Business as a force for good

January 19, 2026

Drawing on the proposals set out in Martin Wrigley MP’s Company Directors (Duties) private members bill, this roundtable considered whether existing legal and governance structures provide directors with sufficient confidence to address material sustainability risks alongside traditional financial priorities. Participants also examined the relationship between effective stewardship, board decision-making and long-term competitiveness.

Key contributors:

  • Martin Wrigley MP
  • Eliot Whittington of the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL)
  • David Mortimer of the Chartered Governance Institute
  • Mark Babington of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC)
  • Amelia Woodley of Speedy Hire.

Summary

Participants argued that the proposed Company Directors (Duties) Bill is less about changing the purpose of business and more about providing greater clarity that directors can take long-term risks and wider stakeholder interests into account when making decisions. Discussion focused on the need to move beyond viewing ESG as a compliance exercise or moral obligation, instead recognising it as an essential component of sound risk management and value creation. The conversation also highlighted the disconnect that can exist between sustainability reporting and actual boardroom decision-making, with short-term market pressures often discouraging investment in resilience. Participants stressed that effective stewardship, clearer expectations around directors’ duties and a stronger understanding of materiality are all necessary to support more balanced, forward-looking governance. 

Recommendations

  • Clarify directors’ duties to better reflect the material financial impact of environmental and social risks on long‑term value. 
  • Reinforce the expectation that ESG considerations are part of core board decision‑making, not a delegated or discretionary activity. 
  • Promote a consistent understanding of materiality that directly links sustainability risks to fiduciary responsibility. 
  • Align stewardship expectations with governance reform, so investors support boards taking resilience‑focused, long‑term decisions.
  • Avoid framing ESG reform primarily through additional disclosure; prioritise measures that influence behaviour and judgement. 
  • Support board capability and confidence through guidance and practical examples grounded in real‑world business constraints. 
  • Encourage a shared understanding of what constitutes a well‑run company in the 2020s, balancing financial performance with environmental and social resilience.