Société Générale has accepted the mandate to structure export financing of Alstom turbines for the controversial Kaliningrad nuclear power project, with a potential export credit guarantee from the French State, via Coface. European NGOs and civil society organizations are organizing street actions in front of Société Générale branches in at least eight cities across France, as well as in Russia and Poland from June 24-30, criticizing Société Générale’s irresponsibility and demanding its immediate withdrawal from this dangerous, useless and dodgy project.
Les Amis de la Terre
When will Coface and Société Générale follow BNP & HypoVereinsbank and withdraw from Kaliningrad nuclear plant?
(Friends of the Earth France, Paris, 26 April 2013) Following in the footsteps of BNP Paribas, the German HypoVereinsbank recently announced that it will not finance the Kaliningrad nuclear power plant in Russia. Today, to mark the anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, Friends of the Earth France launches the mobilization against this project in France with an online petition (1), supported by Greenpeace, the Nuclear Exit (“Sortir du nucléaire”) network, ATTAC and BankTrack, demanding that Coface and Société Générale follow their example immediately. In addition, 94 organisations from 22 countries have signed an open letter (2) in support of this goal, while the Russian NGO Ecodefense, currently undergoing an inspection by the Russian authorities, demonstrates in front of the offices of Société Générale’s subsidiary in Kaliningrad (3).
NGOs warn banks not to further finance PNG LNG project
(Banktrack, Nijegen, 18 April 2013) A coalition of seven NGOs (BankTrack, Jubilee Australia, Pacific Environment, Act Now! PNG, Mineral Policy Institute, International Accountability Project and Friends of the Earth France) today sent a letter to seventeen banks that are already involved in the financing of the highly controversial PNG LNG project to ask them not to extend any further financing to this project. Despite a first warning letter more than three years ago, 17 banks decided to finance the PNG LNG project, the biggest project ever in the history of Papua New Guinea. Because of huge cost overruns (20% from US$14bn to US$19bn), due in part to the failure to anticipate local conflict, ExxonMobil is looking for a US$1.5bn additional debt facility to complete the project from the very same banks. The export credit agencies involved in this financing were: Export Import Bank of China, Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Australia, Japan Bank for International Cooperation, Nippon Export and Investment Insurance, SACE S.p.A. and the Export-Import Bank of the United States.
Asia Pulp & Paper (APP) default on its obligations to Export Credit Agencies
(June 11, 2012) Press release launched on the day that more than 30 European non governmental organisations (NGOs) delivered a letter calling on governments not to fund a new pulp mill proposed by Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), one of the world’s most controversial pulp and paper companies. The plant is planned to be build in Sumatra, Indonesia where APP is estimated to have already pulped more than two million hectares of natural rainforests.
Financing Nuclear Times
This newspaper style publication outlines the history of Export Credit Agencies’ support for the nuclear industry and concludes by detailing the destructive projects still in the pipeline.
Articles include; Crippling losses and corruption: nuclear exports Canadian-style; Gift RAPP: Canada’s support for nuclear power and proliferation in India and Pakistan; Nuclear – a publicly subsidised love affair; and German nuclear exports 2009 – 2011:Back to square one!
Member State compliance with Article 21 of the Lisbon Treaty
On 6 August 2012, ECA Watch and the European Coalition for Corporate Justice sent a letter to the President of the Commission Jose Manuel Barroso requesting a meeting to discuss how the Commission intends to monitor Member State compliance with Article 21 of the Lisbon Treaty and how NGOs can be involved in the elaboration of an appropriate compliance framework
Letter: ECA Watch to Head of Export Credits Division, OECD
(8 November 2011) This letter from ECA Watch outlines the network’s position the OECD Draft Sector Understanding on Renewable Energy, Climate Change Mitigation and Water Projects.
Giving human rights credit: EU countries agree to toughen export loan scrutiny
(June 29, 2011) A press release from ECA-Wach, Amnesty International and Eurodad. It welcomes EU permanent representatives’ endorsement of the European Parliament’s proposal to make national export credit agencies (ECAs) more accountable for the support they give companies doing business around the world. The three organisations believe this move will increase transparency and human rights compliance and hope that this will trigger more ambitious reforms in EU capitals, leading to a general reform in global ECA standards.
European Parliament demands that Export Credit Agencies open up
(April 6, 2011) This press release by ECA-Watch outlines the importance of the European Parliament’s adoption of a proposal to regulate Export Credit Agencies (ECAs). This move will make ECAs more transparent on where their funds come from and go to, as well as how they charge for social and environmental risks. Furthermore, the Parliament requires ECAs to comply with EU human rights objectives in their activities, and to phase out the subsidising of fossil fuel projects in line with commitments adopted by the G20 in 2009.
Export Credit Agencies and Climate Change: a briefing for Cancun
(December 2, 2010) After the collapse of UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) talks in Copenhagen in December 2009, the future financial architecture for funding climate change mitigation and adaptation continues to be fiercely debated. At the 2010 climate summit in Cancun, Mexico, the issue will again be on the table for negotiation.
In Cancun, the role of public and private finance will be considered, and thus the role of export credit agencies (ECAs). ECAs sit at the nexus of public and private finance, and may become increasingly important. Many ECAs support billions of dollars worth of exports to fossil-fuel projects which emit greenhouse gases. ECA financing for fossil fuels eclipses ECA financing for climate-friendly technologies.
This briefing outlines the negative impact of ECA fossil fuel financing. The paper also raises the question of whether ECAs have a role to play in contributing to “climate finance.”
