Today we submitted our Statement of Defence to the Dutch court in response to the climate court case Milieudefensie started against us last year. Milieudefensie has set out a series of unrealistic and unreasonable demands which they want the court to impose on ING.
As a result of these demands ING would need to stop doing business with a large number of companies and homeowners and comply with a set of rules that contradict existing legislation and do not fit with our role in the real economy.
Arnaud Cohen Stuart, head of Business Ethics at ING, said: “Quite simply – what Milieudefensie wants might sound good – but their approach will not help the world achieve its climate goals. Forcing us to move away from clients may harm the economy and won't help the transition.”
“Climate change is real and we’re confident in our climate approach. We want to help our clients finance their transition - from individual homeowners to large companies who want to become more energy efficient or protect themselves against climate risks.”
So what does Milieudefensie want and what might that mean?
In summary their demands include:
Reduce ‘on paper’ emissions that are assigned to ING by almost half - Milieudefensie claims that banks must force clients, like homeowners and companies, to reduce their emissions by specific percentages on a set timeline. If clients do not follow Milieudefensie's emission reductions, ING should stop financing them.
For companies – this would mean we can no longer provide them with loans or other banking services even though society still relies on what these companies provide. Like steel or cement for building houses.
For private individual customers – this would mean we have to stop providing mortgages for homes with lower energy labels, adversely impacting a large group of homeowners.
If we cannot offer loans to these clients anymore, they will have to find another bank to continue with their activities - so emissions in the real world won’t be lower.
Stop working with all companies that are in any way involved with new fossil fuel projects - This is a broad demand that does not consider the impact on the reliability, cost, and security of energy supplies for homes and businesses in the Netherlands and across Europe.
So why is this set of demands unrealistic and unreasonable?
As detailed in our Statement of Defence, we disagree with Milieudefensie’s suggested way of tackling climate change for three main reasons:
1. At the core, Milieudefensie’s demands won’t help the climate transition.
Forcing us to pull out of high emitting sectors on an unrealistic and imposed timeline will not help society transition to a low carbon economy in an orderly way. Instead it could negatively impact the economy and our customers. Milieudefensie’s demands won’t lead to lower emissions in real terms. Our clients’ activities will just be financed by another bank, so the emissions will likely stay the same. In other words, if we stop working with high emitting clients, ING’s loan book might look greener but the world would not be.
2. Millieudefensie’s demands are not in line with Dutch or EU banking and climate legislation.
The Netherlands and the EU have comprehensive and detailed policies and legislation in place to tackle climate change – specifically designed to balance various needs in society. This legislation deliberately does not include requirements for banks to withdraw from emission intensive sectors. These industries are working on their transitions within the boundaries set by governments and they need financing to make that change. Stepping away would be counterproductive.
3. Milieudefensie’s demands do not fit with our role as a bank in the economy.
As a global bank our role is to finance what society needs today and tomorrow. At the same time, we must remain financially sound ensuring that we do not put the bank and the financial system at risk. Companies need billions of euros to transition and become more sustainable as well as protecting themselves against climate risks. We want to provide this financing – like for renewable energy solutions, improved industrial processes and sustainable buildings. We can’t play our role effectively if we need to move away from our clients or if we’re restricted in the ways that we can help them.
Arnaud Cohen Stuart: “The transition to a low carbon economy is a massive shift that requires system thinking and collaboration. There’s no quick fix. In reality, Milieudefensie’s demands won’t help the climate.”
More information
You can see a summary of our Statement of Defence or the full Statement of Defence or visit the climate case page for more information.
Our climate action approach
Our climate approach is based on the changes needed for a low carbon future. We work with our clients on their sustainable transitions – helping them to drive down their emissions while building up the financing of new technologies and solutions needed for a low carbon economy. And because the climate transition needs to include everyone – not only companies - we’re also finding new ways to help people to play their part.
Society is transitioning to a low-carbon economy. So are our clients, and so is ING. We finance a lot of sustainable activities, but we still finance more that’s not. See how we’re progressing on our climate approach.
This website discusses one or more specific transactions and/or contains general statements about ING’s climate approach. The approach and criteria referred to on this website are intended to be applied in accordance with applicable law. Due to the fact that there may be different or even conflicting laws, the approach, criteria or the application thereof, could be different.