On Tuesday, the president of the home of Representatives' Judicial Commission, Jim Jordan, and the Chair of the Subcommittee on Administration, Regulatory and Anti-Monopoly Reform, Thomas Massie, sent a letter to over a 100 American companies demanding clarification on the alleged collusion and participation in the ESG decarbonization cartel – Climate Action 100+.
"Commissions proceed to analyse whether existing civilian and criminal penalties and current antitrust enforcement activities are adequate to halt anti-competitive collusion in the promotion of ESG objectives in the investment industry", the letter states.
The letter is addressed to more than 130 companies, pension funds and government pension schemes that are members of the Climate Action 100+ coalition. This organisation prioritises investment in decarbonisation and digitalisation, focusing on non-financial reporting of the ESG and implementing a fresh kind of corporate governance, including the alleged DEI policy (diversity, favouring allegedly injured minorities and inclusion). This policy is referred to as "woke" (awakening). Companies are being accused of prioritising “investments awakened” over their own trust obligations.
In their letters, the heads of congressional committees informed companies that they were supervising the adequacy and enforcement of American antitrust rules, and according to the findings of the interim study of June 11, this year, there may have been collusion with climate activists (collusion).
"As described in item in the interim study of 11 June 2024, annexed for inspection, the Commission has discovered evidence that financial institutions are cooperating with climate activists through initiatives specified as Climate Action 100+ to adopt left-wing environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG), which possibly violates US antitrust law," it wrote.
It was added that "Climate Action 100+ was designed to exploit the collective influence of its signatories-investors to encourage companies to prioritise the acceleration of emissions reductions to net zero according to the Paris Agreement's nonsubjective of reducing global warming".
In June, the committee published a paper "Climate Control: Revealing a collusion on decarbonisation in environmental, social and corporate investment (ESG)", which presented direct evidence of the existence of a "climate cartel" consisting of left-wing activists and large financial institutions that agreed to impose extremist environmental, social and corporate targets on American companies.
"It's a cartel. Each of these companies, acting alone and adopting an ESG policy harmful to consumers, would go bankrupt on a free and open market," said president Massie in a post on social media.
Companies to which letters have been sent have until 13 August 2024 to supply the requested information.
The calls for answers were addressed to companies from California, Connecticut, the territory of Colombia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, including leading corporations promoting fresh ESG management models specified as Harvard Management Company, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Mellon Investments Corporation, as well as to companies from Maryland, Missouri, Minnesota, fresh York (e.g. Rockefeller Asset Management, Goldman Sachs Asset Management) and many others.
While the US institutions are trying to settle businesses for the alleged "conversation" with climate lobbyists in promoting ESG reporting, a very different approach has been taken in Europe. fresh obligations are imposed on entrepreneurs and administrative penalties are provided for not following the guidelines for non-financial reporting of the ESG.
The ESG (E-Environment, S-Social work and G- Corporate Governance) is simply a way of assessing companies and all organisations on the basis of non-financial factors relating to environmental, social and corporate governance policies in an institution. The ratings thus created have an impact on whether investors choose to buy shares, lend and lend or donate to a non-governmental organisation. Importantly, reporting the ESG is an instrument for eliminating possible competitors applying for contracts. It is besides a way to boycott and punish those who reject the progressive agenda.
ESG issues were first mentioned in the 2006 UN study (UNEP-Environmental Programme) on liable Investment Principles (PRI) entitled "Who Cares Wins". The ESG criteria initially included listed companies in the US. At the time, 63 investment firms managing assets worth $6.5 trillion signed an agreement to take into account ESG factors. By mid-2019, they were joined by nearly 2,400 entities representing assets worth over $80 trillion.
In Europe, large listed companies have been required to study on ESG since 2018. This "progressive investment philosophy" – as conservative politicians describe it – is now powerfully combated in the US and promoted and forced in EU countries.
In January this year, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) Directive came into force, which replaced the NFRD (Non-Financial Reporting Directive) Directive, requiring all listed companies (approximately 50,000 entities) to study on the ESG from 2025.
In the following years, the reporting work will include all entrepreneurs, including tiny companies, and according to Brussels' suggestions, NGOs specified as associations and foundations will besides be required to study to the ESG. Not only the commitment to climate policy, green transition and sustainable improvement will be checked, but besides whether organisations are inclusive, diverse, diversified in terms of race, "sexual orientation", and whether they meet certain "ethical standards". For example, Facebook in ESG ratings of American agencies received a low rating for insufficient blocking of alleged hatred speech.
These fresh indicators are intended to aid build a sustainable, ecological and pantheistic society, and those who get low ratings will lose access to financial services, which is already happening, e.g. on the organization of Grzegorz Braun, who was refused to supply services by mBank, who adopted ESG standards a fewer years ago.
In the US, Deutsche Bank AG and Signature Bank announced in early 2021 that they would no longer supply services to erstwhile president Donald Trump or his firm Trump Organization, solely for ideological reasons. In November 2021, WePay, a payment processing company owned by J.P. Morgan Chase, informed the Political Committee for the Defence of Freedom based in the state of Missouri that it would cease to offer its organization services after planning an event involving Donald Trump Jr. According to a erstwhile North Dakota lawyer, Bette Grande, in 2021, representatives of the lignite manufacture were denied access to insurance due to ESG indicators. besides in 2021, Sustainalytics, a company dealing with ESG and belonging to Morningstar, published a study entitled "How Sustainable Finance is Shaping Change in Banking" [How sustainable finances change the banking system]. The publication notes that “most large banks check their credit portfolios for circumstantial risks of the ESG in accordance with OECD due diligence guidelines, and many usage negative or affirmative ratings to measure possible credit transactions for businesses”. Banks cut companies off from access to funds based on ESG indicators.
The PayPal Platform admitted to closing accounts marked by the far-left confederate poorness Law Center in 2019 as risky due to the alleged "spreading of hatred or supporting extremist movements". PayPal announced a partnership with the Left League Against defamation. In 2019, "New York Post" reported that J.P. Morgan pursuit closed bank accounts linked to respective political activists and commentators (e.g. Enrique Tarrio, Joe Biggs, Laura Loomer and Martin Markot).
The ESG indicators are presented by the EC as an integral part of the renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy, adopted in July 2021 in the EU. The spread of ESG ratings is expected to take place worldwide to carry out the announced "reset of capitalism" and make "capitalism of stakeholders" (sustainable investment), as explained by the planet economical Forum or Larry Fink, the head of the largest investment fund in the world, BlackRock.
Banks and major investment funds have promised to usage the ESG to combat "climate change". The alliance of the largest banks and financial institutions dedicated to this goal – the Glasgow Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), which brings together “more than 450 financial firms from 45 countries liable for assets worth over 130 trillion dollars”, including many large American banks specified as Bank of America, J.P. Morgan pursuit and Wells Fargo & Company.
The CSRD is 1 of the tools to aid implement the Green Deal objectives. Mandatory reporting based on the fresh ESG standards is expected to be a revolution in the European marketplace and companies will gotta employment specialists to supply a detailed, "complete" presentation of the carbon and water footprint throughout the production and provision of services, including the full value chain (e.g. the issue of the investment for which the bank has granted the loan).
On behalf of the Prague Stock Exchange and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, a guide to how to do this, which includes as many as 1,200 indicators, including 300 mandatory for all reporting institutions. The data given must be complete and relevant.
Moreover, companies will not only gotta disclose whether they are following national and global guidelines to accomplish the zero-emission nonsubjective and to contribute to the accomplishment of the 2030 Agenda's Sustainable improvement Goals, but besides to present remedies to bring about compliance with the Paris Agreement, global employment agreements, human rights, etc.
The EC hopes that the unpopular ideological programme (e.g. promotion of sodomy, transsexuality, abortion, widely understood environmentalism) will be implemented thanks to the engagement of the corporate planet and forcing all entrepreneurs to follow the progressive imagination of socio-economic transformation.
In Poland, companies that are already reporting on a voluntary basis provide, for example, any initiatives they take to advance inclusiveness. For example, in UBS, there are worker networks: Awareness Network, Wellbeing, Gender, Pride, Ability and Cultural Awareness Network, operating under the aegis of Diversity, Equality and Inclusiveness. These networks, with the engagement of the Management Board, conduct "aware meetings" on diversity, equality and inclusiveness. Monthly training for employees takes place.
TVN Warner Bross Discovery implements Pride period as part of an inclusive work environment. Shell Poland supports equality parades, ‘coming out’ of LGBT+ people, education in cultural diversity.
Skanska Poland supports LGBTQ+ staff network "Place of Pride". She cooperates with, among others, the Love Association She does not exclude and has developed the sticker action “Business does not exclude”. He publishes reports on the situation of “LGBT society” in the labour marketplace in Poland. It organises DEI training, i.e. diversity, equality and inclusiveness.
Virtual Poland Holding implemented a diversity policy, carrying out the action: November in the period of diversity. It organises webinars on "Inclusive Language in the context of LGBT+ people", "Neurodiversity in organisation", about promoting equal opportunities, etc.
PwC Shine is peculiarly active in promoting sexual minorities. More about the indicators and initiatives undertaken by corporations in Poland can be found in the study “Responsible Business in Poland 2022. Good Practices” published by the liable Business Forum.
At the time erstwhile a number of initiatives are taking place in Poland and EU countries to advance the reporting of the ESG, American Conservatives launched a counter-revolution.
On 10 May 2023, the Committee of the home of Representatives for Supervision and work held the first of many planned hearings on the ESG, following the veto by president Joe Biden of a bill that would prohibit discrimination against companies rejecting reporting to the ESG.
During a proceeding involving respective of the 21 Attorneys-General, who in March of that year sent a letter to the heads of large investment funds, opposing the mandatory reporting of the ESG, committee chief James Comer (R-Ky.) criticized the principles of the ESG, calling them "a progressive plan forced by extremist left-wing groups to put force on large and tiny companies to adopt rules that routinely reduce productivity".
Comer referred to the letter of the lawyer General, recalling that asset managers are evading their trust obligations and, alternatively of taking care of good financial results, prosecute "political objectives" specified as racial and sex equality and compliance with the nonsubjective of zero net emissions by 2050, as enshrined in the Paris Agreement.
The proceeding “ESG Part I” included evidence from Utah lawyer General, Sean Reyes, Alabama lawyer General, Steve Marshall, and Illinois State Treasurer Michael Frerichs (a number witness). In his testimony, Prosecutor Reyes noted that "Since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015, there is an open conspiracy to bypass legislature and impose costly changes on US consumers, utilizing the strength of horizontal agreements by key players in our financial system, consisting of asset managers, banks and insurance companies who want to usage their collective marketplace power over trillions of assets to force costly changes in what they call the real economy. The corporations of the real economy, which are the targets of the attacks, would not accept these changes themselves. These changes increase the prices of the goods and harm the shareholders, reducing profits. In conclusion, ESG is an undemocratic taxation on our economy and productivity."
The Alabama lawyer General, Steve Marshall, believes that "the unelected cabal of global elites is utilizing the ESG to take over our capitalist system" and that they have created at least 10 alliances since president Trump was elected to implement the extremist ESG plans. "These soys endanger consumers by reducing production, raising prices, endangering pension funds and creating anti-competitive behaviour".
Republican Congressman Gary Palmer (R-Ala.) claims that ESG-based priorities are beneficial to the Communist organization of China. Similarly, lawyer General Marshall expressed himself, pointing out that the implementation of reporting would give unfair advantage to Chinese companies.
Democrat Jamie Raskin objected, suggesting that the non-application of the ESG rules would be "a careless and careless investment strategy". Another democratic witness, the Illinois State Treasurer, Frerichs, lamented that the current attacks on investors applying the ESG rules are “highly coordinated” and “politically motivated”.
Comer has announced further interrogations. He stated that "ESG is just a veil for liberal activism and far-left ideology," and Biden's administration is playing with American pensions and intends to fund its unpopular political agenda for their savings.
He stressed that ESG's commitments are frequently against the interests of fund clients, are held without shareholders' cognition and are utilized to force companies to adhere to utmost left-wing ideology. Furthermore, Biden puts the issues of ESG above the economic, energy and national safety needs of the United States.
In his opinion, "ESG activists penetrated the wider market, influencing 2 advisory companies that jointly control over 90 percent of the market". This “conspiracy”, coordinated, wants to impose its policies on American taxpayers, investors and pensioners. They intend to accomplish their objectives through intimidation and coercion, due to the fact that they would not be able to accomplish them as a consequence of the democratic process.
Legal firms will be victorious from all the confusion, which already indicate that the number of lawsuits is expanding and should be expected to increase importantly with the ESS reporting obligation. And it is not only opponents of non-financial disclosures, but besides their supporters who gain an instrument to sue companies for alleged greenwashing, that is, giving false, incomplete information about their pro-climate activity, which in fact is not. The implementation of the ESG will thus consequence in expanding the burden on companies and generating revenues for various advisory bodies and law firms.
Lawyers stress that the DEI issues are no longer solely the work of diversity officials, but "an crucial hazard management function of the ESG". Companies request to explain why there are not only adequate women on their boards, but besides representatives of another races and sexual minorities.
Source: judicary.house.gov, PCh24.pl
AS
