Decision Maker

Barclays


Does Barclays have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning BlackRock, BNPParibas , State Farm Insurance Cos., Barclays, HSBC, Banco Santander, JBS, Vanguard, Cargill, Marfrig , European Commission, United States Supreme Court, China, belgium, Denmark, neth...

Retiren la inversión que deforesta el Amazonas

(English) Desde hace tres semanas el Amazonas arde sin ningún tipo de control. Sólo en los últimos días se han registrado más de 12.500 incendios en 4 países, sin el esfuerzo necesario para apagarlos. El 80% del territorio deforestado en Brasil se dedicará a criar vacuno y a cultivar soja (soya) para pienso de los pollos, cerdos y vacas que comeremos. Toda la carne que consumimos está detrás de la pérdida del Amazonas: China, Unión Europea y Estados Unidos son los mayores importadores desde Brasil. ADM, Bunge, Cargill, Dreyfus, JBS, Marfrig, Minerva, Benavides Madeiras, Nordisk Timber, Tradelink, Usina y Temate son las principales agroempresas, productoras de soya, ganado, madera y azúcar. BlackRock, Capital Group, HSBC, JPMorgan, BNP y Banco Santander sus máximos inversores/prestamistas El 44% de las exportaciones de Brasil vienen de estos productos (soja, ternera, azúcar y madera), mayoritariamente de tierras deforestadas del Amazonas y el Cerrado. PEDIMOS A LA UNIÓN EUROPEA, CHINA Y ESTADOS UNIDOS QUE DEJEN DE IMPORTAR CARNE, SOJA Y MADERA DE TIERRAS DEFORESTADAS DE BRASIL E INCIDAN EN UN CAMBIO DE POLÍTICA AGROFORESTAL EN LA AMAZONÍA PEDIMOS A LAS ENTIDADES INVERSORAS Y PRESTATARIAS QUE RETIREN SU APOYO A PRODUCTOS Y EMPRESAS BRASILEÑAS QUE OPERAN EN TIERRAS DEFORESTADAS LO EXIGIMOS COMO CIUDADANOS/AS, CON EL PODER DE DEJAR DE CONSUMIR LA CARNE ALIMENTADA CON INCENDIOS DE BOSQUES. --- El Amazonas ha sido hasta ahora el mayor bosque tropical del planeta, dándonos el 20% del oxígeno que respiramos y albergando el 10% de la biodiversidad global. Ha sido el hogar de un millón de indígenas y aún es fundamental como sumidero de nuestro CO2 en la emergencia climática ante la que nos encontramos. En las últimas dos semanas se ha incrementado en un 80% el número de incendios en la Amazonía y en el Cerrado, sobre todo en Brasil (Rondonia y Mato Grosso), Bolivia (Chiquitanía), Perú y Paraguay. No se están poniendo los medios adecuados para apagar estos incendios en ninguno de los países. En el caso de Brasil, el 80% del territorio deforestado se dedica a soya (para cualquier pienso animal) y ternera. Si redujésemos nuestro demanda de carne, se reducirían los motivos para deforestar intencionadamente. El 23% de la economía brasileña proviene de las exportaciones, y la mayor parte de ellas son de esta soya (soja) y de ternera. Más áreas de cultivo agrícola beneficia a las exportaciones a corto plazo. La manera más sencilla de ampliar frontera agrícola es quemando los árboles, lo que aún se complica más en época seca. En el informe reciente de Amazon Watch se identifican las principales empresas brasileñas que exportan soya, carne, madera y azúcar y el apoyo financiero que recibían. Soya: China es la principal compradora de soya brasileña. Las principales empresas son ADM, Bunge, Cargill y Dreyfus, con capital estadounidense y europeo. El crédito fundamentalmente llega de BNP Paribas, JP Morgan, Barclays, Bank of America, Citigroup y Deutsche Bank. La inversión proviene de Vaguard, State Farm y BlackRock. Carne: el 41% de la ternera que comemos en Europa proviene de Brasil. La piel de vacuno brasileña se exporta fundamentalmente a Italia y Estados Unidos. JBS, Marfrig y Minerva son las principales empresas exportadoras de carne de ternera. Fundamentalmente obtienen su crédito de HSBC, Banco Santander, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley y Bank of America. Capital group, BlackRock y Fidelity financian sobre todo a JBS, de acuerdo a Amazon Watch. Madera: al menos la mitad de la madera exportada proviene de tala ilegal. Benavides Madeiras, Nordisk Timber y Tradelink son las principales exportadoras brasileñas. Las compradoras son mayoritariamente empresas europeas de distribución de madera, sobre todo de Bélgica, Holanda, y Dinamarca, seguidas por Francia, Reino Unido, Canadá y Estados Unidos. Azúcar: un producto que hoy en día está en cada alimento procesado, en cada bebida y hasta en el pan. Usina y Temate son las principales productoras brasileñas que venden a las dos principales refinerías (ASR y ED&F) con compradores tan claves como Pepsi o Coca-cola para sus bebidas azucaradas. Pidamos que se retire la inversión y la compra de estos productos que llevan la huella de la Amazonía brasileña deforestada. Como consumidores, hagamos que nuestras firmas se conviertan en nuestra voluntad por reducir la compra de carne y alimentos envasados, sabiendo que lleva la huella de la deforestación amazónica, que condena nuestro futuro y el del planeta. Más información aquí <---- @rosaenlatierra #AmazonDefenders #PrayforAmazonia #SaveAmazonRainforest

Rosa en la Tierra
134,561 supporters
Closed
Petitioning JPMorgan Chase, Bank Of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank, US Bank, PNC Bank, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, TD securities, Origin Bank, Citizens Bank, Suntrust , Compass Bank, BNP Paribas, The Bank o...

Stop The Dakota Access Pipeline By Pressuring The Investing Banks to Pull Their Money Out!

We ask that all banks and institutions that are currently providing the money to Energy Transfer Partners to make the Dakota Access Pipeline happen, IMMEDIATELY withdraw and terminate their investment and funds from this project. Complete list of banks found at www.DefundDAPL.org We ask that these banks re-invest these funds into renewable and sustainable energy research, development, and installations that do not impact the environment in destructive ways. We the people are now taking action to close our accounts, mortgages, car loans, business loans, etc, with your banks and campaigning to get others to join in this movement. At Standing Rock, we have seen those that are gathering peaceably and prayerfully being met with unprecedented violence. Unarmed people including elders and children are being maced, beaten, shot, arrested, strip-searched and left unclothed in kennels meant for animals. To us that is elder and child abuse. As spiritual people we cannot sit and watch as those who claim to be upholding the law, repeatedly violate their own man-made laws. These contemptible actions must stop along with this Nations’ addiction to oil. The path to life and a healthy future requires this addiction to end. You can make a difference if you as an individual/business have accounts with a bank that is invested in this Dakota Access Pipeline project, we ask that you close your accounts, loans, mortgages, and find a more local credit union or bank that is investing directly back into the community you are in. This pipeline will contaminate the drinking water for millions of people as well as already desecrating the native indigenous peoples' sacred burial grounds, other sacred sites and cultural ways. This project and construction breaks the treaties that the United States made with indigenous peoples in 1868. We can make a major impact in this movement by pulling our money out of banks, sending emails and letters to the owners of these banks, organizing peaceful demonstrations at these banks to make locals aware, take ads out in your local newspaper, write a press release and distribute to your local media, get on the radio, get on TV, make yard signs and install throughout your area, print flyers and distribute at large events - parked cars are very receptive to flyers :  ), the possibilities are endless.... By signing this petition, you are committing to take action to Defund DAPL. You are committing to close your accounts if you have them with any of these banks and to spread the word to whatever extreme you feel most comfortable. List of Involved Banks: Chase BankBank of AmericaWells FargoCitibankUS BankPNC BankGoldman SachsMorgan StanleyTD SecuritiesRoyal Bank of Canada...and many others. Check out the full list on our website: http://www.DefundDAPL.org

Defund DAPL
7,160 supporters
Petitioning HSBC, Barclays, Crédit Agricole

Anche io ho diritto a respirare aria pulita

Mi chiamo Julia Fish e vivo a Johannesburg in Sud Africa vicino alle più inquinanti centrali a carbone del mondo che producono energia elettrica. L'aria inquinata che ho respirato in questi anni mi ha portato a soffrire di seri problemi di respirazione e sinusiti che hanno causato una pericolosa meningite che ha messo a rischio la mia vita. Dopo mesi di ricovero in ospedale mi sento fortunata ad essere ancora viva. Tuttavia ancora oggi respiro quest'aria inquinata. Eskom è l’azienda nazionale di energia che ha costruito e amministra queste centrali tossiche. E se non le fermiamo ora, continueranno a creare e diffondere il più disastroso mostro inquinante di sempre. Eskom però può contare sull’aiuto di banche private come HSBC, Barclays e Credit Agricole - banche internazionali che stanno vendendo il mio diritto a respirare aria pulita in cambio del loro profitto. Le grandi banche sono però sensibili all’opinione pubblica e alla pressione internazionale che può venire dalle persone. Qui in Sud Africa non siamo stati in grado di obbligare questa banche a smettere di finanziare questi progetti ma se ci uniamo tutti insieme da qualsiasi parte del mondo potremo sicuramente obbligarle a fermarsi. Il Sud Africa in questo momento è un centro nevralgico di NO2 - diossido di azoto - che è prodotto da questi impianti a carbone. Il diossido di azoto è un pericolosissimo inquinante dell’aria che è in grado di causare seri problemi respiratori e danni ai polmoni oltre a causare patologie croniche alle vie respiratorie sul lungo periodo. Tutto questo mi spaventa e quello che mi spaventa ancora di più è pensare a tutti quei bambini che qui devono crescere respirando quest’aria tossica. Saranno tanti i bambini che moriranno perché l’aria che respirano è piena di tossine. Tante persone qui in Sud Africa stanno chiedendo a Eskom di convertirsi all’energia solare ed eolica che tra l’altro funzionerebbe bene in questo Paese dove sole e vento sono un'abbondante fonte energetica. Ma l’azienda continua ad ignorarci. Speriamo che con il vostro aiuto riusciremo a mettere pressione a queste grandi banche internazionali così che la smettano di finanziare l’avvelenamento dell’aria. Sappiamo che esistono modi migliori per produrre l’energia di cui abbiamo bisogno. Quando ci accorgiamo che dobbiamo sacrificare il nostro diritto a respirare per arricchire alcuni banchieri nel mondo, ci sentiamo come se le nostre vite non contassero nulla, che la nostra salute non ha alcun valore. HSBC finanzia un altro impianto a carbone, che si chiama Kusile, che presto sarà uno dei più grandi impianti a carbone nel mondo e produttore di gas killer per il nostro clima. Tutto questo non sta accadendo solo in Sud Africa ma ovunque: accade in Vietnam, in Indonesia e in Bangladesh. Tutti Paesi dove HSBC sta finanziando attività che danneggiano la salute di chi vive in quei luoghi. Tutto quello che chiedo è poter respirare l’aria senza preoccuparmi che l’aria possa uccidermi. Vi chiedo una mano per fermare le banche che si arricchiscono grazie all’inquinamento. Non c’è alcuna ragione per cui non debbano finanziare energie pulite e rinnovabili. Chiedo a HSBC e alle altre banche coinvolte di interrompere i loro finanziamenti a progetti come la centrale a carbone Kusile: finanziate il nostro futuro, usate i vostri soldi per energia pulita.  Julia Fish Fund Our Future  

Fund Our Future
5,704 supporters
Stop your transphobic voice gendering protocols.

On behalf of Barclays, let me reassure you. Barclays is firmly of the belief that no one should suffer any discrimination or unsatisfactory service as a result of being transgendered. I’d also like to thank Ms Swadling for bringing this matter to our attention. Any incident of a customer being challenged over the pitch of their voice is simply unacceptable. We have looked into this matter as a priority, and in addition to the training and events we already hold on transgender awareness, we are taking additional steps to ensure our staff are fully aware of their obligation to treat transgendered customers fairly. We are sorry that our level of service, from our telephony centre and in our branch, did not meet Ms Swadling’s expectations, and we would like to take this opportunity to offer a formal apology. In fact Barclays is proud of our support for LGBT colleagues and customers, and we have been recognised as a leading employer in this area, not least through our Spectrum diversity network. We also have a number of transgendered employees who are senior managers and leading our Spectrum network. Barclays was also the first bank to feature a transgendered colleague in our advertising, and to our knowledge we are the first to have a transgendered woman as a bank manager. We also work closely with the Gender Identity Research and Education Society to ensure we constantly strive to adopt best practice for transgendered employees and customers alike. Finally we recognise that making assumptions about a person’s voice is neither a practical nor an appropriate way to help our customers to identify themselves over the phone. That is why we are also the first bank to pioneer voice biometric technology, which will be able to recognise that you are who you say you are when you call us. This will make banking much more convenient for all our customers, removing the need for security questions, and will be available to retail customers next year. Let me finish by saying that we are determined to recognise all our customers for who they are, and our door is always open if there is more that we can learn and do. Raymond Pettitt Managing Director, Barclays Telephony

5 years ago
UK Gov:take everystep you can to ensure remittances flow through safer channels to Somalia

Thank you for inviting Barclays to respond to this survey. We welcome the opportunity to explain what is happening here and the reasons why. Firstly, the decision that has been made by Barclays has not been an easy one. From the outset our aim has always been to do the right thing given the constraints upon us. We would like to give you some further background on our decision so you can see what we have had to take into account before coming to a conclusion. As a global bank, we operate in a very different regulatory environment to money service businesses. It is well recognised in the industry as well as by regulators and law enforcement agencies that some money service businesses (including some money remitters) don’t have the necessary checks in place to spot criminal activity with the degree of confidence required by Barclays’ regulatory environment. Two recent reports highlight why it’s become even more important for us to take immediate action. These concern instances where the money service sector has been used as a conduit for financial crime, including terrorist financing. In their recently published Annual Financial Crime Report, our regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority, drew attention to the heightened money laundering risks, with the sector “being at particularly high risk of abuse by those seeking to launder money or finance terrorism, and some money service businesses have been seen to be complicit in these activities”. In addition, a report by the ‘Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea’ to the UN Security Council on 12 July 2013 highlights the financial crime risks in relation to terrorist financing. If these money service firms have their services abused, it can have significant negative consequences on society, by enabling criminals to move money around and the funding of terrorist attacks. Barclays does not want to unwittingly facilitate such transactions, given these serious risks. Additionally, if we were caught up in such transactions Barclays could be punished by our regulators and potentially fined, as we have seen with global banks receiving fines of hundreds of millions for anti-financial crime failures. The regulatory environment compels us to take reasonable steps to not knowingly or unknowingly facilitate such activities. As a global bank, we must comply with the rules and regulations in all the jurisdictions in which we operate. The risk of financial crime is a crucial regulatory concern and we take our responsibilities in relation to this very seriously. We have recently reviewed our eligibility criteria for money service businesses to take into account the above regulatory concerns. Having done that, we then assessed our UK money service business clients against our new criteria. As a result of that review, we have asked those clients who in our opinion no longer meet our new criteria to rebank, and provided them with sufficient time to do so, extending deadlines to allow this to happen where appropriate. Only a small proportion of those clients whom we have asked to rebank (4 to be precise) send money to Somalia. The vast majority do not. Although we have tried to work hard to find a resolution, given the regulatory environment, we believe that we have no choice but to exit these firms. However, to help them and the remittance industry, we have proactively engaged with the UK Government, remittance industry bodies and other stakeholders to discuss the issues around providing banking services to the remittance industry. We understand how many of you feel about this issue, and hope that this post goes some way towards explaining how important this matter is to us and how we have thought long and hard about the reasoning behind our decision. Barclays remains committed to responsibly supporting the remittance industry and we recognise the benefit that money transfer firms provide to local communities around the world. We are happy to continue to serve companies who, in our opinion, have sufficiently strong anti-financial crime controls and meet our eligibility criteria. We appreciate all your comments on this, and every one of them helps us make informed decisions for the future. We know not everyone will agree with our decision but hope you can now see why we made it. Barclays

6 years ago