Fossil Free Guelph initiates first steps in upcoming proposal for action
Fossil Free Guelph (FFG) hosted an information panel at the Grad Lounge on Feb. 8 to discuss the first steps in rolling out their Special Action Policy (SAP) proposal to the University of Guelph on divestment.
The group believes that there is deception in the University’s “green” image in relation to their actual investments in fossil fuels.
“Given the fact that this idea rolled out last week, I was very surprised by the turnout. It really sets the tone for what the students are interested in,” said Adrian D’Alessandro, a representative of FFG.
The information panel consisted of four presentations. The first three were delivered by members of the student activist group and the fourth was delivered by 10 Carden, a local and community-driven NGO, on sustainable community-driven investing.
The presentation began with a general rundown on the implications of climate change and why divestment matters. The second presentation gave general information on the SAP and the final presentation discussed FFG’s forthcoming submission and the requirements imposed in order to have that submission authorized.
[media-credit name=”Matteo Cimellaro” align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
FFG believes that working through policy, rather than overt activism is a tactic used by the University to mitigate the group’s influence.
“The place where we are least threatening is when we are quietly writing policy. I think the way they actually structured the policy, they actually don’t want this to be a mechanism for us to have progress. They want it to be a mechanism to quiet us,” D’Alessandro told The Ontarion. “They’ve given themselves a thousand outs.”
During the second presentation on general information on the SAP, students in the crowd voiced their suspicions on the ambiguity of the policy’s definition of social injury, as outlined by Yale University: “Social injury—the injurious impact which the activities of a company are found to have on consumers, employees, or other persons, particularly including activities which violate, or frustrate the enforcement of, rules of domestic or international law intended to protect individuals against deprivation of health, safety, or basic freedoms.”
Under the University’s SAP, “stakeholders”—which, in this case, include students, staff, faculty, and alumni—must gather and provide evidence to the board of governors to demonstrate that investments in specific companies must meet this definition of social injury.
[media-credit name=”Matteo Cimellaro ” align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
“Should individuals of a Stakeholder group have an issue with respect to specific investments in the endowment portfolio, it will be their responsibility to prepare the proposal outlining the case for ‘Special Action’ and to obtain sufficient evidence and expressions of interest for special action by the University community,” the University of Guelph’s SAP reads.
However, before FFG can make their case to take “Special Action,” they must first collect 20 signatures from three of the groups defined as stakeholders. Once that is complete, the activist group can take their proposal to the board of governors. Following the proposal submission, the board of governors will create an ad hoc committee that will have the final say on additional recommendations.
D’Alessandro, however, has voiced his anger over what he believes are loopholes.
“They can take out anything they want with this policy. The terms are completely skewed in their favour, so they can make whatever decision that works for them and justify it in their language,” he told The Ontarion.
A clause in the SAP states that the University can deem either a whole submission or portions of it “repetitive” and then subsequently remove it.
“If the Committee determines that the submission is repetitive (i.e., has previously been considered) or vexatious, it may recommend that the submission be rejected,” the SAP reads.
[media-credit name=”Matteo Cimellaro ” align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
D’Alessandro is skeptical of the University’s willingness to commit to divestment, one of the founders of FFG and University of Guelph alumna, Atiya Jaffar, is hopeful.
“I think that depends on how much students are willing to organize and mobilize for this,” Jaffar told The Ontarion. “I think if they do see this significant threat, they will be held accountable by students. It’s not inevitable that they’re going to reject this call for divestment.”
Jaffar, however, realizes the discrepancy in a “green” imaged school and the investments it makes through the judiciary.
“Right now, by choosing not to [divest], they are choosing to side with the fossil fuel industry, and of course the fossil fuel industry sees climate change as a profitable enterprise,” Jaffar said. “So they’re on one side, students are on the other, and the board of governors and the president are in the middle and they can choose a side.”
D’Alessandro agrees that the University isn’t directly opposing student wishes, but rather is upholding the concurrently held belief that investment in the fossil fuel industry is financially safe.
“I don’t think they maliciously hate the idea of divesting. I think it’s difficult. They have conflicts of interest and they don’t want to move or change the status quo, so it’s up to us to get the students together and give them a good reason.”
[media-credit name=”Matteo Cimellaro ” align=”aligncenter” width=”1020″]
In a December 2016 interview with The Ontarion, vice-president of finance Don O’Leary said that, within the current system, the University does not hold direct stocks of companies—such as oil gas and coal companies like BP, Exxon Mobile, Suncor, and Shougang Fushan resources—rather they hold pool funds handled by investment managers.
“[The investment managers] choose and we invest in those pool funds, and to pull out of these pool funds would be very difficult. We would have to decide that we were going to make investments directly ourselves and we don’t have that ability—that’s why we hire managers to do that, people who are far more specialized in these areas then we would be,” O’Leary explained.
FFG hopes to pressure the University to act positively following the release of the SAP and embody the environmentally responsible and morally directed University it purports to be.
“[The investment managers] choose and we invest in those pool funds, and to pull out of these pool funds would be very difficult. We would have to decide that we were going to make investments directly ourselves and we don’t have that ability—that’s why we hire managers to do that, people who are far more specialized in these areas then we would be,” O’Leary explained.
FFG hopes to pressure the University to act positively following the release of the SAP and embody the environmentally responsible and morally directed University it purports to be.
Photo by Matteo Cimellaro
Edit: A previously published version of this story misspelled Atiya Jaffar’s last name as Gaffar and listed Adrian D’Alessandro as the president of Fossil Free Guelph. FFG operates on a non-hierarchical structure. The Ontarion regrets the errors made in the print article.