I first met President Lagarde back in 2022, during my first Monetary Dialogue at the European Parliament. That November, President Lagarde was heavily criticised for the ECB’s failure to predict and handle the inflationary shock, which came in around two years after the pandemic. Lagarde’s position at the ECB’s helm was challenged from day one, with Covid-19 shocking the global economy, while Madame President also shook markets when a simple reference to not targeting government yields required billions in liquidity to fix. 

It is comforting to say that after that first mistake, President Lagarde learned from it; recently, the Financial Times’ Chris Giles described the ECB’s approach as “very boring… but it’s very clear what the message is”. In central banking, boring is definitely better than shocking, and when I attended a press conference in person, it felt more like listening to a repetitive robot than a human. 

Despite making her communication more structured, she still came across more as a persona than her typical central banking predecessors. She stepped off a train in Kyiv, gave interviews on television shows, and clearly redefined the ECB’s communication through the 2021 strategy review. Communication has been a priority for central banks in the 21st century, and with Lagarde out of the picture, the ECB risks falling back into its era of complexity. 

President Lagarde handpicked the current Director General, Wolfgang Proissl, who may be German but has been a strong internal ally. Once his current ECB contract expires at the end of 2028, a new President could replace him with their own handpicked choice and set a new institutional approach to communication. Judging by the most recent assessment of the strategy review, presented by Philip Lane in summer 2025, the ECB spent time and resources saying nothing in an extremely complicated manner. A new President will set the tone, creating a make-or-break moment: the ECB might lose the communication advantages that came with Lagarde’s persona and style. 

The second element some think could be challenged is the ECB’s role in tackling climate change. During her tenure, sustainability became a key part of the ECB’s work, and establishing the Climate Change Centre protected that commitment. I look back at the preparatory work we did for the 2024-25 Climate and Nature Plan, and during our bi-weekly meetings with Irene Heemskerk, the chair of the centre, I saw not just an expert but a passionate professional. 

The mandate for banks was simple and has been successful, so a new President could not easily challenge or reverse it. At the same time, work on monetary policy and tackling biodiversity degradation has become a priority more recently. Some of these priorities faced challenges, even internally. When Frank Elderson was heavily criticised for his “reprogramming” remarks around climate change considerations, I had a long discussion with Conny Lotze about how these comments were misinterpreted. For weeks afterwards, Elderson did all he could to explain himself and apologise. However, I think he was right that modern central banks have been reprogrammed, and people now understand climate policies much better and try to incorporate them into their policymaking. 

The ECB has said countless times that it is not in the driving seat on climate change policy, but follows the work done in Brussels. The level of ambition set here could therefore also determine the climate ambition in Frankfurt. Earlier this week, the Commission presented its climate resilience framework, continuing its work to provide simplified rules while maintaining a strong incentive for investment. 

The challenge the ECB will face is less the EU’s climate ambition than international backlash, which has also stalled progress. At the recent COP31 summit, Commissioner Hoekstra said talks on new climate finance commitments are “dead in the water”. The work done at the international level, especially through the Network for Greening the Financial System, will continue no matter who comes next in the ECB’s top position. 

The most widely discussed names to replace Madame Lagarde are Klaas Knot and Pablo Hernández de Cos. Both have worked extensively on climate change policies and on incorporating sustainability into their decision-making at their national central banks. During their time on the ECB’s Governing Council, both were moderate voices who expressed views largely similar to Lagarde’s, and they could represent continuity rather than a restart. 

In addition to the President’s early departure, Isabel Schnabel announced hers in September, leaving two vacancies on the ECB’s Executive Board. The deadline for Member States to submit candidates for Schnabel’s role was moved to November, and finance ministers are expected to discuss both vacancies at the Eurogroup on 8 November. This puts Germany in an awkward position, as all its appointees over the last 20 years have left the ECB early. 

One of the most common references during my time at the ECB was to Spider-Man and the idea that “with great power comes great responsibility”. Central bank independence is not a blank cheque that lets Executive Board members act however they want and then leave their non-renewable posts early. The ECB retains great power, modernising the euro area’s financial system, and these early departures only undermine that work and its credibility. The ECB already faces a paradox: it produces a currency, the euro, that people love to use, yet its credibility as an institution has never matched this strong public support for the single currency. 

The cornerstone of the ECB’s accountability remains the Monetary Dialogue. At the upcoming ECON hearing at the end of November, members will question the interinstitutional relationship between Parliament and the ECB. Markus Ferber has already criticised the early departure and argued that “the independence of the ECB must not be subordinated to the political election calendar”. In March 2023, the exchange of letters was again a missed opportunity for stronger accountability from Parliament. Now, Parliament has the chance to redefine how it holds the ECB accountable under a new President and with new relationships established. 

The Council will propose its shortlisted candidates for both positions, and Parliament will then hold hearings with the top picks before giving its final green light. The ECB needed a politician and an equaliser back in 2019; now, it needs a forward-looking policymaker who can see the ECB as a part of the broader puzzle of the EU’s comparative advantage. The ECB might reverse its communication path while keeping its sustainability trajectory. Unfortunately, one key element Member States will fail at again is representation, and we might return to a fully male Governing Council, suggesting this institution may be stuck in the past. . 

Find out more

DeHavilland is always monitoring developments around EU policy and events. If you would like to start receiving these updates, start your trial today.