UK asset managers ‘backtracked on climate resolutions at oil major AGMs’
S
ome of the UK’s largest traders have been accused of backtracking on their help for a local weather decision at oil majors’ annual basic conferences this yr.
Shareholder activist group Follow This mentioned on Monday that asset managers comparable to Legal & General, abrdn, Janus Henderson, Schroders and Aviva have voted in opposition to their decision at a number of 2023 conferences after they had beforehand supported it.
The Dutch group places ahead a decision at AGMs every year calling for oil majors to align their local weather technique with targets set out by the Paris Agreement.
HSBC Asset management is the one giant British investor who voted for the decision involving Shell, BP, TotalEnergies, Chevron and ExxonMobil in 2023.
Legal & General, abrdn and Janus Henderson voted in opposition to the decision at US oil corporations Chevron and ExxonMobil this yr, having beforehand voted for it in earlier years, in response to Follow This.
They managed to speak traders into this false dilemma that they need to selected between revenue and local weather, however you are able to do each
Schroders voted for the decision at UK corporations Shell and BP in 2022 however didn’t help it on the companies’ AGMs this yr.
Aviva solely voted for the decision at ExxonMobil this yr, having beforehand backed it at Shell and Chevron in 2022 as effectively.
Follow This founder Mark van Baal mentioned present windfall earnings signify a once-in-a-lifetime alternative to put money into new enterprise fashions in renewable power.
Instead he mentioned that Shell, BP, Total, Exxon and Chevron are utilizing votes in opposition to their local weather resolutions to justify suspending emissions cuts, which conflicts with the purpose of Paris to restrict international warming to 1.5C.
He added that Paris will fail except the oil business modifications, which is a call for shareholders.
Mr van Baal informed the PA news company: “It’s not a choice between climate and profit but it’s a choice between change and inaction.
“The oil majors obviously don’t want to change. They want to cling on to their business model as long as possible and we know that they do that already for decades.
“They managed to talk investors into this false dilemma that they have to chose between profit and climate, but you can do both.”
Climate change is without doubt one of the defining problems with our time
Legal & General mentioned it backs the Follow This proposal’s fundamental rules however its wording imposes inflexibility on corporations that’s difficult to justify in the mean time.
A spokesperson mentioned: “We fundamentally reject the assertion from Follow This about sacrificing Paris for short-term profits.
“Climate change is one of the defining issues of our time. In recognition of its potentially catastrophic outcomes for the world – and the financial materiality to our clients’ assets – we proactively use our voice and support efforts to align the global economy with a 1.5C pathway.”
The agency mentioned it had supported 70% of shareholder resolutions on local weather by the tip of May 2023 and its voting report demonstrates its dedication to holding corporations to account for failing to deal with local weather dangers.
We are clear on our method – the voting selections which were taken and why these selections have been reached are publicly accessible on our web site
Aviva referred to its voting report for 2023, which mentioned the decision didn’t add any worth or a robust case was not made at Shell and Chevron AGMs.
Andrew Mason, head of energetic possession at abrdn, mentioned: “We are supportive of the spirit of the resolution and the achievement of the Paris Climate Agreement.
“However, the resolution does not fully account for the ongoing engagement abrdn has had with investee companies or the steps already being taken by companies to address climate change.
“abrdn is committed to work with investee companies to achieve GHG reductions.
“We are transparent on our approach – the voting decisions that have been taken and why these decisions have been reached are publicly available on our website.”
A Schroders spokesperson mentioned: “Every resolution is a specific ask of a specific company which we assess through our own fundamental research.
“Our approach is therefore tailored to each company context and we consider each shareholder resolution in detail.
“We have been actively engaging with oil majors for decades and our nuanced approach has led us to support the Follow This resolution at Chevron and Exxon, where we agreed there was a lack of ambitious net zero commitments and targets, but not at the European oil majors, which are aiming to transition to net zero business models and have set interim targets covering the use of their energy products.”
PA additionally contacted Janus Henderson for remark.