Rethink Campaigns

Prime Minister Stephen Harper on American Funding of Canadian Environmentalists Against the Northern Gateway Enbridge Pipeline

Back in September, Globe and Mail columnist, Gary Mason predicted that the American funding of Canadian environmental groups would become one of the discussion points in the debate over the Northern Gateway Enbridge pipeline. Well, that's exactly what seems to be happening. (See: The next great pipeline debate - and American funding).

In an interview with Global TV in Vancouver, Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper was asked about opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline. This new pipeline would allow Canada to export Alberta oil to Asia, via a port at Kitimat. One of the trade consequences of opening the Northern Gateway would be that the U.S. would lose its monopoly on Canadian oil exports.

Here's what Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Global TV:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper: There are environmentalists who will oppose any of these projects.  Obviously, there will be environmental assessments and there always have to be negotiations with First Nations but that all said, this is a critical and important project to Canada as a whole.

Global TV: Canadian opposition may not be the only stumbling block.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper: I think we'll see significant American interests trying to line up against the Northern Gateway project, precisely because its not in the interests of the United States. Its in the interests of Canada.

Global TV: Could they do anything to stop it?

Prime Minister Harper: Well, they'll funnel money through environmental groups and others in order to try to slow it down but, as I say, we'll make sure that the best interests of Canada are protected.

Glad to hear it said.

Top 20 USA Grants to Canadian ENGOs: $116 Million

Over the past decade, American foundations have granted a minimum of $300 million for environmental campaigns in Canada, according to my analysis of the tax returns of these U.S. foundations. The total value of the top 20 grants, as listed in the table below, is approximately $116 million.

Most of these grants are not among the most telling, nor do they constitute the bulk of the money that American foundations have paid to environmental organizations in Canada. However, what this list does indicate is just how big some of these grants are.

Some of these grants are to the American counter-parts of Canadian environmental groups, for example, the U.S. Tides Foundation (Tides USA) and Ducks Unlimited USA.

As shown in the figure above, the biggest grants were for the Boreal Forest Initiative and the Great Bear Rainforest Initiative. For the Boreal Forest Initiative, the largest 10 grants alone totaled nearly $60 million. The largest seven grants for the Great Bear Rainforest Initiative totaled approximately $40 million. Of that, $12 million was ear-marked specifically for First Nations on the strategic, north coast of British Columbia.

For a larger version of the table below, click on the table itself:

Below, here are links to these grants in the on-line databases and tax returns of the American foundations:

• $15 million - A "program-related investment" from the David & Lucile Packard Foundation of up to $15 million to the Nature Conservancy to support both environmental protection and economic diversification in 21 million acres of coastal rainforest in British Columbia. (2005)

• $12,000,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "to continue work that has been instrumental in protecting significant amounts of boreal wilderness at the provincial and territorial government level." (2004)

• $8,413,822 granted by the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation to Tides Canada "for  Supporting the Pacific North Coast Integrated Management Area Initiative." (2010)
  

• $7,000,000  granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "to protect North Americas boreal forest by providing support for the Canadian Boreal Initiative and other conservation organizations." (2007)

• $6,500,000 granted from the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation to the Pew Charitable Trusts "for general support of the Western Boreal Forest Public Land Conservation and Responsible (Energy Development). (2006)

• $6,100,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "To protect the Canadian Boreal Forest." (2009)

• $5,842,736 granted by the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation to the Coast Conservation Endowment Fund Foundation (B.C. First Nations) for "British Columbia Salmon Conservation - Great Bear Rainforest." (2007)
  

• $5,756,680 granted by the David & Lucile Packard Foundation to Tides Canada Foundation "To fulfill the Foundation's commitment to the Coast Conservation Endowment Fund Foundation." (2007)
  

• $5,336,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "to protect North Americas boreal forest by providing support for the Canadian Boreal Initiative and other conservation organizations." (2006)

• $5,000,000 granted by the Oak Foundation to the Global Campaign for Climate Action “to mobilize civil society and public opinion in Canada to support transformational change and rapid action to save the planet from dangerous levels of climate change. The GCCA will facilitate civil society to undertake massive public organising, rigorous and rapid analysis, nimble co-ordination and targeted, effective campaigning at all levels.” (2009)

• $4,860,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "to protect North Americas Boreal forest by continuing to host the Canadian Boreal Initiative." (2007)

• $4,500,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA "for a scientifically based, public education campaign supporting permanent protection of wilderness in the Canadian boreal forest." (2002)

• $4,500,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA in 2003 "for a scientifically based, public education campaign supporting permanent protection of wilderness in the Canadian boreal forest."(2003)
  

• $4,400,000 granted by the Pew Charitable Trusts to Ducks Unlimited USA  "To protect Canadas Boreal Forest by providing support to the main partner in the International Boreal Conservation Campaign, providing annual support for Ducks Unlimited boreal campaign staff, the Canadian Boreal Initiative project within Ducks Unlimited, and consulting contracts with the Boreal Songbird Initiative and other key IBCC campaign partners." (2009)

• $4,000,000 granted by the William & Flora Hewlett Foundationto the Pew Charitable Trusts "for general support of the International Boreal Conservation Campaign." (2004)

• $3,956,632 granted by the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation to Tides Canada Foundation "for the Ecosystem-Based Management Implementation Donor Advised Fund." (2007)
  

• $3,562,658 granted by the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation to Tides Canada  for "First Nations Areas Based Management." (2007)

• $3,434,245  granted by the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation to Tides Canada "for the Coast Opportunities Foundation Donor Advised Fund." (2007)

• $3,000,000 granted by the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation to Tides USA "for reducing the environmental impacts of oil and gas development in Northern Canada." (2008)

• $3,000,000 granted by the David & Lucile Packard Foundation to Tides Canada Foundation "To support ecosystem-based management implementation in the Great Bear Rainforest through 2010." (2007)

Open Letter to Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson RE: Campaign Funding

November 22, 2011

Mayor Robertson,

I wish you and your team great success in making Vancouver the greenest city in the world and ending homelessness. I support many of your initiatives, in particular, your promise to put a moratorium on the expansion of gambling in downtown Vancouver.

As before, I am writing to you as a member of the public. I am not part of any campaign or any political party.

Yesterday, in your CKNW interview with Bill Good, you referred to my questions about your campaign funding as "baseless allegations." I find this comment difficult to reconcile with your own statements to the editorial board of the Vancouver Sun, on November 10, 2011.

According to the blog of your Vancouver Sun editorial board meeting, one of the questions asked by columnist Harvey Enchin, was about Interdependent Investments Ltd. (II Ltd.), a low-profile "investment firm" that made two modest donations to Vision Vancouver for a total of $6,000 between 2008 and 2010.

Mr. Enchin drew your attention to the fact that II Ltd. doesn't appear to have any revenue streams other than the Endswell Foundation ("Endswell"). "Ergo, a registered charity donated to Vision Vancouver," Mr. Enchin surmised.

The Vancouver Sun's blog reports that you responded by saying that corporations are allowed to donate to political parties. Mr. Echin then asked, "Do you know what the company does?" "I don't drill down to the details and the operating backgrounds of all our donors," you replied, according to the Vancouver Sun's blog.

Of all the donors to Vision Vancouver, I would think that II Ltd. would be one of the easiest donors for you to find out about.  After all, Joel Solomon, your biggest financial backer in the previous election, is the president of II Ltd. One of Joel Solomon's "investment firms," Renewal Partners, is supposedly the big investor behind your company, Happy Planet. Furthermore, the treasurer of Vision Vancouver, Martha Burton, is the long-time secretary of II Ltd., and is the vice-president of Renewal Partners.

Incidentally, I have noticed that according to company records, Ms. Burton's long-standing involvement with II Ltd. was quietly discontinued in April of 2011 - one week after I sent you an open letter asking questions about II Ltd.

U.S. tax returns show that over the years, the Endswell Foundation paid staff at Renewal Partners a total of $2.3 million in salaries. Endswell also paid $1.4 million to Interdependent Investments Ltd. That's a total of $3.7 million that went from Mr. Solomon's charity to Mr. Solomon's two "investment firms," and towards the payment of staff salaries at at least one of those firms. That included $979,529 for Mr. Solomon himself, U.S. tax returns say.

If you don't "drill down to the details and the operating backgrounds of donors," as you told the Vancouver Sun, how do you know that $194,000 from Mr. Solomon's "investment firms" and Strategic Communications did not originate from the millions of dollars that Mr. Solomon's charity paid to these firms?

If II Ltd. has no sources of revenue other than Endswell, it follows that campaign donations that were attributed to II Ltd. must have originated from Endswell. In my opinion, this would then call into question all of the campaign finance reporting by the treasurer of Vision Vancouver as she was closely involved in both "investment firms," the charity, and your political party.

I have no doubt that Vision Vancouver has not received money directly from a registered charity. That would be too obvious.  My question is whether Vision Vancouver indirectly received campaign donations (a total of $339,265, according to my calculations) that originated from Endswell or Tides Canada. In other words, was a substantial amount of money passed through these so-called "investment firms" and P.R. firms that were used, for lack of a better term, as a front?

I also hope that you will help to bring about some answers with regards to Tides Canada's "strategic plan to address the development of oil and gas in British Columbia," and whether campaign donations to pave your path to power in B.C. politics is any part of that.

Sincerely,

Vivian Krause

Tides Canada's "Strategic Plan" to Address Oil & Gas Development in B.C.

"The election of Mayor Robertson is the result of creating conditions where these things could take hold. Nearly 20 years of moving in a purposeful direction."

- Joel Solomon, The Huffington Post 

Tides Canada funds hundreds of charities, it says, but a close analysis of the U.S. tax returns finds that the major thrust of work of Tides Canada appears to be to channel large amounts of money, especially from American foundations, to First Nations and environmental groups, particularly on the strategic, north coast of British Columbia.

Tides Canada has made grants to a wide variety of organizations including children's hospitals and the Dalai Lama but its biggest project, by far, has been the Great Bear Rainforest on B.C.'s north coast.  In 2009, about half of Tides Canada's grants went for projects on the northern B.C. coast and for "reforming" Canada's energy sector, according to my analysis of tax returns. Obviously, something about this relatively small but very strategic part of Canada's coastline - the gateway to Asia - is very important to Tides Canada.

Back in 2004, the San Francisco-based, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation ("Hewlett") paid Tides Canada $70,000 "for the development of a strategic plan to address the oil and gas industry in British Columbia."  Hewlett also granted $50,000 to Tides Canada "for developing a business plan for the organization."

Since 2004, Hewlett has granted $26 million to Tides Canada and other groups to tackle the oil and gas industry in Canada. That's a lot of money, and it raises a fair question: What was the strategic plan? 

Since Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson was a director of Tides Canada back in 2004 when the plan was hatched, one would think that he would know the plan.

To read this entire post, click here.

Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer

Vancouver Mayor Dismisses Funding Concerns with CKNW's Bill Good

On Monday, two days after his re-election as mayor of Canada's third largest city, Gregor Robertson was asked by Bill Good, a prominent Vancouver radio host, about whether he would comment on "allegations" that his political party, Vision Vancouver, has received more than $300,000 in campaign donations that originated from two registered charities: the Endswell Foundation and Tides Canada. Bill Good referred to these allegations as stemming from the research posted at this blog.

What I've been trying to do, actually, is to raise questions that I believe are important and fair. I haven't made allegations per se.

Mayor Robertson responded, "No, they're baseless allegations.  This has been an on-going attempt to smear, to drag down foundations which are public foundations audited by Revenue Canada and businesses..." 

To listen to Mayor Robertson's response, click on the link below:

CKNW Bill Good & Mayor Gregor Robertson on Campaign Donations 

Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson Avoids Campaign Funding Question With The Vancouver Sun

On Thursday, November 10, 2011, one week before the 2011 Civic Election, Mayor Gregor Robertson met with the editorial board of the Vancouver Sun.  Mayor Roberton, an avid cyclist, was asked about a variety of issues ranging from whether he would stay in office for the whole term, to whether he cycles in his suit. One of the questions put to Robertson by columnist Harvey Enchin, was about Interdependent Investments Ltd. (II Ltd.), a low-profile investment firm that made two modest contributions to Vision Vancouver for a total of $6,000 between 2008 and 2010.

Enchin drew the mayor's attention to the fact that II Ltd. doesn't appear to have any revenue streams other than the Endswell Foundation ("Endswell"). "Ergo, a registered charity donated to Vision Vancouver," Enchin surmised.

"Corporations are allowed to donate to political parties," responded the mayor.

"Do you know what the company does?" Enchin asked.

"I don't drill down to the details and the operating backgrounds of all our donors," the mayor replied.

In short, Mayor Robertson didn't answer the question. In a Global TV interview, Mayor Robertson said categorically that Vision Vancouver hasn't received any funding from charities.  That's a no-brainer. One only has to read the campaign finance disclosure statements to know that.  That's also NOT the question that I've been asking.  My question is about whether Vision Vancovuer indirectly received campaign finance that originated from Endswell and/or Tides Canada, but was passed through one of two "investment firms (Renewal Partners or Interdependent Investments Ltd.) or three P.R. firms (Strategic Communications, Convergence Communications or Communicopia).

Of all the donors to Vision Vancouver, one would think that II Ltd. is a donor that the mayor would look into. CityCaucus, a Vancouver blog that is sympathetic to Robertson's political opposition, has been asking questions about Interdependent Investments Ltd. for a year now and a certain tenacious blogger (yours truly) has been writing open letters to the mayor about II Ltd. for even longer, since September 23, 2010. Last fall, the mayor replied but didn't answer any questions about II Ltd. "Your letter is inquiring about business matters of third parties," he wrote.

Evidently, II Ltd. should be one of the easiest donors for the mayor to find out about.  After all, the president of II Ltd. is Joel Solomon, Robertson's single biggest financial backer in the last election. The long-time secretary of II Ltd. is Martha Burton, the treasurer of Vision Vancouver.

For the Vancouver Sun's live blog of the editorial meeting, click  here.

Tides Canada, Fraser Institute & the Vancouver Foundation: A Comparison

With 250 employees, a payroll of $10.5 million and annual revenue of $20 million, Tides Canada has become a powerhouse of influence and yet most Canadians have never heard of it. That's why this post offers an overview of Tides Canada in comparison with two well-known Vancouver-based, charitable foundations:  The Vancouver Foundation and the Fraser Institute.

Like Tides Canada, the Fraser Institute has two operating units:  The Fraser Institute and the Free Market Research Foundation. The table below provides figures for the individual operating units and for the organization as a whole.

Activities

In terms of their activities, these three organizations are different.  The Fraser Institute is primarily a research organization and source of information and analysis, particularly about free market economics. The Vancouver Foundation is a grant-making foundation.  Tides Canada is comprised of two parts, a grant-making foundation and an internal, operating charity known as Tides Canada Initiatives Society (formerly the Sage Centre).

Assets

In terms of assets, the Vancouver Foundation is in a league of its own with nearly $750 million.

The total assets of the Fraser Institute are less than one third of the assets of Tides Canada.

In less than ten years, Tides Canada has increased its total assets from about $2 million to nearly $40 million. Where that money came from is a bit of a mystery.  Tides Canada says that it was "founded" by Carol Newell. Media have reported that she "activiated" her personal wealth and "infused" the charitable sector but as far as I can tell, it has never said that she actually gave her own personal money. Unanswered questions remain about whether the $60 million that she supposedly brought to Tides Canada is from her personal wealth or whether this is  money from U.S. foundations.

Revenue

In terms of revenue and expenditures, Tides Canada is almost twice as big as the Fraser Institute.

In 2010, the Fraser Institute reported total expenditures of nearly $11 million while Tides Canada reported nearly $20 million according to consolidated financial statements for  Tides Canada Foundation and Tides Canada Initiatives Society.

Staff & Payroll

When it comes to staff and payroll, Tides Canada is way ahead of both the Fraser Institute and the Vancovuer Foundation. In fact, Tides Canada has a staff that's roughly twice the size of the Fraser Institute and the Vancouver Foundation combined.  Tides Canada reported a total of 251 employees in 2010 while the Fraser Insitute reported 71 and the Vancouver Foundation reported 57.

Tides Canada's payroll for staff and consultants was a total of $10.5 million in 2010 whereas the Fraser Institute spent $5.7 million for human resources and the Vancouver Foundation spent slightly under $4 million. Indeed, when one looks at the staff size and the total payroll at Tides Canada, its clear that something about its activities appears to be far more labor intensive than what's going on at other grant-making foundations.

Foreign Funding

In terms of income from foreign sources, Tides Canada reported $8 million for 2010 while the Fraser Institute reported $1.9 million.  In other words, Tides Canada took in nearly four times as much foreign funding as the Fraser Institute, in 2010.  This likely reflects a very large grant to Tides Canada for $8.4 million (previously $8.3 million) from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.

Fundraising

Both the Fraser Institute and the Vancouver Foundation reported about $1 million in fundraising expenses while Tides Canada reported none. And yet, Tides Canada managed to generate revenue of $20 million, nearly $4 million more than was spent. How does Tides Canada manage to pull in $20 million in revenue without spending a penny on fundraising? Who is funding Tides Canada so that it doesn't need to spend any money at all on fundraising?

Please read: Copyright Notice & Disclaimer

"Nothing Short of Explosive," Says CKNW's Bruce Allen

 

For Bruce Allen's  One Minute Reality Check on questions about Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson's campaign finance, click here: 

Bruce Allen, Reality Check

"A Smear Campaign," says Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson About Campaign Finance Questions

 

Asked by CTV about whether Vision Vancouver received campaign funding from U.S. foundations, Mayor Robertson avoids the question by saying, that his party isn't accepting U.S. contributions in this campaign." That's no surprise.  The questions that I've been asking - for over a year - aren't about this campaign. My questions are about the 2008 campaign and how the party paid off its debt after that election.

Mayor Robertson dismisses the issue as "a smear campaign."

Terence Corcoran Weighs In On Vancouver's Mystery Mayor

In The Financial Post, November 16, 2011:

For many Canadians, their first exposure to Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson has come in recent weeks as he rose to defend Occupy Vancouver’s encampment outside the city’s art gallery — and as he waffled on the need to remove the demonstrators.

At times it looked like the youthful Mayor, first elected in 2008, was looking to join the occupiers in solidarity. “There are very legitimate concerns about equality, climate change and the state of the world that almost all of us share and we are willing to see what a global protest like this might precipitate,” he said. “I believe this movement has a lot of support, and kudos to the protesters and police for keeping it constructive and peaceful.”

A heroin overdose death at the occupation site seemed to end the Mayor’s infatuation with the protests. Facing an election on Saturday, the Mayor is now seeking a court injunction to evict Occupy Vancouver. Still, the waffling continues. On Tuesday, he set a new distant deadline: “I want to see [the encampment] gone before the Grey Cup weekend,” he told The Province editorial board, giving OV another week.

So who is this Gregor Robertson? The Occupy Vancouver episode is instructive. If nothing else, Canadians have seen the Mayor as a card-carrying leftist, a sympathizer with unfocused youths, radical activists and a potential mobilizer around a list of fashionable green and social causes. That would not be news to Vancouver voters, who in 2008 installed Mr. Robertson as Mayor and gave members of his new political party, Vision Vancouver, eight of the city’s 11 council seats. What might be news to city voters is the tangled and unusual web of radically minded backers and unusual funders who, in a few short years, have masterminded Vision Vancouver’s takeover of Vancouver City Hall.

Since mayors of Vancouver sometimes use the city as a springboard to provincial politics — former premiers Mike Harcourt and Gordon Campbell being prime recent examples — the answer to the riddle of Gregor Robertson’s rise to local power is of some consequence nationally.

To continue reading, click here.