Vancouver City Council greenlights $700,000 on lawsuit against oil firms

Vancouver City Council greenlights up to $700,000 on lawsuit against oil firms

The Chevron marine gas station in the middle of Coal Harbour in downtown Vancouver. (Shutterstock)

An expenditure of up to $1 per resident or roughly up to $700,000 will be added to the City of Vancouver’s 2023 draft operating budget for the purpose of suing “Big Oil.”

On Wednesday, Vancouver City Council narrowly approved a member motion by Green Party councillor Adriane Carr on making a municipal financial contribution towards a potential class action lawsuit against fossil-fuel companies, as urged by the “Sue Big Oil” campaign of environmental activist group West Coast Environmental Law.

You might also like:

It was green lighted in a 6-5 vote; Green councillors Carr, Pete Fry, and Michael Wiebe, OneCity councillor Christine Boyle, COPE councillor Jean Swanson, and Forward Together mayor Kennedy Stewart voted in support, while ABC councillors Lisa Dominato, Rebecca Bligh, and Sarah Kirby-Yung, NPA councillor Melissa DeGenova, and TEAM councillor Colleen Hardwick voted in opposition.

Carr said the premise of the City’s contribution is that the municipal government would recover its costs associated with climate change, such as repairing the seawall from storm damage or expanding its storm water infrastructure. This assumes a successful outcome in the class action lawsuit, with other municipal governments and entities also contributing to the effort.

“This is a prudent fiscal move. Our city right now is spending about $50 million per year on adaptation, not mitigation, and that means repairing damage made by climate change. We have a lot of money that can be recovered,” asserted Carr during the meeting.

“This is a new source of revenue, and one that could reap us a lot of money back.”

Fry suggested this class action against fossil-fuel companies for their role in climate change carries parallels with the lawsuits against Purdue Pharmaceuticals for their role in the drug addiction and overdose crisis, caused by their OxyContin product.

Those dissenting questioned whether this is an effective use of municipal resources.

“I agree with the seriousness of the issues of climate change, with increasing temperatures, and that there’s urgency to this matter. We need to move away from fossil fuels, I don’t think anyone at this table disputes that, and that we need to move to cleaner energy technologies and sources,” said Dominato.

“What I wrestle with since this motion was brought forward is I don’t think it’s the right tool in the toolbox… This is not going to eliminate the use of fossil fuels at this time.”

Both Dominato and Kirby-Yung also brought to attention previous City Council measures, such as the Climate Action Levy — a tax proposed by Stewart and approved by City Council in late 2021. This levy is expected to raise $9 million annually starting in 2022 for the municipal government’s various projects under the Climate Emergency Action Plan.

Kirby-Yung rejected the notion that the lawsuit’s cost per resident is highly nominal, equivalent to a “cup of coffee.”

“There have been a lot of ‘cups of coffee’ over the term of this council, and people are struggling to buy coffee beans or food right now,” she said.

The future makeup of City Council after the October 15, 2022 civic election will determine the 2023 operating budget, including the final say on whether the municipal government should contribute to the class action attempt.

You might also like: