October, 13 2020, 12:00am EDT
P&G Investors Challenge CEO Over Forest Destruction Concerns at Company's Annual Meeting
In win for advocacy groups, 67% of shareholders split from company’s recommendation and vote yes on key proposal to protect boreal forest of Canada, tropical forests in Southeast Asia.
WASHINGTON
In a shocking move by Procter & Gamble's shareholders that defied the company's own recommendations, two-thirds of Procter & Gamble (P&G) shareholders voted "yes" at the company's annual meeting on Tuesday, October 13, to pass a proposal on forest sourcing and impacts. The vote is a clear indication that despite repeated insistence from company executives, the world's largest consumer goods company is not doing enough to deal with the financial threats of deforestation and forest degradation in its supply chains.
67% of shareholders voted yes on Green Century Equity Fund's shareholder proposal #5 (page 78), which reads "Shareholders request P&G issue a report assessing if and how it could increase the scale, pace, and rigor of its efforts to eliminate deforestation and the degradation of intact forests in its supply chains." (See the full text of the resolution below.)
"P&G's CEO David Taylor has been trying to convince shareholders and customers that the company is doing enough for forests. Losing this shareholder resolution by a huge margin is a slap in David Taylor's face and a clear rebuke. The owners of the company are saying directly to the CEO, 'You have failed and you need to do more to protect forests,'" said Todd Paglia, Executive Director at Stand.earth.
"This is a clear directive from investors that P&G needs to do much more than the status quo to protect the world's remaining intact forests. This vote makes clear that shareholders agree that P&G is not doing enough. The choice now for P&G is whether they will work with us to establish a more sustainable supply chain, or face even greater pressure from concerned citizens and their investors moving forward," said Shelley Vinyard, Boreal Corporate Campaign Manager at NRDC.
"This vote is a clear sign that shareholders are asking Procter & Gamble to do more. P&G must take action for forests globally and the communities who depend on them. In Indonesia and Malaysia, P&G needs to take responsibility for the palm oil it sources for soaps and shampoos, and take a stand for workers rights, Indigenous rights, rainforests, and the global climate," said Brihannala Morgan, Senior Campaigner at Rainforest Action Network.
"Over the past decade, major institutional shareholders have too often failed to use their voting power to defund deforestation and forest degradation. Today's overwhelming vote at Procter & Gamble is a watershed moment for shareholder power to challenge management and defend forests," said Jeff Conant, Senior International Forest Program Manager with Friends of the Earth U.S.
The vote comes amid mounting pressure from international environmental advocacy groups -- including Stand.earth, NRDC, Friends of the Earth, Rainforest Action Network, David Suzuki Foundation, and Wildlands League -- to expose the ways Indigenous and frontline communities have been historically impacted by Procter & Gamble's destructive forest sourcing, land grabbing, and poor labor practices in the boreal forest of Canada as well as tropical forests in Malaysia and Indonesia, where the company sources some of its palm oil and fiber from. Learn more about the campaigns in this briefing note sent to P&G investors.
In recent weeks, advocacy groups had increased their campaigning in support of the proposal, hosting a virtual webcast critiquing P&G's "Our Home" climate initiative, leading multiple days of protest outside the company's headquarters in Cincinnati, Ohio, and holding private meetings with shareholders to discuss the proposal. Groups including NRDC and Stand.earth met with a combined $90 billion of P&G investors representing about 30 percent of total shareholder value -- including some of the largest investment institutions in the world.
ABOUT THE ISSUE WITH TISSUE CAMPAIGN
Today's shareholder vote comes more than a year after the launch of Stand.earth and NRDC's Issue with Tissue campaign against Procter & Gamble for making toilet paper and tissue products from endangered forests and threatened species habitat.
In February 2019, Stand.earth and NRDC released the "Issue with Tissue" sustainability scorecard flunking Charmin and other major toilet paper brands for refusing to use zero recycled content in their at-home toilet paper. In June 2020, NRDC released "The Issue With Tissue 2.0," including a new sustainability scorecard that once again flunked P&G brands.
In the months following the release of the 2019 report, activists with Stand.earth created a "blind wipe" video spoofing Charmin over its softness claims, held a protest outside Procter & Gamble's shareholder meeting featuring a chainsaw-wielding bear, got Santa arrested for delivering coal to Procter & Gamble's headquarters, delivered a tongue-in-cheek Earth Day message about folding vs. wadding toilet paper, released a poll showing 85% of Americans want toilet paper makers to use more environmentally responsible materials, and supported religious leaders in Cincinnati in sending a letter to Procter & Gamble about the moral imperative of addressing climate change.
ABOUT THE BOREAL FOREST
Despite engaging in a long negotiation process with company executives late last year, Stand.earth and NRDC reached an impasse with Procter & Gamble over its sourcing practices. The company refused to set time-bound goals to stop sourcing from Canadian suppliers that don't meet the 65% habitat intactness thresholds established by the Canadian federal government to support the survival of endangered boreal caribou. The company has also failed to require its suppliers to adhere to the principles of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent when sourcing from traditional territories of First Nations in Canada.
The boreal forest of Canada is the largest intact forest remaining on the planet, and it also stores more carbon per hectare than nearly any other forest type on Earth (second only to mangroves), making it vital to mitigating the worst impacts of climate change. Often called the "Amazon of the North", this climate-critical ecosystem is home to over 600 Indigenous communities, as well as boreal caribou, pine marten, and billions of songbirds. The loss of this intact forest is impacting Indigenous peoples' ways of life and driving the decline of boreal caribou and other species.
Procter & Gamble recently launched their "It's Our Home" climate initiative, which centers around "the power of nature as a climate solution." The initiative includes plans by P&G to protect places "that are rich in carbon", such as the mangroves in the Philippines. However, the announcement conveniently downplayed the massive impacts the company has on the places it sources its fiber and palm oil, and completely ignored the boreal forest.
ABOUT SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL #5
The full text of shareholder proposal #5 reads:
ITEM 5. SHAREHOLDER PROPOSAL -- REPORT ON EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE DEFORESTATION
Green Century Equity Fund, 114 State Street, Suite 200, Boston, Massachusetts, 02109, the owner of at least $2,000 in value of Common Stock of the Company, has given notice that it intends to present for action at the annual meeting the following resolution:
Whereas: Procter and Gamble (PG) uses palm oil and forest pulp. These commodities are among the leading drivers of deforestation and forest degradation, which are responsible for approximately 12.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and also contribute to biodiversity loss, soil erosion, disrupted rainfall patterns, land conflicts, and forced labor.
Companies that do not adequately mitigate deforestation and forest degradation in their supply chains are vulnerable to material financial risk.
Supply chains that illegally contribute to deforestation are increasingly vulnerable to interruption from regulatory action and enforcement, and in 2019, two of PG's Tier 1 palm suppliers were tied to illegal deforestation.
PG lists potential reputational damage from the real and perceived environmental impacts of its products as a risk factor in its 2019 10-K. The Company received negative attention from 115 NGOs for sourcing pulp from forests that serve as a substantial global carbon sink. PG also received unfavorable coverage from media, including major outlets like Reuters, for failing to meet its 2020 zero-deforestation palm oil goal. Chain Reaction Research calculates PG's potential reputational losses at $41 billion, or 14 percent of equity, which "dwarfs the cost of solutions."
PG's peers have adopted and implemented stronger forest sourcing policies:
- Kimberly-Clark, one of the world's largest buyers of market pulp, has committed to halve its sourcing from natural forests, dramatically increasing the use of alternative and environmentally-preferred fibers. Kimberly-Clark regularly reports progress and appears on track to meet its targets.
- Unilever has committed to zero-net deforestation by 2020 in its supply chains and will sustainably source 95 percent of 12 key crops--including palm oil and paper/board--by the end of 2020.
PG was rated below these peers by both Forest 500 and CDP Forest and as "high risk" by SCRIPT, a soft commodity risk analysis tool.
PG lags on implementing its existing no-deforestation commitment, achieving RSPO certification for only one-third of its palm oil supply and retaining as its single largest palm kernel oil supplier a company that has not obtained RSPO certification since 2016. Additionally, PG lacks a comprehensive plan to mitigate exposure to deforestation and forest degradation throughout its operations; its current sourcing policies allow the Company to source from critical ecosystems, like Canada's boreal forest.
Failure to adopt and implement policies that mitigate these exposures may subject the Company to significant systemic and company-specific risks.
Resolved: Shareholders request PG issue a report assessing if and how it could increase the scale, pace, and rigor of its efforts to eliminate deforestation and the degradation of intact forests in its supply chains.
Supporting Statement: Proponents defer to management's discretion on the content of the report but suggest that indicators meaningful to shareholders may include:
- Whether the company has adopted a no-deforestation and no-degradation policy for all relevant commodities, such as avoiding intact forests and regions at high-risk for deforestation and degradation; and
- Disclosure of progress toward any stepped-up efforts, such as quantitative progress reports, timebound action plans, and non-compliance protocols.
Stand.earth (formerly ForestEthics) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with offices in Canada and the United States that is known for its groundbreaking research and successful corporate and citizens engagement campaigns to create new policies and industry standards in protecting forests, advocating the rights of indigenous peoples, and protecting the climate. Visit us at
LATEST NEWS
Watchdog Urges FEC to Investigate Trump Campaign Over Scheme for Legal Fees
"By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much."
Apr 24, 2024
A campaign finance watchdog on Wednesday filed a Federal Election Commission complaint accusing former President Donald Trump's 2024 campaign, affiliated political groups, and an accounting firm of violating U.S. law in a scheme "seemingly designed to obscure the true recipients of a noteworthy portion of Trump's legal bills."
The Washington, D.C.-based Campaign Legal Center (CLC) said that "evidence appears to show an illegal arrangement between several Trump-affiliated committees and a compliance firm named Red Curve Solutions that is designed to obscure the identities of those providing legal services and how much they are being paid."
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money."
CLC alleges that the Trump campaign, Trump's political action committee (PAC) Save America, and three affiliated organizations "violated federal reporting requirements based on a scheme in which the committees reportedly paid over $7.2 million—described as 'reimbursement for legal' costs or expenses"—to Red Curve.
The watchdog also said that Red Curve appears to be "making or facilitating illegal contributions that violate either federal contribution limits or the prohibition on corporate contributions."
According to CLC:
Red Curve is a domestic limited liability company that offers compliance and FEC reporting services but does not appear to offer any legal services. It is managed by Bradley Crate, who also serves as the treasurer for each of the five Trump-affiliated committees concerned in this complaint, as well as over 200 other federal committees.
According to filings with the FEC, Red Curve appears to have been fronting legal costs for Trump since at least December 2022, with Trump-affiliated committees repaying the company later. This arrangement appears to violate FEC rules that require campaigns to disclose not only the entity being reimbursed (here, Red Curve) but also the underlying vendor. By not disclosing the vendors that actually provided legal services, the Trump-affiliated committees effectively blocked the public from knowing which attorneys and firms are being paid—and how much they are being paid—through this arrangement.
"Voters have a right to know how the presidential campaigns and other committees supporting presidential candidates spend their money," CLC senior director of campaign finance Erin Chlopak said in a statement. "When campaigns and committees obscure that information from the public, not only do they make it difficult to determine if the law has been violated, but they deny voters the ability to make an informed choice when casting a ballot."
"The steps taken by the Trump campaign, its affiliated committees, and Red Curve Solutions concealed information about how campaign funds were used to pay former President Trump's legal expenditures, including the amounts and ultimate recipients of these expenditures—and the FEC must investigate immediately," Chlopak added.
Trump—who is the presumptive 2024 GOP presidential nominee—faces 91 federal and state felony charges related to his role in the January 6 insurrection and his organization's business practices. He is currently on trial in New York for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The twice-impeached former president has been open about his use of campaign donations to pay his legal costs.
The new CLC filing comes a day after the watchdog filed separate FEC complaints urging investigations into a pair of Trump-affiliated "scam PACs," which "pretend to fundraise for major candidates or issues while secretly diverting almost all of their donors' money back into fundraising or the fraudsters' own pockets."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'One Step Closer': Arizona House Votes to Repeal 1864 Abortion Ban
"With a total ban still set to take effect June 8, the Arizona Abortion Access Act is needed now more than ever," one state campaigner said of a November ballot measure.
Apr 24, 2024
Three Republicans in the Arizona House of Representatives on Wednesday joined with Democrats to advance legislation that would repeal an 1864 ban on abortion—a development rights advocates welcomed while stressing that the fight is far from over.
The 32-28 vote on House Bill 2677—with GOP Reps. Tim Dunn (25), Matt Gress (4), and Justin Wilmeth (2) voting in favor—was the third attempt in as many weeks to pass repeal legislation since the Arizona Supreme Court upheld the ban.
"The state Senate could vote on the repeal as early as next Wednesday, after the bill comes on the floor for a 'third reading,' as is required under chamber rules," according toNBC News. Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs on Wednesday toldThe Washington Post that "I am hopeful the Senate does the right thing and sends it to my desk so I can sign it."
Applauding the House passage of H.B. 2677, Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona president and CEO Angela Florez said that "today, Arizona is one step closer to repealing the state's Civil War-era total abortion ban. While the repeal still must pass the Senate, this is a major win for reproductive freedom."
"We must celebrate today's vote in support of abortion rights and harness our enthusiasm to spread the word and urge lawmakers in the Senate to support this necessary repeal bill," she continued. "Despite this step forward, Arizonans cannot stop fighting."
Florez noted that "even with the repeal of the Civil War-era ban, the state will still have a ban on abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy that denies people access to critical care. And lawmakers continue to attack Arizonans' ability to access reproductive healthcare. Our right to control our bodies and lives is hanging on by a thread."
"Thankfully, voters will have the opportunity to take back control if the Arizona Abortion Access Act is on the ballot this November," she added. "Abortion bans are out-of-step with the will of Arizonans and will force pregnant people to leave their communities for essential healthcare. Planned Parenthood Advocates of Arizona will continue fighting to ensure everyone has the right to make decisions about their health and futures."
The Arizona Abortion Access Act is a proposed state constitutional amendment that would prevent many limits on abortions before fetal viability and safeguard access to care after viability to protect the life or physical or mental health of the patient.
The coalition supporting the amendment, Arizona for Abortion Access, highlighted on social media that the House-approved bill "did not include the emergency clause required to stop the 1864 ban from taking effect on June 8," meaning H.B. 2677 wouldn't apply until 90 days after the end of the legislative session.
Coalition campaign manager Cheryl Bruce said that "with a total ban still set to take effect June 8, the Arizona Abortion Access Act is needed now more than ever. We remain committed to taking these decisions out of the hands of extremist politicians."
Arizona is one of multiple states where rights advocates are promoting abortion rights ballot measures this cycle. Reproductive freedom is also dominating political races at all levels, including the presidential contest. Democratic President Joe Biden is set to face former Republican President Donald Trump in November.
"Donald Trump is responsible for Arizona's abortion ban. Women in the state are still living under a ban with no exceptions for rape or incest and have been stripped of the freedom to make their own healthcare decisions," said Julie Chávez Rodriguez, Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris' reelection campaign manager.
While the presumptive GOP nominee has tried to distance himself from the Arizona Supreme Court's reinstatement of a 160-year-old abortion ban, he has also campaigned on his three appointees to the U.S. Supreme Court who helped reverse Roe v. Wade.
"Trump brags that he is 'proudly' the person responsible for these bans and if he retakes power, the chaos and cruelty he has created will only get worse in all 50 states," Chávez Rodriguez said. "President Biden and Vice President Harris are the only candidates who will stop him."
Keep ReadingShow Less
US Dodges Growing Calls for Probe of Mass Graves at Gaza Hospitals
"Somehow I don't think the U.S. State Department would defer to Russia as a credible source to investigate itself if a mass grave were discovered in Ukrainian territory it had occupied," said one legal expert.
Apr 24, 2024
While continuing to give Israel billions of dollars in support to wage war on the Gaza Strip, the Biden administration this week has declined to join the growing global demands for an international probe into mass graves discovered at hospitals in the besieged Palestinian enclave.
Two journalists on Tuesday questioned Vedant Patel, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, about the administration's response to the hundreds of bodies found at Gaza City's al-Shifa Hospital and Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis as well as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk's call for an independent investigation.
"Would you support such an independent investigation?" Said Arikat asked during a press briefing. Patel responded, "Right now, Said, we are asking for more information... That is squarely where we are leaving the conversation."
Patel added that "I don't have any details to match, confirm, or offer as it relates to that. We're aware of those reports, and we have asked the government of Israel for additional clarity and information. And that's where I'm at."
When Said asked a follow-up about potential U.S. support for a probe, Patel reiterated that the administration is awaiting information from the Israeli government.
Later, Niall Stanage asked Patel to explain U.S. "resistance" to supporting a probe, the spokesperson insisted that "it's not about resistance to this particular situation, it is me not wanting to speak in detail about something which Said posed as a hypothetical question when, from the United States' perspective, I don't have any additional information on this aside from the public reporting."
After Patel again stressed that the administration has asked Israel for more information, Stanage inquired, "And do you believe the government of Israel is a credible source in enlightening you?"
The spokesperson interrupted Stanage to say, "We do."
While supporting the six-month Israeli assault on Gaza that the International Court of Justice has found to be plausibly genocidal, the Biden administration is also arming Ukrainians' resistance to a Russian invasion. Brian Finucane, a senior adviser for the Crisis Group's U.S. program and a former legal adviser at the State Department, pointed to the latter.
"Somehow I don't think the U.S. State Department would defer to Russia as a credible source to investigate itself if a mass grave were discovered in Ukrainian territory it had occupied," Finucane said on social media in response to Stanage's questioning.
Meanwhile, European Union spokesperson Peter Stano made clear Tuesday that the E.U. supports an independent probe.
"This is something that forces us to call for an independent investigation of all the suspicions and all the circumstances, because indeed it creates the impression that there might have been violations of international human rights committed," Stano said. "That's why it's important to have independent investigation and to ensure accountability."
Human rights groups around the world joined the call for an independent investigation on Wednesday, as the official death toll in Gaza hit 34,262 with 77,229 people injured and thousands more missing and presumed dead beneath the rubble.
In an Arabic statement translated by Al Jazeera, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor said that the number of bodies found in the mass graves is "alarming, and requires urgent international action, including the formation of an independent international investigation committee."
The group added that some of those killed were subjected to "premeditated murder as well as arbitrary and extrajudicial executions while they were detained and handcuffed."
Amnesty International senior director of research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns Erika Guevara Rosas said in a statement that "the harrowing discovery of these mass graves underscores the urgency of ensuring immediate access for human rights investigators, including forensic experts, to the occupied Gaza Strip to ensure that evidence is preserved and to carry out independent and transparent investigations with the aim of guaranteeing accountability for any violations of international law."
"Lack of access for human rights investigators to Gaza has hampered effective investigations into the full scale of the human rights violations and crimes under international law committed over the past six months, allowing for the documentation of just a tiny fraction of these abuses," she noted. "Without proper investigations to determine how these deaths took place or what violations may have been committed, we may never find out the truth of the horrors behind these mass graves."
Guevara Rosas continued:
Mass grave sites are potential crime scenes offering vital and time-sensitive forensic evidence; they must be protected until professional forensic experts with the necessary skills and resources can safely carry out adequate exhumations and accurate identification of remains.
The absence of forensic experts and the decimation of Gaza's medical sector as a result of the war and Israel's cruel blockade, along with the lack of availability of the necessary resources for the identification of bodies such as DNA testing, are huge obstacles to the identifications of remains. This denies those killed the opportunity to have a dignified burial and deprives families with relatives missing or forcibly disappeared the right to know and to justice—leaving them in a limbo of uncertainty and anguish.
Noting that the International Court of Justice directed Israel to preserve evidence in its initial genocide case order, Guevara Rosas said that "amid a total vacuum of accountability and mounting evidence of war crimes in Gaza, Israeli authorities must ensure they comply with the ICJ ruling by granting immediate access to independent human rights investigators and ensuring that all evidence of violations is preserved."
"Third states must pressure Israel to comply with the ICJ orders by allowing the immediate entry into the Gaza Strip of independent human rights investigators and forensic experts, including the U.N.-appointed Commission of Inquiry and investigators of the International Criminal Court," she added. "There can be no truth and justice without proper, transparent independent investigations into these deaths."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular