AGM season 2026: Voting intentions
Posted on April 15th, 2026
As an active steward, Border to Coast will engage with companies and exercise its voting rights at company meetings. When used together, voting and engagement can produce better stewardship outcomes.
As part of our formal engagement escalation, we publicly pre-declare how we will vote against management of investee companies during AGM season each year.
Our Responsible Investment Policy and Corporate Governance & Voting Guidelines detail our approach and role as a global asset owner representing a partnership with close to £120bn of assets.
Below, we list the company and how we will vote – or have voted – at the 2026 AGM. This page will be updated as new votes are added.
Conoco Phillips
We intend to vote against the re-election of the Chair of the Board at Conoco Phillips at this year’s AGM on 12 May on the following basis:
- The company has a net zero target by 2050 or sooner, but it does not include relevant Scope 3 emissions, and its medium and long-term targets do not include relevant Scope 3 emissions.
- The company also does not have a decarbonisation strategy that explains how it intends to meet its medium and long-term GHG reduction targets. ConocoPhillips fails to meet every CA100+ net zero benchmark indicator for decarbonisation strategy.
BP
We voted against management on four BP resolutions at this year’s AGM on Thursday 23 April.
- We opposed the re-election of the Chair of the Board as the company fails to fully meet Climate Action 100+ indicators 3 (medium-term target) and 5 (decarbonisation strategy). We have concerns about the company’s governance regarding long term risk management, shareholder rights, and transparency.
- We opposed the company’s request to be allowed to hold online only AGMs as this may limit shareholder participation and reduce board accountability and the opportunity for effective engagement.
- We opposed the revocation of resolutions 25 (2015) and 22 (2019) as we do not believe that the disclosures required by the two resolutions fully overlap with current mandatory reporting requirements, meaning that the revocation of these resolutions could lead to reduced transparency.
- We approved a shareholder proposal on disclosure of the capital expenditure approach for oil and gas projects as we believe greater transparency around the company’s capital allocation decisions would be beneficial for shareholders and enhance risk management.
Back to all News & Insights
