Currys, the UK’s largest electricals retailer, has scrapped its board-level ESG committee, effectively ending formal oversight of environmental, social and governance issues at the highest level of the company.
The decision comes as regulation and investor expectations on sustainability tighten across the UK and Europe, raising questions about the message it sends on corporate governance priorities.
Although Currys has stressed that it remains committed to its ESG objectives, critics argue the move is poorly timed. Under new frameworks such as the UK’s Sustainability Disclosure Requirements and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, boards are under mounting pressure to demonstrate clear accountability for ESG.
Ciarán Bollard, CEO of The Corporate Governance Institute, warned that dissolving the committee could undermine confidence in Currys’ approach: “Statements of this kind are becoming more common. We hear companies say: ‘we are stepping back from formal ESG structures, but our commitment remains.’ In the United States, this has often been driven by political hostility towards ESG. The UK, however, is a very different environment.”
He added that while governance models vary, the absence of a dedicated board-level committee risks diluting focus: “A board-level committee ensures focus, visibility and responsibility. Without that, ESG risks becoming fragmented and treated as a peripheral issue rather than embedded in strategy. That can create challenges for compliance, investor relations and reputation over time.”
The closure of Currys’ ESG committee highlights a tension for UK boards: how best to integrate ESG into governance structures at a time of rising regulatory demands.
Bollard said the decision risks sending “the wrong signal” to stakeholders: “In the UK, stepping back from formal ESG oversight as standards rise is likely to raise more questions than it answers. The lesson for boards is clear: commitments to ESG are judged not just by what is said, but by the governance structures that underpin them.”
While no single model of ESG oversight is mandatory, the development is being seen as a broader test case for UK corporate governance. Businesses face the dual challenge of demonstrating long-term resilience while navigating new reporting regimes.
For investors and regulators alike, governance structures remain a critical marker of whether a company’s ESG promises carry real weight.
