by theSociety to discuss such topics.

On the Discussion Forum on theSociety’s website members can keep up to date with developments and contribute their views at: www.actuaries.ie/discussion forums/General Discussion-SAI Members

Shauna McHugh


How to Make your Money last all of your Life andhow Policymakers can HelpPaul O'Faherty chaired our recentPensions Conference which was scheduled as part of the Society's 40thanniversary celebrations. The speakerswere selected to tackle the increasinglyindividualised challenge that is retirement savings. The certainty ofdefined benefit is fading fast to bereplaced by a world where we all haveto take individual responsibility for our lifetime financial planning. It is aconsiderable challenge.

The key themes to emerge from themorning were as follows:

Study after study has shown that mostpeople have very little awareness oftheir retirement benefits, even thosewithin 10 years of their expected retirement age. Alan Barrett's recentfindings from the TILDA participantswere a stark reminder that no amountof communication or financial literacyinterventions will enable the averageparticipant to engage with and understand the issues. The concepts oflong term savings are simply beyondthe complexity threshold of most people leading busy lives in other fields.

This means that policymakers andemployers cannot just hand responsibility over to members andexpect reasonable outcomes. Someguard rails are required to ensure aminimum level of future provision and sound investment choices.

Auto enrolment at a minimum is anessential design feature of any nationalsavings framework.

Patrick Cosgrave went on to reviewthe incentives inherent in the currentIrish pension system. Using a FinancialIncentives Index (FII) methodology, heillustrated the progressive nature of the Irish system, especially for Pillar 1pensions where benefits are capped butcontributions apply on all income. Hehighlighted the danger of standard rating current tax reliefs and showedinternational comparisons where evenmandatory savings systems such as

Australia and Singapore are supportedby a strong framework of individualincentives. The decision to defer consumption for 30 years or more is aserious act of faith in the future and is only realistically possible within thecontext of positive incentives.

Niall O'Callaghan reminded us all ofthe Marshmallow Test used with 4 yearolds to assess their capacity to delaygratification. This has proved highlypredictive of later academic and business success and highlights againthat the need for incentives is hardcoded into our DNA. Niall outlined afascinating example of the lifetimewealth difference between a "BMWfamily" and a "Volkswagen family"which amounted to €860,000 for thecar purchasing decisions over our lives.Not many of us understand the longterm wealth impact of our routine consumption choices. Everything needsto be simplified into tangible exampleslike this one to make the complexity oflifetime financial planning accessible tothe average worker.

Aisling Kennedy talked about the challenges and opportunities presentedby longer working lives. Most peopleremain in denial that current retirementexpectations are totally misaligned withcurrent lifestyles and savings rates.Aisling produced a simple model whichshowed age 73 as the retirement agewhich matches those current lifestyles


L to R: Robin Webster, Aisling Kennedy, John Deely, Paul O’Flaherty, Niall O’Callaghan and Patrick Cosgrave

Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton T.D., addressing the Conference.


and savings rates. She made the strongpoint that we should be focusing as much on healthy ageing as thefinancial aspects. Longer lives are onlyvaluable to the extent we have thehealth capacity to enjoy them. Aisling finished with the provocativesuggestion that, given the uncertaintyinherent in long term savings, wemight indeed be better off investing inour health and capability rather thansaving for the future.

Investing in our own capability ledneatly to the career transition talk byJohn Deely. Longer working lives willalmost certainly depend on successfulcareer transitions. It was very useful tohear John outline the underlyingprocess and habits he has observed insuccessful transitions. Busy lives canlead to a reflection deficit and ourcareer satisfaction should always remainunder review. We don't want to spendretirement haunted by "should have"regrets. Once aware of the need for transition, we need to appreciate that itis typically a three to five year journey.Networking is a critical part of findingnew horizons and we need to continuously nurture our personal andbusiness networks. Financial resourcesalso matter as transitions are rarely possible without short term incomereductions. Change is always difficultbut John helped to demystify theprocess with clear examples from hisown client experience.

We were then joined by Minister JoanBurton, who freed herself from Leader’squestions in the Dail (and a mediascrum around the Roisin Shortall resignation) to join the Conference. She reassured the audience that despite the grave fiscal backdrop, theGovernment was keenly aware of thelong term importance of the retirementsavings framework. She emphasised theneed for widespread confidence in thesystem for citizens to willingly commit

to the long term savings process. Sheexpressed the clear desire on the partof Government for more investment inIreland by the pensions industry,assuming the right risk and rewardopportunities can be made available.Her presence added significantly to the event.

Time deprived us of an extensive paneldiscussion but we did have a valuablecontribution from Robin Webster, CEOof Age Action Ireland. He reminded usthat age - discrimination is increasinglypervasive with all of us falling prey to"elderly" stereotypes. Age is merely alabel and we need new languagearound the later phases in life. We maylose some of our physical capability aswe get older but this can be ably compensated by increasing experience,wisdom and insight.

All in all, it was a stimulating morningand a timely reminder of the eclecticcontribution actuaries can make to thiscentral issue facing every developedsociety. Defined Benefit may indeed bein decline but the capacity of actuariesto make financial sense of the futurewill enable us to remain at the centreof the lifetime savings challenge.

Donal Casey

L to R: Patrick Cosgrave, Minister Joan Burton T.D., Paul O’Flaherty, and Alan Barrett

“Longer lives are onlyvaluable to the extent wehave the capacity to enjoythem.”


Health Care – At What Cost?

It may have been a sign of new andexciting career opportunities to seemore than 50 actuaries attend thehealth care conference in the ConradHotel on 17th October. The seminaralso provided an opportunity for actuaries to showcase our expertise inthis challenging area, to the attendeesfrom outside the profession.

Our chairman for the day, PaulO’Faherty, opened the conference witha collage of the many column inchesoccupied by the health care sectorwithin the past week, but reminded usof the successful features of our healthcare system. He questioned whethergeneral perceptions regarding ourhealth care system are fair, consideringenviable advances made in lifeexpectancy and disease management.

The first speaker of the day was Jo Buckle, an actuary with Milliman,based in London. She has a wealth ofexperience working with health careproviders across several continents. She shared with the audience her globalexperiences of successes and failures inmanaging medical cost inflation. Sheintroduced us to a formula to predictmedical inflation (formulas are alwayspopular with actuaries!) based on priceinflation, GDP growth and technologytrends. She emphasised that medicalinflation is not always bad – higherspending on health care can be justifiedas valid social policy with a good returnon investment, if the additional spendresults in better quality and outcomes,not just higher utilisation. Her casestudy on the enhanced recovery programme used within the NHS was

described as nirvana by one audiencemember, combining pre-op assessment,post op early mobilisation and dailypatient specific care plans from a multi-disciplinary team.

David Costello is head of actuarial with Allianz Worldwide Care. He beganby highlighting the wide variation inutilisation and claim costs around theworld, even between neighbouringcountries. He commented on theopportunity this provides for medicaltourism. He highlighted the stark difference in typical health care costsby age and drew a comparison withthe pensions crisis before giving us avery helpful summary of Obamacare.Finally, he shared with us some ideason containing health care costs, including some entertaining stories in medical insurance fraud.

Piet Stam is an econometrician with a doctorate in risk equalisation. The audience was very interested inhearing about the much lauded Dutchhealth care system and Piet’s views on our government’s direction toward universal health insurance. He described the enviable features ofthe Dutch system: mandatory privatehealth insurance for every citizen withsubsidies for low and middle incomepeople, yearly free choice of insurer,community rating, standardised benefitpackages, all underpinned by a comprehensive risk equalisation system.He described the aim of risk equalisationto achieve solidarity in a competitivemarket, but discussed the difficulty ofensuring that only factors that reflectunderlying health status are equalised.

Despite intensive regulation, Dutchhealth care expenditure has increaseddramatically from 10% to 13% of GDPin the last 10 years and this trend isexpected to continue. He predictedthat more out of pocket payments,benefit restrictions and improvementsto the financing system will be requiredto address inflation. He left us with thesobering thought that the design of the health care system itself is not the driver of quality and efficiency – thesuccess of any health care systemdepends on how it is managed.

Oliver O’Connor is an independentbusiness consultant, specialising inhealth finance, innovation and publicpolicy. From 2001 to 2010, he was a senior Special Adviser in theGovernment, working for Mary Harney.He started by giving us a fascinatinginsight into the day to day politics ofhealth care in Ireland. He discussed thetrend of medical inflation but reassuredus that no country has ever gone bankrupt due to medical costs! He drew comparisons with Finland inthe early 1990s and wondered if it willalso take Ireland 20 years to restoreprevious levels of health care spend. He provided a useful breakdown ofmedical inflation, showing that ageingcontributes a small proportion, with thebiggest drivers being income growthand technology. He discussed theimperfect but highly effective tool ofbudget caps to contain inflation. Hehighlighted the difficulties of high fixedcosts. He gave comparisons of Irish and international medical costs todemonstrate that Ireland is expensive,even compared to countries with a similar social profile. There was a gaspat the low starting salary of a medicalconsultant in Spain! He took us througha breakdown of the HSE’s spend andcommended the recent deal on pharmaceutical costs.

A lively discussion followed, with manyquestions for the speakers, particularlyexploring lessons that could be learnedfrom other countries and applied toIreland. Anyone who came looking fora silver bullet may not have found it,but will have found the content of theseminar to be comprehensive andthought-provoking. In particular theseminar emphasised the valuable rolethat the Society can play in facilitatingand shaping debate and analysis ofthese complex issues.

Joyce Brennan

L to R: Oliver O’Connor, David Costello, Paul O’Faherty, Piet Stam and Jo Buckle

Embedding Stress Testing as part of an IntegratedRisk Management FrameworkOn the 24th October 2012, the ERMcommittee of the Society hosted anevening meeting on the topic of‘Embedding Stress Testing as part of an Integrated Risk ManagementFramework’. The speakers, AlistairClarkson and David Hare, were bothworking for Standard Life when theirpaper was first presented at theActuarial Profession’s Life Conference in November 2011 – Alistair in the riskfunction and David in the actuarialfunction.

The presentation got off to a lively start with pictures of items such asmotorbikes, airplanes and pencils beingstress tested in different ways. Alistair’smessage was that we should look for a business benefit in carrying out thestress tests. He described the ERMframework within his company whererisk appetite setting is part of the business planning process. In general,risk should be at the heart of this process, or as Alistair remarked ‘What isthe point of making a profit if it is notsustainable?’

The two key metrics he uses are excessworking capital and shareholder value,which can sometimes be in conflict with each other. In this situation, judgement is required to decide which is the more important in the circumstances. He noted that shareholder value at risk is similar to the Standard Capital Requirementunder Solvency II. He recommendedexpressing the risk appetite in terms of pre-defined stresses. A statement like‘we want to be able to survive a 30% market value fall’ is one that acompany’s board can understand. It ismore accessible than saying ‘we wantto be able to withstand a 30% fall inshareholder value.’

A picture of a flying cow was used tointroduce the idea of an emerging risk -a new or increasing risk that has a lowprobability and an uncertain outcomebut could have a significant impact onthe company’s ability to deliver its strategy or on its key risk exposures.Consideration of emerging risks canencourage the use of creative thinkingto come up with scenarios for ‘reversestress testing’ or extreme scenario testing. It is important to consider

‘What can we do now to improve ourposition in the light of these extremescenario test results?’ and not just‘What would we do in the event ofthese scenarios coming to pass?’ David then took over and began totease out some of the tensions that canarise in the Actuarial Function Holder(AFH) role. The AFH is required toadvise on both the statutory valuationand on risks. There is some overlapwith the systems and controls function(an FSA controlled function referred toas CF28) which is also concerned withrisk. The FSA stopped short of requiringa separate risk function although thatwas initially proposed in 2010. Instead,CF28 allows for the possibility of a separate risk assessment function whichforms part of the systems and controlsfunction. However, under Solvency IIseparate actuarial and risk functions will be required.

David emphasised the need for collaboration between the risk andactuarial functions to avoid any difficulties or stand offs. He alsoemphasised the need to get the numbers done with enough time toconsider them, interpret them and provide insights to the Board. Stresstesting should then be used to help theBoard and management to understandthe possible evolution of the Company’sbalance sheet over time.

David noted that as part of their ratingsanalysis work S&P check to see if anERM framework is really at a ‘Group’level. The thinking here is that theframework and initial scenarios shouldbe group wide with the flexibility toselect additional local vulnerabilities atthe business unit level.

David’s successful interaction with therisk function had enabled him turn his Financial Condition Report into aholistic document with emphasis onoperational risks as well as financial risks– it had become an ORSA style reportthat gave a ‘complete picture’.

Alistair then came back in to sum up.He noted that the key to using stresstests in running the business is buy-infrom executives and also from peoplewhose primary focus is not risk. Risk is,after all, about human behaviour.

In conclusion, we were treated to a picture of a dead fish! The presentersencouraged us not to become one –clearly the dead fish’s stress testing programme was not effective.

A lively discussion followed. Whenresponding to a question on competitorbehaviour, the speakers were keen topoint out that they would not takecomfort from their competitors beingequally affected by a particular risk.However, if their company was moreaffected than others by a particular riskthen they would want to understandwhy.

There was some discussion aboutwhether the actuarial functionbelonged in the first or second line ofdefence and whether or not it shouldbe integrated with the finance or therisk function. There was also a questionfrom the audience about includingpension scheme risks in stress tests.

The speakers were asked aboutSolvency II. Based on his UK experiencewith Individual Capital Assessments(ICA), David felt it had been successfulin providing a common currency fornon-financial people to discuss risk. Hewas less convinced about the benefitsof a market consistent approach across27 countries where in some cases thereis no market e.g. in very long termbonds.

A copy of the presentation slides andthe podcast are available on theSociety’s website. These won’t includethe visual effects of flying cows anddead fish that we saw on the night butare still well worth a read or a listen.

Carmel Brennan



Test Achats: Impact on General InsuranceOn a rainy September evening, James Grennan, Tony Culley and KarlNiemann presented and led an enthusiastic panel discussion of TestAchats and the practical implications of the EU Gender Directive for generalinsurance business.

James started the presentation by giving some history of Test Achats;some practical consequences of theGender Directive; and discussing theissue of indirect discrimination, implications for advertising and the fallout from breaching the gender rules.

The Gender Directive enforces theequal treatment of men and women in access to goods and services. Article5(1) of the Directive prohibits the useof gender as a factor in calculating premiums and benefits for new contracts sold after 21 December 2007,only if the use of gender in the calculation results in a difference in premiums or benefits between thesexes. One could understandably ask why gender is arising as an issue now in 2012, considering the rulingdate above. Ireland availed of an exemption permitted under Article 5(2)of the Directive which stated that proportionate differences in individualpremiums and benefits were permittedonly if the difference was based on relevant and accurate actuarial and statistical data.

A number of years ago, Test Achats (a Belgian consumer association) tookan action that the exemption wasinvalid under the terms of the Directiveand on 1 March 2011 the EuropeanCourt of Justice deemed that Article5(2) would become invalid on 21 December 2012, due to it beingcontrary to the charter of fundamentalrights.

James raised two practical issues thatinsurance companies would need tograpple with post 21 December, namelyactive selection by astute policyholdersand indirect discrimination. There is arisk that an insurer could stray into theterritory of indirect discrimination byattempting to use proxies for gender insetting the premiums and benefits of itspolicies. If a pricing factor puts one sexat a particular disadvantage and thatfactor cannot be objectively justified

by ‘a legitimate aim and the means ofachieving that aim are appropriate andnecessary’ then the company could beexposing itself to legitimate legal actionfrom policyholders and consumergroups. In this event, the policyholderonly needs to demonstrate that the factor puts one sex at a disadvantage,whereas the insurance company wouldneed to demonstrate the factor's legitimacy and that it is not a potentialproxy for gender. For example, whetherhigher premiums for high-performancecars related to a higher risk associatedwith driving those cars, or whether it is discrimination against men who aremore likely to drive high performancecars?

James also highlighted historical precedent that the courts have, in thepast, permitted and upheld gendercases when the arguments supportingthe case have not been straightforwardand required a lateral understanding ofthe wider circumstantial issues. So itseems the cards could potentially bestacked against the insurer in the eventof a case coming to court.

Additionally, it was pointed out that the Equal Status Act would need to beconsidered when addressing advertisingissues.

The Gender Directive will apply to newcontracts from 21 December 2012,where new contracts include theamendment of existing contracts whenthe consent of all parties is required.However, the Directive will only applyto policies sold to insured individualsand will not apply to reserving practices within insurance companies,reinsurance rates, corporations or occupational pension schemes.

Tony took over the reins to give anunderwriter's perspective of the practicalimplications of the Gender Directive fornon-life insurance companies in the runup to 21 December 2012. Tony's over-arching view was that the introductionof the gender directive was not a fundamental change to the industry –'we've lost a factor, we need to get onwith our lives and get another factor.'He pointed to developments such as acommunity rated market or telematicsas being example of philosophical shiftswithin the industry.

Tony suggested that the ultimate arbitrators of the Gender Directive will be the courts, and that opinionscurrently held by actuaries and underwriters may very well prove to be wrong when viewed through a legal lens.

He highlighted that the introduction of the Gender Directive has led to significant costs for insurers particularly regarding their IT systems.He commented that the value of thisinvestment may be lost if the use oftelematics becomes more mainstreamin the coming years.

Simply put, telematics is a method ofmonitoring a vehicle. Insurers could usetelematic technology to determine theprices that an individual should pay fortheir motor insurance based on detaileddata. For example, this could includethe number of miles they drive, theiraverage speed and the extent to whichthey drive on known hazardous roads.This could possibly eliminate the needfor the gender factor crutch that hasbeen heavily leaned on until now.

Tony touched briefly on the regulatoryenvironment that may spring uparound the gender neutral requirements.Consumer bodies, regulators and theFinancial Ombudsman are all likely tobecome more active in this area due tothe potential increase in scrutiny in theinitial aftermath of the new legislation.

Karl discussed the impact of the introduction of community rating inprivate health insurance in Australia asan example of an industry where riskfactors are significantly restricted. Likein Ireland, factors such as age, weightand smoker status cannot be used toset premiums in the Australian healthinsurance market. Naturally this leadsto considerable challenges in settingpremiums.

Karl identified the two main risks toinsurers in a community rated market:getting assumptions about membershipprofile incorrect, and antiselection.Antiselection and a drifting member-ship profile can lead to a death spiralfor insurance providers in a communityrated market. Higher claims lead tohigher premiums which can cause“good risks” to leave. This can further


deteriorate the membership profile,leaving the insurance company withspiralling premiums and claims.

The presentations were followed by awell participated question-and-answersession covering loyalty discounts, the potential that age discriminationlegislation is coming down the track,telematics and midterm adjustments.

Frank O’ Regan

Professionalism Course forExperienced StudentsA Professionalism Course, hosted by theSociety, for Experienced Students tookplace on the 12th of September 2012in the Stillorgan Park Hotel. The Society organised this course tofacilitate SAI students who are requiredunder the UK Profession’s new professionalism training framework toattend a course.The introduction of thiscourse recognises that these studentshold important roles with a lot ofresponsibility and that professionalismissues can and do arise. The 27 participants represented all practiceareas and a wide range of companiesWhile the number of attendees wassmaller than other ProfessionalismCourses run by the Society, this did notimpact on the level of participation oractive debate!

The one-day course started with a session on the Code of ProfessionalConduct, Disciplinary Scheme & Life-long learning by Yvonne Lynch,Director of Professional Affairs. Whilethe Disciplinary Scheme structure andprocesses were presented in detail, theemphasis was on how professionalismcan help you avoid coming in front ofthe Disciplinary Scheme altogether.Professionalism Case Studies were thenexamined and discussed in detail withYvonne Lynch and Tracy Gilbert,Actuarial Manager for the Society.

Participants’ knowledge of the Code ofProfessional Conduct was then put to

the test with a multiple choice quiz.The results were very good – it wasclear that the participants had donetheir homework and were well pre-pared for the course! Areas that werenot so straightforward were discussedbetween tables until agreement wasreached on the right answers.

Mike Claffey kicked off a very lively and thought-provoking session on the Practice Area Case Studies andeverybody present including the facilitators got new insights into thevarious issues and challenges that canarise when working as part and fullyqualified actuaries.

President of the Society, Paul O’Faherty,presented the final session on theHistory & Role of the Society ofActuaries in Ireland followed by aQuestion and Answer session.

Paul was inundated with questionsfrom participants. Interesting questionsincluded whether the increase in thenumber of actuaries over recent yearscould be sustained. Paul explained thatthis question has been raised andexplored many times in the past andthat all recently qualified actuariesattending the Professionalism Course inMarch were employed and showingthat the demand for actuaries hasincreased along with supply.

After the event, the Society circulated asurvey to the participants to determinehow the event was enjoyed andwhether any improvements can bemade going forward.

Some examples of the answers receivedto the following question are set outbelow:

Overall, how did you enjoythe Professionalism Courseand what did you gain fromattending the course?“I thought it was well run and interesting.It can be hard to get people to ask questions in that environment, but onceone or two questions had been askedpeople felt that they could ask anything. I think that it was sufficiently informal to make people comfortable asking questions/making points. It was an enjoyable and educational day.”

“I quite enjoyed the course, particularly

the group work on case studies and thediscussion on the Auditor in Court. Theformat worked well as there was a lot ofparticipation and not too much timespent listening to a presentation. Thespeakers were very helpful and answeredall questions.”

“I found the course very beneficial andvery relevant. I am pleased that this typeof course is now available for students, as the areas covered have becomeincreasingly relevant over recent yearsand I imagine this trend can only continue.”

“I really enjoyed the course and found itvery interesting, particularly learningabout challenges faced in other practiceareas such as pensions and the conflicts of interest they face.”

What, if anything, do youthink should be added to theCourse?“nothing”

“I found the pieces of insight we heardfrom Mike and Paul from their position(as Appointed Actuary and pensionsexpert) fascinating. I think it would begreat to have an experienced Actuaryfrom each practice area speak aboutwhat they do and how they got there.”

We would like to thank everybody thattook part in the survey. We appreciateyour comments and your ideas on howto make future professionalism coursesevent better.

Please note that it is unlikely theSociety will run a ProfessionalismCourse for Experienced Students everyyear. However, the UK ActuarialProfession run an online version of their Professional Skills Course (PSC) –completing the online PSC will ensurethat experienced students can meet the requirements of the UK ActuarialProfessional Framework.

Some of the course participants werestudying for the September exams – wereally hope the exams went well!

Tracy Gilbert

continued from page 14


SAI Golf Newsletter – November 2012

Summer ScrambleAfter an early summer of terribleweather we were all geared up to make it onto the golf course for thefirst outing of the year. However, whilethe morning of the event was brightthe forecast promised some terribledownpours for the afternoon. After ademocratic vote, the vast majorityvoted to postpone the event. As itturned out, the decision to cancel waswell founded as that evening led tosome of the worst weather of the summer.

Captain’s DayOn 23rd August, Hollywood Lakes GolfClub hosted the Society’s Captain’sprize. The morning weather forecastwasn’t good but the rain managed tostay away for once leading to one ofthe brighter days of the summer.

The course takes pride in its toughgreens which make most members nervous when standing over the three-foot putts. However there weretwo players in particular who didn’tappear to have any problems in thisdepartment. Playing in the same groupMicheal O’Briain and Brian Fitzgeraldmatched each other score for scoreuntil it came down to the last hole with Micheal taking the prize with an excellent 39 points.

The scores on the day were excellent,Brian Fitzgerald came second with 38points with Eamonn Heffernan pippingSteven Hardy for third on count-backwith 37 points. All was not lost forSteven when he won the longest driveat the 14th to add to his matchplay victory (see Steven’s commentarybelow). Neil Guinan won closest to thepin at the 17th and Thomas Farrell wonthe best back nine of 20 points aftercount-back.

Faculty MatchThe final outing on the golfing calendarwas the annual match against theFaculty, played this year on home turfat the Portmarnock Hotel and GolfLinks.

The Society lost the Tom Ross Quaichfor the first time in 2011 having previously won or retained it every year

since the annual match started back in2003. Some might say playing on alinks course was handing the advantageto the Scottish. Others might say it wasmore of a ploy to lull them into a falsesense of security with the Society teamhaving been formed of members whohad played very well in either thematchplay or the captain’s day or inthe case of Steven Hardy, both. Allplayers played very well on the daywith the Society winning 3 – 1 to takeback the trophy. We will need to matchthis performance next year to retain iton Scottish soil.

Finally, I must say I enjoyed my year as Captain of the Golf Society and mythanks to all those who participated in making the golf year successful. I would especially like to thank Mary and Catherine in the office for keepingeverything running smoothly and givemy best wishes to next year’s Captain,Thomas Farrell.

Brian ConnaughtonSAI Golf Captain 2012

The Piers Seagrave-DalyMatchplay TropyThe Piers Segrave-Daly Matchplay trophy has once again proven to be a very popular competition, with 28 entrants battling it out since thebeginning of May. As usual, this popularannual event was a great opportunityto meet fellow actuaries, play somenew courses and get in a few sneakygames of golf along the way.

Matchplay is an ideal format for golfersof all abilities. The odd stray shot ismerely a lost hole, not an unforgivingblot on the card, and each hole is anindividual battle where you try tomatch your opponent shot for shot.

The weather seemed to play a big partin the summer’s golfing calendar and it was credit to everyone involved thatthe competition was completed in timefor the Captain’s day dinner and prizegiving. As usual, stories emerge overthe summer of matches played - I heardthat next year’s captain, Thomas Farrell,didn’t know his own strength in his firstround match with Frank Downey as hekept over hitting the green with shortirons and losing golf balls.

I had the honour of winning the eventthis year after falling short in the semi-final to the eventual winner on my twoprevious occasions in the competition.All my matches were close and veryenjoyable – although I wish the poorweather had not featured so heavily. My second round match againstEamonn Heffernan was suspended afternine holes with the match evenlypoised at all-square as torrential rainclosed St Margaret’s – we returned thefollowing week to complete the finalnine. Finding a course open for thesemi-final against Dermot O’Hara was achallenge with both our home coursesclosed. Portmarnock Hotel & Links wasopen for play but barely playable suchwas the strength of the wind! I wasdelighted to come through the matchto meet Brian Connaughton in thefinal.

Brian was making his third final in arow and defeated me in last year’ssemi-final on the way to winning thecompetition so I knew that he was anopponent not to be taken lightly inmatchplay. We played the final atRoganstown Golf Club which beingroughly half-way between our homecourses seemed the ideal neutral venue.Brian took a strong lead and was threeup after seven but we were back to all-square after ten. From there on, weboth played some of our best golf andit was a very close match with nevermore than one hole in it. Eventually I took a one hole lead down the 18thwhich I was able to hold on to by holing a putt on the final green in therapidly dying daylight to end a veryenjoyable match and a very enjoyablematchplay competition.

The Piers Segrave-Daly Competition is a fantastic part of the Society’s annualgolf diary since 1996, and is a credit toPiers’ vision (himself a winner of hisown trophy in 2001) that it is such apopular competition each year. It is testament to the challenge that therehave been 16 different winners in the17 times the Matchplay competitionhas been played. The role of honourcan be seen in the golf section of theSociety’s website. I would encourage allgolfers, male and female, to give it a goin 2013.

Steven Hardy


Captain’s Day

Micheal O’Briain being presented by Brian Connaughton with the Captain’s Prize

Steven Hardy – winner of the Matchplay Competition

Brian Connaughton presenting Neil Guinan with his prize for ‘Closest to the Pin’

Eamonn Heffernan – receiving 3rd prize in Captain’s Day

Brian Fitzgerald – receiving 2nd prize in Captain’s Day


Student News

Annual Student Society BBQ

On the 19th July, the Student Societyheld the annual favourite event – theBBQ – in the beer garden of HarcourtStreet’s D2 Bar. There was a bumperturn out of 120 people. This gave theevent a great atmosphere, despite thegrey clouds in the sky – not exactly typical BBQ weather! The event wasjointly hosted by the Student Societyand Acumen Resources, who also kindlydonated an iPad to be raffled.

People started arriving at 7pm and afterthat the flow of actuaries was fast andsteady. On offer were a choice of main courses from the BBQ, as well aswedges and a selection of salads. Wewere all impressed with the food beingfreshly cooked from raw, however thisdid cause the queue to be rather longat points during the night. Everyoneagreed the quality was high and thefood was delicious.

After this came the event that everyonewas waiting for. One lucky attendeewould win an iPad. Everyone who registered on the special Acumen website was entered into a draw. Onlythose present on the night were able totake part, however. Five names weredrawn by Jenny Johnson from Acumenbut unfortunately one person was notpresent so a sixth name was picked.

Four successive knock out rounds werethen held, with questions on theOlympic Games. Each contestant wrotedown their answer and the person with the answer furthest away from thecorrect answer was eliminated (in ‘ThePrice is Right’ style). Questions rangedfrom the year London first held theOlympics to how many gold medalsthe USA had won since the beginningof the modern games.

The final challenge was to guess thecorrect height in metres of London’snew Olympic stadium. Ciarain Kelly

was declared the winner after his guesswas out by just three metres, and waspresented with a shiny new iPad byAcumen.

A great night was had by all, and it was great to see such a high turn out.The committee would like to thank themembers for attending and for Acumenfor helping us with this event.

Rachel Gow

Jenny Johnson of Acumen with iPad winner Ciarain Kelly

Student Consultative Forum

The Student Consultative Forum is a forum that meets twice a year to discussissues of concern to students. It includes representatives from the Institute andFaculty of Actuaries, the Exam Board, ActEd as well as student representativesfrom actuarial societies across the UK, Ireland and South Africa. EamonComerford is the Society’s representative on this Forum. Eamon has written areport following the meeting of the Forum, held on 9th November last. His report covers topics of particular interest to SAI students. His report alongwith previous reports are available on the Society ‘s website at: www.actuaries.ie/students/consultative-forum - (member login is required)


Student NewsSAI Student Society WineTasting Evening – 15th November

With exams all out of the way for theyear, student actuaries enjoyed a winetasting evening in D2 on HarcourtStreet on Thursday, November 15th.They experienced and tasted somemagical wines on a world tour of someof the most famous wine producingregions - visiting France, Spain, Italy,New Zealand, Australia and The USA.They learned about how wine is made,and tasted stunning wines.

SAI Christmas Drinks & Table Quiz

Monday 10th December, Davenport Hotel

Christmas Drinks hosted by the SAI President, Paul O’Faherty, from 6.00pm – 7.00pm

Table Quiz commences at 7.00pm

Come along and join fellow members for Christmas Drinks and participate in the traditional annual table quiz, with all proceeds going to a recognised charity, chosen by the winning team.

On the MoveFELLOWS:

Carmel Brennan has moved from Hansard to Canada Life

Colin Murphy has moved from Aviva to Deloitte

Liam O’Keeffe has moved from Generali Pan Europe to Canada Life

Tanya Beattie has moved from Mercer to Central Bank of Ireland

Cormac O’Leary has moved from Mercer to Cuna Mutual Europe

Maurice Lyons has moved from Euro Insurances to Bearing Point Ireland Ltd

Tom Leahy has moved from Invesco to Allianz Worldwide Care

Marc Convery has moved from Aviva to SCOR International Reinsurance

Michael Bennett has moved from Hannover Re to Arch Mortgage Insurance Ltd

Gerry Jordan has moved from Hansard to ECCU Assurance Company Ltd

Eoghan O’Baoighill has moved from RSA to Liberty Insurance

Conor Gaffney has moved from PwC to Greenlight Reinsurance

Stuart Redmond has moved from Irish Life to Deloitte

Duncan Robertson has moved from Aviva to PricewaterhouseCoopers

Micheal Sharpe has moved from R+V International to Generali PanEurope Ltd.

Dermot Marron has moved from Central Bank of Ireland to Allied Risk Managment

STUDENTS:

Marie Bradley has moved from Towers Watson to Central Bank of Ireland

Owen Fallon has moved from CACI to Hansard Europe

Kevin O’Rourke has moved from AON Hewitt to Aviva Life International

Joseph Doran has moved from Aviva to St James Place International

Tomas Griffin has moved from AON Hewitt to Deloitte

Daniel Morosan has moved from Bank of Ireland to Euro Insurances

Marie Finn has moved from Mercer to Standard Life

Edward Roche has moved from Milliman to RSA Insurance

Shane Kennedy has moved from Aegon to Canada Life

Clanwilliam House, Clanwilliam Place, Dublin 2

Tel: +353 1 634 0020 Fax: +353 1 634 0039 Email: [email protected] Web: www.actuaries.ie


PodcastsAll SAI evening meetings and Forums are now recorded and are available on the Society’s website under:Events / Past Events

Newsletter November 2012 - Society of Actuaries in Ireland

Documents

Transcript of Newsletter November 2012 - Society of Actuaries in Ireland