Spirax Group PLC

Lobbying Governance & Transparency

Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:

Lobbying Governance
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
None Spirax Group PLC does not disclose any specific governance processes for managing lobbying activities. The evidence focuses entirely on climate strategy oversight, noting that “The One Planet strategy has central strategic oversight and sponsorship by the Group Executive Committee and day-to-day oversight by the Group Sustainability Management Committee (GSMC)” and that “The Board received an update at every Board meeting and the Group Executive Committee received monthly updates on progress,” but there is no mention of how the company oversees or aligns its direct or indirect lobbying efforts. We found no evidence of roles, policies, or procedures related to lobbying governance or any description of how policy engagement is managed, despite affirming a public commitment “to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.”

View Sources

E
Lobbying Transparency
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
Limited Spirax Group PLC offers only a limited window into its climate-related lobbying. It indicates that its engagement is centred on the EU Horizon 2020 SPIRE6 “SYMBIOPTIMA” project and describes this as work on energy-efficiency and industrial-integration policy, but it does not name any specific regulation, directive, or legislative proposal it sought to influence. The company does reveal one clear lobbying route—acting as “Project Co-ordinator for the consortium, liaising directly with the EC on behalf of the consortium”—which shows direct contact with the European Commission, yet it gives no further examples of letters, consultations, or coalition activity. Likewise, the objective it describes—promoting “greater industrial process integration and the sharing/recycling of waste energy streams”—remains broad and aspirational, with no concrete policy amendments, targets, or timelines attached. As a result, while the disclosure confirms some engagement and identifies a policymaking target, the lack of detail on the exact policies involved, additional engagement channels, and the specific outcomes sought keeps the overall transparency at a limited level.

D