Latest news with #JustShare
Daily Maverick
4 days ago
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Just Share accuses Standard Bank of evasion in climate reporting, calls for comprehensive accountability
Three years after a near-unanimous shareholder vote for greater climate accountability, Standard Bank is being accused of missing the mark on climate targets. At Standard Bank's 2022 annual general meeting, shareholders overwhelmingly voted in favour of a climate resolution calling for greater transparency and emission reduction commitments. Co-filed by Aeon Investment Management and shareholder activism organisation Just Share, the advisory resolution passed, backed by 99.74% of shareholders. It laid out the following roadmap: 31 March 2023: Report progress on calculating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from oil and gas exposure. 31 March 2024: Disclose a baseline of these emissions. 31 March 2025: Publish short-, medium- and long-term reduction targets aligned with the Paris Agreement. Now Just Share is accusing Standard Bank of delivering an 'incomplete picture' of its fossil fuel involvement by adjusting the metric tools by which it holds itself accountable. What you should know about the Paris Agreement, the APS and financial institutions Click on each block in the infographic for a pop-up explanation. Changing the metric or the mission? According to Standard Bank, it has ticked the baseline disclosure box. The bank's 2024 Climate Related Financial Disclosures Report states that its baseline disclosure has been 'completed for oil and gas'. What the bank has actually disclosed, Just Share argues, covers just 19% of its total oil and gas exposure and only 82% of on-balance sheet upstream oil and gas loans. 'It has not provided a timeline for setting targets for mid and downstream exposure,' said Karishma Bhoolia, a senior climate risk analyst at Just Share. 'This incomplete picture of Standard Bank's oil and gas exposure allows the bank to downplay the significant impact that its involvement in midstream projects such as the East African Crude Oil Pipeline will have on its oil and gas exposure and financed emissions.' Oil and gas value chain explained Upstream: Exploration and extraction of oil and gas Midstream: Transportation and storage thereof Downstream: Refining oil and gas and selling it to customers Moving the goalposts Standard Bank's 2022 Climate Policy committed the bank to reducing upstream oil and gas exposure by 5% by 2030. This target is nowhere to be found in the bank's 2025 Climate Policy. Now Standard Bank commits to ensuring that oil and gas lending remains under 3% of its total loans and advances by 2030. According to Just Share, this new figure is both weaker and more ambiguous. The updated policy is based around physical intensity metrics (a measure of emissions per barrel of oil) without accompanying absolute targets or timelines, a report by Just Share states. 'The targets are weaker than those contained in the bank's 2022 Climate Policy and allow the bank to significantly increase its exposure to oil and gas,' Boohlia said. Boitumelo Sethlatswe, the head of sustainability at Standard Bank, said that their updated targets and disclosures balanced climate ambition with the realities of sub-Saharan Africa's development needs. 'We have set robust, measurable targets that directly address our material oil and gas financed emissions,' he said. 'These include a 10% reduction in physical intensity for upstream oil and gas, limiting upstream exposure to 3% of total loans, and ensuring we finance at least three times more renewable energy than non-renewable power.' These targets are grounded in the International Energy Agency's (IEA) Announced Pledges Scenario (APS), which is compatible with the Paris Agreement's objectives, Sethlatswe said. What is a baseline emission? An article by global consulting firm McKinsey describes baseline emissions as a 'footprint', meaning a measure of emissions recorded during a specific period, like a year. This measure is then taken as a starting point against which to measure change. From Paris to pledges The bank appears to have reoriented its climate ambition away from the Paris Agreement. In its 2024 Climate Related Financial Disclosures Report, the bank states that it is 'committed to the goals of the Paris Agreement'. While the 2022 policy referenced targets aligned with the Paris Agreement, the updated 2025 version uses the IEA's Announced Pledges Scenario (APS) as a pathway, which is a model that assumes countries will meet their net zero targets, probably leading to a 1.7℃ temperature rise by 2100. While the IEA's Net Zero by 2050 scenario (which aligns with 1.5℃ ) is mentioned, the only reference to the Paris Agreement in the 2025 Climate Policy is to its principle of 'common but differentiated responsibilities'. No explanation is offered for the change. Standard Bank maintains that its current actions deliver on the requirements of the 2022 shareholder resolution. The East African Crude Oil Pipeline elephant One of the blind spots in Standard Bank's climate reporting, according to Just Share, is midstream oil and gas, which includes its potential financing of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline (EACOP). Just Share says that the 2030 limit the bank touts applies only to upstream investments and that there is no restriction on midstream and downstream exposure. 'EACOP funding is a midstream oil and gas asset,' Boohlia explained. 'The 2030 limit has no impact on this funding. Thus, Standard Bank could continue to fund EACOP and other projects like it without limit.' Standard Bank's oil and gas portfolio accounts for nearly 80% of its operational emissions, according to Sethlatswe. 'We continue to work on improving data availability for midstream and downstream activities, which will inform future target setting,' he said. How does Standard Bank stack up? An assessment of South Africa's 13 largest banks by non-profit group Bank Green paints a bleak picture. Not one received a 'great' rating when it came to climate responsibility. According to the group's findings, one third of the banks assessed failed to provide transparency regarding lending to the fossil fuels and renewable energy sectors, and only five out of the 13 reported any financed emissions. Transparency, continuous improvement, and supporting a just energy transition remained a commitment to Standard Bank, Sethlatswe said. Investor pressure mounting As a shareholder itself, Just Share says it will continue to hold Standard Bank accountable. It recommends that investors hold Standard Bank accountable to update its 2025 Climate Policy to: Include emission reduction targets aligned with the Paris 1.5℃ pathway. Provide a strategy of how these targets will be met. Set targets across the full oil and gas value chain. 'Banks can either exacerbate the climate emergency or play a constructive role in urgently reducing greenhouse gas emissions and financing the transition to a low-carbon, inclusive economy,' Boohlia said. DM
Mail & Guardian
26-05-2025
- Business
- Mail & Guardian
South Africa's biggest polluters accused of derailing climate policy for 20 years
South Africa's largest corporate polluters have worked persistently over the past two decades, in public and in private, to derail an effective climate policy response by the government, according to non-profit shareholder activism organisation Just Share. South Africa's largest corporate polluters have worked persistently over the past two decades, in public and in private, to derail an effective climate policy response by the government, according to non-profit shareholder activism organisation The group has released a new 'Various aspects of our work … over the past five years have strongly indicated that business was influencing the evolution of climate policy,' 'We wanted to understand the degree of that influence and establish an evidence-based account of its impact.' She said the two Acts have been 'the targets of persistent industry intervention'. Just Share used corporate submissions on legislative processes and records of industry's private meetings with the government, which were largely obtained via requests under the Promotion of Access to Information Act. This demonstrated how industry interventions, predominantly via '… What is actually striking is how much we can't see, especially when it comes to the bilateral meetings between government and high-emitting companies, which remain hidden from public view and knowledge, unless specific requests for this information are made. Even then, we have no idea whether we are getting the full picture,' Schuster said. While the report is by no means a comprehensive record of government and business interactions, 'even so, it demonstrates a clear pattern of influence'. Resisting regulation The implications of corporate influence are profound. 'The failure of the government's climate policy response to drive meaningful greenhouse gas emission reductions by big polluters means that the just transition to a low-carbon economy is not supported by a robust regulatory framework, which holds emitters accountable,' the report said. This threatens to leave South Africa 'economically vulnerable, environmentally compromised and increasingly out of step' with global efforts to mitigate climate change. Major polluters with powerful financial incentives to maintain the status quo inevitably resist regulation aimed at forcing them to internalise the social and economic costs of their operations — costs which are often borne by the rest of society, especially the poorest and most vulnerable. 'It is the government's role to stand firm in the face of such resistance and to develop effective regulation, which addresses this profound injustice. But, as this report demonstrates, [the] government is susceptible to industry pressure. 'The corporate actors responsible for the pushback against climate regulation do not act for the benefit of the majority of South Africans but instead represent a narrow set of elite vested interests.' Their historically powerful role in the economy, and the access that this affords them to policymakers, means that a 'cohort of major polluters dominates the national economic dialogue' and appears to have succeeded repeatedly in persuading the government to roll back its progressive climate-related policy initiatives.' This success has been reinforced by the absence of any significant countervailing action from other local businesses, which stand to be severely affected if the country fails to decarbonise. This includes the automotive, agricultural, tourism and insurance sectors and the renewable energy industry. 'These industries do not appear to play any significant role in engaging the government on climate policy, leaving industry associations representing the interests of high emitters to set the agenda, and establishing major polluters as the arbiters of what constitutes acceptable climate progress,' the report said. Schuster said industry associations play a crucial role because they allow individual companies to project their public commitment to positive climate action while they are able to act on their behalf and take positions that might contradict these. 'The industry associations are not bound by the same transparency requirements as companies are. They don't face shareholder or customer pressure and, crucially, they can speak within a unified voice, which obviously is much more influential with the government.' Economic hostages The report said industry players opposed to climate action have mastered the art of 'economic hostage-taking' through inflating their contributions to society and ignoring the damage they cause, while creating a false dichotomy between climate action and economic prosperity. The carbon tax, initially proposed in 2006, has been systematically weakened over time in the face of consistent industry opposition. 'Consequently, the effective carbon tax is one of the lowest in the world … and has achieved neither the internalisation of the cost of emissions by big polluters nor a meaningful reduction in greenhouse gas emissions,' the report said. After repeated extensions of the low-rate, introductory 'phase 1', South Africa's carbon tax, is now set to continue to allow up to 85% to 95% of tax-free allowances to remain at least until 2031. Between December 2024 and January, following the release of the treasury's discussion paper on phase 2 of the tax, Sasol had three private meetings with it, the report said. When the now defunct March budget review was released, the most important proposals for increasing the effectiveness of the carbon tax in phase 2 had been abandoned. Similarly, after at least a decade of preparation, the first Climate Change Bill was released for public comment in 2018. Also 'the subject of protracted opposition from industry', the Climate Change Act was only promulgated in 2024 and became operational in March 2025. The report said that, not only have key provisions of the Climate Change Act not commenced, but high emitters have successfully lobbied to eliminate criminal penalties for exceeding carbon budgets. Corporate narrative Corporate actors have persistently driven a narrative which appears to have had a significant impact on policy outcome. This is characterised by three themes, which are 'deployed repeatedly over time', Schuster noted. The first theme is 'positive contribution framing', where industry positions itself as essential to jobs, growth and the economy, and 'then threatens that regulation making its life more difficult will have catastrophic impacts on these things'. The second is developing country framing. Here, it argues that South Africa is only a small emitter and should not be a leader in climate action to the detriment of their industry. 'Finally, is the pace and scale framing where industry acknowledges that a transition is necessary but again that Schuster said each of these arguments that industry uses is 'politically potent' and together they manage to frame climate action in opposition to development goals, 'wilfully ignoring that the transition is about growth and development that replaces the current high unemployment, high poverty, coal-based economy with one that is more just and sustainable'. Critical reforms The scale and success of corporate influence is undeniable and yet most of it remains invisible, Schuster added. 'This imbalance has real consequences. South Africa's climate policy is not achieving its goal of reducing emissions and implementing the polluter-pays principle and it's ordinary people, especially the poor and vulnerable, who will bear this cost.' The development of climate policy has been fundamentally imbalanced, allowing corporate interests to consistently override public interests in effective climate action. 'The success of high emitters in weakening climate policy now threatens the competitiveness and the stability of the entire economy.' This, however, is not an inevitable outcome, she emphasised. Just Share is calling for greater transparency in government dealings with industry, inclusive policymaking that elevates marginalised voices and evidence-based policy impact assessment that is free from corporate interference. Without these changes, South Africa's climate policies will continue to serve elite interests 'at the expense of people and the planet'. Sasol noted the release of Just Share's report and said it would study it further, while Business Unity South Africa had not responded to the Mail & Guardian by the time of publication. Minerals Council South Africa spokesperson Allan Seccombe said it acts as the principal advocate for mining in the country in engagements with the government on policy, taxes and other areas affecting mining. 'The Minerals Council seeks to create, in partnership with key stakeholders, a conducive policy, legislative and operating environment that facilitates growth and investment to grow the mining industry for the benefit of the economy and all South Africans,' he said. He added that the council participated in workshops and provided data and responses 'to the challenges we were facing as an industry and as broader business' and its members were supportive of climate action within the national context and compliant with relevant laws. 'The Minerals Council has supported critical reforms that reduced load-shedding and accelerated renewable energy adoption,' Seccombe said. He added that the mining sector is leading South Africa's energy transition, with about 16 000MW of embedded renewable energy projects with an investment value of R275 billion, according to data from Operation Vulindlela, a joint initiative of the presidency and treasury to accelerate the implementation of structural reforms and boost the economy. 'These investments enhance energy reliability, lower operational costs and drive sustainability, aligning with both national and global decarbonisation goals.'
Daily Maverick
15-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
‘A clear pattern of influence' — how corporate lobbying has delayed SA's climate policies
South Africa's biggest polluting companies have worked behind the scenes for nearly two decades to delay and dilute climate policy, according to a new report by nonprofit shareholder activist organisation Just Share. The Obstruction Playbook: How corporate lobbying threatens South Africa's Just Transition documents how powerful industry actors — including Sasol, Business Unity South Africa (Busa) and the Minerals Council South Africa — have worked persistently, in public and in private, to derail an effective climate policy response by the South African government. A window into closed-door meetings Over the past two decades, major polluters and industry associations have regularly met in private with the Treasury and other government officials to discuss climate legislation — engagements that are largely invisible to the public. While companies made formal submissions during public consultations, much of the real influence happened behind closed doors, through bilateral meetings and direct communication with policymakers. To uncover the extent of industry influence, Just Share spent two years gathering evidence from public records and documents obtained through Promotion of Access to Information Act (Paia) requests. These included Treasury budget papers, policy documents, draft legislation, and submissions to the Davis Tax Committee. Just Share reported that accessing records of private meetings between government officials and major polluters was especially difficult — some responses to Paia requests taking months, and even then the information was often incomplete or vague. 'It's not clear whether the government isn't keeping proper records or is just reluctant to share them — we suspect it's the former,' said Emma Schuster, Just Share's senior climate risk analyst, during a webinar to launch the report on Tuesday. 'Especially when it comes to bilateral meetings between the government and high-emitting companies which remain entirely hidden unless specific Paia requests are made. Even then, we have no idea whether we're getting the full picture.' She noted that despite the length of their report, 'what is striking is how much we can't see — especially bilateral meetings between the government and high-emitting companies, which remain entirely hidden unless someone makes a specific request for that information. 'So, what we offer here is not by any means a comprehensive record of government/business interactions, but even so it demonstrates a clear pattern of influence,' said Schuster. An unregulated landscape Unlike in the US or EU, lobbying in South Africa is unregulated. There are no legal requirements for companies or government officials to disclose private meetings or written communications. 'For the most part, it's not even acknowledged as something that happens,' said Schuster. 'Interactions are framed as 'engagements' or, more concerningly, 'partnerships'. And certainly not as the kind of lobbying we associate with the US or Europe.' The report shows the government often gives in to industry pressure, but this report does not allege corruption — rather, it highlights how an under-resourced state, struggling to deliver on its mandates, often turns to business for support, inadvertently allowing vested interests to take the lead in shaping policy. 'The state's record-keeping is abysmal,' said Schuster. 'This opacity allows corporate influence to flourish unchecked.' The key players The report identifies Sasol — South Africa's largest private emitter — alongside powerful industry associations Busa and Minerals Council SA, as central actors in a coordinated effort to stall climate action. Industry associations play a critical role. 'They allow individual companies to project public commitment to climate action, while the association lobbies on their behalf for weaker regulation,' explained Schuster. Because associations are not subject to customer or shareholder pressure, their lobbying is harder to scrutinise. 'It was particularly striking to us how the positions taken by Busa — which is meant to represent a broad set of corporate interests across multiple sectors — appear to be dominated by the interests of its high emitting members,' she said. She noted that the report doesn't cover Eskom due to its parastatal status, but acknowledged its significance. Three core narratives dominate these lobbying efforts: Positive contribution framing: 'We're essential to jobs and economic growth; don't regulate us.' Developing country framing: 'SA's emissions are small; others should take the lead.' Pace and scale framing: 'We support the transition — but not too fast or ambitiously.' It should be noted that The Presidential Climate Commission's own report, The State of Climate Action in South Africa (2024), challenges fossil fuel companies' narrative that they are indispensable for jobs and economic growth by demonstrating that South Africa's just energy transition (JET) will create significantly more jobs in renewable energy, green hydrogen, and electric vehicles than those lost in coal. Far from harming the economy, the JET is projected to attract more than R1-trillion in investments, boost energy security, and drive sustainable economic growth, positioning South Africa competitively in the global green economy while addressing climate risks Daily Maverick reached out to Sasol, Minerals Council SA and and Busa, who are the three main players, for comment in response to the report's findings. Minerals Council SA described itself as 'the principal advocate for mining in South Africa in engagements with government on policy, taxes and other areas affecting mining', and said it aimed to create 'a conducive policy, legislative and operating environment that facilitates growth and investment to grow the mining industry for the benefit of the economy and all South Africans'. The council noted that it participated in multi-stakeholder workshops and provided data and responses to industry challenges. 'Our members are supportive of climate action within the national context and are compliant with the relevant laws,' it said. The council also highlighted that the mining sector was 'leading South Africa's energy transition, with about 16,000 MW of embedded renewable energy projects with an investment value of R275-billion', citing Operation Vulindlela data. These investments, it said, were helping to reduce load shedding, lower operational costs, and support national and global decarbonisation goals. Sasol said it had 'noted the release of Just Share's report, and we will study this further'. Business Unity South Africa (Busa) had not responded by the time of publication. The Carbon Tax Act — a case study in delay and dilution First proposed in 2006, South Africa's Carbon Tax was designed to apply the 'polluter pays' principle by putting a price on greenhouse gas emissions to encourage reductions. However, implementation was delayed for more than a decade. The tax only came into effect in June 2019 — and remains one of the weakest carbon pricing mechanisms globally. Although the nominal tax rate has increased over time, generous tax-free allowances of up to 95% mean the effective rate is far below the global average. The Treasury has proposed maintaining many of these allowances until 2030 or 2031. Currently, companies pay just R35.40 ($1.90) per ton of CO₂ for combustion emissions, and R11.80 ($0.63) for process emissions — far below the $75 to $100/tCO₂e recommended by the World Bank to meet climate targets. Sasol, while publicly supporting carbon pricing, has consistently lobbied to retain these allowances. Paia documents show that in Treasury workshops, the company argued that 'higher rates without allowances would harm productivity and job creation', a claim the report calls 'self-serving'. A clear example of interference In November 2024, The Treasury released a long-overdue discussion paper on Phase 2 of the carbon tax. The paper proposed key reforms: raising the tax rate by 2030, gradually reducing tax-free allowances, and applying higher rates for emissions above companies' carbon budgets. 'The carbon tax has been delayed for so long, and these were all proposals that really should have been implemented five or more years ago,' explained executive director of Just Share, Tracey Davies A stakeholder workshop followed in January 2025, attended by industry and civil society groups, where, Davies said,'the Treasury really seemed to be standing firm on this being finally the time to move forward'. But by February, the national Budget review dropped most of the key proposals. The proposals had been dropped, just completely disappeared — and it is really fair to say that we were gobsmacked. We could not understand how this could have happened. So Just Share filed a Paia request to uncover what had changed. The Treasury responded with a list of private meetings it held with Sasol executives in the lead-up to the Budget — three meetings between December 2024 and January 2025, each involving five to seven senior Sasol representatives. 'We don't get the minutes of those meetings — apparently, that is protected by taxpayer confidentiality, even though it's massively in the public interest,' said Davies. 'But the subject of those meetings was the carbon tax discussion paper.' During the webinar's public Q&A, David le Page, an attendee from Fossil Free South Africa, pointed out that, 'some of the world's most democratic countries — Norway, Sweden and Finland — make tax returns public'. Davies added that not long after the budget, both Sasol and Minerals Council SA publicly welcomed the decision to drop or dilute Phase 2 proposals. And then Sasol's chief financial officer confirmed the Phase 2 proposals 'would have had a significant impact on Sasol's free cash flow' and welcomed the Treasury's decision to withdraw them. 'So I think there are very logical conclusions to be drawn from that sequence of events,' said Davies. Climate Change Act The Climate Change Act, passed in 2024 after years of delays, faced similar corporate pushback. The report illustrates how corporates successfully pushed to remove criminal penalties for companies that exceed their carbon budgets. Instead, the government proposed a higher carbon tax for over-emitters — an alternative that still requires new regulations and changes to the Carbon Tax Act, none of which have materialised. Meanwhile, the key sections of the act — those governing corporate carbon budgets — remain dormant. Emitters have also lobbied to align these budgets with the already-weak Carbon Tax Act, effectively making limits more lenient and compliance voluntary. Combating the imbalance The report offers several recommendations to begin addressing the power imbalance: Regulate lobbying: Introduce mandatory disclosure of meetings, submissions and communications between government and private sector actors. Record and publish meetings: Keep accurate records of all engagements — and make them public by default. Strengthen civil society input: Ensure meaningful representation from non-industry voices in all climate policy forums. Reform consultation processes: Prioritise the interests of those most affected by the climate crisis, not just those most able to influence policy. 'This is about more than climate policy — it's about democracy, accountability, and justice,' said Schuster. 'And unless there is action taken to rebalance power in policy making, we risk locking ourselves and future generations into a more dangerous and a less fair world.' DM
Zawya
15-05-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Corporate lobbying derailed South Africa's climate goals, report finds
Just Share's report shows failure to lower greenhouse gas emissions by big polluters. A report by shareholder activist organisation Just Share has shown that South Africa's largest polluters pay so little carbon tax that it barely has any impact on their greenhouse gas emissions. - A new report by shareholder activist organisation Just Share has shown that South Africa's largest polluters pay so little carbon tax that it barely has any impact on their greenhouse gas emissions. - This, the report says, has in turn led to a failure to lower greenhouse gas emissions by big South African polluters. - South Africa ranks among the top 15 countries with the highest emissions, according to the International Energy Agency. Most of these emissions are from the fossil fuel industry. - Climate change policy has been on the government's agenda since the early 2000s, with the National Climate Change Response Strategy published in 2004, but progress towards those goals has been slow. South Africa's bigger polluters pay so little carbon tax that it barely has any impact on their greenhouse gas emissions, a new report by shareholder activist organisation Just Share has shown. This is largely in part because of corporate lobbying against climate policies in South Africa, which has led the government to make concessions and delays in two leading climate bills. This, the report says, has in turn led to a failure to lower greenhouse gas emissions by big polluters, and derailed effective climate responses. Just Share's report, which has been three years in the making, discusses climate shortfalls as a result of corporate lobbying. It focuses on two of South Africa's leading climate laws — the Carbon Tax Act of 2019 and the Climate Change Act — signed into law in July last year. During the launch of the report on Tuesday, Emma Schuster, senior climate risk analyst at Just Share, said that 'ordinary people, especially the poor and vulnerable' bear the cost of the 'imbalance' in our climate policies. South Africa has consistently ranked among the top 15 countries of CO2 emissions from fuel, according to the International Energy Agency. Most of these emissions are from industry. Just Share also highlighted how some of these 'high emitters' have lobbied against climate policies. Part of this anti-climate lobbying narrative is labeling 'climate action as something that will cripple the economy,' explained Tracey Davies, executive director at Just Share. This is the argument that places climate action at odds with economic prosperity. For example, between December 2024 and January 2025 — after the release of National Treasury's discussion paper on Phase 2 of the carbon tax — at least five senior Sasol execs had three private meetings with Treasury, the report read. When the 2025 March Budget Review was released, the most important proposals for increasing the effectiveness of the carbon tax in Phase 2 had been abandoned, according to the report. Other arguments include that South Africa's contribution to carbon emissions is small, and that too ambitious climate action will impact the economy. Climate change policy has been on the government's agenda since the early 2000s, with the National Climate Change Response Strategy published in 2004, but progress towards those goals has been slow. The Just Share report made use of publicly available information, such as government policy papers, budget reviews, parliamentary reports, and records of meetings between industry and government, often obtained via Promotion of Access to Information (PAIA) requests. Interventions predominantly by Sasol and ArcelorMittal South Africa (AMSA), as well as industry associations like Business Unity South Africa (BUSA) and the Minerals Council, are responsible for 'significant regulatory concessions' and 'extensive delays' in the two leading climate bills, the report states. The Carbon Tax Act, which Just Share calls a 'crucial tool in the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions', is meant to get corporate polluters to pay and incentivise reduction of emissions. However, opposition to carbon tax has meant it is now one of the lowest carbon taxes in the world, according to the Just Share report. Phase 1 of the carbon tax was initially supposed to run from 2015 to 2020, where a low carbon tax rate was paid and tax allowances phased out. But this phase was extended twice and the phase-out of tax-free allowances has not even begun. This means that 'industry pushback' has delayed the carbon tax to a point where it has 'neutralised the impact of the tax', the report found. 'Carbon tax is currently not doing what it should be doing at all,' said Davies. Similarly, the Climate Change Act, which took nearly ten years to develop, faced multiple delays and key sections of the bill are not yet operational, such as the allocation of corporate carbon budgets. The Just Share report also criticised that criminal penalties for companies exceeding their carbon budgets were also not included in the bill. The report recommended improved transparency and accountability. This would include public disclosure requirements for meetings between government and industry. The report also recommended communities and civil society have a greater say in climate policy, and that policies be based on rigorous evidence-based research.
