put their plan back up for a vote, either every three years or if material changes i think in this case, not putting it up from the vote with the revised targets is an issue from a governance perspective. however, i do not think that that kind of necessitates shareholders directing operational strategies of the board, if that makes sense. it does. what do you say to those campaigners who say that you are only concerned, you and your clients, with helping the company and shareholders in the short term, and shareholders in the short term, and actually, bp made more than £27 billion last year, and it is backsliding on its commitments, and it is yourjob to hold their feet to the fire? it it is your “ob to hold their feet to the fire? , w ., , it is your “ob to hold their feet to the fire? , . , , the fire? it is actually the board s “ob the fire? it is actually the board s job to ensure the fire? it is actually the board s job to ensure that the fire? it is actually t
so where does that leave us? well, most experts agree that getting to net zero will not simply be a question of pulling one lever, whether government action, technological innovation or shareholder activism, but rather many levers. will tomorrow s bp vote prove to be a successful one? that remains to be seen. let s talk to courteney keatinge, senior director for environmental and social governance at glass lewis. they are investment advisers who have advised investers not to support the follow this resolution. thank you very much for talking to us. why are you advising your clients not to back this resolution? absolutely. when we are looking at proposals like this, we really are trying to understand if adoption of the proposal would help shareholders. we are looking at this through the lens of shareholder value, and in ourview, through the lens of shareholder value, and in our view, the proposal wasjust a bit value, and in our view, the proposal was just a bit too prescriptive, value,
through the lens of shareholder value, and in ourview, through the lens of shareholder value, and in our view, the proposal wasjust a bit value, and in our view, the proposal was just a bit too prescriptive, value, and in our view, the proposal wasjust a bit too prescriptive, and in our view, the board and management should be handling things like operational strategies, which i really required in orderfor like operational strategies, which i really required in order for the company to try and set goals and meet those goals. although bp didst invite shareholders to vote on its original climate targets last year, but did not put these new curtailed ones of the consultation this year, so they have shot themselves in the foot in a way? absolutely. i think that was really the largest concern about this newest agm. it really is a governance concern when you are putting these up for a vote, shareholders are approving them, then you are not kind of going on board with them. i will say that mo