UCP BEATING A DEAD HORSE
Opinion: Misleading to suggest Canadian charities rely on foreign fundingBob Wyatt
- Yesterday
Edmonton Journal
Steve Allan, who conducted the public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns, produced a series of recommendations to address related economic, social and governance challenges. Those recommendations include investing in and supporting the collaborative development of a methodology to establish world-class best practices, standards and processes for the measurement, accumulation and reporting of GHG emissions data.
Re. “Time to put words into action,” Steve Allan, March 26
In his op-ed essay published on March 26, Steve Allan once again raised concerns about foreign funding of Canadian charities and, once again, we fear he has left people with misleading information about the issue.
Mr. Allan cites 2018 figures in saying that Canadian charities received $2.4 billion from outside Canada. That amounted to about 0.9 per cent of the total revenue of charities in that year, according to the publicly available data from the Canada Revenue Agency.
Since Mr. Allan’s inquiry focused on environmental charities, some readers may have been left with the impression that all of this foreign funding went to such charities. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Mr. Allan does not mention, for example, that 30 per cent of all foreign funding received by Canadian charities in 2018 went to one charity — the University of Toronto. Nor does he mention that the listing of charities receiving the top 80 per cent of funding from outside Canada is primarily made up of universities, health organizations, and international-development agencies. Only two charities that could remotely be considered environmental appear in that list — Ducks Unlimited and the Nature Conservancy of Canada.
It might also have been useful to note that Alberta-based environmental charities received only $211,000 from foreign sources in 2018.
Canadian charities have received funding from outside the country since long before Canada had a formal system of registering charities. It is not new, and it is not news.
Mr. Allan’s piece also reiterated his suggestion that charities need to be more transparent about their funding. It is not clear how much more transparent he thinks they can be. The annual reporting form of every charity is published online by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), and financial statements can be obtained from the charity or CRA. Those returns detail how charities spend their funding in significantly more detail than do corporate financial statements, even of publicly traded companies.
The former commissioner of the public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns did not mention that his report recommended that all Canadian charities, and all non-profits in Alberta, be required to disclose the identity of every person who donates $5,000 or more — a move that has not been adopted by any other jurisdiction in the world, and rightly so, since it would represent a gross violation of donor privacy.
Nor does Mr. Allan’s op-ed mention that his report found no wrongdoing by any charity.
Much of the inquiry report focused on providing advice to the energy industry on how it might be more effective in telling its story. That wasn’t part of his mandate, but it might be useful to some people. Seeking to upset the public by partial disclosure and non-disclosure of the facts about charities is not useful and, in fact, is harmful to all of the 86,000 charities that serve Canadians and those in need throughout the world.
The op-ed says that his report has faded from the public eye. Rightfully so.
Bob Wyatt is executive director of the Muttart Foundation.
Edmonton Journal
Steve Allan, who conducted the public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns, produced a series of recommendations to address related economic, social and governance challenges. Those recommendations include investing in and supporting the collaborative development of a methodology to establish world-class best practices, standards and processes for the measurement, accumulation and reporting of GHG emissions data.
Re. “Time to put words into action,” Steve Allan, March 26
In his op-ed essay published on March 26, Steve Allan once again raised concerns about foreign funding of Canadian charities and, once again, we fear he has left people with misleading information about the issue.
Mr. Allan cites 2018 figures in saying that Canadian charities received $2.4 billion from outside Canada. That amounted to about 0.9 per cent of the total revenue of charities in that year, according to the publicly available data from the Canada Revenue Agency.
Since Mr. Allan’s inquiry focused on environmental charities, some readers may have been left with the impression that all of this foreign funding went to such charities. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Mr. Allan does not mention, for example, that 30 per cent of all foreign funding received by Canadian charities in 2018 went to one charity — the University of Toronto. Nor does he mention that the listing of charities receiving the top 80 per cent of funding from outside Canada is primarily made up of universities, health organizations, and international-development agencies. Only two charities that could remotely be considered environmental appear in that list — Ducks Unlimited and the Nature Conservancy of Canada.
It might also have been useful to note that Alberta-based environmental charities received only $211,000 from foreign sources in 2018.
Canadian charities have received funding from outside the country since long before Canada had a formal system of registering charities. It is not new, and it is not news.
Mr. Allan’s piece also reiterated his suggestion that charities need to be more transparent about their funding. It is not clear how much more transparent he thinks they can be. The annual reporting form of every charity is published online by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), and financial statements can be obtained from the charity or CRA. Those returns detail how charities spend their funding in significantly more detail than do corporate financial statements, even of publicly traded companies.
The former commissioner of the public inquiry into anti-Alberta energy campaigns did not mention that his report recommended that all Canadian charities, and all non-profits in Alberta, be required to disclose the identity of every person who donates $5,000 or more — a move that has not been adopted by any other jurisdiction in the world, and rightly so, since it would represent a gross violation of donor privacy.
Nor does Mr. Allan’s op-ed mention that his report found no wrongdoing by any charity.
Much of the inquiry report focused on providing advice to the energy industry on how it might be more effective in telling its story. That wasn’t part of his mandate, but it might be useful to some people. Seeking to upset the public by partial disclosure and non-disclosure of the facts about charities is not useful and, in fact, is harmful to all of the 86,000 charities that serve Canadians and those in need throughout the world.
The op-ed says that his report has faded from the public eye. Rightfully so.
Bob Wyatt is executive director of the Muttart Foundation.
No comments:
Post a Comment