Two major banks leave UN Net Zero Banking Alliance in two weeks

Under Texas law, financial institutions that boycott the oil and natural gas industry are prohibited from entering into contracts with state governmental entities. State law also requires state entities to divest from financial companies that boycott the oil and natural gas industry by implementing ESG policies.

Not soon after the general election, and within two weeks of each other, two major financial institutions have left a United Nations Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA).

This is after they joined three years ago, pledging to require environmental social governance standards (ESG) across their platforms, products and systems.

According to the “bank-led and UN-convened” NZBA, global banks joined the alliance, pledging to align their lending, investment, and capital markets activities with a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, NZBA explains.

Since April 2021, 145 banks in 44 countries with more than $73 trillion in assets have joined NZBA, tripling membership in three years.

“In April 2021 when NZBA launched, no bank had set a science-based sectoral 2030 target for its financed emissions using 1.5°C scenarios,” it says. “Today, over half of NZBA banks have set such targets.”

There are two less on the list.

Goldman Sachs was the first to withdraw from the alliance this month, ESG Today reported. Wells Fargo was the second, announcing its departure Friday.

The banks withdrew two years after 19 state attorneys general launched an investigation into them and four other institutions, Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Morgan Stanley, for alleged deceptive trade practices connected to ESG.

Four states led the investigation: Arizona, Kentucky, Missouri and Texas. Others involved include Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Virginia. Five state investigations aren’t public for confidentiality reasons.

The investigation was the third launched by Texas AG Ken Paxton into deceptive trade practices connected to ESG, which he argues were designed to negatively impact the Texas oil and natural gas industry. The industry is the lifeblood of the Texas economy and major economic engine for the country and world, The Center Square has reported.

The Texas oil and natural gas industry accounts for nearly one-third of Texas’s GDP and funds more than 10% of the state’s budget.

It generates over 43% of the electricity in the U.S. and 51% in Texas, according to 2023 data from the Energy Information Administration.

It continues to break production records, emissions reduction records and job creation records, leading the nation in all three categories, The Center Square reported. Last year, the industry paid the largest amount in tax revenue in state history of more than $26.3 billion. This translated to $72 million a day to fund public schools, universities, roads, first responders and other services.

“The radical climate change movement has been waging an all-out war against American energy for years, and the last thing Americans need right now are corporate activists helping the left bankrupt our fossil fuel industry,” Paxton said in 2022 when launching Texas’ investigation. “If the largest banks in the world think they can get away with lying to consumers or taking any other illegal action designed to target a vital American industry like energy, they’re dead wrong. This investigation is just getting started, and we won’t stop until we get to the truth.”‘

Paxton praised Wells Fargo’s move to withdraw from “an anti-energy activist organization that requires its members to prioritize a radical climate agenda over consumer and investor interests.”

Under Texas law, financial institutions that boycott the oil and natural gas industry are prohibited from entering into contracts with state governmental entities. State law also requires state entities to divest from financial companies that boycott the oil and natural gas industry by implementing ESG policies. To date, 17 companies and 353 publicly traded investment funds are on Texas’ ESG divestment list.

After financial institutions withdraw from the NZBA, they are permitted to do business with Texas, Paxton said. He also urged other financial institutions to follow suit and “end ESG policies that are hostile to our critical oil and gas industries.”

Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar has expressed skepticism about companies claiming to withdraw from ESG commitments noting there is often doublespeak in their announcements, The Center Square reported.

Notably, when leaving the alliance, a Goldman Sachs spokesperson said the company was still committed to the NZBA goals and has “the capabilities to achieve our goals and to support the sustainability objectives of our clients,” ESG Today reported. The company also said it was “very focused on the increasingly elevated sustainability standards and reporting requirements imposed by regulators around the world.”

“Goldman Sachs also confirmed that its goal to align its financing activities with net zero by 2050, and its interim sector-specific targets remained in place,” ESG Today reported.

Five Goldman Sachs funds are listed in Texas’ ESG divestment list.

The Comptroller’s office remains committed to “enforcing the laws of our state as passed by the Texas Legislature,” Hegar said. “Texas tax dollars should not be invested in a manner that undermines our state’s economy or threatens key Texas industries and jobs.”

Up Next

Canadian health care continues to perform poorly compared to other countries

Don't Miss

Comparing four federal finance ministers in moments of crisis

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Four of Canada’s top banks ditch UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate alliance

National / 3 hours ago

77% of Canadians want immediate election amid Trump tariff threats: poll

conflict / 4 hours ago

Trump Fails to End Ukraine War on Day 1

Banks

Four of Canada’s top banks ditch UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate alliance

Published on January 22, 2025

Todayville

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Among the banks that have withdrawn from the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance are TD Bank, the Bank of Montreal and CIBC.

In a stunning reversal, four of Canada’s top banks have withdrawn themselves from a United Nations “net zero” alliance that supports the eventual elimination of the nation’s oil and gas industry in the name of “climate change.”

Last Friday, Toronto-Dominion Bank (TD), Bank of Montreal (BMO), National Bank of Canada and the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) said they were all withdrawing from the Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), which calls for banks to come in line with the push for “Net Zero” emissions by 2050. The NZBA is a subgroup of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ), which was founded and backed by the United Nations.

Interestingly, the GFANZ was formed in 2021, while Liberal Party leadership candidate Mark Carney was its co-chair. He resigned from his role in the alliance right before he announced he would run for Liberal leadership to replace Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last week.

The sudden decision from Canadian banks to ditch the alliance comes despite Trudeau’s government still being committed to so-called “net zero” policies and only a few days before pro-oil and gas U.S. President Donald Trump was sworn into office.

According to a statement from BMO, it is no longer a “member of the Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA),” but it is still “committed” to the idea of an eventual “net zero” world.

“We are fully committed to our climate strategy and supporting our clients as their lead partner in the transition to a net-zero world. We have robust internal capabilities to implement relevant international standards, supporting our climate strategy and meeting our regulatory requirements,” it said.

In a statement regarding its exit from the NZBA, TD Bank said that it has the “resources, relationships and capabilities to continue to advance our strategy, deliver for our shareholders and advise our clients as they adapt their businesses and seize new opportunities.”

Large U.S. banks such as Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo and Bank of America have all withdrawn from the group as well.

Since taking office in 2015, the Trudeau government has continued to push a radical environmental agenda like the agendas being pushed by the World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” and the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.” Part of this push includes the promotion of so called “Net Zero” energy by as early as 2035 nationwide.

Business

Debunking the myth of the ‘new economy’

Published on January 22, 2025

Todayville

From Resource Works

Where the money comes from isn’t hard to see – if you look at the facts

In British Columbia, the economy is sometimes discussed through the lens of a “new economy” focused on urbanization, high-tech innovation, and creative industries. However, this perspective frequently overlooks the foundational role that the province’s natural resource industries play in generating the income that fuels public services, infrastructure, and daily life.

The Economic Reality

British Columbia’s economy is highly urbanized, with 85% of the population living in urban areas as of the 2021 Census, concentrated primarily in the Lower Mainland and the Capital Regional District.
These metropolitan regions contribute significantly to economic activity, particularly in population-serving sectors like retail, healthcare, and education. However, much of the province’s income—what we call the “first dollar”—originates in the non-metropolitan resource regions.

Natural resources remain the backbone of British Columbia’s economy. Industries such as forestry, mining, energy, and agriculture generate export revenue that flows into the provincial economy, supporting urban and rural communities alike. These sectors are not only vital for direct employment but also underpin metropolitan economic activities through the export income they generate.

They also pay taxes, fees, royalties, and more to governments, thus supporting public services and programs.

Exports: The Tap Filling the Economic Bathtub

The analogy of a bathtub aptly describes the provincial economy:

Exports are the water entering the tub, representing income from goods and services sold outside the province.
Imports are the water draining out, as money leaves the province to purchase external goods and services.
The population-serving sector circulates water within the tub, but it depends entirely on the level of water maintained by exports.

In British Columbia, international exports have historically played a critical role. In 2022, the province exported $56 billion worth of goods internationally, led by forestry products, energy, and minerals. While metropolitan areas may handle the logistics and administration of these exports, the resources themselves—and the wealth they generate—are predominantly extracted and processed in rural and resource-rich regions.

Metropolitan Contributions and Limitations

Although metropolitan regions like Vancouver and Victoria are often seen as economic powerhouses, they are not self-sustaining engines of growth. These cities rely heavily on income generated by resource exports, which enable the public services and infrastructure that support urban living. Without the wealth generated in resource regions, the urban economy would struggle to maintain its standard of living.

For instance, while tech and creative industries are growing in prominence, they remain a smaller fraction of the provincial economy compared to traditional resource industries. The resource sectors accounted for nearly 9% of provincial GDP in 2022, while the tech sector contributed approximately 7%.

Moreover, resource exports are critical for maintaining a positive trade balance, ensuring that the “economic bathtub” remains full.

A Call for Balanced Economic Policy

Policymakers and urban leaders must recognize the disproportionate contribution of British Columbia’s resource regions to the provincial economy. While urban areas drive innovation and service-based activities, these rely on the income generated by resource exports. Efforts to increase taxation or regulatory burdens on resource industries risk undermining the very foundation of provincial prosperity.

Furthermore, metropolitan regions should actively support resource-based industries through partnerships, infrastructure development, and advocacy. A balanced economic strategy—rooted in both urban and resource region contributions—is essential to ensure long-term sustainability and equitable growth across British Columbia.

At least B.C. Premier David Eby has begun to promise that “a new responsible, sustainable development of natural resources will be a core focus of our government,” and has told resource leaders that “Our government will work with you to eliminate unnecessary red tape and bureaucratic processes.” Those leaders await the results.

Conclusion

British Columbia’s prosperity is deeply interconnected, with urban centres and resource regions playing complementary roles. However, the evidence is clear: the resource sectors, particularly in the northern half of the province, remain the primary engines of economic growth. Acknowledging and supporting these industries is not only fair but also critical to sustaining the provincial economy and the public services that benefit all British Columbians.