The Minerals Council of Australia received positive reviews, having moved to "close the gaps" in its energy policy identified by BHP Billiton Group, which is reviewing its membership with the industry lobbyist.
S&P Global Market Intelligence confirmed that BHP was consulted on the council's policy change, as was another member, Rio Tinto, which faces a shareholder resolution at its April 11 annual general meeting in London requesting it review the climate policies of industry groups to which it belongs.
BHP's Minerals Australia operations president, Mike Henry, is the Minerals Council of Australia's, or MCA's, vice president, while Rio Tinto's iron ore chief executive, Chris Salisbury, is also on the council's board of directors.
BHP published a report Dec. 19, 2017, that set out seven material differences in position identified across the MCA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the World Coal Association.
The report noted that the MCA has sometimes argued that energy policy should prioritize reliability and affordability over other policy goals, whereas BHP believes that climate policy and energy policy are linked.
The MCA's new policy states that while reliable and affordable energy is central to Australia's economy, sustained global action is required to reduce the risks of human-induced climate change.
It also supports a measured transition to a low-emissions global economy, which necessitates Australia's participation in global agreements such as the Paris Agreement on climate change with greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments from major emitting nations, the statement said.
The revised policy also advocates for "substantial" investment in a broad range of low-emissions technologies and adaptation measures.
Another bone of contention is that while the MCA has expressed support for "technology neutrality" in energy policy, it has also publicly called for policy changes that are, as far as BHP is concerned, more "technology-specific" and "interventionist" in relation to high-efficiency, low-emissions coal.
BHP, by contrast, believes that energy markets should be both fuel and technology neutral and should not artificially favor one type of technology over another.
While a BHP spokesman would not go so far as to say the MCA's new policy ticked the required boxes for the miner, which is the middle of a 12-month review of its membership with the lobbyist that wraps up in December, his response was positive when commenting to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
"BHP notes the publication of the MCA's energy and climate change policy position, which incorporates a technology-neutral approach as well as acknowledging the need to achieve affordable and reliable energy while ensuring that Australia is able to meet its emission reduction commitments," the spokesman said.
A Rio Tinto spokesman told The Australian Financial Review that the lobby group's changes were "a good development."
"We've been engaged in the process and it affirms a number of positions on climate change that we consider important," the company said, according to the March 14 report.
BHP CEO Andrew Mackenzie told ABC Radio National Breakfast on Feb. 22 that the company and the MCA "don't have to agree on everything," but added that the diversified miner did want to close gaps identified in the policies advocated by the two organizations.
"We're very clear that we will point out where we're not entirely aligned with any industry association, not just the MCA; but we're pretty close, and we believe that the MCA does a lot of good," he said.
"We want to remain a member. We've had some pressure from NGOs and some investors to look at those differences. I believe we're a long way down the track to reconcile those."
