Kingfisher PLC

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	Kingfisher PLC provides highly detailed and specific disclosures about its climate-related lobbying. It names a wide range of individual measures it has engaged on, including the “ECO+ (now the Great British Insulation Scheme),” the UK “Green Homes Grant,” the French “MaPrimeRénov” finance scheme, the French circular economy law, the French Renewable Energy Act, the “EU Deforestation Regulation,” the “EU Forest Strategy,” the “European Timber Regulation,” and associated UK timber and deforestation consultations, clearly indicating the jurisdiction, focus and status of each measure. The company is equally explicit about how and where it lobbies. It describes direct meetings with UK BEIS officials, engagement “through the Energy Efficiency Infrastructure Group” which “arranged meetings with Lord Callanan, the minister,” written budget submissions, formal “response to consultation” processes, and position papers channelled through European trade associations such as EuroCommerce, EDRA and the British Retail Consortium, as well as cooperation with NGOs. These descriptions consistently identify both the mechanism (meetings, submissions, consultation responses, coalition papers) and the policymaking targets (named ministers, UK, French, Polish and Russian governments, the European Parliament and Commission). Finally, Kingfisher sets out the concrete outcomes it seeks: it is “pushing for government to go further on regulation, incentives for home-owners, and potentially further grant and loan funding” to retrofit UK housing; calling for VAT reductions on energy-efficiency products; supporting targets in France to “recycle 100% of plastics by 2025 and end single-use plastic packaging by 2040”; urging the EU to publish an “Action Plan on Deforestation”; and pressing for regulatory wording in the EUDR to avoid “due-diligence duplication.” It often states its stance, e.g. “Support with minor exceptions,” and confirms alignment of each position with the Paris Agreement. Taken together, these disclosures demonstrate a comprehensive level of transparency across the policies lobbied, the channels used, and the specific policy changes the company is seeking.	4

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Strong	Kingfisher PLC discloses a clear governance structure that covers both direct and indirect climate-related lobbying and assigns explicit oversight responsibilities, indicating strong governance. It states that “responsibility for overseeing the policy lies with our governance groups including but not limited to the Responsible Business Committee (a committee of Kingfisher’s Board) and the Group Climate Committee,” while its “Director of Corporate Affairs manages our public policy activities, reporting to our Chief People Officer,” and “the Board of Directors reviews the key aspects of our public policy activity at least twice a year.” The company commits to align lobbying with climate goals, noting that its Environmental Policy requires it to “use our voice as a major European retailer to advocate for climate policy and action consistent with the aims of the Paris Agreement” and that “Kingfisher’s engagement activities in areas relating to climate change are aligned with the business’ four pillars of its Responsible Business strategy.” For indirect lobbying, Kingfisher explains that “relationships with trade associations in the UK, Ireland, France and Brussels are overseen by our Group Director of Corporate Affairs… We want to make sure that our trade associations are aligned with our position on climate change and regularly engage with them on this issue,” and adds that “we may terminate our relationship with trade associations if they don’t meet our standards,” citing its 2023 decision to withdraw from the CBI. These disclosures show an ongoing process to monitor and, if necessary, correct both its own advocacy and that undertaken through industry groups. However, the company does not disclose a standalone climate-lobbying alignment report, provide detailed criteria or a systematic audit of association positions, or specify how misalignments are formally assessed and remedied beyond the option to exit, so transparency on the depth and frequency of reviews remains limited.	3