Finance Committee on May 3rd, 2012

[Andrea McManus]

No, I don't. I think the costs would decrease. It's not about efficiency; it's about effectiveness.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

I'm sorry, there are about 30 seconds left, so I will ask for a quick answer from Mr. Howlett.

[Dennis Howlett]

I don't have an answer to that, but would just point out that even though it's sometimes assumed that charities can deliver programs more efficiently than government, that's not always the case, precisely because of the costs of fundraising. That is a big cost. It depends, and it varies a lot. It's really hard to give any one answer about that. It is an issue that should be considered.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

You have 15 seconds.

[Guy Caron, NDP, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Ms. MacKenzie.

[Ruth MacKenzie]

As Ms. McManus says, it's about effectiveness.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Merci, Mr. Caron.

Ms. McLeod, you have five minutes.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I also would like to thank the guests.

Mr. Patrick, I find it quite fascinating. I think there's amazing opportunity. One of the issues we're looking at as a federal government, and the purpose of doing this study, is whether or not there is anything the federal government can, should, or needs to do to support this as an option for charities moving forward? Or is this just good information for us to have?

[Jim Patrick]

We're not seeking any specific changes to the taxation framework. We have in interest in ensuring that any changes don't impact the efficiency or effectiveness of the program.

If I could just use another 10 seconds, if we could encourage everyone with a federal cellphone to do something, it would be to sign up for our free wireless amber alert program that allows you to get free amber alerts on your cellphone as a text message. You can localize it to your area or riding. You could set it up to receive alerts in your riding and in Ottawa, so that you don't get them in areas where you don't live.

So we have one standing recommendation: We would like to see every federal public servant signed up for our wireless amber alert program.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you. That's a good idea. So you have Rogers and Bell and Telus and the smaller groups all as part of your network?

[Jim Patrick]

Yes, as an association we represent all of the incumbent wireless carriers, all of the new entrants, and all of the regionals—so, everybody.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Great, thank you.

I have to make a comment, Mr. Howlett. Certainly I appreciate your comments concerning how important it is that there are front-line groups that have the ability to have input on policy, which is why we actually created the 10% rule many years ago. The move of the government, and it doesn't matter what the organization is advocating for, is to ensure that the rules around the 10% are actually followed.

I think it's important to recognize that the rules have not changed; it's just that it's important that the CRA, in any program it has, have some tools and have some opportunity to monitor. If I were giving to Big Brothers and they were spending all their time in meetings for some issue as opposed to doing what I as a charitable giver expected them to be doing, I would be very concerned. So I think it's important to recognize that the rules aren't changing; that there's a reason the rule was put there in the first place, but that it is deemed important, and that's why the 10% piece is also there. As the parliamentary secretary for the revenue agency, I thought it was important for me to make that comment.

Ms. MacKenzie, we've heard a fair amount about stretch tax credits and a fair amount about the capital issue. I appreciate your focus on the volunteers. I have had people in my riding recently advocating for credits for volunteers, and I appreciate your comments about how complicated this is and how it may be moving us away from the whole volunteerism focus.

You talked about something like police checks supporting training. Could you talk a little more, without going down that path of tax credits, about how there might be some support that the federal government can give in terms of volunteers? What would you envision there?

Also, I anticipate that although the police checks make eminent sense, there would probably be millions and millions of them, with a fairly significant cost at $40 per check. Talk a little bit more about how you would envision that whole volunteer overlap.

[Ruth MacKenzie]

We know that volunteering is still a fairly middle-class construct. Volunteers tend to be well-educated and tend to be on higher ends of the income scale. We'd like to see some analysis done of the economic barriers to volunteering. Many volunteers can't participate in volunteering because of the costs associated with it, and many organizations are not in a position to support some of the direct costs associated with volunteering. We'd like to see a system that could support some recognition of the direct costs, supporting them in kind, perhaps in funding initiatives, and that would ask organizations to quantify the costs associated with volunteering.

Police checks are important, because of course volunteers who are working with vulnerable groups want their clients to be safe. Police checks are one component of a more robust screening package, though. We would like, and we have some work underway with the Department of Public Safety right now to develop, some real tools to support organizations to implement broad-based screening practices. Having those broad practices, based on a risk assessment, will actually minimize the number of police checks that happen.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms. McLeod.

Mr. Marston, you have five minutes.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I believe that if our chair doesn't show up twice in a row, we should have this chair permanently.

I want to give a bit of a history lesson here to our folks across the way. In 1927 in Hamilton, the Chamber of Commerce and the labour movement started the United Way there. I served about 25 years in association with them. During the 1980s, we had to sort out where we were going to place our donor dollars, because government was backing away from a lot of the areas it had traditionally funded. That was a very trying time, because that was when we were getting our first food banks. As we all recall, everybody told us they were a temporary measure. Well, that temporary measure has gotten out of hand.

Imagine Canada was before the committee and made a couple of statements that I think should be referred to again. It expressed concern about the impression that charities and non-profits are not accountable for public money. I think they're very accountable for public money, and that needs to be stated again for the record, because it is very important. There's a kind of cloud that hangs over some agencies because of media reports and questions about how much of the donor dollar goes here or there. I want to commend you all for the work you're doing, because I think it's significant. You're important to Canadians.

Ms. McManus, I have a very specific question. What do you believe are the overall effects of the elimination of capital gains on donations of publicly listed securities?

[Andrea McManus]

Unfortunately, we don't have quantified numbers on that, other than knowing that a study was done in the year after the capital gains was completely lifted, and the number of gifts of securities doubled and the value of those gifts far more than doubled.

Anecdotally, in my own experience, until the economy took a downturn and the tax advantage of gifting by securities became less attractive, every organization I'm involved with or have worked with—and across the board—was seeing increases. I know that for our local United Way, their campaign goal in the year following was somewhere in the vicinity of $46 million that about 40% came through gifts of securities. In the previous year, it had been less than 10%.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Howlett, a question that I think is more in line with where your testimony came from is, why are corporate donations treated as tax deductions rather than tax credits?

[Dennis Howlett]

I don't think that what's being proposed is for corporations, but for individuals. In the case of corporations, I'm not sure about the rules that apply to them.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

I'm just rejoining the committee. In the conversation around the stretch tax, it's hard to find anybody who's speaking against it. It seems to me, at least on this side of the table, that it is the way we're beginning to think we should be going.

I'll stay with Mr. Howlett. Have you observed trends in charitable giving from Canadian corporations with respect perhaps to their location or the business sector they're in? Is there a stand-out area that you've noticed relative to tax treatment?

[Dennis Howlett]

Corporate donations are actually not as large as donations from individuals. They get a lot of publicity, because usually when they give they ask that their name be prominently displayed.

[Wayne Marston, NDP, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Sure, it's their corporate image.

[Dennis Howlett]

So there is a perception that they give more than they really do. It is not as big an amount as one might think. I don't know the exact figures on it, but I don't think they can be....

One of the problems we have is that corporations and rich individuals tend to give to large organizations such as universities, hospitals, and so on, and the charitable groups doing work in community service serving the poor only get about 10% of the charitable dollar. That's a problem.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Peggy Nash]

Thank you, Mr. Howlett.

Thank you, Mr. Marston.

Mr. Adler, you have five minutes.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you all for coming today.

I would like to comment that Mr. Marston knows about the United Way founding because he was there in 1927.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!