After a year of campaigning, this afternoon RBC and RAN finally sat opposite the same table to talk tar sands (here’s the background for those just tuning in).
In RBC’s corner was COO Barbara Stymiest joined by Sandra Odendahl and Shari Austin. We correspond with Sandra and Shari pretty regularly. Barbara was a new contact. She’s one of nine members of RBC’s “Group Executive” responsible for setting the overall strategic direction of the bank.
Weighing in for RAN was Acting Executive Director Rebecca Tarbotton joined by Eriel Deranger and me. Our aim was to learn whether RBC is ready to begin putting its money where its mouth is on Indigenous rights, water quality and climate change by scaling back its financing in Canada’s tar sands.
The resounding conclusion? Maybe a little. Maybe. Enough to scale back the campaign? Read the play-by-play after the jump.
Indigenous rights took much of the agenda . After a December letter from CEO Gord Nixon cited “little room for agreement” on Free, Prior Informed Consent, we were pleased to see the bank reconsidering its position. We heard about a recent trip by Stymiest and Odendahl to visit with three First Nations in the tar sands region. We heard about the bank’s keen interest in promoting dialogue between industry and First Nations and government. And while the bank appeared ready to strengthen its lending standards on Indigenous rights, recognizing “Consent” continues to be a deal-breaker for RBC. Progress? Maybe a little, but not the standard already recognized by Toronto Dominion Bank–not to mention 143 countries (Canada, the US and New Zealand excepted) signed onto the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
Next on the agenda was environmental lending standards in the tar sands. On the table was draft language for a new Environmental Risk Policy. The document would replace RBC’s “outdated” policy that guides bank decisions on lending to companies operating in high-impact industries like the tar sands. The proprietary policy would be subject to internal audits and would prohibit lending to clients operating in ways “which adversely impact, in a non-reversible manner, critical natural habitats or freshwater resources.”
Good language. In fact, it’s the same language that we proposed to the bank one year ago now on the books at French bank Dexia. Asked whether the policy would change RBC’s business in the sector, Stymiest said that we “should see change over time as new credits are vetted according to the policy.” Progress? Maybe. The proposal still needs to be vetted internally with lenders, risk managers and external advisors. We’re looking forward to the details.
With virtually no time to spare, we took up climate change. The RBC team characterized measuring the “financed emissions” embedded in the bank’s lending portfolio as impractical, but assured us that the bank is committed to promoting renewable energy. Nice, but not on par with Unicredit Bank’s commitment to do just that.
So are these commitments enough to cool the campaign? Should the 150+ people planning to descend on RBC’s shareholder meeting next month bring champagne instead of chants.
We want to hear from you in the comments.
Twitter Updates
i dont mind picking up some champagne on the way to the shareholder meeting, but i am definatly NOT leaving my chants at home.
I think keeping a clear dialogue and “way-out” prior to embarassing actions is always good… holding them to account until they make solid commitments, better! Great work, did you start the conversation with “So have you seen that new Avatar movie?”… ;)
Thanks for the update Brant, and congrats on the great work! I’ve heard that more groups in the Toronto area are preparing demonstrations around RBC in advance of the upcoming AGM next month. Hopefully RBC can strengthen and finalize their policy for a celebration and not a protest.
This is very heartening news, but it doesn’t seem like time to ease the pressure just yet. If the new lending policy still needs to be vetted internally – presumably by people who are less inclined than Sandra and Shari to make decisions based on social and environmental health, then they need to perceive their continued financing of the tar sands as a palpable PR risk. Indeed now seems like time to *step up* the campaign, albeit while acknowledging the progress that has already been made.
At any rate, a sincere thanks for your great work.
BTW – When I closed my RBC account in Vancouver months back, I made sure to explain to each of the 4 bank associates I dealt with why I was taking my money elsewhere, and found that not one of them had even heard of the tarsands . They should be feeling some heat.
Progress yes, back off – NO! Progress means our campaign is working, lets keep it going.
No Green Olympics at all, stop the most destructive project on earth: Tar sands in Canada.
The super-rich oil companies extract a bit of oil out of enormous amounts of sand and even more gigantic amounts of energy and water, the devastation and pollution is unbelievable, nearly as bad as uranium and coal mining.
You have to watch it from outer space to understand the full dimensions:
http://j.mp/Watch-our-HOME#t=59m13s
Sounds like progress and good reason to step up the campaign rather than ease-off!
Glad to hear ’bout the progress. I’d say no, don’t let up. However, I would think about changes in messaging. Perhaps the rhetoric can be toned down a tad bit, but still just as visible, if you know what I mean.
You should use this time until you meet next to motivate them EVEN MORE to come to a meaningful agreement, but without burning any bridges (goes without saying).
As for ideas, I leave that to the campaigners and organizers. Keep rocking.
“Maybe” might be progress but the campaign should not end until there is at least a moratorium on tar sands expansion, preferably a decrease in production down to pre-2000 levels.
Hi! Just having executives on your side is not enough. Unfortunately people lower down in the bank’s hierarchy still hope to profit from the growing tar industry. Here in the UK the government has basically decided against drivers’ complaints, not to maintain many roads, which are made of tar-mac, and invest in rail in the next 50 years. England’s nationalised bank Northern Rock is probably going to become a mutual, owned by its workers, who will be pushing for a million and a half green jobs.