Defence debanking debunked
Financing for defence companies by the UK's four largest banks – Barclays, Lloyds, NatWest and HSBC – has risen by a fifth since 2022, according to data shared with The Observer.
So what? In an age of insecurity and renewed commitment to Nato, the increase to £10.8 billion in 2024 is hardly unexpected. More surprising is how tricky it has been to get loans signed off. Banks have been caught between
- campaign groups publicly protesting such investments;
- defence companies of varying scope saying they have been unfairly "debanked"; and
- politicians clamouring for defence lending to be classified as "ethical" or "ESG" in the national interest.
Lending to whom? As BAE Systems' Roger Carr has said, it's become essential to distinguish between "highly-regulated, ethically-led and government-backed defence contractors" and "freewheeling arms dealers". But how that's done is still being figured out.
Guns out. In March, more than 100 Labour MPs and peers signed a letter urging banks and financial institutions to treat weapons manufacturers as "ethical" investments. That might be helpful from the point of view of national security and deterring Russia. But the Financial Conduct Authority said it wouldn't be necessary: "There is nothing in our rules, including those related to sustainability, that prevents investment or finance for defence companies."
Missing the point. The MPs weren't asking the financial sector to allow investments in defence. They were asking it to encourage them. But even then they were focused on the wrong solution, James Alexander from the UK Sustainable Investment and Finance Association says. "A massive problem for defence companies is the amount of time it takes to get MOD procurement. If you're an SME, you sometimes have to try and keep your company going for six years before getting a contract signed. ESG is not the problem here."
Fighting to get a loan. There has, nonetheless, been a steady stream of claims of "debanking" – a term that has gained traction since Nigel Farage settled a high-profile dispute with Coutts. One source claimed to know of a defence tech firm from outside the UK that had raised £12 million, but had to take out an account with Revolut. A survey from ADS, a trade body representing 1,500 small defence firms, found that nearly three-quarters struggled to access basic banking services. It claims that reputational concerns have been a "key driving factor" behind the trend. It may have a point. In the past year
- activists have targeted multiple branches of Barclays to protest its work for companies that produce equipment used by the IDF; and
- UK Finance has written to the government warning of the risk of harm to innocent branch staff or members of the public.
In a response earlier this year, Barclays said questions about why it "invests" in nine defence companies supplying Israel "mistakes what we do". The bank trades in shares of listed companies in response to client instruction and, while it provides financial services, Barclays says it is not making investments for itself and is not a "shareholder" or "investor".
The bank also updated its policy in 2023 to say it won't finance "companies known to trade in, or manufacture cluster munitions and their components, chemical and biological weapons, and antipersonnel land-mines".
Pushing the button. The research, collected by the anti-nuclear campaign group Don't Bank on the Bomb, found that Barclays had the largest increase (59 per cent) in loans and underwriting provided to defence companies since 2022, while HSBC's financing for defence companies decreased.
The data comes from annual reports, financial statements and company registries, and does not include all defence companies, just those with significant contracts related to nuclear weapon maintenance and production, as per DBTB's focus. These include most big names in the industry including Lockheed Martin, Rolls Royce, BAE Systems and Babcock, which, after rising 13 per cent this week, is the best performing stock on the FTSE this year.
What's more… With Nato leaders' commitment to invest 5 per cent GDP on defence by 2035, the industry has well and truly buried its "sin stock" status. Keeping it that way will require more clarity.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario