Climate Integrity

Our latest report warns of the legal risks for Australian companies lobbying against climate action. Companies who say they are committed to the #ParisAgreement then lobby to weaken, delay or block climate reforms and policies are exposing themselves to significant legal risks. We compared InfluenceMap lobbying data to the public climate commitments made by nine companies: AGL, Origin Energy, Rio Tinto, BlueScope, Qantas, South32, Woolworths Supermarkets, Coles Group and Telstra, and their industry associations such as the Business Council of Australia Half of the companies assessed were found to be making inadequate or incorrect disclosures about their lobbying. In multiple cases, companies were found to have publicly supported a policy while simultaneously lobbying to weaken or delay legislation via an industry association. This report serves as a wakeup call to company directors on the legal risks of misaligned lobbying and as a tool for investors and customers to assess the credibility of companies’ claims and commitments to real and tangible climate action. Full report: https://lnkd.in/gWtBmWn9

New climate laws passed the Senate yesterday. They are a welcome first step in mandatory reporting, but financial disclosures alone won’t increase climate ambition and accountability. The new laws will require mandatory climate disclosures from January 2025. ✔ The laws will create a significant increase in transparency. ✖ But alone won’t drive the higher ambition and accountability that is urgently needed to see businesses decarbonising rapidly in line with climate science. Australia still has a significant climate integrity gap – where net zero pledges are frequently unsubstantiated, lack credibility or are not 1.5 degrees aligned. ACCC is reporting a rise in corporate greenwashing and misleading claims and 30% of Australian companies do not intend  to meet their own stated climate targets. The lack of science-aligned business climate action is the achilles heel of Australia’s emissions reduction efforts. To drive greater climate leadership from businesses, the Australian Government must complement the new disclosure regime with an ambitious 1.5-aligned NDC, mandatory science-aligned transition planning, well resourced regulators, and rules that stop greenwashing and close integrity loopholes. Without further measures focussed on swift decarbonisation, company disclosures alone do not change the 'business as usual' approach. The integrity of the disclosure framework now solely rests with ASIC, Australia’s embattled corporate watchdog who must now use all their powers to ensure public trust in corporate climate reporting.

Our recent report, Risky Influence, identified that anti-climate lobbying undertaken by industry associations was the greatest source of misalignment and legal risk to Australian companies who have publicly stated their alignment to the Paris Agreement. The new Business Associations Climate Action Guide outlines concrete steps companies can take to ensure their business association memberships align with their positive climate positions. With an ambitious climate policy agenda underway in Australia by the current government, now is the time for businesses with high climate ambitions to ensure their industry associations are not lobbying to weaken or delay new climate legislation or regulations. Business Climate Action Guide: https://lnkd.in/ewCvf8e2 More on the legal risks to companies: https://lnkd.in/gWtBmWn9

Climate disclosure laws currently before parliament could improve climate reporting while paving the way for three years of corporate greenwashing. The bill is a welcome step forward in aligning Australia with global reporting frameworks that will increase interoperability, transparency and lead to consistent climate reporting. But if it passes in its current form, it could be legal for companies to mislead customers and investors with inaccurate net zero claims for the next three years. This is bad news for consumers, investors and our climate. Alongside Australian Conservation Foundation Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) and Equity Generation Lawyers we’re calling on the government to seize the opportunity to improve the integrity of these new laws and protect consumer and investor rights by removing the controversial legal immunity clause, lobbied for by business industry groups to protect corporations if they make false or misleading statements. 🔗 Read more in the Canberra Times: https://lnkd.in/gtxntHDP 🔗 Read more about the immunity clause: https://lnkd.in/giKsMtGD

Australia claims to be a leader on climate change, all the while continuing to approve new carbon bombs. And the emissions from our fossil fuel exports make us the 2nd highest polluting country in the world. With no policy or plan to phase out fossil fuel production, Australia cannot claim any ambition on climate change. New reports from UNSW Australian Human Rights Institute and Climate Analytics expose the threat our exports pose to the climate and all Australians. The vast majority of those emissions are from just a handful of companies like Glencore Australia, Chevron, Woodside Energy, Anglo American, Santos Ltd, BHP, INPEX Australia, Shell Energy Australia, ConocoPhillips, South32, Esso & Centennial

Without transparency, there can be no accountability. Human Rights Law Centre's whistleblowing guide is for anyone considering raising concerns about climate wrongdoing in Australia. Too often wrongdoing by governments or corporations goes unnoticed or is hidden. But we all have a responsibility to act in the best interests of the environment and the global community. Climate whistleblowing is another crucial mechanism for corporate accountability. https://lnkd.in/gg-x3UY3

A new report by The London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) shows that Australia has the second-highest number of climate-related court cases. Legal cases can drive change and accountability, but they are not a long-term solution. A sustainable transition requires regulation to level the playing field and improve corporate accountability. The current climate-related financial disclosures legislation before parliament could be the start of ensuring real progress towards global emission reduction goals, by removing opportunities for greenwashing and the need for legal action. However, the current legislation provides corporations with legal immunity for three years. Removing third-party rights to take legal action on misleading climate statements reduces accountability and paves the way for corporations to continue greenwashing. For Australia to meaningfully contribute to science-aligned climate action the government must close these loopholes and commit to raising the bar on what business is required to do. ➡ The LSE report on trends in climate litigation: https://lnkd.in/dEWNfK6j ➡  More on the government plan to provide corporations with legal immunity: https://lnkd.in/giKsMtGD

Australian stakeholders have expressed concerns over the Treasury's decision to protect sustainability reports from private litigation during the bill’s first three years of implementation. The draft bill, which is currently being debated before the Senate stipulates that “no action, suit or proceeding” can be made against a “protected” statement, unless it is criminal in nature, or brought forward by the ASIC. ACCR issued a statement in support of this. “An extended enforcement holiday decreases the motivation for companies to take mandatory climate disclosures seriously,” said executive director, Brynn O'Brien. She added that ACCR is “particularly concerned” about the effect the three-year legal immunity would have on disclosures of the largest emitters, which have been publishing climate transition plans in line with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures “for years”. via Responsible Investor

A new guide has been developed to provide companies with concrete steps to align business association memberships with positive climate engagement. Our recent report, Risky Influence, found that indirect lobbying via industry associations was the greatest source of climate action misalignment for Australian companies. Leaving companies and board directors vulnerable to legal risk. This new guide provides practical pathways to alignment for companies to assess and align business association memberships with positive climate policy engagement. Read more: 🔗 Business Associations Climate Action Guide: https://lnkd.in/ewCvf8e2 🔗 Risky Influence Report: https://lnkd.in/gWtBmWn9 Business Associations Climate Action Guide developed by Exponential Roadmap Initiative, #RaceToZero of High-Level Climate Champions, We Mean Business Coalition, WBCSD – World Business Council for Sustainable Development, UN Global Compact Network UK and Climate Action for Associations.

Our latest report is a wake-up call to company directors on the legal risks of misaligned climate lobbying, either directly or via industry associations. Legal opinion developed by the Environmental Defenders Office highlights potential risks associated with misleading or deceptive conduct claims, shareholder advocacy and tort-based claims. Directors should ensure they have oversight of lobbying activities including those undertaken by industry associations. Read more: https://lnkd.in/gWtBmWn9