Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:
Sign Up
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Comprehensive |
Centrica provides an extensive and highly specific account of its climate-policy lobbying. It names a wide range of concrete measures it has engaged on, including the UK and EU Emissions Trading Schemes, the Carbon Price Floor consultation, the Renewable Heat Incentive and its successor schemes, the Boiler Upgrade Scheme, the ‘Hydrogen Storage Business Model’ and the ‘Hydrogen to Power’ consultations, the Great British Insulation Scheme, smart-meter roll-out policy, proposals for hydrogen transport and storage business models, and reviews such as REMA and Chris Skidmore’s Net Zero Review. The company is equally clear about how and where it lobbies: it describes submitting consultation responses, emailing detailed letters to departments such as DESNZ and BEIS, “giving evidence at the House of Lords,” hosting policy roundtables and site visits, sending an open letter to “Mr Pankaj Bhatia, Global Director of GHG Protocol,” and working through trade associations like Energy UK and Hydrogen UK. Targets are identified by name, from Ofgem and the FCA to the UK Government, the European Commission and the World Resources Institute. Centrica is also explicit about the outcomes it seeks, for example calling for “a clear and tangible hydrogen storage target of 10 TWh by 2030,” urging government to “fast-track decisions on hydrogen transport and storage business models,” advocating that green energy subsidies be moved “from electricity bills to general taxation,” asking for “doubling the annual rate of allowances … placed in the Market Stability Reserve” of the EU ETS, and requesting that Annex B be removed from the GHGP Land Sector and Removals Guidance “to allow a market-based approach for biomethane.” By clearly disclosing the policies, the channels and the specific policy changes it pursues, Centrica demonstrates a comprehensive level of transparency around its climate-related lobbying activities.
|
4
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Comprehensive |
Centrica discloses a clearly structured process to keep its policy advocacy in line with its climate strategy. It commits to Conduct all direct advocacy with governments, regulators and policymakers in line with our climate goals and those of the Paris Agreement and to Assess indirect advocacy through the positions and activities of trade associations were members of, against our climate goals and those of the Paris Agreement, signalling that both direct and indirect lobbying are covered. Practical mechanisms are described: dedicated policy groups develop detailed policy positions which are collated and taken to the CEO / executive via a regular, typically monthly, policy and engagement meeting for review and approval, and before joining any association we evaluate whether any of their stated positions contradict any of the stated climate policies Any contradiction is then evaluated to determine whether we should join, engage, or not become members. Transparency is reinforced by a repository on Centrica.com showing all of the advocacy we undertake, and the company pledges to analyse alignment with our climate goals and those of the Paris Agreement, and highlight any actions we took where misalignment was identified. On the same climate lobbying transparency site, published in 2023 and 2024, are reviews of its trade associations' lobbying and its actions to ensure lobbying alignment. Oversight responsibilities are explicit: The CEO therefore has ultimate ownership and sets the companys position on public policy, while The outcome from the key engagements are fed back to the Board, and the Safety, Environment and Sustainability Committee supports the Board in monitoring climate-related matters. This indicates strong governance over both channels of lobbying; however, the company does not disclose a stand-alone, published climate-lobbying alignment audit or an external review, and the frequency and results of trade-association alignment assessments are not yet reported publicly, suggesting room for further transparency.
|
4
|