Alstom SA

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

Direct Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Comprehensive	Alstom provides a highly detailed picture of its climate-policy lobbying. It clearly names a wide range of concrete measures it works on, including the EU “Fit for 55” package (such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, the Energy Taxation Directive and the extension of the Emissions Trading Scheme), the revision of the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Directive, the European Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities, the Clean Vehicle Directive, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, national initiatives like Australia’s Carbon Tax and provisions in the U.S. Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, among others. The company also explains how it seeks to influence these files. It describes direct engagement with EU Commissioners, Members of the European Parliament and representatives of Member States, formal responses to European Commission consultations, participation in expert groups (e.g., the Technical Expert Group drafting the EU Taxonomy), quarterly-reported lobbying of U.S. federal and state officials, meetings with Canadian federal, provincial and municipal authorities, and targeted discussions with the Australian Federal Government. Indirect channels are likewise specified, such as drafting position papers inside trade associations like UNIFE and MEDEF, work through the Transport Decarbonisation Alliance, and presentations during UNFCCC COPs. Alstom is equally explicit about the concrete outcomes it pursues. It backs the inclusion of both direct and indirect emissions and an expanded product scope in CBAM, calls for the Energy Taxation Directive to “promote reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions, energy efficiency and the uptake of alternative fuels such as hydrogen,” urges that member states be required under AFIR to plan for battery- and fuel-cell-powered trains, supports use of the MEAT principle so that public tenders “take into account environmental (and social) criteria and not only price,” and advocates “policy support to internalize external costs, in particular through coherent CO2 pricing.” It also seeks mandatory carbon reporting legislation and long-term funding vehicles such as a well-resourced Connecting Europe Facility. By naming the specific policies, detailing the precise channels and counterparts of engagement, and spelling out the legislative changes it wants to see, Alstom demonstrates comprehensive transparency on its climate-related lobbying.	4

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Moderate	Alstom discloses a basic governance structure that seeks to keep its policy advocacy consistent with its climate objectives, noting that it “communicates about its climate-related engagement activities in its URD… in the section ‘Relations with governments, international & national organisations and think tanks’” and that it has processes “to ensure that your engagement activities are consistent with your overall climate change strategy.” The company sets out clear internal rules for any lobbying, stating that “All lobbying must advance sound public policies,” that “outside lobbyists are strictly limited, subject to stringent approval and thorough due diligence by the Ethics and Compliance Department,” and that gifts or hospitality to officials must follow anti-corruption rules, which indicates the presence of procedural controls and a named oversight body. It also reports that it files “public filings quarterly to the U.S. Congress, New York State Joint Commission on Public Ethics and LA Metro Ethics Department” and complies with Canadian disclosure requirements, suggesting an operational mechanism for monitoring direct lobbying. In addition, the company makes “a public commitment… to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” evidencing an intention to align advocacy with climate goals. However, the disclosures do not explain how the Ethics and Compliance Department assesses whether specific positions or trade-association memberships are aligned with Alstom’s climate strategy, and we found no evidence of a formal, recurring review of indirect lobbying or of board-level oversight. The absence of any published alignment audit or description of corrective actions when misalignment is identified means the governance framework remains limited to internal compliance controls rather than a comprehensive climate-lobbying alignment process.	2