Investors for Paris Compliance, which seeks to hold publicly traded companies accountable for their climate commitments, argues the companies have breached the Alberta Securities Act “with long-standing and widespread inaccurate and incomplete disclosure” related to net-zero commitments.
“By extensively using net-zero terminology in their communications, Cenovus and Enbridge have led reasonable investors and the public to believe that their business models are aligned with the net-zero energy transition, which in fact threatens both their existing business and fossil fuel expansion plans,” the group said in its submissions to the Alberta Securities Commission.
It said it opted to take its complaint to the ASC instead of the federal Competition Tribunal under new anti-greenwashing rules because “investors have a strong interest in the credible and timely enforcement of securities law.”
It adds that nothing in the amendments to the Competition Act, which became law last year, supersedes the obligations of securities regulators to also crack down on greenwashing. It cites guidance from Canadian Securities Administrators, a national umbrella group, that says environmental disclosures should be subject to the same standards as financial reporting.
MoneySense’s ETF Screener Tool
Private parties can file complaints directly to securities regulators
Under the Competition Act changes, private parties, including environmental groups, can now launch a complaint directly.
But Michael Sambasivam, senior analyst with Investors for Paris Compliance, said that shouldn’t be necessary. “We don’t believe the burden for enforcement for these kinds of complaints should be on private citizens and private groups.”
He said his group zeroed in on the two companies to capture two separate segments of the energy business—Cenovus produces the raw product, while Enbridge transports it. Sambasivam said they also both “offered some of most consistently flagrant violations of Canadian security principles” of the company disclosures it looked at.
After the Competition Bureau’s anti-greenwashing provisions took effect, Cenovus was among the oilsands companies to pull its net-zero statements from its website. Uncertainty over whether the company has abandoned those commitments is a “form of incomplete disclosure disallowed by the Alberta Securities Act,” the complaint said.
X
The complaint also makes note of public lobbying that it says contradicts climate commitments. Top executives of both companies were among the signatories to an open letter from oil and gas industry leaders to newly elected Prime Minister Mark Carney this spring that, among other things, urged Ottawa to scrap its cap on greenhouse gas emissions and industrial carbon levy.
Enbridge remains committed to achieving net zero emissions from its operations by 2050 while at the same time delivering energy people rely on, spokesman Jesse Semko said in an emailed statement. The company has reduced emissions from its operations by 22% compared to its 2018 baseline through improved efficiency, purchasing less carbon-intensive electricity and investing in renewables, he added. “We also remain committed to accuracy and transparency—and we stand behind the information we share in our reports and communications.”
Investors for Paris Compliance argues emissions from the end use of the fossil fuels produced and shipped should be taken into account in net zero reporting, not just emissions from operations.Cenovus did not respond to a request for comment.
The group is asking the ASC to investigate existing and past climate disclosures from Cenovus and Enbridge to assess their accuracy and adequacy. The investigation should consider evidence from peers and competitors, it said. It also wants the ASC to work with other provincial securities regulators on guidance for net zero claims for Canadian publicly listed companies.
A spokeswoman for the commission says it and its counterparts have given companies guidance and resources to help them prepare disclosures of material climate-related risks, as well as avoiding language that could be considered greenwashing. She said it does not comment on reviews it does of complaints.
Canada’s best dividend stocks
Read more investing news:
