How the shire’s climate change policy could cost you

THE Bass Coast Shire Council has been warned that its new Investment Policy, around not investing in banks which engage with fossil fuel companies “may lead to reduced interest returns”.

However, despite being made aware of the risk it was planning to take with ratepayers’ money, a majority of councillors, with the exception of Cr Les Larke, voted in favour of amendments to the policy at its council meeting last Wednesday.

In line with ‘Action 35’ in its Climate Change Action Plan 2020-30, that council should “further encourage fossil fuel divestment”, councillors were being asked to allow more flexibility with where its surplus funds were being invested, increasing the variance from the “best available rate” (currently 0.3%) to 0.5%.

Effectively, if the shire invested the $35 million it expected to have on deposit at June 30, 2023 at an interest rate that was 0.2% below what it could get at one of these fossil fuel aligned banks, it would be out of pocket by $70,000.

But it’s a risk the shire is prepared to take based on its climate change stance.

Former mayor Cr Michael Whelan was unapologetic:

“A few years ago, Council declared a climate emergency and developed a comprehensive climate action plan as a result of that,” said Cr Whelan.

“One of the things that plan recognises is that climate action is a whole of organisation initiative and a whole community initiative not just the bailiwick of sustainability. If we are to be truly resilient, then we need to take a whole range of issues.

“One of the things that is important is where we invest our money. It has become clear that the big four banks are just ticket checkers for the fossil fuel industry, having invested over $57.5 billion in fossil fuel projects since 2015.

“In 2022 alone, the ANZ Bank put in $18.6 billion, Commonwealth Bank $15.8 billion, NAB $14.1 billion and Westpac $9 billion into supporting fossil fuel projects.

“Our children depend on us decarbonising our economy, getting out of fossil fuels, despite what the president COP28 may say. And we really need to wind this down quickly to 
respond quickly.”

Cr Whelan said Australia’s big four banks, in particular were “a disgrace”.

“I would hope invest to not a single dollar in their dirty projects,” he said highlighting that while Westpac, for example, offered “green” investments on the one hand, they were funding multiple fossil fuel projects on the other.

Cr Les Larke raised a pertinent question:

“Could I just clarify with the administration who our major banker is to facilitate all our operations?”

“I believe our current bank is Westpac,” said the shire’s General Manager Business Transformation Robyn Borley.

Speaking next in the debate, Cr Rochelle Halstead said that while she agreed “wholeheartedly with the intent of this decision” she did so with some trepidation that it might come back to bite council in the future.

Cr Whelan closed the debate:

“A couple of points I’d like to make – Westpac. We should be moving out of Westpac, their money stinks as far as I’m concerned. If they invest in fossil fuel projects, then they are bad news. Now the likes of the Bendigo Bank, the community banks, don’t invest in fossil fuels, the Bank of Queensland, you’ve got a whole range of banks, Sunbank (Suncorp Bank?). So, there are many options out there of banks that do not invest in fossil fuels, and we should be taking that on board.”