Blog Post: AGMs in Spotlight
As AGM season unfolds, shareholders are intensifying their calls for credible climate strategies, demanding clearer targets, stronger governance, and greater transparency. Below is our analysis of key climate-related resolutions and investor responses from several high-profile AGMs.
🔍 Shell (AGM: May 21)
Resolution 22 calls on Shell to disclose how its LNG demand outlook, production targets, and gas-related CAPEX align with its Net Zero 2050 commitment. Investors argue Shell’s LNG growth projections far exceed all IEA scenarios, including those aligned with 1.5°C, and that the company’s exposure to uncontracted LNG volumes poses financial and climate-related risks.
The resolution highlights a lack of clarity around Shell’s assumptions and alignment strategy, especially given that LNG is central to its growth plans — projected to represent 30% of upstream production by 2030.
Shell’s Board opposes the resolution, arguing it is a binding Special Resolution, which could create governance challenges. The company claims that the requested information is already disclosed and has pledged to publish a summary note consolidating its existing LNG disclosures by 2026. This will include portfolio analysis, scenario comparisons, price sensitivities, and country case studies.
While acknowledging LNG’s role in displacing coal and supporting energy security, investors are pressing Shell to reconcile its growth ambitions with its climate targets — and to provide evidence that the strategy is financially and environmentally resilient.
🔍 Equinor (AGM: May 14)
Equinor has committed to net zero by 2050 across all three scopes, but its near-term trajectory remains misaligned. The company is planning to continue expanding oil and gas production until at least 2030 — a strategy difficult to reconcile with its carbon intensity targets for that same horizon. It will be seeking support for its Energy Transition Plan under proposal 8.
We do note with the rollback of its previous goal to allocate 50% of growth CAPEX to renewables and low-carbon solutions. That said, we also welcome the company’s decision to submit its transition plan for a Say on Climate vote this year — a positive step toward greater accountability.
🔍 Holcim (AGM: May 8)
Holcim maintains its ambition of net zero by 2050, but its strategy leans heavily on carbon capture and storage (CCUS), which accounts for 44% of its emissions reduction pathway for scopes 1 and 2.
We note progress on scope 3: the company now covers ~80% of its scope 3 emissions in its reduction target, up from just 31% last year, with SBTi validation for its 2030 targets. While the action plan clearly outlines contributions toward the 2050 objectives for scopes 1 and 2, it still lacks robust quantification for scope 3 reductions.
On capital allocation, nearly 60% of Holcim’s 2023–2032 CAPEX plan is directed toward CCUS — an increase from last year, coming at the expense of investments in clean energy and broader decarbonisation efforts.
That said, we welcome the company’s continued commitment to shareholder dialogue, including the presentation of a Say on Climate vote under proposal 1.4 for the fourth consecutive year.
🔍 Centrica (AGM: May 13)
Centrica targets Net Zero by 2040 for its operations and 2050 for its customers, with a 10% cap on offsets and a clear commitment to avoid new gas exploration.
However, its decarbonisation pathways are not third-party certified and currently align with WB2°C by 2030–2032 — with operational emissions exceeding that threshold before 2032. Emissions are expected to rise in 2024, and no short-term targets are in place.
The company plans to direct 50% of CAPEX to green investments by 2028, but details remain limited. Climate criteria feature in executive pay, though with low transparency on weighting or impact.
Resolution 21 invites shareholders to approve Centrica’s Climate Transition Plan on an advisory basis — a first step, though gaps remain in short-term targets, CAPEX transparency, and the weighting of climate metrics in executive pay.
🔍 BP (AGM held on April 25)
BP’s AGM spotlighted growing investor dissatisfaction over the company’s pivot away from its renewables strategy. Leading shareholder Legal & General voted against the re-election of outgoing chair Helge Lund, citing “deep concern” over BP’s renewed focus on oil and gas and the lack of a shareholder vote on the shift.
They weren’t alone. Robeco, Nest, and Border to Coast also opposed Lund’s reappointment, pointing to weakened climate governance and inconsistency in the company’s transition strategy. The move reflects frustration over BP’s back-and-forth approach: once seen as a front-runner on renewables, it has since backtracked under pressure from shareholders like Elliott Investment Management, who advocate for slashing green spending.
While the board defended its “reset” strategy, the contested vote underscores a deepening divide among shareholders on the role oil majors should play in the energy transition.
🔍 Rio Tinto (AGM held May 2, Perth)
Rio Tinto faced pressure from activist investor Palliser Capital to review collapsing its dual UK–Australian listing in favour of a single Australian entity. Palliser argued the move could unlock long-term value, streamline governance, and better reflect the company’s business reality — with 80% of earnings coming from Australia.
The resolution gained just under 19% support — far short of the 75% required to pass, and below the 20% threshold that would have triggered further consultation under UK listing rules. Still, the debate caught attention, especially amid broader scrutiny of London’s appeal for mining stocks following BHP’s delisting and Glencore’s review.
Chair Dominic Barton dismissed the proposal as “value-destructive” but said the board remains “open-minded” to ideas that enhance shareholder value. While major shareholders like Royal London, Ninety One, and Ausbil opposed the motion, proxy advisers ISS and Glass Lewis had supported a further review.
Palliser sees the outcome as a first step: “They must come up with a solution that fixes this outdated structure,” said CIO James Smith, who previously led a successful unification campaign at BHP.
For more information, contact the team by email via contact@compassinsights.uk