BHP says shareholder resolution to leave industry groups at odds with climate stance is unnecessary, as review is under way

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

BHP’s board has rejected as unnecessary a shareholder resolution requiring it to suspend its membership of organisations, including the Minerals Council of Australia, that are at odds with the goals of the Paris climate agreement.

The miner said the resolution, backed by investors including tech billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes and a group of pension funds, was not needed because, as the Guardian has previously reported, it is already reviewing its membership of industry bodies.

It said the review included the controversial Coal21, which has links to the Minerals Council and plans to launch a $4.5m advertising blitz to “invoke national pride” in coal.

BHP pressured by investors to suspend membership of groups including Minerals Council Read more

“BHP is currently conducting its 2019 industry association review and will publish the outcome of the review,” BHP told the Australian and London stock exchanges on Thursday night.

“The review includes comparison of the positions taken by relevant industry associations since January 2018 as against the positions held by BHP in climate and energy policy areas of importance to the company.”

The resolution is to be voted on at BHP’s annual shareholder meeting on 7 November.

BHP said its board, which is led by chairman Ken McKenzie, “recognises that there is increasing stakeholder interest in the nature and role of industry associations, and the extent to which the positions of industry associations on key issues are aligned with those of member companies.

“Responding to global warming remains a priority governance and strategic issue for BHP and the company will continue to take action,” it said.

BHP faces fresh calls to quit Minerals Council ahead of pro-coal ad blitz Read more

It said that after its last review two years ago it quit the World Coal Association and “worked with the Minerals Council of Australia and the United States Chamber of Commerce to develop new climate and energy policy positions”.

Minerals Council chief executive Brendan Pearson left the organisation in late 2017, reportedly as a result of pressure from BHP and fellow big miner Rio Tinto over the body’s pro-coal position.

In July, BHP chief executive Andrew Mackenzie compared tackling the climate crisis to mobilising for the second world war and said the company wanted to reduce its carbon emissions to a net of zero by 2050.

He said drastic action was needed to combat “indisputable” global heating and for the first time committed BHP to reducing its so-called “scope 3” emissions – those generated by its customers.

Mackenzie also committed BHP to creating a direct link between emissions and executive pay.