Proxy Adviser ISS Recommends Defying BP Board Over "Unprecedented" Plan to Retire Climate Reporting Standards

Proxy adviser ISS urges BP shareholders to vote against board plans to retire climate disclosures as new CEO Meg O’Neill pivots back to oil.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 5, 2026, 11:15 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Reuters

The Rare Confrontation Between ISS and BP Leadership

In a significant challenge to corporate governance, the influential proxy adviser Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) has recommended that shareholders vote against the BP board’s attempt to revoke long-standing climate reporting resolutions. It is highly unusual for major advisory groups like ISS to oppose a board’s formal recommendations, particularly on issues of environmental transparency. The firm described BP’s plan to "retire" these disclosures as an unprecedented move within the British corporate landscape. This friction coincides with the first week of Meg O’Neill’s tenure as CEO, the fourth person to lead the firm since 2023, as she oversees a definitive strategic shift back toward oil and gas production.

A Pivot Away from Low-Carbon Commitments

The specific resolutions in question date back to 2015 and 2019, when they were passed with nearly 100% shareholder support to ensure company-specific transparency regarding climate impact. BP’s board now seeks to retire these commitments at the upcoming April 23 meeting, arguing that they have been superseded by newer, standardized international reporting frameworks. However, ISS countered this logic, stating that the board has not provided a sufficiently compelling case to justify the removal of the specialized disclosures. The move is widely seen as part of BP’s broader effort to simplify its operations and prioritize high-value fossil fuel projects over its previous, ill-fated expansion into renewable energy.

Contention Over Virtual-Only Shareholder Participation

Beyond climate reporting, ISS has also urged shareholders to reject a proposal that would allow BP to transition to virtual-only annual general meetings (AGMs). The board has defended the measure as a way to increase cost-effective participation and flexibility for its global investor base. Conversely, critics and advisory groups view the move, combined with the revocation of climate reporting and the exclusion of certain activist proposals, as a troubling signal regarding the company’s stance on direct shareholder engagement. ISS suggested that these collective actions could be interpreted as an attempt to limit the influence and visibility of dissenting investor voices.