November, 09 2021, 01:23pm EDT
Climate Groups Call Out Banks Lobbying for Watered Down Net Zero Commitments
Stop the Money Pipeline organizations respond to news that on behalf of a group of 12 banks, HSBC lobbied Mark Carney’s GFANZ to scrap mandatory science-based targets and delay a deadline.
WASHINGTON
Yesterday The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported that HSBC coordinated efforts to try and water down action on climate change. The Bureau details that HSBC lobbied Mark Carney's Net Zero Banking Alliance to:
remove the list of sectors that must be included in the first round of target-setting
set targets only for sectors where there are "credible transition pathways" to a net-zero future
delay until 2025 or 2030 the deadline for banks to set targets for some carbon-intensive sectors, instead of 18 months from signing the NZBA commitment
HSBC denies "lobbying to dilute the ambition of the NZBA" and denies that the letter sent in March on behalf of the 12 banks reflects its own position. The twelve banks are on Prince Charles's Financial Services Taskforce and they include Bank of America, Citi, JP Morgan, Barclays, BNP Paribas, and more.
Member organizations of the Stop the Money Pipeline coalition released the following statements in reaction to the news:
"This confirms what Indigenous people and climate activists have been yelling from the frontlines for years: banks cannot be trusted to align their profit mindset with the fight for our planet. We need wealthy nations to reign in their greed with unprecedented science-based regulation, otherwise we have no chance of meeting the 1.5C goal" said Jackie Fielder, communications coordinator of Stop the Money Pipeline
"Black, Brown, and Indigenous frontline communities across the globe have demanded that banks stop pouring money into fossil fuel projects and pipelines that are devastating our planet and communities, but it's clear banks will always put profit before people when left to self-regulate. This is why we need global leaders to stop letting financial institutions dilute climate action and to demand science-based targets and regulations," said Erika Thi Patterson, campaign director for climate and environmental justice, the Action Center on Race and the Economy.
"These allegations that HSBC lobbied to weaken the guidelines of the Net-Zero Banking Alliance on behalf of banks in the Sustainable Markets Initiative are concerning and should raise red flags for shareholders and customers about their true commitment to net-zero. HSBC's comments seem in direct opposition with what the bank has committed to doing in the last year, and with its messaging on climate change. These banks, which include Credit Suisse, JPMorgan and Standard Chartered, have huge clout within the banking industry and should use their influence for the better - not to water down already insufficient guidelines," said Jeanne Martin, Senior Campaign Manager at ShareAction
"HSBC's public rhetoric on climate change can't be trusted - their behaviour in private, lobbying to weaken climate action, is their true position. Banks like HSBC know what the International Energy Agency has said - 'net zero by 2050' means no new fossil fuel expansion, from this year. So it's staggering that a bank signed up to that target is doing everything it can to make sure that target can't be met," said Adam McGibbon, UK Campaign Lead at Market Forces.
Time and time again we see banks launch voluntary climate initiatives which seem to be aimed purely at reaping PR benefits now, while postponing all concrete action as far into the future as possible. This was the case with the Principles for Responsible Banking in 2019, and now again with the NZBA. 18 months is already a lavish amount of time to set 2030 targets, and it is shocking to learn that not only HSBC, but apparently also official COP26 sponsor NatWest lobbied to procrastinate even longer. And with half the world's fossil fuel assets expected to become worthless as soon as 2036, all this effort to delay action is not even in banks' own best interests", said Maaike Beenes, Climate coordinator at BankTrack.
It's astonishing that banks like HSBC are doubling down on greenwashing their role in the destruction of our planet at a time when frontline communities cannot afford anymore lip service. We cannot allow HSBC to wreak any more havoc on our climate than they already have" said Amy Gray, Senior Climate Finance Strategist at Stand.earth, "It's time to stop funding the fossil fuel industry now and respect Indigenous sovereignty, frontline communities and re-invest in a just and equitable transition to renewable energy."
The Stop the Money Pipeline coalition is over 160 organizations strong holding the financial backers of climate chaos accountable.
LATEST NEWS
'We Will Organize Those People,' Anti-Poverty Crusader William Barber Says of Millions Set to Lose Medicaid
"They will not kill us and our communities without a fight."
Jul 02, 2025
Armed with 51 caskets and a new federal analysis, faith leaders and people who would be directly impacted by U.S. President Donald Trump's so-called Big Beautiful Bill got arrested protesting in Washington, D.C. this week and pledged to organize the millions of Americans set to lose their health insurance under the package.
Citing Capitol Police, The Hill reported Monday that "a total of 38 protestors were arrested, including 24 detained at the intersection of First and East Capitol streets northeast and another 14 arrested in the Capitol Rotunda. Those taken into custody were charged with crowding, obstructing, and incommoding."
The "Moral Monday" action was organized because of the "dangerous and deadly cuts" in the budget reconciliation package, which U.S. Senate Republicans—with help from Vice President JD Vance—sent to the House of Representatives Tuesday and which the lower chamber took up for consideration Wednesday.
According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the megabill would result in an estimated 17 million Americans becoming uninsured over the next decade: 11.8 million due to the Medicaid cuts, 4.2 million people due to expiring Affordable Care Act tax credits, and another 1 million due to other policies.
"This is policy violence. This is policy murder," Bishop William Barber said at Monday's action, which began outside the U.S. Supreme Court followed by a march to the Capitol. "That's why we brought these caskets today—because in the first year of this bill, as it is, the estimates are that 51,000 people will die."
"If you know that, and still pass it, that's not a mistake," added Barber, noting that Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.)—one of three Republican senators who ultimately opposed the bill—had said before the vote that his party was making a mistake on healthcare.
Moral Mondays originated in Tillis' state a dozen years ago, to protest North Carolina Republicans' state-level policymaking, led by Barber, who is not only a bishop but also president of the organization Repairers of the Breach and co-chair of the Poor People's Campaign: A National Call for Moral Revival.
This past Monday, Barber vowed that if federal lawmakers kick millions of Americans off their healthcare with this megabill, "we will organize those people," according to Sarah Anderson of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS).
In partnership with IPS and the Economic Policy Institute, Repairers of the Breach on Monday published The High Moral Stakes of Budget Reconciliation fact sheet, which examines the version of the budget bill previously passed by the House. The document highlights cuts to health coverage, funding for rural hospitals, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The fact sheet also points out that while slashing programs for the poor, the bill would give tax breaks to wealthy individuals and corporations, plus billions of dollars to the Pentagon and Trump's mass deportation effort.
"Instead of inflicting policy violence on the most vulnerable, Congress should harness America's abundant wealth to create a moral economy that works for all of us," the publication asserts. "By fairly taxing the wealthy and big corporations, reducing our bloated military budget, and demilitarizing immigration policy, we could free up more than enough public funds to ensure we can all survive and thrive."
"As our country approaches its 250th anniversary," it concludes, "we have no excuse for not investing our national resources in ways that reflect our Constitutional values: to establish justice, domestic tranquility, real security, and the general welfare for all."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Asylum Crackdown Dealt Major Blow in 'Hugely Important' Court Ruling
"Nothing in the Constitution grants the president the sweeping authority asserted," wrote a U.S. district judge.
Jul 02, 2025
President Donald Trump's crackdown on asylum-seekers was dealt a major blow on Wednesday when U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss ruled that the administration had vastly overstepped its legal authority with an executive order issued on the first day of his second term.
Politico reports that Moss found that Trump's January 20 executive order slapping new restrictions on asylum-seekers even if they arrive at proper points of entry exceeded his powers as outlined by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which the judge described as containing the "sole and exclusive" procedure for properly deporting undocumented immigrants. In fact, Moss went so far as to say that Trump had established "an alternative immigration system" with his asylum order.
Moss—appointed to the district court in Washington, D.C. by former President Barack Obama—also didn't buy the administration's rationale that such drastic measures were necessary due to the emergency of an "invasion" at the southern border.
"Nothing in the INA or the Constitution grants the president... the sweeping authority asserted in the proclamation and implementing guidance," the judge wrote. "An appeal to necessity cannot fill that void."
Lee Gelernt, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union who argued the case in court, praised the ruling as "a hugely important decision" that will "save the lives of families fleeing grave danger" and "reaffirms that the president cannot ignore the laws Congress has passed and the most basic premise of our country's separation of powers."
The original Trump order not only barred asylum-seekers who showed up at the border outside the proper points of entry, but also mandated that asylum-seekers at the points of entry provide additional documentation beyond what is required by law, including medical histories and information about potential past criminal records.
Moss' order is not going into effect immediately as he is giving the administration two weeks to prepare an appeal.
Keep ReadingShow Less
House Dems Form Procedural 'Conga Line' to Block Medicaid and SNAP Cuts
"We're here to help people, not screw people over!" said Rep. Jim McGovern.
Jul 02, 2025
Democrats in the House of Representatives on Wednesday banded together in an attempt to gum up the works to block House Republicans from passing their massive budget bill that includes historic and devastating cuts to both Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program known as SNAP.
One by one, House Democrats moved in what Punchbowl News reporter Jake Sherman described as a "conga line" to make the exact same request for unanimous consent "to amend the rule to make an order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid and SNAP." Each time a Democrat would make the request, Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), holding the gavel in the chamber, informed them that "the unanimous consent request cannot be entertained."
At one point, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) grew frustrated with his Republican colleagues for their insistence on passing the budget bill, which he noted would significantly cut taxes for the richest Americans while decimating safety net programs designed to help poor and working class Americans.
"We're here to help people, not screw people over!" McGovern fumed.
As of this writing, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R.La.) remained in his office, according to Punchbowlreporting, an apparent signal that a floor vote for Wednesday remained up in the air.
The United States Senate on Tuesday passed a budget package by the slimmest of margins that the Congressional Budget Office has estimated would slash spending on Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program by more than $1 trillion over a ten-year-period and would slash SNAP spending by more than $250 billion over the same period.
Previous polling has shown that the budget package is broadly unpopular and a new poll from Data for Progress released Wednesday found that the Republican plan grows more unpopular the more voters learn about its provisions. In particular, voters expressed significant concern about the plan's impact on the national debt, cuts to CHIP and Medicaid, and attacks on clean energy programs.
Over 100 @HouseDemocrats lined up to ask for "unanimous consent to amend the rule and make in order the amendment at the desk that protects against any cuts to Medicaid & SNAP" pic.twitter.com/r5ktS9Uj0K
— Jahana Hayes (@RepJahanaHayes) July 2, 2025
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular