Disclaimer: This blog offers the author's opinions and the analyses on which they are based.
As I've said before, questions need to be asked about the oversight of registered charities by the Charities Directorate at the Canada Revenue Agency. Initially, I came to this conclusion because of how the Charities Directorate handled the controversial audits of the political activity of registered charities. Further to that, on the basis of additional research into the revenue and expenditures of Chimp Foundation and a network of charities that shares a common core of directors with Chimp, it is clear to me that there is some monkey business going on in the charitable sector and that, unfortunately, the Charities Directorate is allowing some charities to run amok.
Click here to continue reading about how I came to look at the financials of Chimp Foundation, and what I found.
For a list of more than 100 charities that share a common core of directors including Blake Bromley and the employees of his company, Benefic Group, click here. Eight of these charities have had their status revoked by the Canada Revenue Agency:
Updated November 25, 2018.
Blake Bromley, a Vancouver-based lawyer, claims to have registered more than 650 charities and executed more than $2 billion worth of charitable giving. Mr. Bromley refers to himself as "one of the world's foremost experts in charity law, and the recognized pioneer of charitable law and gifting in Canada."
Of the 650 charities that Mr. Bromley has been involved with, so far I have taken a look at the finances of 70 registered charities. Of these, the charitable status of 20 has been revoked; seven had their status revoked following an audit by the CRA while 13 revoked their status voluntarily. All of these charities share a common core of directors, including Blake Bromley and the employees of his company, Benefic Group.
Click here for a summary of my analysis of the revenue, expenditures and grantmaking of 25 charities where Blake Bromley is involved. Have a look at the pattern of revenue and expenditures of these 25 registered charities and ask yourself, is this charity?
For excerpts of the full report, click here: The Tar Sands Campaign Against Overseas Exports of Canadian Oil: Activism or Economic Sabotage?
On the basis of the evidence presented in this report, it is clear that The Northern Gateway pipeline and other proposed pipelines for the overseas export of oil from western Canada have been deliberately sabotaged as part of a multi-million dollar, U.S.-funded effort referred to as "The Tar Sands Campaign." This effort aims to stop the export of oil from western Canada by pipeline, tanker and by rail. The absence of a successful response to anti-pipeline activism and other factors also contributed to pipeline project cancellations.
When the American funding behind The Tar Sands Campaign first came to light in 2010, the strategy of the U.S. funders was not entirely clear. But now it is. In the words of the original director of The Tar Sands Campaign, from the very beginning the strategy was to "land-lock" oil from western Canada within North America so that it could not reach overseas markets where it could attain a higher price per barrel.
The Tides Foundation alone has made more than 400 payments totalling $40 million to 100 organizations involved in The Tar Sands Campaign.
Over the years, The Tar Sands Campaign has broadened from environmental activism to elections activism. After Canada's 2015 federal election, The Tar Sands Campaign organizers claimed credit for helping to defeat the Conservative Party of Canada.
Among the Canadian participants, two of the most heavily funded organizations are Leadnow and The Dogwood Initiative. Both are active in municipal, provincial and federal elections, especially in British Columbia. What this means is that one of the factors in Canadian elections at all levels of government is a multi-million dollar effort that continues the U.S. monopoly on Canadian oil exports, keeping Canada over a barrel.
To continue reading, click here.
More information:
For my complete report (99 pages) click here: Election Activism: Who Is The Dogwood Initiative & Who Funds It?
The Dogwood Initiative is a non-profit organization that campaigns against coal and also plays a lead role in the anti-pipeline, Tar Sands Campaign. Created by the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, The Tides Foundation and other U.S. foundations, The Tar Sands Campaign aims to sabotage the Canadian oil industry by undermining investor confidence and “land-locking” oil sands crude within North America so that it cannot reach overseas markets where it could fetch a higher price per barrel. U.S. foundations that support this campaign have paid Dogwood at least $2.7 million (2008 - 2016).
Dogwood runs get-the-vote-out campaigns in municipal, provincial and federal elections in order to elect candidates and political parties who oppose pipelines and more broadly, to defeat any politician or political party who supports the Canadian oil & gas industry.
Dogwood claims to have helped elect seven mayors during the 2014 municipal elections in B.C. Dogwood also claims to have helped to defeat eight Conservative incumbents in the 2015 federal election. In B.C.’s 2017 provincial election, Dogwood helped to make “corporate cash” a central issue and got voters to the polls in key ridings, especially in Vancouver. It follows that one of the many factors in election outcomes in Canada is a U.S.-funded campaign to keep Canada over a barrel.
For 2016/2017, Dogwood’s total revenue was $1.6 million, up four-fold since 2010. According to the analysis presented here, funding from U.S. foundations accounted for roughly 15% of Dogwood’s total revenue for 2016. With 260,000 supporters, most of whom are Canadian, Dogwood has came to the point that with or without U.S. funding, Dogwood can influence elections at all levels of government.
For more information, click here: Election Activism: Who Is The Dogwood Initiative & Who Funds It?
Leadnow is a Vancouver-based, non-profit society that was created in 2010 with the goal of bringing to Canada a model of on-line, political campaigning and movement organizing that began in the U.S. behind President Barack Obama.
During Canada’s 2015 federal election, Leadnow ran a strategic voting initiative called Vote Together. Leadnow claims to have defeated 25 Conservative incumbents. That’s a stretch but in a small number of ridings, it is conceivable that Leadnow had an impact. For example, in Elmswood-Transcona where Leadnow had paid staff and 130 volunteers, the Conservative incumbent was defeated by only 61 votes.
Leadnow presents itself as a thoroughly Canadian “youth-led” organization with a modest budget, the brainchild of two university students, Adam Shedletzky and Jamie Biggar. But that is not the whole story.
Leadnow’s original business plan, written in 2010, called for $16 million over ten years. Leadnow acknowledges that received seed capital but won't identify the source.
At least 17 companies & consultants have provided services to Leadnow, including the design of its brand, the creation of its donor base, surveys, polls and report editing.
One of Leadnow’s original "founding advisors" is Ben Brandzel. At the time, Brandzel was the Director of Strategic Incubation at the Citizen Engagement Laboratory (CEL), based in Oakland, California. With funding via The Tides Foundation (“Tides”), the CEL began in 2008, the same year that Tides began to fund its anti-pipeline, Tar Sands Campaign.
In 2011, Brandzel came to Canada to help set up Leadnow and has since provided behind-the-scenes help. On the basis if these facts it appears that Leadnow was set up as part of the CEL’s “Strategic Incubation” program.’
One of CEL's fiscally sponsored projects is the Online Progressive Engagement Network (OPEN). Ben Brandzel is its director. OPEN describes itself as "a sisterhood of grassroots campaigning organizations from around the world." As it appears, the CEL bundled its "strategic incubation" projects – including Leadnow - into OPEN. OPEN’s member groups appear to be authentically grassroots outfits but, in fact, some of them, including Leadnow, began with help from the CEL.
Leadnow staff have attended OPEN meetings in New York, England, Germany and Australia, photos show. In January of 2016, Leadnow received an award from OPEN for its campaign, Vote Together, that helped defeat the Harper government. And yet, in all Leadanow’s on-line communication, not one single mention of Leadnow’s involvement with OPEN could be found.
Why the secrecy if there is nothing to hide?
OPEN calls itself as "the people behind the people." OPEN says it is a ‘B2B’ organization that intentionally keeps "a very low public profile" because of the sensitive political implications of its work. OPEN “helps insights, expertise and collaboration to flow seamlessly across borders,” it says. OPEN gives “special access to best-in-class external resources ranging from video production to management coaching.” “Seasoned campaign veterans provide expert training and strategic support,” OPEN says.
In a job ad that OPEN posted in 2014, OPEN indicated that it anticipated the possibility of assisting Leadnow with the production of advertisements for use during the 2015 federal election. OPEN has also advertised to hire staff that could be based in Vancouver.
From Leadnow's 2010 Business Plan, it is clear that as far back as 2010, Leadnow has been focused on defeating the Conservative government. Leadnow's "Investor Package" states that Leadnow intended to "offer tangible support to parties that adopt their policies, and use tools like strategic voting to "swing elections" to reflect Canada's progressive majority." Evidently, it stands to reason that the Citizen Engagement Laboratory appears to have knowingly supported a foreign organization with a clear, multi-million dollar plan to defeat a democratically elected, Canadian government. Clearly, this is not what American charitable organizations are supposed to do.
Initially, Leadnow had a policy that prohibited “international funding.” At some point before the spring of 2012, that policy was re-written, records show, and the ban on international funding was discontinued.
Leadnow has received funding from The Tides Foundation in San Francisco, both directly and indirectly through the Sisu Institute, based in Sointula B.C. Neither Leadnow nor Sisu will disclose exactly how much of Leadnow’s revenue it receives via Sisu and Tides. For 2015, The Sisu Institute reported total revenue of $1.7 million. Of that, roughly $1 million (nearly 60%) was from the U.S. via Tides in San Francisco. In 2016, Leadnow and the Sisu Institute received US$59,041 and US$201,848, respectively, from Tides.
The most obvious way that Leadnow had an impact in Canada’s 2015 federal election was in terms of ‘getting out the vote,’ particularly in certain ridings. The less obvious means was by running a hard-hitting, negative campaign on social media against the Conservative party, and in particular, against its leader, Stephen Harper. Justin Trudeau hardly needed to “go negative” because Leadnow and other third parties - and much of the media - were doing so, thereby generating a foil of bad press about the Prime Minister and the Conservatives, in general.
To be sure, there is nothing wrong with Leadnow being part of an international network of progressive organizations. However, given Leadnow’s influence in Canada’s 2015 federal election, its electoral reform campaign and activism against important energy and pipeline projects, Leadnow’s funding and U.S. support needs to be out in the open.
For my full report, submitted to Canada Elections in May of 2017, click here: Vivian Krause Who Is Behind Leadnow?
