[ad_1]
Pension fund administrators in Parliament need to reconsider the rules of their investments to take into account the risk of climate change, a first for members' finances.
Trustee engagement is an important first step in badessing and reducing the effect of pension fund investments – ultimately paid for by the taxpayer – on climate change.
This decision is a victory for a group of MPs from all parties who have long campaigned for changes that would prevent funds, which currently represent more than 700 million pounds, from being invested in companies that promote fossil fuels or take advantage of it, thus exerting economic pressure. on them to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MP who is campaigning for a reform of the fund, said: "The protection of nature is now the greatest mission of humanity. This change of course of the MP pension fund is therefore welcome. It took four long years to get to that point, but the administrators now seem to accept now that fossil fuels are a risky investment for both savers and the planet, and that marks a significant policy shift. "
Around the world, the divestment campaign targeting investors with significant holdings in fossil fuels has accelerated over the last five years, with significant victories. Last week, the Norwegian national oil fund started to refocus on renewable energies. About two-thirds of British university pension funds, as well as other public pension funds, have also surrendered or reformed their rules, although some have kept fossil fuels in spite of strong public pressure.
Other funds to be divested include the Irish Infrastructure Fund, the New York State Pension Fund and local authorities in the UK, including Waltham Forest and Southwark.
Members' pensions are managed by the Parliamentary Contributions Pension Fund (PCPF). The directors wrote to Caroline Lucas, in correspondence with the Guardian, to confirm that they would review the funding guidelines to recognize the risks badociated with climate change.
The directors pledged to ask their advisers to "prepare a climate change policy" and added that they "want to be ambitious in this area". They will formulate a responsible corporate plan and, by October, update the Statement of Investment Principles.
They also indicated that disinvestment would be considered in conjunction with the option of retaining fossil fuel interests in order to be heard on the future direction of these companies and to put pressure on the companies involved.
Five of the fund's top 20 investments, worth more than £ 20 million, are in fossil fuel companies, including UK-based BP, which is the largest stake in the fund. Other companies include Royal Dutch Shell (United Kingdom and the Netherlands) and the French company Total.
Last December, more than 200 deputies and former deputies from all parties, led by Lucas, called on the PCPF to phase out investments in fossil fuels.
Lord Deben, Chair of the Climate Change Committee and former Conservative Secretary for the Environment, called the new director initiative a "positive step" and said PCPF should follow scientific advice as the basis for its investment policies .
"The PCPF should now adopt a strategy that directs investment to companies that drive innovation in low-carbon technologies and, over time, removes their investments in coal, oil and gas," he said. he declared. "Aligning investment with the aspirations of the Paris Agreement by 1.5 C is the best way to protect our prosperity for future generations."
Sir Ed Davey, former Liberal Democratic Secretary of State for Climate Change and Energy, called on all pension funds to invest more in renewable energy and reduce their carbon emissions. "All pension administrators need to ensure that their investments take into account climate risk, so Parliament should take this initiative," he said. "The best way is to convert fossil fuel funds into clean technologies, because they are already very profitable, but without the long-term carbon risk of oil, gas and coal."
Attempts to divest the Members' fund have already been opposed. When the Guardian asked Liz Truss, one of the names now evoked as a possible Conservative Party leader, if she supported such an approach as an environmental secretary in 2015, she would like to see her. is opposed to it.
Source link
