Evidence of meeting #62 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Also, West Coast Environmental Law was funded by the Rockefeller Brothers Foundation to prevent the development of a tanker port and a pipeline.
8:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Why aren't they working on an anti-oil sands campaign in northern Alberta? They seem to be working just on the delivery of it to the west coast.
8:15 p.m.
As an Individual
There are a number of things that just don't make sense. The best example I can think of is that the Hewlett and Packard foundations have put $1 billion over the last decade—$1 billion—into the development of the renewal energy strategy.
Here's the thing. The Hewlett Foundation spent more than $50 million in British Columbia, the highest jurisdiction in the world for renewable energy. It seems to me that British Columbia is the last place on earth where this American foundation should be spending its money.
It's the lack of logic in the campaign that makes me ask questions about it.
8:15 p.m.
Conservative
8:15 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes. Frankly regardless of the intentions, the net effect is that they've put $150 million into the creation of the Great Bear Rainforest, which is an area the size of Switzerland that's become basically a no-trade zone right smack on the strategic gateway to Asia. It happens to go all the way from the northern tip of Vancouver Island to the southern tip of Alaska.
8:15 p.m.
As an Individual
So I think we need to ask ourselves whether that was intentional or not.
8:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you, Ms. Krause. Unfortunately we'll have to move on to the next member.
Thank you, Mr. Jean.
Mr. Brison, please.
8:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you very much to each of you.
This chill effect, potentially.... I'm hearing the same from non-profit organizations and boards on those organizations—people who have opinions. For instance, if you run a food bank you probably have an opinion on poverty and poverty-related issues. If you are involved in an environmental organization, say the Pembina Institute, you probably have political views on environmental and related issues.
Mr. Ellerton, you mentioned twice that Greenpeace lost their tax number with Revenue Canada. That was accomplished before we had these changes. Your example proved we have the capacity now legislatively and from a regulatory perspective for Revenue Canada to act. You cited that example.
Isn't that an example that our current approach is working?
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
I think the Canada Revenue Agency has resources and the potential to look after these things, but it's my understanding that Bill C-38 will increase transparency to further explore the disclosure of organizations that engage in political activity that can potentially be violating charities law by abusing the subsidy of the Canadian taxpayers. It also provides resources to the Canada Revenue Agency that not only enforce the compliance efforts but also increase education so that all charities know what's required of them under the law.
8:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Are you familiar with an organization or a family of American philanthropists, the Koch brothers?
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
No. Ethical Oil only accepts donations from Canadian businesses and Canadian individuals. We do not accept any foreign money.
8:15 p.m.
Liberal
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
That is correct. Ethical Oil has a policy to only accept donations from Canadians and Canadian businesses.
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
No, Ethical Oil has faced legal action from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. They suppressed free speech and succeeded in having CTV not air our ad that contrasted Canadian ethical oil to Saudi Arabia's conflict oil. As a result of the potential for legal action, we're not going to expose our donors to that sort of litigation.
8:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
So because you're not a charity, you do not believe you should have to....
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
Yes. Ethical Oil is in full compliance with the law. Registered charities receive a subsidy from the taxpayers of Canada for the work they do, and they have a certain level of rules to follow. A non-profit organization has a different set of rules, and we are in full compliance with the law.
8:15 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
So for instance if we were to say any group or organization that engages in political advocacy, regardless of whether or not they have a tax number, ought to provide full financial disclosure in the interest of transparency, which is consistent with more accountability, would you support that kind of legislation?
8:15 p.m.
Executive Director, EthicalOil.org
Ethical Oil does not have a position on comprehensive tax policies and whatnot, but we feel registered charities that receive a public subsidy for their work, a taxpayer subsidy, should have a greater requirement for transparency as a result of the gift from the public purse.
8:20 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
If for instance the Koch brothers gave $500,000 to the Fraser Institute, and the Fraser Institute, while providing information and research on a lot of topics, were to advocate—
8:20 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
—for instance, for a pipeline, would that be political advocacy?