19th April 2024

Our latest analysis of Problems with GMPF’s approach to investment concludes that the Fund has a limited understanding of climate risk and is out of step with industry best practice, such as the Net Zero Asset Owners Alliance.

We reviewed the Fund’s November 2023 document How we’re Investing for the Energy Transition as well as its latest Annual Report and correspondence with a GM, councillor and found four key problems with the Fund’s approach.

GMPF claims that it is Paris-aligned and that it’s a signatory to the Paris-aligned Investment Initiative’s Net Zero Asset Owner Commitment. In a recent letter to a GM councillor the Fund’s chair stated that, ‘we have set our portfolio emissions targets in line with science-based pathways as laid out in the Net Zero Investment Framework and the Net Zero Asset Owners Alliance guidance.’

But the Alliance‘s guidance has interim absolute emissions reduction targets from 2019 of 22-32% by 2025 and 40-60% by 2030. Similarly, the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC) Net Zero Stewardship Toolkit aims for investors to halve their absolute emissions by 2030.

In contrast, GMPF, which is not a member of the Alliance, has an interim target only for reducing carbon intensity – by 50% by 2030. As we pointed out before, carbon intensity targets cannot substitute for absolute emissions reduction.

The latest Transition Plan Taskforce Disclosure Framework (p17) recommends that a transition plan should specify the actions to be taken in the short, medium and long term to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But GMPF has no such plan.

GMPF claims that it’s taking the lead on its approach to climate risk and Paris alignment, but the reality is quite the reverse.

We’ve written to Councillor Ged Cooney, leader of Tameside Council and chair of GMPF, pointing out the Fund’s failure to meet widely accepted good practice on climate risk, net zero targets and transition plans. We’ll let you know what he has to say.