Transcript
Check against delivery
Introduction
I would like to begin by acknowledging the Gadigal People of the Eora Nation, the Traditional Custodians of the land we are meeting on today, and to acknowledge their descendants and their continued connection to this country. I’d like to pay my respects to their elders past and present. I acknowledge their connection to the land, sea and community. I would also like to acknowledge and pay my respects to First Nations people who are attending today’s event.
It’s a pleasure to be here at the Sustainability Reporting Summit. And I’m grateful for the opportunity to deliver this address to the professionals in this room who are at the forefront of an increasingly complex and fast-moving regulatory landscape.
Evidence-based sustainability reporting is not just an exercise in compliance. It can catalyse business innovation, resilience, and long-term value.
Whether you work in finance, legal, risk, governance, public affairs, marketing, or investment, you have central role in achieving these goals.
Your work not only ensures compliance but also strengthens corporate credibility, builds stakeholder trust, and supports Australia’s transition to a more sustainable economy.
This is my second year attending this summit and much has changed in sustainability reporting since I was here last year.
In the past 12 months, we have seen genuine progress towards embedding sustainability reporting as a fundamental part of doing business in Australia and in our region.
This includes the passing of mandatory climate-related financial disclosure legislation; and the introduction of the Australian sustainability reporting and assurance standards.
Mandatory climate reporting for Australian businesses is now in place both here and in key international markets .
This regulatory transition creates challenges for businesses in the near term. But it also has the potential to promote a level playing field in the long term – through greater transparency, accountability and merit-based competition.
While I recognise the regulatory challenges in this time of transition, I would also like to reassure you all that the ACCC’s expectations for businesses remain unchanged.
Fostering competition, protecting and promoting the welfare of consumers, and making markets work for all Australians, has always been the driving purpose of the ACCC. This applies equally to markets in which sustainability claims are a key factor in consumer choice as it does to other markets. We recognise that effectively protecting consumers and promoting competition based on sustainability credentials can be a key driver of green innovation and an efficient green transition.
Since 2022, the ACCC has prioritised consumer, fair trading and competition concerns in relation to environmental claims and sustainability.
In the past 12 months, we have maintained our proportionate compliance and enforcement approach to markets transitioning to greater sustainability.
And in the year ahead, our priority and focus on environmental claims and sustainability will remain firmly in place.
The ACCC is not an environmental regulator, but we do play a key regulatory role in this space.
Our aims include:
- Ensuring consumers aren’t misled by greenwashing – and ensuring businesses who have genuinely invested in sustainability aren’t put at a disadvantage by competitors making misleading green claims.
- Ensuring businesses comply with Australia’s competition and consumer law – and, where appropriate, enforcing breaches of the law.
- Ensuring businesses understand Australia’s competition and consumer law – and know that the law need not be a barrier to genuinely investing in, and communicating about, sustainability.
Today, I will discuss three areas of our work in achieving these aims, with a particular focus on how these areas relate to sustainability reporting.
First, I will discuss sustainability collaborations under Australia’s competition law – including case studies and opportunities for collaboration on sustainability reporting.
Second, I will discuss greenwashing and greenhushing – including tips for avoiding legal pitfalls when making environmental claims.
Finally, I will discuss some of our recent compliance and enforcement cases. And I will discuss the various ways we work to improve compliance and drive change.
Sustainability collaborations and competition law
To start, I would like to discuss sustainability collaborations, and the obligations of businesses seeking to collaborate under competition law.
Normally, collaboration between competitors risks breaching Australian competition laws.
However, since the commencement of Competition and Consumer Act (then the Trade Practices Act) in 1974, the ACCC has had the power to exempt cooperation between competitors from competition laws where we are satisfied there is a net public benefit.
Public benefits are broadly defined and can include environmental benefits. And in recent years, as action on environmental sustainability has become more urgent, we have more frequently applied our exemption power to enable collaborations that seek to bring about sustainability outcomes that would be much more difficult to achieve by a single entity working alone.
There are many types of sustainability collaborations that will not raise competition concerns. And it is critical that these legitimate collaborations are not hampered by a fear of breaching competition law or confusion about how competition law operates.
If legitimate sustainability collaborations are not occurring, private sector resources – which often represent the majority of capital and expertise – may be unnecessarily prevented from contributing to Australia’s green transition. This delays environmental progress and increases the burden on governments and taxpayers.
Where cooperation or collaboration poses competition concerns, the ACCC’s authorisation regime allows us to consider and weigh up public benefits including environmental benefits when assessing whether overall the conduct will result in a net public benefit. If this is the case, ACCC authorisation can provide legal protection to businesses who wish to work together to achieve better outcomes.
In 2024, around one third of the authorisation applications that the ACCC released decisions on included sustainability-related public benefit claims.
Businesses across Australia are increasingly working together to achieve sustainability outcomes — whether to reduce emissions, improve recycling and waste management, or develop more sustainable supply chains.
Examples of sustainability collaborations that have been authorised by the ACCC include industry stewardship schemes, joint buying of renewable energy, a voluntary code to address working conditions in supply chains, and collaboration to manage disruptions to recycling systems.
There is also an opportunity for greater collaboration between businesses to support their sustainability reporting goals.
The scale and complexity of sustainability reporting requirements for businesses in Australia today is significant. And there are many ways businesses can collaborate on sustainability reporting without risking a breach of competition law.
Given the need for consistent, accurate and decision-useful data – and the need to generate this data as efficiently as possible – cross-sector collaborations on sustainability reporting would ordinarily be considered likely to deliver a net public benefit.
Collaborating on sustainability reporting may improve the accuracy and comparability of data. For example, if businesses share best practices for scenario analysis, data gathering, or reporting methodologies – but then act on those best practices independently – there may be a net public benefit.
Collaborating on sustainability reporting may also improve efficiency. For example, if businesses collaborate to gather data from suppliers to reduce duplication of effort – but then act on that data independently – there may be a net public benefit.
The ACCC considers that, in most cases, sustainability reporting collaborations present low competition risk, so long as the collaboration doesn’t impact competition, for example:
- The collaboration doesn’t make it more challenging for new businesses to start competing or existing businesses to compete effectively or expand.
- Commercially sensitive information, particularly price-sensitive information, is not shared between collaborating businesses.
- Collaborating businesses continue to make decisions independently, rather than in consultation, coordination, or cooperation with competitors
- Businesses are free to innovate, buy from or sell to whoever they choose
Take the following case study as an example.
Large food processing businesses are required to report Scope 3 (in other words, supply chain) emissions, and need to collect data from their farmer suppliers.
To improve the accuracy and comparability of data collected, these businesses might collaborate to develop best practice guidance for their suppliers to enable emissions calculation.
Such an initiative is unlikely to raise competition concerns provided the appropriate safeguards are in place, including:
- Making it clear that suppliers are free to use other reporting methods if preferred and collaborating businesses will not stop dealing with a supplier if they do not use the ‘best practice’ methodology.
- Implementing measures to ensure no commercially sensitive information is exchanged and independent decision-making is maintained.
The ACCC published this and other case studies, along with detailed information on navigating sustainability collaborations, in our final Sustainability Collaborations Guide which was released late last year.
This guide aims to help businesses understand how competition law applies to sustainability initiatives, including collaborations on sustainability reporting.
It also provides information on what exemptions are available for business collaborations that do risk breaching competition law but deliver a net public benefit.
In addition to this guide, the ACCC has an open-door policy and welcomes contact from businesses considering collaborations. While we cannot provide legal advice, we can and do help businesses to understand the available competition exemption processes and the authorisation process.
By carefully structuring sustainability collaborations, businesses can contribute to a more transparent, responsible, and competitive market. And can meet their regulatory and reporting obligations effectively.
Our message to business is clear: competition law need not be a barrier for those considering sustainability collaborations that deliver a net public benefit.
Environmental claims, business confidence and consumer trust
It is not news to anyone in this room that a growing number of Australian consumers want to make sustainable purchasing decisions.
Green consumer demand drives market innovation and can accelerate the broader transition to a low-carbon economy.
Consumers rely on claims made by businesses to guide their purchasing decisions, and it is critical that these claims are credible, accurate and can be understood by the ordinary and reasonable consumer.
It’s important to remember that obligations for businesses making environmental and sustainability claims under the Australian Consumer Law will continue to apply to claims you make to consumers outside of your sustainability reports.
Again, in a rapidly changing regulatory landscape, this is one area that has remained constant.
Under the ACL, the ACCC assesses environmental claims through the lens of the reasonable consumer — what an ordinary person would understand from the claim.
Businesses making marketing claims to consumers must take care, especially when drawing on language from a mandatory or voluntary sustainability report that is intended for an expert audience such as investors. Such claims, reused for marketing purposes, must be appropriately tailored to the reasonable consumer.
While an expert audience may be fluent in the language of sustainability reporting –for example the difference between Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions – we cannot assume that the average consumer will understand the same technical nuances. While this is just one example, highlighting what the ACL standard requires in the context of emissions claims will be an increasing area of focus for the ACCC.
When businesses provide accurate, substantiated information about their environmental impact, they help consumers make informed decisions, drive competition, and encourage meaningful investments in sustainability.
False or misleading environmental claims, on the other hand, undermine these efforts by distorting purchasing decisions and eroding consumer trust. False claims also undermine the competitive process and ultimately weaken the incentive for real environmental progress.
When businesses invest in sustainable innovation, they should be able to differentiate themselves in the market and receive the benefits of that investment. If misleading claims are allowed to proliferate, businesses that make real sustainability commitments are put at an unfair disadvantage.
Put simply, consumers want reliable information about sustainability, and markets in which sustainability is important in consumer choice function best when businesses are empowered to compete on their environmental credentials.
Considering this, the ACCC has made tackling greenwashing a priority. And we continue to work with the likes of ASIC and the Clean Energy Regulator to facilitate information sharing that can help us in addressing greenwashing conduct.
To date, our investigations into greenwashing have uncovered conduct across a range of industries where misleading green claims have a direct impact on consumer choice.
In addition, our consultations and work with the business community have also uncovered concerns around greenhushing.
We have heard that in some cases, businesses are choosing not to communicate their environmental and sustainability initiatives, due to fear of regulator scrutiny.
Just as greenwashing is a detriment to the proper functioning of markets, greenhushing also has the potential to stymie sustainability-based competition, and in doing so, slow the nation’s progress towards more sustainable environmental outcomes.
I want to be clear today that the ACCC considers legitimate environmental claims to be enormously beneficial to consumers, to the effective functioning of markets, and to the green transition. Those that have made the effort to differentiate their products or services on sustainability factors should not hesitate to inform their customers and potential customers about this.
Making environmental claims: a guide for business
Our work to address greenwashing conduct is balanced with the need to ensure that businesses can make truthful, evidence-based environmental claims with confidence.
To support this, in 2023 the ACCC consulted with stakeholders across consumer, business and environmental organisations to develop a practical framework for businesses making environmental claims.
The Making environmental claims: a guide for business acknowledges that environmental claims are often technical and can be difficult for businesses to communicate clearly.
But by following the eight core principles of the guide, businesses can more confidently make meaningful claims that consumers can understand and trust.
These core principles are:
- Make accurate and truthful claims
- Have evidence to back up your claims
- Don’t hide or omit important information
- Explain any conditions or qualifications on your claims
- Avoid broad and unqualified claims
- Use clear and easy-to-understand language
- Ensure visual elements do not create a misleading impression
- Be direct and open about your sustainability transition
I’d like to take the opportunity today to draw your attention to four of these principles.
1. Make accurate and truthful claims
Sustainability claims to consumers should provide honest, factual assessments of a business’s environmental performance. Any claims about sustainability initiatives — such as emissions reductions, renewable energy use, or waste management — must be correct and not exaggerated.
For example, if a business claims to consumers that it has reduced its carbon emissions by 30 per cent, it must ensure that this figure is calculated using a recognised methodology and does not omit emissions from key parts of the supply chain or product lifecycle.
2. Have evidence to back up your claims
Marketing claims to consumers should be supported by verifiable data, for example a company stating that it is “100 per cent carbon neutral” should be able to provide data, including emissions calculations and details of offsets, to support such a claim.
Providing access to the detailed methodologies and data sources strengthens credibility and builds trust.
If you cannot produce clear evidence, you should reconsider whether the claim is appropriate.
3. Don’t hide or omit important information
Consumer-facing sustainability claims should provide a balanced view, covering both areas of progress and areas needing improvement.
For example, consumers should be able to distinguish between the actions that businesses have made to reduce their emissions (or the emissions of a product or service) as opposed to offsetting them. If this distinction is not clear, it creates the potential for two competing businesses, products or services to trade on the same playing field despite having very different inherent environmental impacts.
For example, if your business has only abated a portion of its emission through direct action and is claiming to be “carbon neutral” or “net zero” through the use of offsets, be up front about this.
4. Be direct and open about your sustainability transition
If a business makes a claim to consumers relating to future matters, for example claiming that a business or product will be “net zero by 2030”, that business must have a reasonable basis for making that representation and be able to justify that claim. If circumstances subsequently change and a business is no longer likely to meet that target, it must be open, honest and specific about the reason for the change.
I have shared a breadth of detail on environmental and sustainability claims today, but the takeaway is simple: if you make environmental claims, you must consider what an ordinary and reasonable consumer would understand from those claims and you must be able to back them up.
Compliance and enforcement to drive market change
As I mentioned at the outset, the ACCC has made environmental and sustainability issues a key compliance and enforcement priority since 2022. And our focus in this space will remain firmly in place for 2025-26.
We have made significant progress in tackling greenwashing and continue to investigate and take enforcement action against greenwashing.
Noting the need to allow businesses to promote their legitimate environmental claims, the ACCC takes a proportionate, harm-based approach to enforcement. Put simply, we prioritise taking court action against breaches of the law that cause significant harm to consumers, small businesses or competition.
This includes targeting greenwashing that has a significant impact on consumer’s purchasing decisions, such as in food, cosmetics, fashion and waste management.
Last year, for example, we commenced proceedings against Clorox Australia, the manufacturer of GLAD-branded kitchen and garbage bags. We allege that Clorox made false or misleading representations that certain kitchen and garbage bags were partly made of recycled ‘ocean plastic’.
We are particularly concerned that, by its alleged conduct, Clorox deprived consumers of the opportunity to make informed purchasing decisions and may have put other competitor businesses at an unfair disadvantage.
In determining whether to take enforcement action against environmental claims we consider whether genuine efforts and appropriate steps were taken by a business to verify the accuracy of any information that they relied on.
We also recognise the significance of business size and associated resources – while larger companies would be expected to have robust verification processes, small businesses will be assessed with their resource limits in mind.
While we will always promote our enforcement work and outcomes it’s important to look beyond isolated legal outcomes. Our ultimate objective is market-wide behavioural change and promoting business compliance with Australia’s competition and consumer law across all sectors. Litigation is just one tool we use to prevent harmful conduct and to ensure that businesses which are already engaging in such conduct take action to correct their behaviour.
To achieve these aims we also encourage proactive compliance through guidance, education and awareness campaigns. And we make use of administrative resolutions and early investigative tools – such as substantiation notices – to prevent or stop misconduct and restore the competitive process.
In addition to these actions, we also have a key role in monitoring new sustainability-driven markets as they emerge — such as those for electric vehicles, green hydrogen, and circular economy initiatives — to ensure they remain competitive and are not subject to anti-competitive consolidation. Market integrity, even in emerging markets, is critical to ensuring these industries develop in ways that are both pro-competition and pro-consumer.
Conclusion
Today I have discussed the continuing work of the ACCC in addressing competition and consumer issues in relation to environment and sustainability, including:
- Supporting sustainability collaborations that achieve a net public benefit.
- Ensuring consumers can make informed choices when they want to buy sustainable products and services – and ensuring businesses who have genuinely invested in sustainability aren’t put at a disadvantage by competitors making misleading green claims.
- Ensuring businesses comply with Australia’s competition and consumer law – and, where appropriate, taking enforcement action; and
- Ensuring businesses understand Australia’s competition and consumer law – and know that the law need not be a barrier to genuinely investing in, and communicating about, sustainability.
To conclude, I would like to reflect again on the increasingly complex and fast-moving regulatory landscape in sustainability reporting. And to reinforce that, despite this, the ACCC’s expectations of business have not changed since I appeared at this summit last year.
In the past 12 months we have finalised both our sustainability collaborations guide and environmental claims guide for businesses.
And in the year ahead we will continue to work with businesses to ensure they not only comply with Australia’s competition and consumer laws but that they understand that these laws need not be a barrier to genuinely investing in, and communicating about, sustainability.
Thank you.