A Hostile Climate

A radical activist group targets RBC. This time it’s personal.

by Patricia Best on Thursday, January 14, 2010 12:10pm - 25 Comments

A Hostile ClimateGord Nixon, 52 years old and chief executive officer of Canada’s largest bank, drove home from his downtown Toronto office one day in late July as per usual, to his mid-town manse on a neatly tree-lined street. By the time he got home he was apoplectic. The entire route, all the way to his front door, was postered with messages on light poles reading “Help us Mrs. Nixon,” aimed at his wife, Janet. That was in addition to similar notices plastered in the downtown core in the previous weeks. The posters didn’t say who “us” were, but Nixon knew what it was about.

It was the most provocative step to date in a campaign against the Royal Bank of Canada launched by a U.S.-based environmental activist group few in Canada had heard of—the Rainforest Action Network (RAN). The group’s purpose: to stop lending in Canada’s oil sands. Not cut lending, stop lending altogether.

RBC is, to be sure, a formidable target—it’s a bank with over $720 billion in assets. But RAN is also a force to be reckoned with. In the past 15 years, it has managed to get U.S. corporations like Citigroup, Home Depot and Boise Cascade to make concessions on environmental issues. It’s a slick organization posing as a grassroots and granola outfit; it counts a number of Hollywood celebrities among its supporters, and the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund among its donors. But it’s also a radical group that believes in creating a “business nightmare” for its corporate targets, according to its own literature. Its letterhead logo is a black panther, evoking extreme activism of the past, and it trains its members in civil disobedience. Its leaders speak like M.B.A. grads—Mike Brune, its executive director, has an accounting degree from Westchester University, but he has also been arrested at least 11 times.

RAN has drawn fire for its tactics in the past. Its campaign against Boise earned it the enmity of the chair of the powerful U.S. House ways and means committee, who in the mid-2000s authorized an investigation into whether it violated its tax-exempt status. And the few Canadian environmentalists who know RAN wonder about some of its methods. “RAN to a degree is importing a U.S.-style of campaigning into Canada and that presents challenges that are risky on both sides,” says Alan Young, director of corporate programs for Canadian Boreal Initiative.

RAN is masterminding its campaign against RBC from its San Francisco headquarters, using Facebook groups to garner members and to organize “action days” outside bank branches. (Support in Canada for RAN isn’t confined to eco-activists, however. Former cabinet minister Eugene Whelan was moved to write a letter to a journalist earlier this year after he became aware of RAN, saying RBC’s oil sands involvement “is a real contradiction with their other commitments to the Olympics and the Blue Water program.”)

The guiding principle behind RAN’s Global Finance Campaign, first launched back in 2000, is to follow the money. When it targeted Citigroup, it ran ads showing celebrities cutting up their Citibank credit cards and had 2,500 pictures and letters sent by children to former chairman Sandy Weill asking him to stop financing global warming and forest destruction. Then it got personal. RAN papered Weill’s hometown of Greenwich, Conn., with “Wanted” posters with his picture, and when he travelled to Europe on a family vacation, RAN even took out ads in the International Herald Tribune featuring his photo and the line: “Put a face on global warming and forest destruction.”

After a year of this torture, Citigroup made some concessions, including the adoption of an environmental policy that prohibited funding and corporate loans in “high caution” ecological zones. Then, in a spread-the-misery move, Citigroup worked on RAN’s behalf to bring its competitors on board. As far as RAN was concerned, it was a good start. “We need most of the major world banks to deny funding for a whole class of projects,” said Brune.

RAN ventured up to Canada in 2005 and surveyed the banking landscape. Its list of targets quickly came down to the Toronto Dominion Bank and RBC. TD Bank pursued a different course from RBC, engaging with senior RAN representatives and signing some environmental accords. In June 2007, TD Bank announced a new environmental policy that pledged to “manage and minimize the impact of environmental risks and issues from its business operations.” It seemed lifted largely out of the RAN playbook.

Bookmark and Share
  • Rob H

    Does anyone at RAN support themselves or do you all live off RAN donations, welfare or your parents? Has anyone at RAN ever employed anyone, run a business, invented a product people wanted to buy? How about posting some resumes of RAN members, showing us their professional qualifications, education and achievements? You seem to think you are qualified to tell RBC, the oil and gas industry and governments what they should do. What have any of you ever done besides run up large student loans?
    BTW, I did go to your website. It appears you are professional "activists" with no particular professional qualifications or work experience in anything and with your US tax exempt status under question. What arrogance to think you can demand RBC or any company change their legal business practices because of your agenda.

  • Anne

    Stay away from us. Whether we are for or against the oil sands, we don't need a bunch of American maniacs telling us what to do. Who do you think you are? Get out of here. Go.

    • Roberta Speck

      Anne, there are also Canadians working on this campaign. Please dont make broad sweeping assumptions of people as a whole, it makes you look like a nazi. As a Canadian myself, you are embarrassing me.

      These people are trying to help address the issues and make it public knowledge, so that we all may make informed decisions. It seems you agree there are issues we need to deal with. It makes sense to ally with people who feel the same.

    • Civil-rightist

      Environmentalists are international citizens, so get used to the idea and actions by people who take responsibility a whole lot more seriously than Big Oil, Big Banks and the rest of greedy Big Business.

  • Elisa M

    We can demand it because they (RBC) allow for the destruction of our environment and the violation of human rights by financing projects that cause terrible devastation (human and environmental). Our world will continue to be destroyed if people thought solely like you Rob H. We live here, we work here, we want to keep living here and that is enough of a reason.

    What this article fails to mention is all the Canadians working on this campaign, groups of people in Edmonton, Vancouver, and Toronto. This is not just an American NGO barging in and stirring up trouble, the trouble was already here and they helped the voices of these people be heard.

    • Rob H

      You live on "feelings" and other emotions to decide what you "believe". Gaia worship is no different than any other religion, emotional belief with no proof. That is why you can't deal with science and rational reasoning. What human rights are being violated? Name them. Where is the terrible devastation? The earth quake in Haiti is terrible devastation Elisa, get a grip.
      Emotion and hysterical claims are not enough. And don't use "evidence" like the Doctor in Ft McMurray who was exposed after falsely claiming increased cancer rates because of oil sands pollution.

      • Raven

        Hey Rob H I heard that you don't have a degree in posting on websites and that you spend all your time pontificating in your parents' basement. Why don't you post a resume there buddy?
        Seriously, what are you proposing? Only the people who are 'qualified' get to have an opinion on how to do things? I think they tried that and decided that something called "democracy" was a better idea. Otherwise the people with the money get to make all the decisions on what to do with the money. Which would be okay, except that they are by the very nature of the system obliged to make more and more money despite the consequences.
        Unfortunately, capitalism seems to be trumping democracy more and more these days. There are plenty of qualified scientists saying that completely rewriting the rules of the planet's ecology in the span of a few generations is kind of a stupid move for a race that would like to continue to be part of it. If you're looking for more information, you might try researching something called the "Carbon Cycle". Ah yes, part of the greedy conspiracy of leftists who .. wait, what is it they have to gain from this misinformation?
        Despite these warnings, we continue to dig ourselves deeper and deeper into ecological debt by borrowing against future consequences that we don't even understand the full scope of.
        Fortunately for all of us, some people with money have decided that supporting groups like RAN is a good idea. Which actually, even in the minds of the coldest of capitalists, makes them qualified to be doing what they're doing.
        It's also important to consider that Haiti would be in a much better state to deal with their current situation if they had not been in such dire straits for so long. Why is the country so poor? you may ask. That is a very good question.

        • Rob H

          Tut, tut, don't get all emotional. Or is that all you can do? Capitalism trumping democracy? "the System"? Really?
          You are overindulged children who can't make an argument so you have to resort to threats, intimidation and hysterical exaggeration. BTW, the climate change fraud has been exposed Raven, for what it always was, a political power grab for taxes and regulation. Run that up your Mann "hockey stick".

  • Elisa M

    We can demand it because they (RBC) allow for the destruction of our environment and the violation of human rights by financing projects that cause terrible devastation (human and environmental). Our world will continue to be destroyed if people thought solely like you Rob H. We live here, we work here, we want to keep living here and that is enough of a reason.

    What this article fails to mention is all the Canadians working on this campaign, groups of people in Edmonton, Vancouver, and Toronto. This is not just an American NGO barging in and stirring up trouble, the trouble was already here and they helped the voices of these people be heard.

  • Alan Brown

    Attack a bank? What about GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda etc. etc. aren't they causing more polution than a bank? A Honda lawn mower causes more damage to our environment than a bank. How about demanding that all automobile manufacturers be shut down? For that matter all manufacturing companies from printing to plumbing are affecting the environment. Should we attack all their Presidents?

    • The Big JC

      Elisa M – You do not live here. You are an unwanted United Statesian who is not respected. If you actually are Canadian, I beg you to leave this US organization and join a Canadian environmental organization. Otherwise you will not be listened to. You'll be responsible only for making us respect RBC for standing up to tyranny. "RAN", this US organization, has no right to speak to anyone anywhere about things done wrong.

      • Mas Daddy

        And you are? Let me take a wild guess and say that you live in Alberta.

    • Mas Daddy

      It appears to me that you haven't researched this issue all that much. You might want to at least think about the economics of the matter a bit before handing out advice. Of course, this is the internet and you're more than welcome to flaunt your ignorance.

  • Atomic Walrus

    Congratulations to the Rainforest Action Network – you've managed to legitimize SLAPP suits against activists.

  • Mas Daddy

    I would like to point out the obvious that both you and Anne are retards, and I mean that in the technical sense of the words, i.e. you do not understand basic logic. The nationality of the person raising the issue is completely distinct from the argument itself.

    Maybe if you had taken some of my math classes you would've known this a bit better, but let me guess, neither you nor Anne have "one tiny iota" (to borrow your own expression) of college education, and even if you do, it was probably at some community college in Ft McMurray, which amounts to the same thing.

    Try to avoid walking and chewing a gum at the same time: you might hurt yourselves.

    • UnbelievablyArrogant

      No wonder universities are losing much of their gloss because of professors like this.

  • Taylor Scott

    as a Canadian from Toronto, i have to say these anti American sentiments are embarrassing! So many of us are in the same boat, working middle to lower class people who want to watch where our money goes these days…as this seems to be the only way we can help. I have just recently discovered RAN, and i must admit i like the work they do. In 2008 in the U.S. they were able to get Bank of America, the top investor in coal to announce it would 'phase out financing' of mountain top removal, one of the most destructive methods of coal mining

    What i find most interesting is how quickly the people on this thread would jump to defend a corporation like RBC, and by the way, that is how they describe themselves: a Corporation. I have an account at RBC and since 2007 i have been proud of the Blue Water Project, until i looked it up on RBC's website: its upsetting to say the least.

    The discrepancy is in the numbers.. its basically a token gesture in comparison. 50 million promised by 2017, so far only approx. 7.2 million delivered in grants which look mostly like awareness campaigns, nothing concrete that shows RBC investing in the future. In its video http://www.rbc.com/donations/video-blue-planet.ht… it cites local watershed protection as essential in securing clean water, but doesn't cite how RBC is contributing!! Meanwhile RBC is the top financier of Tar Sands in the world, according to Bloomberg.

    So i have to ask myself how does RBC protect 'the whole watershed' while financing an industry that leeches 11 million liters of toxic sludge into the Athabaska watershed every day!

    It is peak oil that has driven us to the Tar Sands, if RBC is serious about helping shape the future it needs to get out of Tar Sands and into green energy.

    I urge all RBC clients to push this issue. That is our money they are using.

    i am myself committed that if i don't see any response by the bank soon, i am leaving RBC and going to a less invested bank that will actually listen to its clients.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/EvanRavitz EvanRavitz

    Americans and EVERYONE have a right to a voice on this. Tar sands (they're not oil sands, though it's good propaganda to pretend they are) are the WORST environmental nightmare on the planet. The vast extra CO2 emitted in turning them into oil -in addition to that emitted by burning the final product- has already heated the entire planet, which will continue for 100 yrs even if we stop burning ANYTHING. It will take 1000 years to return to normal IF we stop NOW. Americans of course are the main customers for tar sand oil, so we ESPECIALLY should condemn this.

  • SAW

    One thing I'd like to know: if RAN expects the banks to take on responsibility for the emissions of the oil sands projects they help finance, does that mean that the oil sands companies themselves are absolved of the responsibility? Otherwise, you're counting the emissions twice, which makes no sense…

  • http://www.newcars4u.com Sarah Jones

    Nice comments was given. Hostel Climate is such no one can forget.
    ——————————————————-
    Sarah Jones
    New Cars

  • http://www.nygoldcashers.com/ New York Gold Buyers

    Great article. I noticed that there is a debate going on.

  • http://www.premieresapconsultants.com/COPA_Consulting.html SAP COPA Consulting

    I really understood what all of you are trying to point out. Great.

  • Ariadne

    No wonder activists are losing much respect from the public. If you are so concerned about environmental issues why don't you look at your own US production of crude oil in Californea and your coal mine which are more toxic to the enviroment than the oil sands here in Canada? Why don't you attack OPEC countries like: Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and others? Your hypocrisy is quite shameful. Do you even know who fund your group or where you get your funding? Are you sure that none of the OPEC countries or those who are heavily invested in them contribute to your funding? If you demand openess from others, then be ready to open your own books to the public. List every single contributor and donor to your group.

  • Raven

    Have you seen photos of the tar sands? There was a pictorial in National Geographic a while back. It's pretty ugly.

  • UnbelievablyArrogant

    Canadians should adopt RAN's tactic of following the money. Why don't we force this groups to list every contributor and donor of this group and follow where their funding comes from. Why are they singling out Canada? Why have we not heard them do these tactics in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, and other OPEC countries ? Yes, the oil sands need more improvement when it comes to environmental issues, but much has been accomplished also. However compared to OPEC countries and US, Canada has done better in this area.

From Macleans