abusesaffiliationarrow-downarrow-leftarrow-rightarrow-upattack-typeburgerchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-upClock iconclosedeletedevelopment-povertydiscriminationdollardownloademailenvironmentexternal-linkfacebookfiltergenderglobegroupshealthC4067174-3DD9-4B9E-AD64-284FDAAE6338@1xinformation-outlineinformationinstagraminvestment-trade-globalisationissueslabourlanguagesShapeCombined Shapeline, chart, up, arrow, graphlocationmap-pinminusnewsorganisationotheroverviewpluspreviewArtboard 185profilerefreshIconnewssearchsecurityPathStock downStock steadyStock uptagticktooltiptwitteruniversalityweb
Article

2 Nov 2016

Author:
Christopher Avery, Founder-Director (2002-2013), Business & Human Rights Resource Centre; former Legal Adviser & Deputy Head of Research, Amnesty International, International Secretariat

Statement by Chris Avery following BP's 2nd response

See all tags

BP’s latest response once again points to the gap between what BP says and what BP does.  If the company was genuinely committed to addressing climate change, the board of its Political Action Committee (composed of BP senior managers) would not have decided to fund campaigns of the U.S. Senator who has been called “America's Most Notorious Climate Change Denier” and who says that only God can change the climate.  If the company was genuinely committed to protecting human rights, the board of its PAC would not have decided to fund the campaigns of far-right U.S. politicians with a record of repeatedly voting to undermine fundamental human rights.

Anyone who cares about the integrity of the democratic process should be concerned that BP and other companies reportedly pressure and/or induce their employees to contribute to their Political Action Committees. (Reuters, “The new U.S. office politics: funding your boss's political causes”)

Story Timeline