Members of the university sector superannuation fund are raising concerns about the operations of one of its major holdings.
UniSuper members are ramping up pressure on the $139 billion fund to take action against APA Group’s climate disclosures.
UniSuper, the largest shareholder of APA Group with a holding of over nine per cent, has witnessed growing support among its members for a recently filed resolution. The resolution calls for APA Group to disclose how it is managing emissions from new gas infrastructure, including planned Beetaloo Basin pipelines, in alignment with its climate commitments.
A recent statement from Market Forces revealed that in May 2023, 96 Australian scientists and experts, most of whom are UniSuper members, called for the Northern Territory government to ban unconventional gas development due to its impact on the climate.
Notably, fracking has been banned in other states including Victoria, Tasmania, and most of Western Australia.
“A growing number of UniSuper members and leading academics are calling on their fund to vote in favour of this resolution holding APA Group to account on its climate commitments,” said Rachel Deans, oil and gas campaigner at Market Forces.
Market Forces, which filed the resolution on behalf of APA Group’s 128 shareholders, said the move marks the first time in Australia that a resolution has been lodged against an oil or gas pipeline company, holding it to account on climate disclosure.
“I really appreciate what UniSuper has done for me in my retirement and I’m asking them to vote in favour of this important resolution so that UniSuper and APA Group can be genuinely Paris Aligned,” Jan McNicol, UniSuper member, said.
This is not the first time that Market Forces has taken aim at UniSuper. In 2020, the group teamed up with academics, scientists, researchers, and other university staff with a goal to pressure the fund into divesting billions of dollars from fossil fuel companies.
The campaign, named UniSuper DIVEST, started with an open letter from UniSuper members to its board of directors.
“While Australia’s academics, scientists and researchers work on climate change solutions, our super fund is investing our retirement savings in the companies causing the problem,” the campaign includes on its site.
In an update from August 2021, Market Forces disclosed that UniSuper had been “quietly” pulling investments from oil and gas producers.
However, in an open letter from June, the UniSuper DIVEST campaign wrote to the fund: “We are writing to call on UniSuper to take a public position against APA’s potential development of large-scale pipelines connecting the Beetaloo Basin to the East Coast gas network and the Middle Arm precinct in Darwin and use the fund’s leverage to advocate for an end to these plans.
“UniSuper’s significant APA holding presents a critical opportunity for the fund to live up to its commitments and drive real-world emissions reductions by forcefully opposing APA’s proposed Beetaloo gas plans.”
Super Review reached out to UniSuper for comment following Market Forces’ latest announcement.
“We assess shareholder resolutions on their merits and will form our view in the best financial interests of our members,” a spokesperson for the fund said.
Shareholders double down
On Wednesday, Market Forces said there are growing concerns that APA’s involvement in fracking of the Beetaloo sub-basin is posing significant financial and climate risks to the company.
“APA Group must come clean with its shareholders and be fully transparent about whether these pipelines are compatible with the company’s climate goals,” Deans said.
The activist group said that APA has signed initial agreements with Tamboran Resources and Empire Energy to build small-scale pipelines. It alleged that the firm is also in discussions regarding the construction of large-scale pipelines with both companies, which Market Forces described as “completely misaligned with the company’s commitment to the climate goals of the Paris Agreement”.
Notably, more than a fifth of APA shareholders in 2022 voted against the company’s Climate Transition Plan, with investors voicing concerns over reliance on carbon offsets.
In particular, all 36,300 tonnes of carbon offsets retired by APA in the financial year 2022 and 2023 failed to achieve their stated purpose of increasing forest cover growth and represented no genuine abatement, according to peer-reviewed academic research.
Responding to Market Forces' claims, APA's spokesperson told Super Review on Monday it has received three resolutions put forward to be considered at its upcoming annual meeting, which have been promoted by Market Forces and are supported by 128 securityholders.
"APA respects the rights of our investors to put forward resolutions and we welcome ongoing engagement with investors and other stakeholders that have an interest in our business," the spokesperson said.
They added that APA has recently engaged with Market Forces on their views about the development of the Beetaloo Basin.
"APA is considering the validity of the resolutions. Our notice of meeting will be published soon and will include any valid resolutions to be considered at the Annual Meeting, together with the response and voting recommendations of the APA board.
"APA is committed to actively participate in Australia’s energy transition and we seek to transparently disclose relevant climate-related information, including our progress against the targets and goals within our Climate Transition Plan. APA is committed to continue to engage with investors, communities and other stakeholders to make the necessary investments to support Australia’s decarbonisation ambitions.”
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.