The unusually large vote against Barclays’ management-backed advisory resolution approving its climate plans (albeit still passing) underlined that far from being the concern only of fringe groups, the bank’s environmental policies still fall far short of what many of its own shareholders are demanding. Campaigners have previously often exhorted individual Barclays customers to abandon the bank in protest at those policies (see here and here, for instance, or the many interventions shown here.) In a development mirroring earlier anti-apartheid reaction, some of the bank’s larger customers are now facing calls to take their business elsewhere.
Chief amongst these is the National Trust (NT), not only Europe’s largest conservation charity, but one that has become increasingly outspoken recently about the need for green jobs, sustainable food production and clean energy, setting out 7 ‘red lines’ that UK Government policy should not cross. Coming from an organisation with a long-standing apolitical stance, this represents a startling indication of how urgent and serious the environmental crisis is (as well as how poorly UK Government has been responding to it.) What’s more, the NT is taking further steps to communicate that urgency, such as funding this article which explains that you should “[m]ake sure the bank you use for a business (and personal, for that matter) account doesn’t hold investments in fossil fuel companies.”
Yet the largest conservation charity in Europe currently banks with Europe’s biggest financer of fossil fuels, Barclays. As a result of this contradiction – and not least in light of the admirable NT resolution passed way back in 2019 to withdraw investments from fossil fuel companies – the upcoming NT AGM will include a vote on a Members’ Resolution proposing similar conditions for the NT’s bank services provider, ultimately requiring a change of bank if not met. Coupled with persuasive video content and reputable coverage, the build-up to the AGM may reveal Barclays’ role in the climate crisis to many who were previously unaware. (You can read more about Barclays and the NT and find instructions on how to vote here.)
While not a conservation charity, Bloom & Wild foreground their undoubtedly sincere awareness of their “responsibility to people and planet”, which includes their carbon-neutral certification and pathway to Scope 3 net zero. Seemingly not understanding the reasoning from Fossil Free London for why Bloom & Wild should therefore stop banking with Barclays, the campaigners are encouraging others to explain (for example) the tension between one the one hand making all your packaging recyclable and planning for plastic-free alternatives to bubble wrap, and on the other hand using a bank found to finance more single-use plastic than any other.
If an individual account holder chooses to switch from Barclays, the number of people who will know about that is often relatively limited, but if a large organisation is known even to be considering doing so, the chances are much higher that the bank will suffer just the kind of fossil-fuel-driven reputational damage that it is concerned about. With CASS statistics showing a net loss of customers for every quarter since 2017, and with that loss significantly increasing so far in 2022, Barclays may see a need to revisit its inadequate environmental policies.