Singing activists disrupted NatWest's annual shareholder meeting in Edinburgh, accusing the bank of 'climate backtracking.' The meeting was temporarily suspended after protesters interrupted the chair's speech, leading to shareholder questions about the bank's climate policies.
Key points
NatWest's annual shareholder meeting was disrupted by singing activists.
Protesters accused the bank of 'climate backtracking.'
The meeting was temporarily suspended due to the disruption.
Shareholders questioned NatWest's climate policies and executive pay.
Mentioned in this story
NatWestExtinction RebellionEdinburgh
The chair of NatWest was forced to defend the bank against accusations of “climate backtracking” at a chaotic annual shareholder meeting, which was temporarily suspended owing to singing protesters.
Not long after the meeting began in Edinburgh, it was adjourned for about half an hour after a protester interrupted Rick Haythornthwaite’s opening speech.
Protesters in the audience, wearing black T-shirts emblazoned with “No more big oil” and “No bombs”, then sang a song to the tune of Frère Jacques, with a chorus of “No more bombs, no more oil”. They appear to represent the campaign group Extinction Rebellion’s XR Money Rebellion, which has targeted NatWest and other banks for financing fossil fuel projects.
When the meeting resumed, it was dominated by questions from shareholders about NatWest’s climate policies, as well as staff wages compared with bumper executive paypackets.
Recent changes to the bank’s climate policy have included dropping a commitment not to lend to any oil and gas companies that lack a credible transition plan or fail to report their overall carbon emissions.
Two people standing up with others sitting behind them
A screengrab of some of the protesters at the NatWest shareholder meeting. Photograph: X/@money_rebellion
Mara Lilley, a representative of the Church of England pension board, said the C of E board wasvoting against Haythornthwaite’s re-election because of “concerns about NatWest backtracking on its climate commitments*”.*
In response, Haythornthwaite, who began his career in energy working in exploration for BP said that, as “a geologist by background”, he was taking climate breakdown “very, very seriously as does all of this board”.
He added: “We’ve had to wrestle with the questions of how do we balance supporting our customers in their [energy] transition efforts with managing the risk of what is an increasingly complex policy environment*.*”
Haythornthwaite said NatWest retained two key goals: to halve its climate impact compared with 2019 levels (it is now at 39%) and to achieve net zero emissions from its financing by 2050. “Those commitments have not gone away.”
Q&A
What accusations did activists make against NatWest during the meeting?
Activists accused NatWest of 'climate backtracking' for its recent changes to climate policy.
Who were the protesters at the NatWest shareholder meeting?
The protesters were associated with Extinction Rebellion's XR Money Rebellion campaign group.
What specific changes to NatWest's climate policy were criticized?
Critics pointed out that NatWest dropped its commitment not to lend to oil and gas companies without credible transition plans.
How did the NatWest meeting respond to the protests?
The meeting was temporarily suspended and resumed with shareholders questioning the bank's climate policies and executive pay.
See every story in News — including breaking news and analysis.
He added that the bank, which provided £19bn in energy transition finance during the second half of 2025, was targeting a new goal of £200bn in sustainable lending by 2030.
The NatWest chair said oil and gas financing was “only” 0.6% of the bank’s total lending, and NatWest would not invest in controversial projects such as shale oil and gas oil sands, or coal gas, methane or coal liquefaction.
He described the company’s policy changes as a “slight shift” in its climate commitments, adding: “We feel that we found a pragmatic middle road.”
However, investors disagreed. Jeanne Martin, from Share Action, said: “NatWest Group plays a key role in the economy’s transition to net zero” but in February, “reduced the ambition of its fossil fuel policy and climate targets”.
Her organisation speaks on behalf of 19 institutional shareholders with $1.4tn assets. Share Action had said before the meeting that “this kind of backtracking has real consequences”.
She asked for a meeting within three months between those investors and Haythornthwaite, to which he agreed.
Haythornthwaite was re-elected as a director with backing from 92% of shareholders, the lowest approval vote among the 25 resolutions.
Martin said in response to the vote: “This is a significant level of dissent in a system where board chairs are normally waved through with overwhelming support.
“It reflects investor concern that the bank tearing up its fossil fuel policy risks accelerating exposure to physical risks like flooding and heatwaves, while storing up long-term financial instability for the future.”
Two representatives from Unite, including Michelle Smith, the union’s lead industrial organiser, asked about NatWest’s rising dividends and executive pay packets.
Smith said bank staff had “seen shareholder dividends and executive remuneration packages increase at inflation-busting levels, whilst … we have got members visiting food banks and having to make choices between eating and heating”.
Haythornthwaite replied that he was hopeful that the bank could soon strike an agreement with the union, saying: “We want to be able to give our colleagues a fair reward for their very considerable effort they put in the company and we’ve got to balance that with the long-term sustainability of the business.”
In February, NatWest reported its boss, Paul Thwaite, would receive £6.6m, the largest payout for a chief executive of the banking group since his disgraced predecessor Fred Goodwin took home £7.7m in 2006. Last year, the UK government sold its final shares in NatWest, ending 17 years of state ownership.
