Under the guise of Environmental, Social and Governance criteria, U.K. enterprises are subtly shifting their decision-making, blending fiscal concerns with societal and environmental agendas. In the Telegraph, Emma Webb and Thomas Harris caution that the economic ‘unpersoning’ of critical voices could soon quash dissent. Here’s an excerpt:
‘Environmental, Social and Governance’ (ESG) is fast becoming the most pernicious phrase you’ve never heard of. The underlying idea is that investors shouldn’t just care about the bottom line, but about corporate governance, social impact and environmental damage. It sounds harmless, but has become the latest vector for the woke subversion of our institutions.
ESG has now become embedded in kitemarking systems that rank companies according to their policies on issues like Net Zero and ‘Equality, Diversity and Inclusion’ (EDI). ESG scores can affect how much investment they receive, and so carry financial clout. Organisations from Coutts to the Church of England’s investment bodies have signed up to the UN Principles for Responsible Investment, which incorporate ESG considerations into investment practices.
It would be dangerously mistaken to imagine these are distant corporate ‘#BeKind’ policies that don’t affect us. The threat these practices pose to the market and individual freedoms have been compared to cartels and the Chinese Communist Party’s social credit system, in which those with a score too low cannot get a mortgage or travel on high-speed trains.
The Free Speech Union (FSU) reports that one in 20 of its cases are directly related to EDI training. For many, these cases have involved the loss of their livelihoods, and for others disruption to their financial lives. When you see de-banking banks talking about ‘purpose’ and ‘values’, or HR departments dragging an employee through the wringer for ‘wrongspeak’, if you follow the trail far enough, you will likely reach ESG.
This situation may soon get worse. It was reported last week that the organisation B Lab U.K. is lobbying for a change in the law to further embed these practices in British companies. The so-called ‘Better Business Act’ would amend section 172 of the Companies Act 2006 to give directors a duty to consider “people and the planet”, not just profit. As we’ve seen with ESG policies, what this means in practice is the importation of woke ideology.
Worth reading in full.
Stop Press: Watch Thomas Harris, co-author of the above piece, discussing the Free Speech Union’s report on B Corps with Nigel Farage on GB News.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Oh I do enjoy it when these murderous scum are unequivocally caught bang to rights and their plots unravel faster than an Andrex toilet roll carried away by a cute labrador. Very satisfying.
The big plus to being caught lying so egregiously is that a few more sheep will have their eyes opened and not just concerning the Voice statement.
Most on here will be well aware of the adage:
How do you know when a politician is lying?
Their lips are moving.
This brings the lies to life. Marvellous. Sadly, the lies can only be seen as cover for something of seriously dangerous intent, something intended to cause great harm to the Australian people.
Given that prison Island Australia appears to be the Davos Deviants testing ground where next for a similar ploy?
The UK, that’s why Sunak has been placed as PM
Is a Prine Minister misleading Parliament as serious in Australia as it is in GB? Should Albanese resign in disgrace??
…it’s only considered misleading if it goes against the approved narrative.
The most pernicious phrases in the English language: “Approved narrative” and “Official narrative”.
Not misleading …. blatantly LYING.
Meanwhile, in neighbouring NZ, take a moment to check out this lying, scummy barsteward PM. Seriously, has nobody confronted him with proof of his own BS yet??
https://twitter.com/_aussie17/status/1698284723918012632
Downright bloody evil.
Bit more evidence of other human pieces of excrement. Of course people were ”forced”. In what realm would anyone other than the rich have the luxury of choosing to have a job or not? Especially if you have dependents. But that’s what they were being told to do through blatant blackmail; ”You either take the jab or we sack you”. Or completely ostracizing people from society… Certainly qualifies as ”forced” in my book.
https://twitter.com/wolsned/status/1698366258029150564
Apologies for this Mogs – what an utter coven of trash Next Tuesday’s in this video.
Oops and another one caught out with internet receipts. Although we are spoilt for choice with clips of Dr Evil lying;
https://twitter.com/mazemoore/status/1698373433963303182
The lying gits all have selective memory issues
I don’t – and won’t – forget and I certainly will always remember what ‘they’ did and said.
This is partially a good news story. Thanks for covering it. The no Campaign has asked for more detail from the start. In response to this many on the yes side quoted the longer document and more detailed Uluru statement as containing all the detail they were asking for. Then the Yes side turned and said the more detailed document was a conspiracy. The labor government has also pulled modest funding for the building of boarding schools for indigenous students whilst spending hundreds of millions on this “gesture” of a referendum. Its quite likely this proposal will further disempower most australians while pouring money into the activist minority and providing no tangible benefits for the most disadvantaged indigenous australians.
This reminded me of the LIES Heath told the country in 1970 when we were taken into the EEC, with no referendum and the LIES Wilson told the country when he finally held one two years’ later:
It was just a free trade area; there would be no loss of Sovereignty. Meanwhile the Mandarin at the Foreign Office had written a briefing note stating that it was intended to morph the EEC into a Federal Europe and by the time the British people woke up to what was being done, it would be too late to escape.
Fortunately, it wasn’t.
Yes, good points.
I have made the point for many years that Heath should have been hung for his treason.