charity

Thursday July 30, 2020

July 30, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday July 30, 2020

The Kielburgers boys’ self-described ‘labyrinth’ organizational structure is still murky

July 24, 2020

WE Charity. ME to WE Foundation. ME to WE Social Enterprise. WEllbeing Foundation. Imagine1day. WE 365 LP, and at least two other entities that sound like the prototype numbers for do-gooder androids. There is such a long list of entities in the WE umbrella that the former chair of WE Charity’s board, Michelle Douglas, wasn’t confident enough to say how many.

The brothers clarified that they need to incorporate in every country where they operate. And under Canada Revenue Agency rules, charities can’t operate as businesses in the administration of “social enterprise,” said Craig. So they had to “build a labyrinth to adhere to Canadian laws and regulations.”

Marc later explained the two started the charity when they were children. He said it’s like building a house. “You add a wing, and add a skylight, and add a swimming pool for your kids,” he said. “This wasn’t out of malice.” A global consulting firm, Korn Ferry, has been hired to help streamline the structure.

July 11, 2020

The Kielburgers said the government was fully briefed on the fact they planned to use a separate nonprofit entity, the WE Charity Foundation—which had been set up to help limit liability—as a party to the contribution agreement. (In the agreement, WE agreed to full liability for participants in the program.)

Former board chair Michelle Douglas, in her testimony, described concerns around the executive team’s refusal to provide substantial financial records that would allow the board to fulfill its functions.

“I did not resign as a routine matter or as part of a planned board transition. I resigned because I could not do my job. I could not discharge my governance duties,” she said in an opening statement.

February 18, 2004

She described in March, the executive—including Marc and Craig—had not fulfilled requests for evidence, reports or data that could support their rationale for laying employees off during the pandemic. In a March 25 phone call, she alleged that Craig asked for her resignation. She gave it. Most of the rest of the board left the organization shortly thereafter, although Craig claimed in committee that this could be explained by an existing “renewal” process.

Douglas said she had also raised concerns, in early 2018, about the WE Charity Foundation. “The board was never satisfied that the operation of this foundation was in the best interests of the charity or its various stakeholders,” she said, adding her understanding at the time was that the organization was intended to hold property. In their testimony, the Kielburgers dismissed the real estate claim as an inaccuracy, saying there were “multitudes of purposes” for such an entity.

Although Douglas said nothing in the organization’s operations caused her “deep concern,” she described a climate characteristic of “founder-led” organizations: “We were always striving to get greater insight into the work.” (Maclean’s)



 

Wednesday July 22, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday July 22, 2020

Ethical questions abound in politics

July 16, 2020

For the third time since he became prime minister in 2015, the behaviour of Justin Trudeau is being investigated by the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner. The investigation involves a proposed non-tendered contract worth $19 million to the WE Charity, which was supposed to operate a new student-volunteer program. Trudeau had participated in the cabinet meeting that approved the contract.

Because both the prime minister and his wife had a close relationship with the charity, the opposition complained to the ethics commissioner that Trudeau was guilty of violating the conflict of interest law. Days later it was revealed that Trudeau’s mother and brother had been paid nearly $300,000 for multiple speaking engagements at WE Charity events. This seems to be a classic case of confusing or intermingling private interests with the public interest, which is the essential nature of a conflict of interest.

The case caused me to reflect on why politicians appear to have such difficulty reasoning and acting ethically. Here are some random thoughts:

July 11, 2020

There is illegal and unethical behaviour in all occupations, but politics seems to involve greater temptations and risks that legal rules and ethical standards will be violated.

Politics involves contention over competing ideas and interests, together with competition to gain power, and these fundamental facts can override respect for ethical norms. Politicians and their advisers take the pragmatic view that if they do not break or bend the rules, they will lose ground to their opponents. They tell themselves that after they win, they will behave in an exemplary ethical manner, but then re-election becomes a strong motivation.

Most politicians enter public life for altruistic reasons of public service. A minority, however, become corrupted by the political process. They develop the view that politics is a game and to the winner go the spoils. Individuals from a famous political family, or long-serving politicians, may develop the view that they are, as a former Liberal cabinet minister declared, “entitled to their entitlements.” Rewarding family and “political friends” is seen as a perk of the job. (Winnipeg Free Press) 

 

Friday November 17, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 17, 2017

Da Vinci painting sells for $450 million, shattering auction records

After 19 minutes of dueling, with four bidders on the telephone and one in the room, Leonardo da Vinci’s “Salvator Mundi” sold Wednesday night for $450.3 million U.S., or $575 million Canadian, with fees, shattering the high for any work of art sold at auction. It far surpassed Picasso’s “Women of Algiers,” which fetched $179.4 million (U.S.) at Christie’s in May 2015.

August 25, 2012

The buyer was not immediately disclosed.

There were gasps throughout the sale, as the bids climbed by 10s up to $225 million, then by 5s up to $260 million, then by 2s. As the bidding slowed, and a buyer pondered the next multimillion-dollar increment, Jussi Pylkkanen, the auctioneer, said, “It’s a historic moment: We’ll wait.”

There were two big jumps toward the end to shake off the competition by Alex Rotter, Christie’s chairman of postwar and contemporary art for the Americas, who represented a buyer on the phone.

The price is all the more remarkable at a time when the old masters market is contracting, because of limited supply and collectors’ penchant for contemporary art.

And to critics, the astronomical sale attests to something else — the degree to which salesmanship has come to drive and dominate the conversation about art and its value. Some art experts pointed to the painting’s damaged condition and its questionable authenticity. (Source: Toronto Star) 

 

SaveSave

Thursday August 21, 2014

Thursday August 21, 2014
By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday August 21, 2014

When Stunts dictate our charitable giving

The choices we make about where to donate money for health causes aren’t always rational. We are probably more often driven to give by a disease that has touched a loved one than by utilitarian calculations about which illnesses impact the most people or receive the least investment from pharmaceutical companies.

Sometimes our decisions about donating don’t even seem to be driven by values or potential impact — but by celebrities and the entertainment value of the fundraising campaigns they endorse. Look no further than the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. The feel-good campaign works like this: you film yourself throwing a bucket of ice over your head, post it to social media, and then challenge your friends to either do the same or donate $100 to the ALS Association, which works to end Lou Gehrig’s disease.

Now every famous person — from Martha Stewart to Justin Bieber and Bill Gates — seems to be dumping ice on their heads in the name of the motor neuron disease.

The fun concept and celebrity heft are working. The ALS Association has said they’ve raised so much money so quickly, they’re scrambling to know what to do with it. Since July 29, when the challenge kicked off, they reported receiving $22.9 million in donations. That’s more than ten times the amount they raised in the same period last year ($1.9 million). Other charities are reportedly now searching for their ice-bucket equivalent.

The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge, and its virality, raise some interesting questions about which charities and health causes we choose to give to. It seems to add further evidence to the fact that celebrities and gimmicks often drive our charitable donating more than, perhaps, they should.

To be clear: ALS is an awful, debilitating disease that is worthy of donor dollars. It essentially triggers a slow paralysis in sufferers by causing the nerve cells to stop working. It’s also a death sentence. From the time of diagnosis, most people live only two to five years. There’s no cure, and, more than 70 years after baseball star Lou Gehrig drew attention to the cause, scientists still don’t know what brings it on. (Continued: Vox)

 

Wednesday July 23, 2014

Wednesday July 23, 2014By Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday July 23, 2014

Pen Canada hit with audit by Canada Revenue Agency, joining other charity groups critical of Harper government

The Canada Revenue Agency has launched a political-activities audit of Pen Canada, a small charity promoting freedom of expression that has criticized the Harper government in the past.

Two tax auditors showed up Monday morning at the tiny Toronto offices of Pen Canada, asking to see a wide range of internal documents.

Pen Canada’s president, Philip Slayton, says the tax agency gave notice of the audit two or three months ago, and that the group is “fully co-operating.”

Pen Canada represents more than 1,000 writers and supporters, including Canadian literary luminaries Margaret Atwood and Yann Martel, and presses for freedom of expression at home and abroad.

The group has been highly critical of the Harper government in recent years for the muzzling of scientists on the public payroll, and for alleged spying on Canadian citizens in concert with U.S. eavesdropping agencies.

This latest political-activity audit is among more than 50 that the agency has begun since 2012, which some critics have said creates an “advocacy chill” as charities self-censor for fear of losing their ability to raise funds through tax-deductible donations.

Saturday, February 2, 2013The wave of audits was announced by the federal government in the 2012 budget, and some groups have been under threat of losing their charitable status for more than two years. The list of targets includes Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Canada Without Poverty, and the David Suzuki Foundation.

The Canada Revenue Agency says its work is conducted without political direction from government. (Source: National Post)

SOCIAL MEDIA