Australia’s biggest superannuation fund has joined a protest vote against Woodside Energy’s failure to do more to address the climate crisis, saying it has unanswered questions about the fossil fuel company’s plans.
AustralianSuper said it had spent “a lot of time reviewing and engaging” with Woodside on its climate transition plan before the company’s annual general meeting on Wednesday, and still had “ongoing concerns” about how it would reach net zero emissions by 2050.
“Based on that we’ve decided to vote against it [the company’s climate report] and we will continue our discussions with the company,” the fund’s head of Australian equities, Shaun Manuell, told a Senate inquiry into greenwashing on Monday.
Manuell said the fund had decided not to extend its protest to joining some shareholders in opposing the re-election of Woodside’s chairman, Richard Goyder.
Woodside – Australia’s biggest oil and gas company – is facing the prospect of an overwhelming protest vote against its climate plan, which was updated earlier this year. Critics of Woodside’s strategy say it is overly reliant on contentious offsets and not aligned with the landmark Paris climate agreement.
The company says it is committed to cutting its emissions to net zero, but plans a significant expansion in fossil fuel production, including opening new fields that could lead to billions of tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere.
Norway’s largest pension fund, KLP, and Britain’s biggest asset manager, LGIM, are among investors to disclose they will vote against Woodside’s climate report.
Woodside’s climate report will be put to a non-binding vote. Shareholders delivered a 49% protest vote against its previous climate policy two years ago – the highest protest vote recorded against the dozens of listed companies around the world that regularly put climate-related resolutions to shareholders.
Non-binding votes do not automatically trigger a policy change, but they are a way for shareholders to express their disapproval, and place pressure on directors to change direction.
The chair of the greenwashing inquiry, Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, said the evidence the inquiry heard showed “the climate credentials of Woodside are up in smoke in the eyes of [its] shareholders”.
She said that as a major shareholder, Australian Super had a responsibility to do everything in its power to “change Woodside’s behaviour”, including reconsidering the future of its “anti-climate action leadership”.
AustralianSuper held a 4.52% stake in Woodside at the end of the last financial year, making it one of its biggest stock holdings across its funds, according to its annual report.
Manuell said AustralianSuper had previously sold its Woodside holding but became “a very large shareholder” after the fossil fuel company merged with BHP’s oil and gas portfolio in 2022.
He said the fund would vote for Goyder’s re-election as the company had “engaged extensively over the last 12 months” and made “large improvements” in its disclosure.
“But to some extent all that increased disclosure has left us with additional questions, which we seek clarification for,” Manuell said.
AustralianSuper’s position on Goyder’s future appears consistent with some other major investors, based on an analysis of their voting intentions. The superannuation fund Hesta has also expressed support for the chairman.
A Woodside spokesperson said Goyder and his leadership team held numerous “direct engagements” with shareholders on climate strategy and governance and listened carefully to investors.
Goyder is one of the most high-profile directors in Australia, and is the outgoing chair at Qantas.
Prominent governance group and proxy adviser CGI Glass Lewis said that while there had been an “evident shift in tone” demonstrated by Woodside to shareholder concerns, its climate plans still fell short of expectations. It urged shareholders to vote down the report and against Goyder’s re-election.
The greenwashing inquiry also heard that the consumer watchdog had not certified the government’s Climate Active scheme, which certifies companies and products as carbon neutral.
The inquiry was told climate change department officials had asked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to pause the certification process for the scheme while they responded to questions about how it operates.
More than 500 companies, including some of Australia’s best known brands, claim to be Climate Active certified. Critics of the program say Climate Active enables greenwashing by allowing companies or products to be certified as carbon neutral through the purchase of offsets instead of requiring direct emissions cuts.
