Photo: NYTimes.com

Enbridge, the company responsible for the worst oil spill in Michigan state history, is now enlisting Wall St. to help foot the bill for cleaning up its mess — which means the banks backing the $203 million deal have some explaining to do.

Last July, an aging pipeline operated by Enbridge Energy Partners ruptured near Marshall Mich., spilling nearly 900,000 gallons of tar sands crude.  The toxic ooze ultimately coated 37 miles of the Kalamazoo River watershed, forcing local residents from their homes and sickening hundreds of others. Enbridge is facing Federal charges of criminal negligence and the area remains closed even to property owners due to ongoing contamination.

This was not an isolated incident. Enbridge was also responsible for two other major spills in Illinois and Canada’s North West Territories within the same year.

On Monday, Enbridge announced that it is offering investors a $203 million equity stake in its U.S. pipelines business, in part to pay off its debts. According to regulatory filings, Bank of America will lead the deal, joined by 10 other banks, including RBC. All of which begs the question:

Are bank commitments just words on paper?

The deal raises big questions about whether these banks are taking their environmental commitments seriously. Just for example, take BofA and RBC. Like many banks, both tout recently minted environmental policies that supposedly apply special “due dilligence” procedures to ensure that all clients meet the banks’ environmental standards. Bank of America claims they “consider environmental sensitivity an important component of our credit, investment, underwriting and payment procedures.”

Last year, we applauded RBC for developing a new policy including new underwriting safeguards aimed specifically at protecting water quality. Both banks also maintain that their policies require clients to comply with environmental laws and regulations.

A bright light on Enbridge

So then, what about Enbridge? Beyond the debacle unfolding in Michigan, the company has a long record of safety violations. Last August, federal officials announced more than $2.4 million in civil fines against the company for maintenance and safety problems in Minnesota, Louisiana and Oklahoma dating back to 2006. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, “two Enbridge employees were killed when repairs to an Enbridge pipeline on their Lakehead system in Clearbrook, Minn. caused leaking crude oil to ignite.” The investigation “found Enbridge failed to safely and adequately perform maintenance and repair activities, clear the designated work area from possible sources of ignition, and hire properly trained and qualified workers.”

If RBC, BofA and other banks involved in this deal want to maintain a shred of credibility on “corporate social responsibility,” they have some explaining to do.

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer at the BMO Shareholder meeting in Vancouver

As Canadians were casting their votes in the Federal Election, another important decision was playing out in the board rooms of Canada’s top banks: what to do with Enbridge, sponsor of the Northern Gateway Pipeline.

Over the last several weeks, RAN  teamed up with First Nations of the Yinka Dene Alliance to put senior banking executives on notice as they gathered for this season’s round of annual shareholder meetings. The message? First Nations are rights-holders, not stakeholders.

Here’s how they reacted (each bank’s name is followed by the total amount of funds raised for Enbridge since 2007):

• Bank of Montreal: $286 million

Geraldine Thomas-Flurer, Ann Ketlo and Jasmine Thomas of the Yinka Dene Alliance pressed CEO Bill Downe to dump Enbridge and update long-outdated policies on human rights and the environment. Downe invited them to a meeting to discuss community concerns. More than 50 supporters rallied outside.

• Toronto Dominion: $5 billion

CEO Edmond Clark accepted the invitation of Chief Jackie Thomas of Saik’uz First Nation to visit her community. He also pledged to to uphold the bank’s recognition of Indigenous Rights based on Free Prior Informed Consent. (See this video of the exchange, starts at 64:32.)

• Scotiabank: $10 billion (!)
  

No comment from CEO Rick Waugh after a moving speech by Jasmine Thomas, a youth representing the Yinka Dene Alliance. (Listen to her presentation at this link, starts at 1:58:20). Scotia’s written response to the Alliance was equally vague.

• CIBC: $220 million

Jasmine Thomas and Supporters at the CIBC AGM in Winnipeg

Unlike the other banks, CIBC hasn’t responded to a letter from Chiefs of the Yinka Dene Member Nations raising concerns about Enbridge. This despite (or maybe because of) Enbridge CEO Patrick Daniel’s position on the bank’s Board. After Jasmine’s remarks, Board Chair Charles Sirois also failed to say anything of substance (catch the meeting here).

RBC has also been a big fundraiser for Enbridge (as in $1.5 billion raised since 2007), but didn’t get a visit from the Yinka Dene Alliance or RAN. We opted out this year as a sign of good faith in RBC’s new policy announced in December. The policy ostensibly requires the bank to consider whether clients obtain free, prior, informed consent (FPIC) of Indigenous communities impacted by client activities. How this policy will apply to Enbridge remains to be seen.

Learn more about why FPIC is important here.

Learn more about the Yinka Dene Alliance here.

This week, HSBC became the second international bank in as many months to take a step away from financing in the Tar Sands.

The bank hinted in press reports last year that it was reviewing its tar sands business. Now the London-based bank has come through. In a post to its website, the bank quietly revised its “Energy Sector Policy” to clarify that:

HSBC has policy restrictions where customers are involved in the principal processes of mining, extraction and upgrading. We undertake a balanced analysis of positive and negative impacts to understand whether customers operate in accordance with good practice, focusing on factual data and trends where available. Specifically, we analyse: GHG intensity; water usage; land and tailings pond reclamation; the grievance process in place for local communities; and the extent to which a customer discloses standards and performance.

For the bank we ranked 13th among tar sands financiers last year, it ain’t perfect. The new policy lacks any timelines, targets, or definitions. And the devil’s always in those details.

You have to wonder, for instance, about that “GHG intensity” commitment. Last year the banking giant underwrote $625 million in bonds for TransCanada. TransCanada is now facing a slew of lawsuits and regulatory hurdles over it’s proposed “Keystone XL” tar sands pipeline to Texas. In a request to delay approval of the pipeline, the EPA issued concerns that the product it would carry is  82% more GHG-intensive than conventional crude.

The “local communities” commitment also raises questions. HSBC  raised $100 million in bonds for Enbridge last year. Enbridge is the company working with Chinese oil companies to push the “Northern Gateway” tar sands pipeline through the heart of the Great Bear Rainforest to a tanker port in Northern British Columbia. More than 60 First Nation communities have declared their opposition to the project, calling it a violation of their rights and the integrity of their traditional territories.

Pure greenwash? Only time will tell. And HSBC’s dealings (or not) with Enbridge and TransCanada will be early indicators. Meantime, at the very least, the new HSBC policy is a welcome sign that banks are beginning to recognize that tar sands is a risky business.

For those keeping score, international banks that have developed sector-specific policies that cover tar sands are (in chronological order):

• Dexia – November, ’08
• Rabobank – April, ’10
• RBC – December, ’10
• HSBC – January ’11

Clearly, it means a significant about-face on tar sands for one of the world’s biggest banks. Before today, RBC trailed its peers on basic issues like Indigenous rights, water quality, and the environment. A review of the Bank’s 2009 annual report shows strong philanthropy and energy-saving initiatives across the bank, but relatively few screens for lending and other core financial services. Despite being one of the world’s biggest financiers of the tar sands, RBC’s business in the sector escaped any systematic environmental or social review. During a speech to shareholders in early 2009, CEO Gord Nixon claimed that concerns about tar sands concerns were “not a bank issue.”

What a difference a year makes. In a post to its website, RBC announced its first ever “Policy on Environmental & Social Risk Management for Capital Markets.” The policy guides the bank in assessing the environmental and social impact of its clients and deciding what to do about them. While the announcement doesn’t go into details, Rainforest Action Network (RAN) got a peek at the language in the new policy last month.

The policy breaks significant new ground on Indigenous rights. For clients with operations within Indigenous territories, the bank will document the status of consultation with those groups. That’s not especially new. In fact many banks have incorporated the World Bank standards of “consultation, leading to broad community support” into their lending policies. Where RBC raises the bar is in documenting whether clients have “policies and processes consistent with the standard of “Free, Prior and Informed Consent.”

That “consent” clause—commonly referred to as FPIC (pronounced “eff pick”)—was taken from the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was endorsed by the US government just last week and by the Canadian government last month. No other bank has yet issued such an explicit expectation of its clients regarding Indigenous rights. RBC also extends this policy to its entire capital markets business — not just a handful of its biggest loans, as is the standard established by the Equator Principles.

Policies are one thing, but results for communities facing off against RBC’s clients are quite another. The first test of RBC’s new policy will happen in the heart of the Great Bear Rainforest in British Columbia, where Enbridge is proposing a 727 mile long pipeline to carry more than half a million barrels of tar sands oil per day to a tanker port in Kitimat. Along the way, 61 First Nations are (strongly) withholding consent for the project due to failed consultation over its substantial social and environmental impacts to traditional territories.

Enbridge will likely go to the bond market to finance the $5.5 billion project. If RBC steps in to underwrite that bond, the bank’s policy will have meant little to the communities which it purports to honor. If RBC opts out, it will be a new day in the banking world. Rumor has it that the World Bank will be adopting similar “consent” language in its revised IFC Performance Standards expected to be released next year. RBC’s handling of this new commitment will be a bellwether for the private banking sector’s willingness to implement this emerging international standard.

Is RBC up to the challenge?

Let us know what you think in the comments section below.

A light at the end of the tunnel?Photo:  . SantiMB . via Flickr

The tar sands tide may finally be turning at Canada’s biggest bank. RBC is among the largest financiers of Canada’s Tar Sands but so far lacks policies adopted by other banks that seek to limit harm to Indigenous rights, water quality and climate.

That may be changing. Last week, representatives from RBC showed us a summary of the new draft Environmental Risk policy that it hopes will fill the gap. It’s too early to draw conclusions– the early draft has yet to be ratified by the bank’s Senior Management–but here’s our initial take on where we see progress relative to other banks, and where we still see distance.

Bottom line, we think bank is moving in the right direction on Indigenous rights and the environment but falls well short of establishing a significantly new standard for responsible banking. On a scale of 1 (worthless) to 10 (perfect), we gave the draft a 5. Here’s why:

On Indigenous rights, the policy acknowledges “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) as an international standard established by the UN, but requires it from clients only where FPIC is national law.  Elsewhere (including in Canada’s tar sands), the bank relies on the weaker World Bank standard of “free, prior, informed consultation” and meaningful accommodation. Essentially, RBC is proposing the same “recognize” language on FPIC that TD adopted in 2007, though RBC claims its application will be more robust.

We’ve been asking RBC’s to require evidence of consent from its clients no matter where they operate, especially in Canada’s tar sands where recent studies show that Indigneous communities are facing elevated rates of cancer. RBC maintains that demonstrating consent is impractical given the inconsistent interpretation of “consent”, the lack of a legal framework for establishing “consent” in Canada and overlapping and unresolved land claims and interests. We disagree. Our view is that consent is really just the product of consultation that takes “no” for an answer. It’s a hard pill for industry to swallow, but it’s the right thing to do.

On land and water, the bank singles out clients operating in “environmentally sensitive areas” which it defines as tropical forests, UNESCO world heritage sites, critical habitat for species at risk and High Conservation Value Forests. The policy would require an assessment of whether clients “prevent or mitigate” irreversible adverse impacts to these areas, but stops short of imposing clear penalties if they don’t.

We’ve been asking RBC to phase out financing to companies that can’t do business without wrecking the environment. Despite the bank’s assurances that these new guidelines will help weed out bad apples, we remain unconvinced. We like to see the bank defining “environmentally sensitive areas” but the policy lacks the teeth to avoid doing them harm.

Finally, we’ve been asking RBC to meet Unicredit’s commitment to measure and reduce its “financed emissions” of CO2 by reigning in financing to tar sands operators and other large CO2 emitters. They offered to encourage clients to disclose emissions under the Carbon Disclosure Project, but won’t cut clients that don’t. Again, good sentiment, but ultimately lacking teeth.

We want to see the policy improve but really it’s the practice that counts. And there’s no shortage of test cases in the queue. Analysts expect more than $100 billion to flow into tar sands developments within the next decade. We’re keeping an eye on two: the Enbridge Northern Gateway Pipeline strongly opposed by a number of well organized First Nations, and the Total Joslyn North Mine which threatens the Athabasca watershed with yet another toxic tailings pond. Both companies will likely come knocking at RBC for financial backing for these projects. How will RBC respond?

But enough pontificating from us. Let’s hear from you! One way or another, this policy will impact how the banks relate to the growing controversy over tar sands. How should we respond? Please give us your questions and ideas in the comments.

Rally at the RBS Shareholder Meeting. Credit Ric James

We’ve been going after the Royal Bank of Canada for bankrolling the tar sands for some time now. Today, we went after the other Royal Bank–the Royal Bank of Scotland–with our friends across the pond. RBS ranks 7th globally among banks backing tar sands operators, but first in the UK where taxpayers now own more than 80% of the bank.  Hundreds converged on the Bank’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders and more than 15 bank branches across the UK.

Tomorrow RAN’s own Eriel Deranger meets with RBS Chairman Sir Phillip Hampton (more on that here). Will he pull the plug on companies destroying water and habitat and recognize the basic rights for Indigenous communities like other leading banks have done? We’re hoping he can out-do the “maybe” we heardfrom COO Barbara Stymiest in February.

World Development Movement has a great set of pictures from the demo today in Edinburgh. So does Ric James. Also, check out press coverage from the  Caledonia Mercury, The Independent, Politics.co.uk, The Scotsman and a mention over at the BBC and the Financial Times.

Indigenous Activist Protests RBC Waterloo Branch

An activist was arrested this afternoon at the Waterloo Branch of RBC Bank. Mark Corbiere was charged with mischief for hanging a banner reading “Boycott RBC” and “Stop the Tar Sands” from the roof of the branch, located in uptown Waterloo.

The protest was one of eight “Fossil Fools Day” protests at RBC branches across Canada. For the last five years, activists around the world have adopted April Fools Day as a day of pranks and protest against fossil fuels and climate change. According to Bloomberg, RBC is a top arranger of financing to companies operating in the tar sands.

Those present report that Corbiere was joined by 10 supporters chanting and holding banners in front of the bank branch during the protest. CTV cameras were on scene to catch the action. After an hour of negotiations, police removed Corbiere from the roof and confiscated his banner.

In the spirit of Fossil Fools day, 13 Cities in Canada have taken action and pulled creative pranks and tricks on tar sands supporters.

8 communities in Canada: London, Toronto, Waterloo, Peterborough, New Westminster (BC), Duncan (BC), and Victoria all targeted RBC as the top financier in dirty tar sands projects. In Waterloo, one indigenous activist was arrested after a banner drop at a local branch of Royal Bank of Canada.

photo: Tristan Glenn

In Montreal, 70 people staged a bike bloc protest shutting down the roads in and out of Montreal’s oil refining sector

with clean, green people power.  A banner was hung in front of the Enbridge Trailbreaker Pipeline stating “Changeon le System, Pas le Climat. Trailbreaker=Tar Sands” where cyclists blockaded the road to draw attention to the downstream, destructive effects of the Athabasca Tar Sands.  “The east end of Montreal is a seldom seen and discussed region, but it is the largest urban oil refining center in Canada,” says Cameron Fenton, a member of Climate Justice Montreal.  ”It is a vast wasteland of oil, gas and chemical storage tanks, threatening the health of local residents and all Montrealers. If completed, the Trailbreaker would bring the direct effects of the Tar Sands right here.”

In Edmonton and Calgary, local residents delivered “awards” in the shape of Black and Gold ducks to Premier Ed Stelmach and Environment Minister Jim Prentice respectively.  In Halifax, local youth called out Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty in front of CBC radio for failing to respect the rights of first nations communities affected by tar sands development, and suspending the popular ecoEnergy retrofit program yesterday.  “Harper doesn’t grasp the science [of climate change] let alone the moral issues,” says Emily Rideout, student at Dalhousie University.  “I’d like to see Canada adopt a science-based target, pull out of the tar sands – or at least put a moratorium on development.  Instead, we’re cutting eco-energy programs and funding.”

“Fossil Fools Day is an international day of action to hold dirty politicians and industries accountable for expanding a fossil fuel industry that is fast destroying our planet and our communities,” said Fenton. “In Canada, the biggest Fossil Fools are tar sands developers, investors and political supporters. It’s time they stop the foolery, stop the tar sands, and start building the green economy we want to leave for the next generation.” The group is calling for a global response to ensure that we respect Aboriginal title and peoples and avoid catastrophic climate change.

“Tar sands projects are destroying our forests, our water systems, and are endangering people in Canada,” says Skye Augustine, student at the University of Victoria. “As a

member of the G8 and the G20, we have the resources to look for alternatives and create a clean, green energy economy that protects people and the planet.”

Worldwide, Fossil Fools Day is promoting strong, just climate legislation, corporate responsibility and a clean renewable energy future.  “It is time that Canada cleans up its dirty energy addiction,” said Kimia Ghomeshi, National G20 and Climate Organizer for the Canadian Youth Climate Coalition.  ”People in Canada are ready for change. We need to stop providing subsidies to dirty fossil fuel industries, make substantial investments into the renewable energy sector, and provide a just transition for workers in the tar sands. This is what real climate justice looks like.”

In the lead up to the G8 and G20 meetings taking place in Canada in June 2010, climate justice activists are raising the profile of the tar sands industry in Canada as the key reason the Canadian government is refusing to do its fair share to set deep and binding greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, and tarnishing Canada’s international reputation as a result. For details of days of action leading up to the arrival of the G20 in Toronto, visit http://g20.torontomobilize.org

For photos, visit http://www.flickr.com/photos/climatejusticecanada/

For nomination and action videos, visit www.youtube.com/canadaclimatejustice

For more information on Fossil Fools Day actions, visit http://canadaclimatejustice.wordpress.com/

Other cities across Canada supported the First Nations voices inside the AGM as well with solidarity actions from (click on a city for pictures) London, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton, Victoria and more. Check out photos from those and our events in Toronto.

And see some preliminary media coverage from the Wall Street Journal and Yahoo.

See beautiful photos from Allan Lissner here.

Since 2007 RBC has backed more than $16.7 billion (USD) in loans to companies operating in the tar sands—more than any other bank. Called, ‘the most destructive project on Earth,’ Alberta’s tar sands projects will eventually transform a Boreal forest the size of England into an industrial sacrifice zone complete with lakes full of toxic waste and man-made volcanoes spewing out clouds of global warming emissions.

Outside the shareholder meeting school children, bank customers of every age, First Nations community representatives joined Rainforest Action Network, Indigenous Environmental Network, No One Is Illegal, and Council of Canadians made their outrage at RBC’s investments heard – to the thumping beats of street Samba band, the crowd shouted “Cultural Genocide: who do we thank? Dirty investments from Royal Bank!”

Inside the shareholder meeting, Chief Al Lameman of Beaver Lake First Nation, Alberta,Vice Chief Terry Teegee of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council of BC, Hereditary Chief Warner Naziel of the Wet’suwe’ten First Nation of BC, and Gitz Crazyboy of Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation addressed RBC CEO Gordon Nixon directly about the way tar sands extraction projects have jeopardized their health and their rights.

Downstream communities have experienced polluted water, water reductions in rivers and aquifers, declines in wildlife populations such as moose and muskrat, and significant declines in fish populations. Tar sands has all but destroyed the traditional livelihood of First Nations in the northern Athabasca watershed.

RBC is clearly feeling the public pressure over their tar sands financing. They spent half their shareholder meeting addressing the issue. Recently, the bank convened a high-level meeting with more than a dozen international banks for a “day of learning” about the reputational risks associated with the tar sands. In addition, according to information the bank provided to RAN during a February meeting in San Francisco, RBC is currently evaluating new lending criteria that would apply to the oil and gas sector, in particular to the tar sands. However, the bank has been reticent to include Free, Prior and Informed Consent in its policy, which would ensure that First Nations communities are respected in lending practices.

“RBC’s significant financial relationship with companies pursuing tar sands development activities within our traditional territory and without consent warrants close attention,” said Chief Al Lameman of Beaver Lake First Nation. “RBC should update their policies to include a recognition of Free, Prior and Informed consent for Indigenous communities; this globally recognized concept was adopted by TD Bank Financial Group in 2007 and is endorsed by Indigenous communities across the political spectrum.”

activists disrupt the RBC shareholder meeting inside

Internationally, tar sands financing is gaining tremendous negative attention. An increasingly vocal group of shareholders and environmentalists turned last month’s BP, Shell and Royal Bank of Scotland annual meetings into a referendum on the oil extraction projects.

Today’s marches, rallies, and actions were a triumphant roar of grassroots power from across the spectrum. The day concluded with an apt chant to RBC Headquarters, foreshadowing the growing flame of tar sands resistance across Canada, “Native communities under attack! We won’t stop until you act!”

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.

RAN Toronto led organizing and strategy trainings in places like Lindsay, London, Kingston, with other cities like Barrie, Montreal, and Ottawa also getting organized. Why?

Because right now energy in Canada is exploding around not just the Tar Sands, but by confronting those who invest and support the most destructive project on earth.

The trainings had upwards of 40 participants, and evolved into planning sessions about groups of people coming to Toronto to let RBC shareholders know that the bank’s continued investments in the Tar Sands and disregard for Free Prior and Informed Consent of First Nations communities is unacceptable.

The invitation will soon be public to join community members and activists in Toronto on March 3rd, to participate in a series of actions and large rally at the AGM. Stay tuned.

• JP Morgan Chase’s CEO Jamie Dimon received a bonus of over $16 million ;
• General Mills Inc. chairman and CEO Ken Powell received $13.4 million in compensation, up 105 percent from $6.5 million in fiscal 2008;
• and, Royal Bank of Canada’s (RBC) CEO Gord Nixon was paid C$10.4 million in 2009

From investments in mountaintop removal coal mining and coal-fired powerplants if you’re Chase’s Jamie Dimon and financing of the horrific Alberta tar sands if you’re RBC’s Gord Nixon to supporting Indonesia’s rampant rainforest destruction for palm oil if you’re General Mill’s Ken Powell, profiting from environmental destruction is alive and well.

While it is no surprise that big businesses and big banks are raking in billions even as the unemployment rate hangs around 10%, I can’t help but be a touched shocked at the flagrant arrogance of these CEOs. Even as many of us dream of a new set of values and a new model for our economy and our society, business success is still measured by the old paradigm of continuous growth and maximized return on investment. You grow and you get rich or you die.

But it doesn’t have to be that way. As explained by Judy Wicks, an international leader in the local living economies movement:

“Over the last ten to fifteen years, the socially responsible business (SRB) movement has made great strides in raising consciousness about the responsibility of business to serve the common good, rather than simply increasing profits for the benefit of stockholders. The triple bottom line of people, planet, and profit has become a new measurement of performance for a growing number of companies that consider the needs of all stakeholders – employees, community, consumers, and the natural environment, as well as stockholders – when making business decisions.”

Until our economy puts a proper value on clean air, clean water and a stable climate as well as fair wages and safe working conditions we will continue to see CEOs profiting at the expense of people and the planet.

Can you imagine the day that bonuses are tied to the emissions a CEO helps prevent, for the acres they help save or the solar panels, wind turbines and energy efficient buildings they finance and build? I can.

RBC’s invitation-only meeting clearly aims to develop begin developing a coordinated response among banks to the growing controversy over tar sands financing. We got a peek at a draft agenda featuring Deputy Ministers from Alberta’s Environment and Energy Ministries, tar sands developers, selected environmental groups and at least one “First Nation representative”.

While we didn’t get an invitation to the meeting, volunteers are planning to make our presence known by distributing a special message to bankers in attendance.

We don’t know for sure which banks will show, but we’re expecting most of the 26 ranked in our earlier post on international banks backing the tar sands.

We’re happy to see RBC starting an important conversation in the banking industry, but actions speak louder than words. These banks should stop bankrolling dirty oil and shift those funds into clean energy.

Progress or PR? You decide! Tell us what you think in the comments.

Illustration by Stefan Lorant

As an ode to the  “rank ‘em and spank ‘em” strategy coined by our outgoing Executive Director Mike Brune, we proudly present the following roster of international banks backing expansion in the tar sands.

The table below is based on credit extended underwritten by each bank to companies operating in the tar sands since 2007 according to Bloomberg. Restrictions at Bloomberg now prevent us from publishing deal-by-deal details to the web, but are available upon request if you leave your email in the comments.

Each of these banks received letters from RAN, IEN and BankTrack late last year requesting information about how they are addressing the damage caused by tar sands development. Responses (or lack thereof) will help us identify which banks are serious about responsible banking, and which may need more convincing. Responses received to date are also linked in the table after the jump.

UPDATE: There’s been some questions about how these numbers are derived.  We have answers, following the table.

*Totals are based on underwriting league tables reported by Bloomberg. Totals are derived from loans to companies with significant operations in the tar sands. Specifically the companies listed below. Totals may not reflect actual lending. Totals represent the full value of loans where the bank acted as lead book-runner (also called managing underwriter, lead manager, etc…) . Where the bank was one of multiple lead book-runners, value is awarded pro-rata.  Here’s the details from Bloomberg (look under “fixed income eligibility criteria”).

Athabasca Oil Sands Corp
Baytex Energy Trust
Bonavista Energy Trust
BP plc
Bronco Energy Ltd
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
Canadian Oil Sands Trust
CanWest Petroleum Corp
Cenovus Energy Inc
Chevron Corp
China National Petroleum Corp
Connacher Oil & Gas Ltd
ConocoPhillips
Devon Energy Corp
Enbridge Inc
EnCana Corp
Enerplus Resources Fund
Exxon Mobil Corp
Harvest Energy Trust
Husky Energy Inc
Imperial Oil Ltd
Inter Pipeline Fund
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners LP
Koch Resources LLC
Korea National Oil Corp
Marathon Oil Corp
MEG Energy Corp
Mocal Energy Ltd
Murphy Oil Corp
Nexen Inc
Nippon Oil Corp
Occidental Petroleum Corp
Oilsands Quest Inc
OPTI Canada Inc
Paramount Resources Ltd
Pembina Pipeline Income Fund
Pengrowth Energy Trust
Penn West Energy Trust
Petrobank Energy & Resources Ltd
Petro-Canada
Royal Dutch Shell plc
Sinopec Group
StatoilHydro ASA
Suncor Energy Inc
Syncrude Canada Ltd
Total SA
TransCanada Corp
UTS Energy Corp

It isn’t often that Rainforest Action Network heads to Davos for the opening of the World Economic Forum (WEF). But that’s just what our tar sands campaigner, Brant Olson, is doing. Why? Because as world leaders gather at Davos today to discuss the year’s economic fortunes, one financial institution, the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), will be singled out for their outstanding contributions to increasing climate change.

In a ceremony held concurrently to the World Economic Forum, RBC was awarded the Public Eye Global Award presented by the Berne Declaration and Greenpeace. As a result of our increasingly successful efforts to highlight RBC’s role in financing tar sands extraction projects, RBC was named the year’s most environmentally and socially irresponsible company.

RAN’s Brant Olson is accepting the award for RBC as the bank’s representatives declined to attend the ceremony. As Brant said in a press release earlier today:

“Global banks can no longer ignore the impact their financing has on the climate, people and the future of this planet. The Public Eye Award demonstrates the increasing global concern over the billions of dollars of financing flowing into destructive tar sands projects, which Royal Bank of Canada is playing a leading role in. The world is watching RBC.”

RBC is the leading financier of companies extracting oil from the Alberta tar sands. Since 2007, RBC has backed $14.3 billion (USD) in credit to companies operating in the tar sands, and earned more than $84 million (USD) in underwriting fees. As a result, RBC has enabled the production of the world’s dirtiest oil. Oil extraction from the tar sands generates three times the CO2 emissions as conventionally extracted oil, which will soon make Canada the biggest contributor to global warming.

The Global Public Eye Award is essentially a shame-on-you-award given to the nastiest corporate players of the year. The Public Eye Awards are a critical counterpoint to the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos. The Public Eye Awards are held in Davos, Switzerland, on the opening day of the World Economic Forum (WEF). At this counter-event to the WEF, the organizers of The Berne Declaration and Greenpeace Switzerland remind companies of their duty as truthful corporate citizens. Awards are given to multinational companies that have excelled in irresponsible social and environmental behavior. The Public Eye Global Award included nominees from three continents, but this year RBC took the prize for. RBC declined to attend the event.

Mining oil from tar sands requires churning up huge tracts of ancient boreal forest and polluting so much clean water with poisonous chemicals that the resulting waste ponds can be seen from outer space. The health impacts to Alberta’s First Nation communities are severe, with cancer rates up in some communities as much as 400 times its usual frequency. In addition, communities living near oil refineries face increased air and water pollution from tar sands oil, which contains 11 times more sulfur and nickel and

But first a note to set the record straight. RBC Spokeswoman Katherine Gay claims in the Macleans article that our research into RBC financing activity in the tar sands is “broken and distorted”, citing criticism from unnamed NGOs. Unless she considers Bloomberg to be a buch of crackpots, she has some explaining to do. Our deal-by-deal breakdown of loans reported by Bloomberg shows RBC to have issued served as lead arranger  for $14.3 billion (USD) in credit to companies operating in the tar sands since 2007 and earned more than $84 million (USD) in debt and equity underwriting fees (see updated details on these numbers here). Gay claims RBC has “less than $2 billion” invested in the tar sands. We’re still waiting on the math.

Now for a bit of background. With help from activists across Canada, RAN has been crashing the tar sands party at Canada’s biggest bank for the last year and a half. We leafleted, we made signs, we staged die-ins and we even appealed to the CEO’s wife with our “Please Help Us Mrs. Nixon” stunt. For most of that time, RBC gave us the cold shoulder. Then last month things changed.  We sent a letter to CEO Gord Nixon offering to “turn the page in the New Year” in exchange for RBC updating its human rights and the environmental standards. A quick reply from Nixon dismissed action on human rights but offered that “we may indeed be able to have a productive discussion” on new environmental standards for its lending in the tar sands.

Today we confirmed a meeting with the Bank’s COO Barbara Stymiest in late February. If basic issues like Indigenous rights stay off the table, we don’t anticipate any breakthroughs. But since she does have the power to make big changes at the bank we offered a “no surprises” agreement in return for the face-time.  We won’t be pulling any punches, but we also won’t be showing up to the bank’s branches and speaking events unannounced. At least not for the next few weeks.

Meantime, we’re eager to hear reactions to the article from all sides in the comments.

On Tuesday, RAN activists disrupted a speech by Gordon Nixon, president of RBC at Ryerson University. Nixon was speaking as part of a business conference on Canadian Manufacturing. RAN activists interrupted the speech four times with banners and comments, as well as once during the question and answer period.

During the event, Nixon admitted that tar sands projects were the largest polluters in Canada, though declined to take responsibility for financing the projects. Instead, Nixon maintained RBC was not an oil company.

“Nixon admits that tar sands projects are the largest polluters in Canada, yet he seemingly fails to understand that these projects cannot go forward without financing. Pretty disturbing given he is the president of Canada’s largest bank” noted RAN activist Maryam Adrangi.

Tar sands oil has serious environmental, climate and human health impacts. Described by the United Nations Environment Program as one of the world’s top “environmental hot spots,” global warming pollution from tar sands production is three times that of conventional crude oil. Unconventional tar sands oil is derived from lower-grade, difficult and expensive-to-access raw materials, which have enormous consequences for air quality, drinking water and the climate. In addition, as this oil spills into the U.S., refinery communities face air and water pollution from tar sands oil, which contains 11 times more sulfur and nickel and five times more lead than conventional oil.

The action continues a series of actions performed by RAN Toronto who are lobbying RBC to divest funding from tar sands projects. RBC is the world’s largest financier of tar sands projects and has invested financed over $20 billion USD over the last 5 years (UPDATE: see details on more recent numbers). To extract tar sands oil requires churning up huge tracts of ancient boreal forest and polluting so much clean water with poisonous chemicals that the resulting waste ponds can be seen from outer space. The health impacts to Alberta’s First Nation communities are severe, with cancer rates up in some communities as much as 400 times its usual frequency.

A group of Canadian climate change activists – including RAN campaigner Eriel Deranger, and numerous members of RAN Toronto – caused a ruckus in Canada’s Parliament yesterday. In doing so, they brought their demands for bold action on climate change directly to the country’s leaders – and they didn’t stop until they were expelled from the Parliament building, with five of them being arrested and roughly dragged out.

During a Parliamentary debate, several protesters stood up in the House of Commons Observation Gallery and began chanting loudly, voicing their support for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Bill C-311, the Climate Change Accountability Act.

This news video shows the reaction on the floor of Parliament while the protestors were chanting (skip to 0:50):

The observation gallery was mainly filled with youth listening to the Members of Parliament, who were bickering about pension plans. One activist stood up and yelled: “Canada needs to sign and ratify the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.” Security rushed over, grabbed the individual, and quickly escorted him out as another individual stood up and shouted: “Pass Bill C-311 and take action on climate change.”

As numerous individuals were being escorted out of the public gallery while chanting bold statements about indigenous rights and climate change, a third person stood up and began a call-and-response chant – and the vast majority of the public gallery joined in. “When I say ’311,’ you say ‘Pass it.’”

“311!”

“PASS IT!”

The protestors then began chanting “311, PASS IT;” “INDIGENOUS, RIGHTS;” “CLIMATE, JUSTICE;” “SHUT DOWN, TAR SANDS;” and “WHO’S HOUSE? OUR HOUSE.”

A couple dozen individuals were escorted out of the gallery and asked to line up against the wall; however, after about 100 other youth kept chanting, they too were escorted out.

Over 150 youth were forced to leave the House of Commons public observation gallery, showing that Canadian parliament was not ready to hear a democratic voice. While escorting the youth out of the building, police violently arrested several of the protesters, dragging five people away and detaining them – including RAN’s Eriel Tchekwie Deranger and Dave Vasey from RAN Toronto. Blood was left on the walls and the hallways of Parliament after one protestor’s face was slammed into the ground. The rest of the protestors continued chanting as they were forced to leave the building, filling the normally quiet halls of Parliament with chants for climate justice and Indigenous rights.

A handful of individuals were met by the media just outside the parliament building doors, where Joe Cressy of the Polaris Institute explained what had happened inside. His sentiments were echoed by other protesters who expressed outrage at Canada’s inability to take any leadership role regarding climate change.

One participant, Rosa Kouri, said that while the Canadian government may not be ready for it, “our children will appreciate what we’re doing.”

Bill C-311 is the Climate Change Accountability Act, which would require Canada to agree to IPCC greenhouse gas reduction targets. If this bill were to pass, it’s likely that the government would also need to severely limit emissions from the tar sands, the fastest-growing cause of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. “In shutting down the tar sands, the Canadian government would admit that it is willing to safeguard the rights of indigenous peoples,” said one activist.

Tar sands development is jeopardizing the communities, mainly aboriginal, living downstream from the projects. The projects are causing water scarcity and contamination, causing increased rates of rare cancers, asthma, and cardio-vascular diseases, as well as destroying First Nations communities’ ability to maintain their traditional ways of life.

It’s uncertain whether there has ever been a protest of this sort in the House of Commons, and yesterday’s protest was truly a milestone in the Canadian youth climate movement. This incredibly bold protest has been getting media coverage all of the country – on CBC, CTV, the Toronto Star, the Globe & Mail, the Montreal Gazette, the Calgary Herald, and many more.

Canadian youth have been trying to show their disappointment with their government and their country’s disregard for international agreements, including those on climate change and the rights of Indigenous peoples. Many MPs who support climate justice have told youth that they need to be loud and put pressure on the government. Canadian youth as a group got closer to their parliament than they ever have, in order to tell their elected officials what they want.

Canadian youth want climate justice and are communicating their demands to the government very clearly. Canada’s youth want the government to pass Bill C-311 – the closest Canada has ever come to having a policy on climate change. They want Indigenous rights to be respected – which means shutting down tar sands developments, which are violating aboriginal treaty rights as well as destroying the environment and increasing Canada’s emissions in order to make profits for the oil industry. Canadian youth want climate justice, and that means a safe climate for all people of the world – including those within its borders.

But this year, a wide variety of activists, in B.C. and beyond, are reminding us that the 2010 Vancouver Olympics aren’t all fun and games. In fact, they’re resulting in huge developments on unceded First Nations land, massive spending on hyper-militarized security, and displacement of poor people and increased homelessness in Vancouver.

And, of course, it’s an opportunity for some good ol’-fashioned corporate PR. Companies from around the world with gruesome environmental and human rights track records – like Dow, Coca-Cola, and General Electric – are lining up to spend millions on funding the Olympics and sprucing up their tarnished images.

And the lead sponsor of the Olympic torch run: Royal Bank of Canada, the ATM for the Alberta tar sands. In fact, their website for the torch run calls on people across Canada to “make a pledge” to “make a better Canada,” and touts RBC’s “Blue Water Pledge” to “support watershed protection” – a little bit hypocritical, given that RBC has pledged $3.8 billion in financing to tar sands companies in the last six months alone.

So a group of folks in Vancouver decided to call RBC on their greenwashing. They issued a callout last week – endorsed by RAN - calling for protests at RBC branches across Canada every Friday at noon, to protest RBC’s attempts to use their Olympic funding to greenwash their role as the world’s biggest financier of the tar sands.

This past Friday – on incredibly short notice – protestors in Toronto, Vancouver, and Edmonton took their message to their local RBC branches.

In Toronto, the ever-amazing RAN Toronto set up a tar sands cafe: they served up delicious tar sands tailing ponds “tea” to customers and passers-by outside RBC’s Yonge St. branch. They also went inside and offered “tea” to the branch employees, who politely declined.

In Vancouver, a group of concerned people went to RBC’s Vancouver headquarters, and passed out a brand-new flyer about RBC’s role in funding the Olympics and destroying the tar sands. (You can download the flyer here.)

And our reports indicate that there was a protest at an RBC branch in Edmonton, too! (Of course, the coolest part about decentralized days of action like this is that it’s entirely possible that actions happened that we didn’t even know about.)

This was a great start to the campaign – three protests across Canada, only three days after the callout was issued! But this is only the beginning – after all, if RBC is raking in millions in profits from its financing of tar sands companies, then we’re going to have to make a lot of noise before they start to listen.

So email 2010corporatecampaign [at] gmail.com to find out if there’s a protest happening soon near you – and if there isn’t, you can go ahead and organize one! (And it doesn’t have to be on a Friday at noon, either – and if you’d like help organizing a protest, you can email us at answers [at] ran.org.)

RBC: MAKE A PLEDGE: STOP FUNDING THE TAR SANDS!

RBC CEO Gord Nixon should be putting his bank’s money where his mouth is. Last week, he offered an incoherent defense of RBC’s “balanced approach” to the environment after RAN activists confronted him on the bank’s financial support for expansion of Canada’s tar sands.

Recognizing his stumble, Nelson hit the papers this week to explain. “You can’t over-emphasize the environment at huge cost to the economy” Nixon told the National Post, “and at the same time you cannot do things economically that are a huge cost to the environment.”

Below the surface, though, RBC’s “balanced approach” is anything but. Nixon clarifies that the Bank’s environmental commitment “…doesn’t mean you can’t lend to someone in the oil sands.” In fact, with more than $16.8$14.3 billion (USD) in credit extended to the sector since 2007, nobody lends arranges more lending to oil sands companies than RBC.

Compare this with RBC’s environmental commitments. Nixon points to RBC’s Blue Water Project

“…which, at $50-million, is the biggest philanthropic project for the bank. It is dedicated towards water initiatives in the world from financings that impact wetlands to financing clean-water projects or drilling wells in Nicaragua. We try to do our part.”

Look under the hood, though, and The Blue Water Project looks more like a public relations project. Three years since its launch, the bank has issued just $9.5 million in grants. During the same time period, RBC earned more than $87$84 million (USD) in underwriting fees from tar sands companies. How’s that for balance?

If Nixon were serious about sustainability, he would recognize that the tar sands need to be stopped. That was the recommendation earlier this week from Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. French Bank Dexia and the UK’s Co-Op Bank have both established policies that maintain shareholder returns while effectively prohibiting any lending to tar sands companies. RBC should seek a similar balance.