Students’ Union UCL has resumed banking with Barclays almost as soon as a policy prohibiting the move expired.
The policy, which lapsed in October 2023, argued that the Union should not bank with Barclays because of its complicity in the climate crisis via its vast investments in fossil fuels.
But Finance Committee minutes seen by The Cheese Grater reveal the Union had begun moving some of its cash back to Barclays as early as November 2023 after concerns were raised about the financial stability of Metro Bank.
It admitted: “There would be some reputational risks associated with students and stakeholders viewing the use of Barclays as not being consistent with the Union’s sustainability policy.”
However, the Committee also noted the “importance of looking after the financial sustainability of the Union first and then looking at the ethical sustainability of the providers.”
Panic on the High Street
The Union began withdrawing cash from its Metro Bank account after a panic caused its share price to collapse in September 2023.
According to minutes, the move back to Barclays was intended as an “emergency interim measure” while private auditors hired by the Union explored other options.
But they concluded by April that sticking with Barclays for operational banking was the “most appropriate course of action” to protect the Union’s financial interests.
Auditors considered a total of 45 banks, only 11 of which were accepting current account applications from charities like the Union. Of those, just eight were deemed to have met its credit rating and sustainability criteria.
It is unclear how the auditors landed on Barclays of the eight options considered safe or why the Union acted on the advice despite its constitutional commitment to sustainability and ethical practices.
The British bank was named the largest funder of oil and gas in Europe for eight years in a row, having invested a total of $235bn (£187bn) in the likes of Shell and ExxonMobil between 2016 and 2023.
It was additionally accused of “bankrolling genocide” by pro-Palestine activists who revealed the bank held £2bn in shares and provided a further £6.1bn in loans to nine defence companies whose weapons are currently being used in Palestine.
Last October, pro-Palestine student activists stormed a UCL careers fair to protest the University’s ties to Barclays and forced the bank to pack up early.
Deafening silence
While a “reactive comms plan” was suggested to explain why the Union was still banking with Barclays, no statement has been made on the decision by press time.
Asked whether she thinks the Union acted dishonestly in failing to properly communicate the decision to students, Union President Goksu Danaci said: “I don’t think I am trying to hide anything and I don’t think that’s the Union’s position either.”
She said the Union recently met the environmental consultancy firm MotherTree on the recommendation of the Sustainability Officer to explore alternative banking options.
But the President has refused to say whether she thinks the new arrangements were consistent with the Union’s constitutional commitment to sustainability and ethical practices.
A Union spokesperson said: “We are strongly committed to ethical operations and investments, leading the way in the sector on sustainability for Students’ Unions including leading a national programme of work to decarbonise students’ union supply chains.
“Whilst the majority of students’ union funds are not held with Barclays, we are committed to find a suitable replacement for our current account and money deposit arrangements.
“Our Treasury Policy commits us to review our banking institutions and in January 2025 a review will be undertaken by MotherTree, a specialist organisation whose mission is to empower businesses and their employees to save carbon, money, and the planet.
“The report with their recommendations will be presented to the Finance Committee in March 2025.”
The Union’s continued silence on its decision to resume banking with Barclays demonstrates even its out-of-touch leadership knows it to be utterly indefensible in the court of public opinion.
So why are they still doing it?
The Union has defended the move by saying it has a responsibility to make sure its finances are in a safe pair of hands.
The problem is that these hands have got blood on them.
Let’s not forget that Barclays is actively fueling the climate crisis and global conflict via its vast investments in oil and gas and the arms industry.
The President’s refusal to say whether this is consistent with the Union’s constitutional commitment to sustainability and ethical practices tells us everything we need to know.
It is hypocritical for the Union to continue doing business with Barclays Bank and the sabbatical leadership knows it as well as we do.
This article appeared in CG89
