HSBC accused of greenwashing as watchdog bans poster ads 

HSBC has been accused of ‘greenwashing’ after the advertising watchdog banned posters which boasted of the bank’s climate change credentials.

The lender was ordered to remove all of its ‘climate change doesn’t do borders’ ads, which appeared on bus stops around the country, after the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled they misled customers.

The decision will send shots across the bows of companies around the world, as they try to boost their ‘green’ image in an attempt to attract customers worried about climate change.

Under fire: HSBC was ordered to remove all of its ‘climate change doesn’t do borders’ after the Advertising Standards Authority ruled they misled customers

Robbie Gillett from campaign group Adfree Cities, which led the complaint against HSBC, said: ‘This is a significant moment in the fight to prevent banks from greenwashing their image.

‘HSBC can no longer ply us with ads pretending they are green while continuing to bankroll climate breakdown in the background.

‘HSBC and other banks… must stop funding fossil fuels instead of attempting to buy public favour with deceptive marketing campaigns, before these reputational risks turn into legal ones.’

The complaint to the ASA focused on two HSBC posters. The first read: ‘Climate change doesn’t do borders. Neither do rising sea levels. 

That’s why HSBC is aiming to provide up to $1 trillion in financing and investment globally to help our clients transition to net zero.’ 

The second said: ‘Climate changes doesn’t do borders. So in the UK, we’re helping to plant 2m trees which will lock in 1.25m tonnes of carbon over their lifetime.’

The ASA received 45 complaints about the adverts, including from Adfree Cities – a network concerned about the impacts of corporate advertising – which alleged that the posters were misleading because they failed to mention ‘significant information about HSBC’s contribution to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions’.

The lender has previously been targeted by campaigners because it is one of the biggest funders of fossil fuels.

HSBC argued that its strategy was aligned with global goals for reaching net zero carbon emissions, and referred to reports which claim that fossil fuels will still be important as industries ‘transition’ from carbon-intensive energy production to new ‘greener’ methods.

But the ASA rejected HSBC’s arguments, stating that ‘unqualified claims could mislead if they omit significant information’.

Consumers would assume from the adverts that HSBC was making a ‘positive overall environmental contribution’, the regulator said.

But they would not necessarily understand that the bank was ‘simultaneously involved in the financing of businesses which made significant contributions to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions’, it added.

The ruling means that banks will have to be extremely careful when making any claims about their environmental ambitions.

Companies across every industry are under increasing pressure to display their ESG (environmental, social and governance) credentials.

But this is drawing the attention of regulators, who suspect that many companies may be exaggerating how green they are in the hope of attracting more investors and customers.

America’s financial watchdog, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has fined the Bank of New York Mellon over claims that it falsely implied some of its funds had undergone ESG quality reviews.

And it is probing Goldman Sachs over whether some of its funds, which have clean energy or ESG in the title, are living up to their name.

In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority has warned businesses that it is cracking down on so-called greenwashing, and has initially targeted the fashion ranges of Asos, Bohoo and Asda. And Shell was ordered by a Netherlands court to cut its carbon emissions sooner than planned.

HSBC has already caused a stir in the ESG world, after Stuart Kirk – then-head of responsible investments at the bank’s asset management arm – said earlier this year: ‘Who cares if Miami is six metres underwater in 100 years?’

He later left the bank after being suspended, claiming that there was too much ‘groupthink’ in the industry.

This post first appeared on Dailymail.co.uk