May, 01 2017, 11:15am EDT

New Report: Big Polluters Have Backdoor Access to UNFCCC
Study exposes trade associations currently admitted to talks have long track records of undermining climate action
BOSTON
Today, Corporate Accountability International released a new report"Inside Job: Big Polluters' lobbyists on the inside at the UNFCCC," exposing the dirty fossil fuel trade associations that are stalking the halls of the U.N. climate talks to undermine, weaken, and block progress.
The report release comes just one week before governments convene in Bonn, Germany to continue negotiations on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Governments will, for the first time in history, officially discuss conflicts of interest at this convening. The meetings in Bonn will also be the first for the U.S.' Trump administration, whose State Department is now led by former Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson. This has further raised the specter of conflicts of interest in government and at the talks.
"Right now hundreds of business trade associations have access to the climate talks, and many of them are funded by some of the world's biggest polluters and climate change deniers," said International Policy Director Tamar Lawrence-Samuel with Corporate Accountability International. "With so many arsonists in the fire department, it's no wonder we've failed to put the fire out."
The report peels back the curtain on just six of the more than 270 Business/Industry NGOs non-governmental organizations (BINGOs) currently admitted to the climate talks: U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Mining Association, Business Roundtable, FuelsEurope, Business Council of Australia, and International Chamber of Commerce.
Many of these groups were exposed for their myriad fossil fuel industry connections in an analysis produced by Corporate Accountability Internationalprior to the Marrakech climate talks in 2016. This report expands on that body of evidence, uncovering not just the BINGOs' connections to the fossil fuel industry, but also the actions these groups have taken themselves to weaken, slow, or block climate policy, exposing their duplicity at the talks.
The report and discussion in Bonn build on the Kick Big Polluters Out campaign--a years-long movement of civil society groups and hundreds of thousands of people across the world demanding climate policy be protected from fossil fuel industry interference. Currently, there are no policies in place to protect against organizations intent on derailing the process, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Business Council of Australia.
Recently, the campaign has coalesced around a movement of governments representing nearly 70 percent of the world's population that, last May in Bonn, called for the UNFCCC to address conflicts of interest. The proposal was met with fervent opposition from some of the world's biggest historical emitters, including the United States, European Union, and Australia. And at the Marrakech talks in November, environmental groups confronted the U.S. delegation and delivered the call to kick big polluters out of the talks from more than half a million people, with an additional 75,000 calling for the U.S. delegation to support the policy or step aside.
Governments are looking to the precedent set in the global tobacco treaty. Both its key provision, Article 5.3, and the guidelines for implementation of Article 5.3protect against classic industry interference tactics by barring partnerships, financial relationships, revolving door cases, and industry participation in the policymaking process. These provisions have been recognized by World Health Organization Director-General Margaret Chan as the single largest catalyst of progress in a treaty that could save 200 million lives by 2050 when fully implemented.
The conflict of interest discussion will take place at Bonn during an in-session workshop on enhancing the participation of observer organizations, organized by the UNFCCC secretariat.
###
Key findings and recommendations:
The main takeaway: Under current UNFCCC rules, numerous BINGOs that represent the financial interests of Big Oil, Gas, and Coal have been granted access to the negotiations. These six BINGOs represent just the tip of the iceberg.
Findings from "Inside Job":
1) Big Oil's Yes-man: U.S. Chamber of Commerce
a. Funded by Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and Peabody Energy.
b. Lobbied against greenhouse gas emissions reductions.
c. Priorities for 2017 include increasing fossil fuel production and opposing any attempts to regulate greenhouse gas under the Clean Air Act.
d. Uses legal attacks to intimidate policymakers.
e. Promotes misleading "research" to undermine climate policy.
2) Big Coal's Chief Denier: National Mining Association
a. Represents Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, GE Mining, and the American Coal Council.
b. Has spoken out against the Paris Agreement.
c. Sued to stop the Clean Power Plan.
d. Campaigns for coal production.
3) Big Businesses' Big Bully: Business Roundtable
a. Represents the CEOs of Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, ConocoPhillips, Duke Energy, Phillips 66, Marathon Oil Company, Marathon Petroleum Company, and Peabody Energy.
b. Lobbies to open U.S. federal lands for drilling, mining, and fracking.
c. Relentlessly opposed the Clean Power Plan, clean water, and air rules.
d. Supports controversial and dangerous oil pipelines.
4) Europe's Fossil Fuel Apologist: FuelsEurope
a. Members include BP, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total, Lukoil, and Varo Energy.
b. Opposed European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (conservative, market-based false solution) and greenhouse gas targets.
c. Says the European Union is already doing its fair share and any additional action would be "irrelevant in the global balance," ignoring its historical responsibility.
5) Australia's Fossil Fuel Front: Business Council of Australia
a. Members include BHP Billiton, BP, Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, and Rio Tinto.
b. Business Council of Australia's president is on BHP Billiton's board.
c. Opposed Australia's carbon tax.
d. Its members are at the center of the controversial Great Australian Bight drill plans.
6) The Corporate Door-Opener: International Chamber of Commerce
a. The corporate ringleader of the UNFCCC: It makes sure all doors are open and all access is granted to corporations and trade associations.
b. Access, access, access: The International Chamber of Commerce is the corporate skeleton key.
c. Makes veiled ultimatums about business access: "If the Paris Agreement doesn't work with and for business, then it just won't work."
d. Supports weak, voluntary (non-mandatory) action.
Recommendations of the report: The report makes two overarching recommendations to governments:
- Formally reach a consensus on a universal definition of a conflict of interest: The UNFCCC should adopt the following definition: "A conflict of interest may arise when activities, relationships, or situations place a public institution and/or an individual that represents it in a real, potential, or perceived conflict between its duties or responsibilities to the public and personal, institutional, or other interests. These other interests include but are not limited to business, commercial, or financial interests pertaining to the institution and/or the individual. A conflict of interest, therefore, could be financial in nature or could simply point to diverging interests that may undermine policy objectives or outcomes."
- Create a stringent, transparent process for admission: The UNFCCC should look to the abundance of established best practices that are already embodied in similar legislation around the world and put in place a stringent, transparent process for admission of UNFCCC observers. This process must be rigorous enough to ensure that those allowed to participate in the UNFCCC negotiations are motivated by the sole interest of protecting people and the planet, not private interests or what's good for business.
Corporate Accountability stops transnational corporations from devastating democracy, trampling human rights, and destroying our planet.
(617) 695-2525LATEST NEWS
'AI Death Panels': Trump Pilot Program Seeks to Bring 'Very Worst' For-Profit Insurance Practices to Medicare
The administration, warned two union leaders, "is inserting private AI companies, which have a giant financial stake in the denial of care, into the doctor-patient relationship."
Aug 29, 2025
Creating what critics are equating to "AI death panels" elderly Americans in need of care, the Trump administration is launching a pilot program in six states that will use artificial intelligence to determine whether Medicare recipients should qualify for certain procedures.
As reported by The New York Times on Thursday, the pilot program will hire private firms to deploy AI to make what are known as "prior authorization" decisions regarding whether Medicare should pay for certain procedures, including spinal surgeries and steroid injections. The program is set to run first in Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington.
According to the paper, the program will rely on algorithms similar to those "used by insurers have been the subject of several high-profile lawsuits, which have asserted that the technology allowed the companies to swiftly deny large batches of claims and cut patients off from care in rehabilitation facilities."
The way the program is being structured will also give AI firms big incentives to maximize the denial of claims for Medicare recipients, as the Times reported that "Medicare plans to pay them a share of the savings generated from rejections."
Abe Sutton, the director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, emphasized in an interview with the Times that this program would not be used to review emergency services or hospital stays.
Even so, some experts and advocates have warned that this program risks bringing the same problems experienced by people who use private insurance to Medicare.
"It's basically the same set of financial incentives that has created issues in Medicare Advantage and drawn so much scrutiny," Ohio-based surgeon Dr. Vinay Rathi, who is also an expert in Medicare payment policies, explained to the Times. "It directly puts them at odds with the clinicians."
Jathan Sadowski, a senior lecturer and research fellow in the Emerging Technologies Research Lab at Monash University, also warned about private insurance practices creeping into traditional Medicare.
"The government is hiring companies using AI to make those determinations about healthcare," he wrote on X. "This is exactly the same tactic that private insurers like UnitedHealth use to delay and deny treatment."
The reported pilot program also drew harsh reviews from the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), as president Randi Weingarten and the union's Retirees Program and Policy Council co-chair Tom Murphy issued a joint statement accusing the Trump administration of "attempting to transform Medicare into the very worst of private insurance."
"Instead of making life easier and better for older Americans, this administration is introducing extra hurdles that are burdensome to patients and often get in the way of their desperately needed treatments," they said. "And the administration is inserting private AI companies, which have a giant financial stake in the denial of care, into the doctor-patient relationship."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Another Act of Revenge': Trump Cancels Secret Service Extended Protection for Kamala Harris
"The safety of our public officials should never be subject to erratic, vindictive political impulses," said a spokesman for California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
Aug 29, 2025
US President Donald Trump has canceled extended Secret Service protection for former Vice President Kamala Harris just as she was scheduled to go on a multi-city book tour.
CNN reported on Friday that Trump this week sent a letter to the Department of Homeland Security that simply read, "You are hereby authorized to discontinue any security-related procedures previously authorized by executive memorandum, beyond those required by law, for the following individual, effective September 1, 2025: Former Vice President Kamala D. Harris."
As CNN explained, former vice presidents are entitled by federal law to six months of Secret Service protection after leaving office.
However, former President Joe Biden late in his term signed a directive that extended Harris' protection past the standard six-month window. The reason for the extension—its existence not reported publicly until Trump moved to revoke it—has not been made clear.
Harris last year was the Democratic Party's presidential nominee after then-President Joe Biden decided against running for a second term.
As California is Harris' home state, both California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass are aware of and have been discussing Harris' security situation, and CNN noted she could get added protection in the future from the Los Angeles Police Department or potentially another state agency.
In a statement given to CNN, Bass delivered a scathing denunciation of the president for revoking his former rival's Secret Service protection.
"This is another act of revenge following a long list of political retaliation in the form of firings, the revoking of security clearances and more," she said. "This puts the former Vice President in danger and I look forward to working with the Governor to make sure Vice President Harris is safe in Los Angeles."
Bob Salladay, a spokesman for Newsom, also ripped the president for his actions.
"The safety of our public officials should never be subject to erratic, vindictive political impulses," he said.
Harris is scheduled to go on tour starting next month in New York to promote her book "107 Days," which reflects on her failed 2024 presidential campaign.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Support for Labor Unions Near Historic High as Trump Trashes Working Class
"Working people want unions and the numbers prove it," says one labor leader. "While billionaires and their yes-men in Congress try to slash wages, gut health care, and silence working people, we are fighting back—organizing, mobilizing, and demanding a voice."
Aug 29, 2025
A new poll reveals that Americans continue to support organized labor at historic levels, even as the Trump administration and its Republican allies in Congress take a battering ram to union rights and the nation's working class.
Gallup's annual survey, released Thursday, shows more than two-thirds of people in the US (68%) approve of labor unions and the economic security and prosperity they provide working families. The popular support matches record-high numbers of recent years after a long decline from the 1960s through the early 2000s.
As Gallup notes:
When Gallup first measured Americans’ ratings of labor unions in 1936, 72% approved. Approval reached the record high, 75%, in 1953 and 1957 and ranged between 63% and 73% from 1958 through 1967. Then, from 1972 through 2016, approval was lower, with few readings over 60%, including the 48% all-time low recorded in 2009. This was the only time approval fell below the majority level. Since 2017, approval has been above 60%, the longest period at this level since the 1960s.
"Working people want unions and the numbers prove it," said Lee Saunders, president of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), in response to the latest polling.
The survey shows sharp partisan divides despite the overall approval of organized labor. While 90% of Democrats surveyed and 69% of independents voiced support, only 41% of Republicans expressed the same level of support for organized workers and their unions. "All party groups show increased support for unions compared with 2016," said Gallup, "though Republican support has declined since peaking at 56% in 2022. That was the only time Republicans’ approval has risen above 50% in the past 25 years."
"Instead of getting the respect they've earned, [working families are] getting squeezed by CEOs and anti-worker politicians who want to hand out tax breaks to the billionaire class at the expense of Medicaid, food assistance, worker protections and our communities."
Saunders, like other members of the labor movement, has been a steady voice in rebuking President Donald Trump and his Republican Party as they run roughshod over labor rights and wage a relentless war against the working class by attacking Medicaid, food assistance, public education, better wages, collective bargaining, and workplace safety—all while slashing regulatory safeguards designed to protect America's working families from industry greed and handing out massive tax breaks for billionaires and corporations.
"Gallup polling once again shows historically strong support, because workers understand that they have the power to win fair pay, safer working conditions, and dignity on the job when they organize a union. Today, that power matters more than ever," said Saunders. "While billionaires and their yes-men in Congress try to slash wages, gut health care, and silence working people, we are fighting back—organizing, mobilizing, and demanding a voice."
Despite the support of a large majority of Americans across the political spectrum, union density remains at historic lows, which makes sense given the hostility from both major parties to the needs of the working class and their fealty to represent the interests of big business over those of working families over the last five decades.
In his latest attack on the working class—and just ahead of the Labor Day weekend—Trump on Thursday issued a new executive order expanding his assault on the government agencies where federal employees would lose their collective bargaining rights.
Union members and labor experts immediately called the order unlawful—just like the original March order upon which it was based—and vowed to fight it tooth and nail in court.
"This is how President Trump is commemorating Labor Day: continuing his administration's all-out attack on workers and unions," said Liz Schuler, president of the AFL-CIO. "This new executive order once again distorts the law by ripping away the collective bargaining rights of federal workers in an attempt to silence their voices on the job."
"Issuing these executive orders just days before the holiday that honors everything working people have fought and died for—including our right to come together with our co-workers in a union and bargain for what we deserve—shows us that this administration's callous disregard for workers' rights knows no bounds," added Schuler. "No matter what it throws our way, the labor movement will never stop organizing and fighting for each other—and we'll see him in court."
AFSCME's Saunders, suggested the polling should serve to invigorate the labor movement, even at a time when corporate power's hold on the levers of power seems near complete.
"We know that working families are the backbone of our economy. But instead of getting the respect they've earned, they're getting squeezed by CEOs and anti-worker politicians who want to hand out tax breaks to the billionaire class at the expense of Medicaid, food assistance, worker protections and our communities," he said. "It is easy to see why trust in Congress and big corporations is hitting new lows, while support for unions remains strong."
Saunders added that his union's 1.4 million members are "proud to stand with every worker who is fighting back to demand dignity, fairness, and a voice on the job. Because when we stand together, we can defend our freedoms from billionaires who want to rob us of them."
Bemoaning how Republicans have been able to coopt the mantle of being the party of the working class, all while undermining wages, workplace safety, and the right to collectively bargain, Les Leopold, executive director of the Labor Institute, has been among those warning the Democratic Party that it must change direction, or die trying, if it wants to win back the working class.
As he wrote following Trump's 2024 reelection, "It's time to end this sad chapter in U.S. history when the Democratic Party leaders refuse to be genuine allies for workers and the Republican Party is rewarded for pretending to be."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular