ENGIE | Climate at ENGIE: Say on Climate and reporting
How other organisations have declared their voting intentions
| Organisation name | Declared voting intentions | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| BANQUE HOTTINGUER | For | Need for greater transparency to assess Engie's climate strategy alignment with the 1.5°C scenario + Need for a regular debate on Engie's climate strategy (at most every 3 years for the strategy and once a year for the progress report) |
| Sycomore Asset Management | For | |
| VidaCaixa | For | |
| Meeschaert Asset Management (Delisted) | For | Need for greater transparency to assess Engie's climate strategy alignment with the 1.5°C scenario + Need for a regular debate on Engie's climate strategy (at most every 3 years for the strategy and once a year for the progress report) |
| Ecofi Investissements | For | |
| Mirova | For | |
| MN | For | Need for greater transparency to assess Engie's climate strategy alignment with the 1.5°C scenario + Need for a regular debate on Engie's climate strategy (at most every 3 years for the strategy and once a year for the progress report) |
| EGAMO (Delisted) | For | |
| CANDRIAM | For | Despite ENGIE’s efforts to decarbonise its activities, investors currently lack significant pieces of information in order to evaluate the company’s projected plans against a 1.5°C pathway with low or no overshoot. Although the company has a SBTi well-below 2°C target, we have been reminded by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that any decimal in temperature increase above 1.5°C will have significant negative impacts. The Investor Coalition is not asking ENGIE to change its strategy. Rather, it is asking for improved disclosure to gauge the gap between ENGIE’s current projected trajectory and what would be required of the company to align its decarbonisation plan with requirements of 1.5°C scenarios. This assessment is particularly relevant in light of ENGIE’s purpose (“raison d’être”) to “act to accelerate the transition towards a carbon-neutral economy”. As investors, we are bound by our climate commitments and legal obligations. Disclosure on relevant data of the company’s climate strategy, including assumptions and scenarios, are key for proper shareholder understanding. In the process leading up to the filing, the investors have had multiple meetings with ENGIE’s Board of Directors and teams and have worked with a number of stakeholders including energy and climate experts in the regular course of business as well as NGOs and lawyers. The wording of the resolution was carefully crafted and aims at ensuring that it is receivable from a legal standpoint. The fact that ENGIE’s Board of Directors has decided not to support it demonstrates that the resolution is ambitious and pushes the company to go further in its disclosure. Furthermore, while we appreciate ENGIE’s commitment “to consult its shareholders on its climate strategy every three years or in the event of a significant change in it”, we regret that the company was unable to commit to including specific information in their progress report, which will now be presented at every annual general meeting. This prevents investors from knowing whether they will be able to assess Engie’s alignment with a 1,5°C scenario. Therefore, we disagree with the Board of Directors’ statement that “ENGIE has responded to the essential concerns expressed by the investors who proposed this resolution”. We had a constructive dialogue with Engie throughout the whole process, and our vote For this resolution should be seen as a further encouragement for disclosure to have a well-informed conversation about ENGIE’s contribution to climate change impacts. |
| Rothschild & co Asset Management | For | |
| Anima Sgr | For | Although Engie did improve its level of disclosure in the recent years and submitted a vote on its climate strategy in 2022, the proponents suggest that the level of information can still improve on a number of key datapoints. As the company already commits to improve its future disclosure, a consultative vote, decided by the board, on an annual report showing the progress on this strategy could facilitate minority shareholders' oversight and expression in that regard. Proposing an amendment of the company's bylaws as the vehicle of the shareholders' request is not considered disproportionate. The proposal being related to the organization of the general meeting, it directly involves company governance. Engie's transition plan being outlined until 2045 already, debates around this plan cannot be considered circumstantial. Finally, considering the legal uncertainties surrounding shareholder-proposed resolutions in France, the wording of the proposal appears appropriate by meeting the requirements to be added to the general meeting's agenda. |
| Ircantec | For | |
| LBPAM La Banque Postale Asset Management | For | Need for greater transparency to assess Engie's climate strategy alignment with the 1.5°C scenario + Need for a regular debate on Engie's climate strategy (at most every 3 years for the strategy and once a year for the progress report) |
| AP7 | For |
DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.
Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.
Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.