Aon PLC – Lobbying Governance & Transparency

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:

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Aon discloses a basic but structured approach to making sure its policy engagement supports its climate objectives. It states that "Aon’s Public Affairs team is represented on the ESG Committee, through our Head of Public Policy," indicating that lobbying practitioners sit on a governance body that can review climate-related engagement. The company also explains that "Aon's management team has established a Net-Zero committee… jointly chaired by Aon’s Chief Procurement Officer and Head of Investor Relations and ESG… and is responsible for monitoring progress against Aon’s Net-Zero greenhouse gas emission strategy," showing a defined management forum that tracks whether external engagement activities remain consistent with its transition plan. In addition, Aon confirms that it has "a public commitment… to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement," providing a formal policy reference. These disclosures identify specific committees and senior individuals with oversight and describe an ongoing monitoring process, which suggests a moderate level of governance. However, the company does not disclose any systematic review of the alignment of its direct lobbying positions nor any assessment of trade-association advocacy, nor does it publish a dedicated lobbying-alignment report, so the depth and coverage of its governance remain limited. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

Aon discloses a basic but structured approach to making sure its policy engagement supports its climate objectives. It states that "Aon’s Public Affairs team is represented on the ESG Committee, through our Head of Public Policy," indicating that lobbying practitioners sit on a governance body that can review climate-related engagement. The company also explains that "Aon's management team has established a Net-Zero committee… jointly chaired by Aon’s Chief Procurement Officer and Head of Investor Relations and ESG… and is responsible for monitoring progress against Aon’s Net-Zero greenhouse gas emission strategy," showing a defined management forum that tracks whether external engagement activities remain consistent with its transition plan. In addition, Aon confirms that it has "a public commitment… to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement," providing a formal policy reference. These disclosures identify specific committees and senior individuals with oversight and describe an ongoing monitoring process, which suggests a moderate level of governance. However, the company does not disclose any systematic review of the alignment of its direct lobbying positions nor any assessment of trade-association advocacy, nor does it publish a dedicated lobbying-alignment report, so the depth and coverage of its governance remain limited.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Aon provides only a limited window into its climate-related lobbying. On the positive side, it does name two identifiable pieces of legislation it has engaged on – Australia’s “National Electric Vehicle Strategy” and the draft “Fuel Efficiency Standard – Cleaner, Cheaper to Run Cars for Australia” – showing some willingness to disclose the specific policies under discussion. Beyond that, however, detail is sparse. The firm says COP28 gave it "our opportunity to talk to governments, to talk to our clients" and notes that insurers should "advocate for required policies and standards to assist in regulating the EV segment," but it does not clarify whether this means formal meetings, written submissions, participation in consultations, or work through industry associations, nor does it name the particular ministries, agencies or legislators it addresses. Similarly, it describes aspirations such as helping to “set global strategy on what the transition looks like,” “encouraging investment in EV infrastructure resilience,” and “promoting risk mitigation and safety standards,” yet it stops short of specifying the concrete legislative amendments, targets, or timelines it seeks. As a result, while the company acknowledges some engagement and identifies a couple of policy instruments, it remains largely silent on the precise mechanisms employed and the measurable outcomes it hopes to achieve.	D