The lawsuit that has been filed by former Vancity senior vice-president David Berge against his ex-employer is hard to fathom, pitting, as it does, people who have normally been part of a small world unified in their aim to approach business, development and the environment in a different way from the usual corporate capitalist model.
Now Berge, who is renowned in certain circles for his pioneering work on social-venture funds, is suing Vancity to get it to live up to a commitment he says they made when they hired him: investing $10-million in another social-venture fund they were going to be jointly involved in.
My story in the Globe provides only the most basic elements of the suit, which I’m attaching in full below. It also doesn’t begin to explain the close relationships among many of the parties involved.
One that I omitted: both David Berge and his former boss, Tamara Vrooman, were both advisors to Joel Solomon’s Renewal2 operation. Another that I couldn’t squeeze in: Berge, at Vancity, helped the City of Vancouver, aka Vision Vancouver, with financing for a couple of projects dear to their civic hearts, the Olympic Village co-op and a energy-retrofit program.
I know that those who delight in the whole Tides Canada Foundation conspiracy story will make hay of this (although the Tides connection arose in a strange way in the lawsuit).
But it seems to me that there’s a deeper story at play here, one that this lawsuit doesn’t really get at — one that’s more about the difference in culture between Vancity and the American social-venture movement possibly? Or something else beyond that?
BTW, I made a couple of errors in describing some of the many links in the story: Berge’s Underdog did not invest in Ben & Jerry’s; ice-cream maker Ben Cohen, of B & J’s, invested in Underdog. As well, although Joel Solomon’s Renewal did invest in Underdog, Underdog did not invest in Renewal 1 or 2. Instead, Berge was an adviser to Renewal 2.
57 responses so far ↓
1 waltyss // Oct 14, 2012 at 12:56 am
@jenables: What I really hate is the use of CAPITALS to YELL! Other than that I am actually pretty mellow.
I don’t think you are really a cynic or that you really want to expose yourself to different points of view. In order to do that, you have to be open to learning the facts. Unfortunately as your posts on this thread have shown, you are not particularly interested. When it was pointed out to you that unlike banks, credit unions are provincially regulated, you responded with post #30. It’s first response was in the nature of a “Whatever!”. It then became indecipherable.
You then in post #45 admitted that you did’t know where your statement that banks had to invest 4% of their profits in the community came from. They don’t and the reason banks or any other company invests in community events is because it is a form of advertising but also because in many cases they believe that being a good corporate citizen is what they should do. Proportionate to their capital Vancity has been more generous than most.
And some of it is tone. Your objection to the cover of the 2009 AR might be stated: I understand what they were trying to do but it made me feel left out because I am not wealthy. Rather, it was expressed: “If the cover of that annual report didn’t offend you, you obviously are wealthy and overjoyed that this city is for YOU! But why can’t it be for everyone?” and then: ” like an annual report entitled vancity is for the wealthy which is TACKY AT BEST, regardless of the footnotes, it is a slap in the face to many people in these times)????” Not exactly leaving room for other points of view, is it.
Yes, jenables, you should (or is it SHOULD) think critically. I don’t know about being a cynic but thinking critically and not taking anything at face value is a good way to approach just about anything. However that does not have to mean starting out by thinking the worst about everything.
As for Vancity, I actually probably agree with you that they are not very efficient. That is why I don’t deal with them. However, unlike you, that doesn’t make be believe that they are the devil incarnate.
2 jenables // Oct 22, 2012 at 2:06 am
Walrus, did you get around to googling socially responsible investments, ethical funds and tart sands? Just wondering. My disgust with the annual report cover stems more from feeling like the city is trying to clean out the poors, and watching an exodus of people who can’t afford to live here despite it being their home town. And I’m not clear on where you linked to facts disproving what i said, perhaps youcould repost those links.
3 jenables // Oct 22, 2012 at 2:29 am
Federally Regulated Financial Institutions
Address of the company in Canada
Citizens Trust Company
Vancity Centre
183 Terminal Avenue
Vancouver British Columbia
V6A 4G2
Disclaimer: The information in respect to the address and official representative of the company in Canada in this notice has been provided to the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) Canada by the financial institutions referenced. OSFI makes no representation as to the accuracy of that information and assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or omissions in the content. Interested persons may wish to contact the relevant financial institution to verify that the information is accurate.
(Copied from the gc site after searching vancity. http://www.osfi-bsif.gc.ca/WebApps/WhoWeRegulate/CompanyInfo.aspx?s=1&g=2&c=UY&i=%20&LANG=E )
4 waltyss // Oct 22, 2012 at 10:56 pm
@jenables: I did not link to post saying that you were wrong. I pointed out that the Bank Act regulates banks and that credit unions are regulated by the Credit Unions Incorporation Act [I had the exact name wrong, missing Incorporation but close enough] and the Financial Institutions Act, both provincial legislation. (post 12). IanS at post 24 agreed. We have heard no basis for your allegation. Rather at post 30, we got your Valley girl, “Oh, whatever” response. I am still waiting for something to support your allegation that the Bank Act applies to Vancity.
At post 53, you have copied an undated excerpt from something listing Citizens Trust Company with the same address as Vancity corporate offices. The excerpt is undated and it si unclear when that post came from. A revoiew of Vancity reports is unclear as to whether Citizens Trust still exists. In any event, assuming Citizens Trust still exists and is federally regulated does nothing to establish than Vancity is federally regulated or that it is regulated by the Bank Act. So, last chance, show where Vancity is federally regulated , other than in your mistaken assumptions.
You also alleged (post 9) that the Bank Act required all banks and/or credit unions to do good deeds in the community. Again, I challenged you to show us where. Again I am still waiting. The Bank Act is available online.
Intent on digging yourself a deeper hole, you then alleged that ethical funds invested in tar sands (your words) just as anyone else (Tab 15). I challenged you on that and am still waiting. You said at post 45 that you believed all financial institutions were required to invest 4% of funds in the community. Show me were they are required to do so.
I doubt I will get an answer from my dear friend who claims to be interested in different points of view. However, as somebody apparently more than twice her age, I will throw out some advice which jenables will undoubtedly ignore: don’t post stuff after midnight. My own experience is that when I post after midnight, the post is a mishmash and not particularly articulate. Review the time of your posts and ask yourself (you don’t have to tell me] if you suffer from the same problem.
5 jenables // Oct 23, 2012 at 2:47 am
I’m a true night owl, waltyss. They say that changes over the years buti think since i don’t have kids it hasn’t. If you tried googling socially responsible investments, or ethical funds like i suggested, you would have easily found the truth. Since you refuse, I’ll give you some links.
“What does oil have to do with responsible investing? Almost all Canadian responsible investment (RI) funds have stocks in oil sands, mining, and various other resource industries that comprise Canada’s worst greenhouse gas offenders.
“Counterintuitive, isn’t it? We hear from folks who are quite surprised to hear that socially responsible funds invest in oil sands because they don’t necessarily understand the lack of diversity in the Canadian market,” says Dermot Foley, Strategic Analyst with Vancity Investment Management.
It’s a necessary evil—for mutual funds to be as risk-free, or as financially secure as possible, all financial institutions with RI mutual funds must invest in “dirty fossil fuel production.””
http://www.corporateknights.com/report/2011-responsible-investing-guide/putting-r-responsible-investment
http://www.pathslesstravelled.com/2010/12/how-ethical-are-ethical-funds.html
http://www.change.org/petitions/vancity-credit-union-withdraw-all-funds-and-support-related-to-enbridge-alberta-tar-sands
(i believe in August vancity did drop enbridge. suncor, on the other hand..)
https://www.vancity.com/Investing/InvestmentsAndServices/MutualFundsStocksAndBonds/ProfitWisely/
Can you retract this statement yet, or do you need more?
“Intent on digging yourself a deeper hole, you then alleged that ethical funds invested in tar sands (your words) just as anyone else (Tab 15). ”
I’m not digging myself a hole, i just really, really dislike greenwashing, fake sustainability (tbh I’ve come to hate that weird) and excessive self congratulation. I told you that information above is from the government of Canada website and posted the link. I’m not sure if you can actually accept the information i give you; its not that i want to see the world as horrible, its just that whenever you scratch the surface you get disappointed. There are a lot of good, honest people here, and many do their banking with vancity because they believe their money is doing greater things that benefit everyone. Sometimes it is. sometimes it is doing what every other bank is doing. It doesn’t have to be so black and white. If they give me a sinister feeling, so what? I can’t deny their marketing is effective (well except for that short-lived, post apocolyptic sepia tone theme they had about a year ago) but to me, this in your face moral high ground approach raises suspicion. That suspicion could come from the annual report, it could come from Tamara vrooman and her background, it could come from being told they didn’t want the responsibility of having cheques in the branch over night. It doesn’t matter. The good people aren’t always the ones making the decisions.
I notice vancity belongs to this, i also notice the rockefeller foundation is a strong supporter. Just sayin, doesn’t have to mean a thing.
http://www.gabv.org/about-us
Anyways, it is now actually getting late and its a lot of sifting through extremely dry material, so to speak, to find any information at all on who regulates them and what that entails. I hope this doesn’t incite a snide response from you. I’ll keep looking. thanks!
6 waltyss // Oct 24, 2012 at 12:09 am
@jenables. I will grant you that I was in error about ethical funds investing in the oil sands. You were correct; they do. I actually found the articles interesting.
As for whether Vancity is a bank subject to the Bank Act, you are wrong. That in many respects it functions like a bank (taking deposits, making loans, providing mortgages, etc.) does not make it subject to the Bank Act (which was your allegation). Not one of the links you provided suggests otherwise. It belongs to organizations that also include banks and the Rockefeller Foundation. That tells us nothing about whether it is subject to the Canadian Bank Act, a piece of federal legislation.
You also provided a link to a federal website that was undated and made reference to the Citizens Trust Company, which is (or was, it is not clear that it still exists) a wholly owned subsidiary of Vancity. That the trust company or Citizens Bank, another wholly owned subsidiary of Vancity are federally regulated under the Bank Act does not make Vancity subject to the Bank Act. I am now repeating and have nothing to add here.
Moreover, you also have not responded with proof of your claim that banks (or credit unions or trust companies) must invest a certain % of their profits in the community. Again, that would mean looking in the Bank Act (available online) but either you haven’t or have not found it if you did.
Anyway, jenables, this is going nowhere. I doubt that there is anything that I can say that will convince you. Believe what you want. Doesn’t matter to me.
7 jenables // Oct 27, 2012 at 8:55 am
Waltyss, the only thing you have said to me this entire time is that i was wrong about everything, with the exception of your last reply. We both seem to be having a hard time finding the relevant info, and it’s not made any easier by the nature of the topic. I didn’t know i had to post dates with my links, but may i suggest actually clicking on them to investigate? That is the point. Also, you are correct- telling me I’m wrong repeatedly with no supporting information isn’t going to convince me.