Ontario “charities”: giving to other “charities”
What we should know about Liberal government-created charities
My previous article on Green Energy subsidies focused on those that grew directly out of the Ontario Ministry of Energy but in the quest to find further information on how the taxpayers are involved (beyond the Ontario Clean Energy Benefit) I was led to Liberal government-created charities.
This is just one of those that we taxpayers should question as to its purpose in life. The first annual report of Friends of the Greenbelt contained the following message:
“The physical area of the Greenbelt is enormous and the challenges inherent in pursuing our mission are significant. As such, we need to concentrate our resources over a short time period in order to achieve our ambitious goals and we intend to gift the $25 million endowment over a period of five years.”
Details follow on the success of gifting:
Why has the Ontario Liberal Government created charities focused on anthropogenic global warming or AGW? One example isthe aforementioned “Friends of the Greenbelt” (FOG), created in 2005, funded almost entirely by the Ministry of the Environment and, now, Climate Change. Dalton McGuinty‘s 2003 Speech from the Throne included the following: “It will keep its commitment to introduce legislation that will establish a permanent greenbelt across the Golden Horseshoe, and a new commission to protect it.”
Why has FOG used the $45 million in taxpayer dollars to hand out money to the likes of other charities such as: Environmental Defence (5),NB: David Suzuki Foundation (3), Sierra Club (5), Toronto Environmental Alliance (5), Pembina, Tides, etc.
NB: Brackets ( ) indicate the number of grants those charities received. Also one should note Rick Smith, formerly Executive Director of Environmental Defence, is a Board Member of FOG.
Why has FOG doled out tax dollars to the likes of Ecojustice (2), University of Toronto (2), TV Ontario, Corporate Knights, OSEA and another charity that the Liberal Party have supplied with over $150 million of tax dollars as grants and recently bailed out at a cost of $300 million? I am referring of course to the MaRS Discovery District.
Why does FOG even have “charity” status, having raised only $5,779 in charitable donations in their last reported year-end of March 31, 2014?
Why did FOG’s staff compensation in 2014 ($1.1 million) exceed annual grants ($1 million) and represent over 50% of their expenses?
I am sure the likes of Environmental Defence, David Suzuki Foundation, the Sierra Club, and the others loved the fact that fund raising was made so much easier by having an entity focused on doling out $25 million of taxpayers’ money, and to see it replaced with another $20 million as soon as the first “endowment” was gone.
February 12, 2015