Super funds backpedal on Macquarie climate resolution

While some industry super funds including HESTA, NGS Super and Vision Super maintained their support for the climate resolution at Macquarie's latest annual general meeting (AGM), some super funds have backpedalled from their initial support.

The resolution brought forth by 160 shareholders and coordinated by Market Forces, pushed for improved climate risk exposure and management by Macquarie.

Australian Retirement Trust (ART) and Cbus both voted in favour of the resolution last year but chose to vote against it this year. Aware Super chose to abstain from the vote this time. It had voted in favour of the resolution last year.

Around 18% of Macquarie shareholders voted in favour of the resolution for the investment giant to disclose how its fossil fuel financing aligns with its commitment to the Paris Agreement. This marks a major walk back from last year, when 35% of shareholders voted in favour of the resolution.

Concerns have been raised over Macquarie's role in financing the Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory.

"Macquarie has 'an ambition to support the goals of the Paris Agreement'. It is not clear what this means," Vision Super said.

"It is not clear how financing long-term fracking projects in the Beetaloo basin or Sandow in Texas supports this ambition whatever it is. A report might help the company clarify what it is actually doing and what it means by its statements."

A Cbus spokesperson said the super fund has and will continue to engage with Macquarie regarding its approach to managing climate change risks.

In its Responsible Investment Report 2025, Aware Super highlighted its reasons for choosing to abstain from the Say on Climate vote at a Santos AGM last year.

"Following comprehensive engagement and analysis, we chose to abstain from the Say on Climate vote, reflecting our recognition of the company's progress on climate risk management and transition planning, while signalling our expectation for continued improvement," Aware Super said.

Shareholders in the resolution claimed the latest disclosures and financing activity appeared inconsistent with accepted science-based pathways to meet the Paris climate goals, substantially decrease reported green-energy exposure, and significantly increase reported fossil fuel exposure.