News: WHC Australia's second-largest pension fund blacklists thermal coal investments, page-9

if you have had the pleasure of dealing with any white collar corporate titled sustainability or HR - you will very quickly understand why companies today are handcuffed and sinking.

They are neither hancuffed or sinking, they just need to be more creative and give off a certain perception. They have a lot at the wriggle room that they left themselves open to still invest in coal whilst giving the impression they are anti-coal.


'The A$280 billion ($183 billion) fund has introduced new rules to exclude any company which generates more than 10% of its revenue from the mining and sale of thermal coal' - So straight up it's still OK to be a little bit into coal. It's not bad enough to not be in at all. Sounds kind of reasonable and will look good in a powerpoint presentation.

'Australian Retirement Trust applies exclusions in limited circumstances as part of its sustainable investment approach in accordance with members’ best financial interest'. - Yeah that's very interesting. Leaving the door open for when it is in the members best financial interest which could be all the time. That's a way around getting into thermal coal by saying it's making us money so it's OK.

However, the rule does not bar thermal coal investments made indirectly via money invested with other fund managers. So they just get someone else do it on their behalf. I wonder if they do the same with tobacco etc that is on the banned list.

It's a fantastic public relations stunt that gets them some good headlines for a few days, gets some people off their back whilst still allowing them to be invested in coal by being a bit more creative. That would have been a great brainstorming session in the office. I wonder if the meeting invite subject was 'How to stay invested in coal whilst giving the impression we aren't.'