A grim story of serial depletion of fish stocks, lack of accurate information about fisheries, overfishing and poor management is documented in a new study on the state of Canada’s fisheries.

Less than one quarter of Canadian fish stocks are considered healthy and the status of 45 per cent of stocks couldn’t be determined due to an absence of basic, current information, says the report commissioned by Oceana Canada and conducted by marine biologists.

“As Canadians we perceive ourselves to be good stewards of the environment, but when it comes to our oceans, we have failed to live up to that ideal,” said University of Victoria biologist Julia Baum, lead author of the scientific report.

“We need to get serious about ocean conservation in Canada. Sound management and recovery of our fisheries must become a political priority.”

Too Many Boats, Too Few Fish

Since 1970, the biomass of Canadian marine stocks has declined by 55 per cent and, although more money is being made from the seafood industry than ever before (with $6 billion in exports in 2015), the value is concentrated in a few species — such as Atlantic shellfish, which account for 77 per cent of the country’s seafood value.

That lack of diversification is not sustainable, says the report, predicting that, with the lack of recovery strategies for failing stocks and inadequate legislation (made worse by the weakening of the Fisheries Act under the former Conservative government) stock collapses are likely unless action is taken quickly.

“Canada has fallen well short of the progress made by most developed nations in fulfilling national and international commitments to sustain marine biodiversity,” wrote Jeffrey Hutchings, chair of the Royal Society of Canada Expert Panel on Sustaining Canada’s Marine Biodiversity.

Most of the depletion has happened within the span of a single lifetime beginning with the post-Second World War increase in the number of fishing vessels combined with advances in technological killing power, said Josh Laughren, executive director of Oceana Canada.

“It’s a story of too many boats chasing too few fish, of destructive gear and enormous waste, with science too often falling by the wayside. It’s not just cod numbers that have plummeted, we’ve seen a drop in abundance of all kind of species,” he wrote in the introduction to the report.

Making matters worse is the difficulty in obtaining accurate data, researchers found.

“Partly because of a lack of transparency and partly because of the failure of government to conduct regular assessments, we don’t have a clear picture of the health of Canada’s fish populations,” says the report.

“This stands in stark contrast to the situation in the United Sates and the European Union where stock data and management plans are centrally compiled, publicly available and reported on annually.”

Baum and fellow author Susanna Fuller of Ecology Action Centre looked at 125 stocks, representing the most important commercial harvests and those of greatest conservation concern. They included 28 Atlantic and Arctic species and 18 Pacific species. Salmon were not included as their lives are not spent entirely in the ocean.

Lack of Fisheries Data Hampers Progress

Fuller wrote that fisheries data is often unavailable and there is no central location where Canadians can easily understand the state of fisheries and the reasons behind management decisions.

That lack of transparency was exacerbated by the previous federal government’s cuts to Canada’s science capacity and the policy of discouraging scientists from speaking about their work, according to the report.

For example, Environment and Climate Change Canada published a report this year that rated 48 per cent of Canada’s fish stocks as healthy, but there is no explanation of how those ratings were reached

“This lack of transparency, and therefore public scrutiny, and absence of up-to-date information, creates an environment in which it is all too easy for officials to ignore scientific advice and avoid the tough decisions required to rebuild vulnerable stocks,” says the report.

Canada has a good policy framework in place for fisheries management, but the provisions are not being used, says the report, which points out that, to date, no recovery strategies have been developed for marine fish.

The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) has assessed 28 marine species as being endangered, threatened or of special concern, but they have either been denied listing under the Species At Risk Act or have been waiting for up to 14 years for a decision.

If the species were listed under the Species At Risk Act, the government would be legally required to develop a recovery strategy and an action plan.

Also, the Fisheries Act does not require action when overfishing occurs, there is no requirement to come up with rebuilding plans once stocks are depleted and it does not require quotas to be based on scientific advice, says the report.

A glimmer of hope is offered by the federal government’s announcement that it will be reviewing the Fisheries Act with a view to restoring lost protections and looking at decisions based on science, fact and social responsibility.

The report recommends that the Act should be updated to make it compatible with UN agreements and guidelines and that all integrated fisheries management plans should be made publicly available and updated annually.

The researchers also want the rationale for DFO management decisions to be made public, a single source of information for each of Canada’s fish stocks and a promotion of a department-wide culture of transparency.

Although the report paints a dismal picture of the way Canada has managed its fish populations, there is hope for the future, provided changes are made, it says.

“The good news is the report shows that, with proper management, our oceans can recover and fisheries can be rebuilt, allowing Canadians and the world to benefit from a truly diverse ecosystem,” said Jeff Hutchings of Dalhousie University, one of the leading scientists who peer-reviewed the report.

Among the actions needed are enforcement of science-based catch limits, protection of essential fish habitat, incentives for using lower-impact fishing gear and identification of places where bottom trawling cannot occur, the report recommends.

Oceana Canada, an independent charity that works with international groups focused on ocean conservation, is calling on the federal government to be accountable to the Canadian public about the state of the fisheries and to require overfished stocks to be rebuilt.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

You probably wouldn't guess it, but Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia are unsung heroes in Canadian wind energy — producing more than 10 per cent of their electricity needs from wind, more than any other provinces.

“Some electricity utility companies in Canada will tell you all you’ll ever get from wind is 10 per cent of your electrical needs,” Carl Brothers, an engineer and wind energy consultant, said. "In PEI, we are closing in on 30 per cent."

By comparison, Ontario, Canada’s biggest wind power producer, manages to meet about four per cent of its domestic demand through wind energy.

The shift to renewable energy in Nova Scotia and PEI in the last decade has been nothing short of remarkable.  At the turn of the 21st century, both provinces were dependent on coal and oil-fired power plants for nearly all of their electricity. Neither province possesses the massive waterpower resources Quebec, Manitoba and British Columbia rely on to produce renewable electricity.

Yet today Canada’s two smallest provinces have approximately 25 per cent renewables in their respective electricity mixes and wind power is a leading component. Germany, a global leader in clean energy, generates more than one third of its electricity from renewable sources like wind, solar and biomass.

“We took a look around at the domestic resources available to us and renewable energy, predominantly wind, just made sense,” Catherine Abreu, an energy campaigner for the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax, told DeSmog Canada.

“We have a lot of insight to share on what kind of investments and changes need to be made to existing infrastructure that will be true [for jurisdictions] across Canada as we move towards a clean energy economy,” Abreu said.

If Canada is to have any hope of doing its part to tackle climate change, the country needs to find a way to incorporate substantially more renewable energy into its energy mix. A recent study indicates Canada could produce close to 60 per cent of its primary energy (electricity, transportation, heating/cooling, industry) from wind alone by 2050.

Non-water based renewables like wind and solar currently make up only three per cent of the country’s electrical generation.

Lessons learned in the Maritimes’ rapid transition to wind energy could hold the keys to Canada finally plugging into this clean, sustainable and largely untapped resource.  

PEI Wind Power: "Islanders Own It"

Feeling the pinch from the rapid rise in fossil fuel prices in the early 2000s, PEI and Nova Scotia set ambitious provincial renewable energy targets. In 2008, the PEI government announced 500 megawatts worth of wind energy facilities to be installed in the province, which is equivalent to one third of Alberta’s current wind power capacity. Alberta is the third biggest producer of wind energy in Canada.

“One thing PEI doesn’t have in the ground are fossil fuels, but we have a wonderful wind resource,” Brothers told DeSmog Canada.

Brothers has been in the PEI renewable energy business for over three decades and is also the CEO of Frontier Power Systems in Charlottetown.

Even though PEI has yet to hit its 500 megawatt wind target, nearly 100 per cent of all electricity produced on PEI comes from wind farms, a feat unmatched anywhere in Canada. The rest of PEI’s electrical needs are met mostly by electricity imports from New Brunswick.

A key feature of early wind development in PEI was public ownership.

“Prince Edward Islanders have always had a strong environmental ethic,” Brothers said. “And there is a definite sense of public ownership and pride in our wind farms. Islanders own it.”

PEI Energy Corporation, a provincial Crown corporation, owned and operated early wind facilities and the PEI government guaranteed the loans for the startup projects. To this day, PEI Energy generates the wind power used domestically and private sector companies sell wind energy out of province.

This sense of public ownership may also explain why PEI has not seen the same public pushback against wind turbines that has been experienced by private companies in Ontario.

The benefits of wind energy go beyond cleaning up the province’s electricity. PEI’s North Cape Wind Farm, one of Canada’s first commercial wind farms, is now the site of the Wind Energy Institute of Canada, a leading national wind energy innovation and research institution.

The province’s Hermanville/Clearspring Wind Development Project provides approximately $350,000 annually to nearby landowners and the community at large through royalties and a newly established community development fund, according to the PEI government.

“At the end of the day we need to find a way to sustainability. Our grandchildren will think less of us if we don’t take the initiative,” Brothers told DeSmog.

Source: Canadian Wind Energy Association

Nova Scotia Leads All Provinces in Cutting GHG Emissions

Nova Scotia has quietly crept to the head of the pack as a provincial climate leader. The province implemented North America’s first “hard caps” on emissions in the electricity sector, has a 40 per cent renewables 2020 target and is in position to lead all provinces and territories in future GHG reductions.

Nova Scotia also has installed more wind power capacity than B.C., a province 20 times its size. The province’s Community Feed-In-Tariff, or COMFIT, program deserves much of the credit for gaining public acceptance of wind power.

“COMFIT projects in the end did not produce a lot of energy, but it did help in winning over the public,” Brendan Haley, a Broadbent Institute research fellow and former renewable energy campaigner in Nova Scotia, said.

Introduced in 2011, the COMFIT program guaranteed a predetermined fixed rate to be paid on the electricity local producers sold. Only community entities like municipalities, energy co-operatives, First Nations and universities could participate in and reap the benefits of the program. COMFIT incentivized getting into the renewable energy game by minimizing the financial risks for non-private sector players.

The results exceeded even the Nova Scotia government’s expectations.

A provincial government report estimates 125 megawatts of electricity are produced by projects under COMFIT and an additional 100 megawatts are expected to come online in the future. Most projects are wind farms. When COMFIT was established, the provincial government expected only 100 megawatts of electricity from the program.

“If you look at the latest energy policy, it is fairly transparent the current government is doing whatever it takes to push off any rate increase until after the next election,” Haley told DeSmog Canada.

Despite COMFIT’s success, the Nova Scotia government cancelled the program last August. The provincial government justified the move by claiming it was keeping consumer prices on power bills down. Nova Scotia does have some of the highest electrical rates in Canada.

A year earlier, the same Liberal provincial government capped Nova Scotia’s energy efficiency budget under similar same cost-saving pretenses. Haley says the province’s previously strong energy efficiency standards on electricity played a big role in Nova Scotia’s ability to make deep greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions cuts.

Source: Environment and Climate Change Canada, 2016

An additional reason for the Nova Scotia’s government cancellation of COMFIT was that the program “had achieved its objectives.” Abreu of the Ecology Action Centre argued at the time that surpassing COMFIT’s original goals “should be cause for celebration, not cancellation.”

Atlantic Canada Could Be Canada’s 100 Per Cent Renewable Testing Grounds

The renewable energy revolution in the Maritimes has somewhat stalled and the reasons are not only political.

“The Maritimes are really quickly coming up against the limits of our existing infrastructure,” Abreu said.

Electrical grids in Canada are designed to distribute electricity from a handful of large powerful sources like coal plants or hydro dams, not dozens of smaller intermittent ones like wind turbines or solar panels.

“We are figuring it out,” Abreu told DeSmog Canada. “New Brunswick is really invested in understanding smart grids and how to implement them, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are experimenting with regional dispatch and utilities are doing the work to understand how to deal with intermittent renewable energy.”

PEI may be a ‘lab,' holding clues to solving Canada’s energy questions. Brothers and Abreu agree the province’s vast wind resource and size make PEI the ideal testing grounds for large-scale deployment of electric vehicles and other measures fundamental in shifting Canada from a fossil fuels economy to a clean energy society.

Brothers is concerned that with low oil and natural gas prices and without a price on carbon pollution, the PEI government has lost its appetite for building more wind farms despite the province’s heavily reliance on fossil fuels for energy and tremendous potential to go big in wind power.

A study in 2015 conducted by Stanford University Engineering Professor Mark Jacobson identifies Atlantic Canada, as well as the Pacific Coast, Great Lakes and the Prairies as areas in the world with “strong” wind resources available for power generation.

Image Credit: The Wind Energy Institute of Canada via Green Energy Futures/Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Nova Scotia is potentially on the hook for millions of dollars in decommissioning costs as ExxonMobil prematurely winds down production at a massive offshore gas project near Sable Island.

In 1997 the province’s Liberal government negotiated a deal with Exxon to get the Sable Offshore Energy Project, about 190 kilometres off the coast of Nova Scotia, up and running. As part of that arrangement, Nova Scotia promised to pay a portion of decommissioning costs at the end of the project’s life.

The costs, expected to be in the millions, will be deducted from the $1.7 billion in royalties collected by the province since operations began in 1999.

Nova Scotia Energy Minister Michel Samson said a portion of the royalties have been set aside to pay the province’s contracted share of the decommissioning, but added he “[didn’t] have the exact numbers.”

"Knowing this was a potential liability for the province, the moneys have been set aside,” Samson told a press conference last Thursday.

Mark Butler, policy director for the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax, attended the initial assessment hearings for the project in the late 1990s.

“Back when I went through the hearings, we were critical of the royalty arrangements, but the government was keen to get some activity off our coast. I think they thought the Sable project would be the start of many more projects, so they were willing to give the industry a pretty nice deal.”

Butler told DeSmog Canada the Ecology Action Centre fought against the agreement from the beginning, advising the Nova Scotia government to reject the deal. Nearly 20 years later, Butler said he and others are saying we told you so.

“It was a bad deal,” he said. “Royalties for offshore hydrocarbon projects should be separate from the development costs of the company.”

“I am totally perplexed as to why this should be a government responsibility,” he added. “It’s a private project.”

Exxon said the exact date of decommission — which will include capping underwater wells and dismantling five offshore platforms — won’t be known for another year. Exxon is interested in providing commercial access to the offshore infrastructure to another company, but so far has been unable to generate interest.

Gas production from the Sable project has been steadily declining for seven years.

Nova Scotia has only one other offshore petroleum project — operated by Encana — but renewed interest in oil production off Canada’s east coast in the last year could mean more to come.

Butler said Nova Scotia should avoid disadvantaging itself in future offshore deals.

“Oil companies go around the world and bargain for a living whereas with Nova Scotia it’s a once in a lifetime thing they do when they’re hungry for the business.” 

Given that other companies like Shell and BP are now seriously considering further offshore projects, Butler believes the Nova Scotia government should learn a valuable lesson from the experience with Exxon.

He added that, while the Ecology Action Centre is opposed to further petroleum production off the coast, if development does go ahead “the current royalty regime should not be replicated for this non-renewable resource.”

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

The release of a University of Victoria study calling for updates to Canadian charitable law created quite a stir last week.

The study, prepared for DeSmog Canada, was covered by the Toronto Star, Vancouver Sun, Victoria Times Colonist, Canadian Press, Macleans, The Tyee, Yahoo! News and CFAX.

The report called for the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to clarify rules around “political activities” — defined as any activity that seeks to change, oppose or retain laws or policies — and to provide a more generous limit on allowable policy advocacy in line with other common law jurisdictions such as Australia and New Zealand. It also called for the creation of a politically independent charities commission to remove the potential for political interference in audits.

The findings were raised in the House of Commons by Victoria NDP MP Murray Rankin, who stated the report “analyzes the alarming lack of clarity in the rules governing political activities for charities.”

Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence, said the recommendations put “what’s going on in Canada in the context of what’s going on in other common law and western countries … It gives a sense of how far Canada is behind on these things.”

Do you think charity law in Canada deserves to be updated? Click the image above to share on Facebook.

Environmental Defence was one of 18 Canadian charities that called on the country’s politicians to enhance the ability for charities to engage in public policy debates earlier this month.

“The lack of a level playing field between business and citizens around public policy is particularly evident in the debate around climate and tar sands,” Gray told DeSmog Canada. “There’s massive spending going on by the oil sector to influence public policy and every dollar they spend on lobbyists in Ottawa or on television ads, they deduct from their gross income and therefore reduce the income tax that they pay to build roads and run hospitals.”[view:in_this_series=block_1]

Citizens who donate money to a charity only receive a 17 per cent tax benefit and charities are limited to spending 10 per cent of their resources on policy advocacy work, described as “political activity” by the CRA.

Fifity-two charities have been audited for their “political activities” under a $13.4 million audit program launched by the federal government in the 2012 budget.

“It’s already unfair and the rhetoric that’s out there right now is to say that that level of unfairness should be enhanced,” Gray said. “It would be a huge move to favouring involvement by corporations in public policy at the expense of citizens.”

Gray also said citizens are confused by the current talk around “political activities,” which many assume to mean “partisan activities,” which charities are banned from taking part in.

Bill Schaper, director of public policy and community engagement for Imagine Canada — which advocates for the charitable sector — said his group has been hearing more and more about re-thinking how we define charity over the last couple of years.

“It’s something that’s been percolating,” Schaper told DeSmog Canada.

But he also noted that there are risks associated with opening up charitable law for major changes. National Post columnist Andrew Coyne, for instance, has argued that we should get rid of charitable status altogether.

“As much as the grey zones are causing issues right now, sometimes grey zones are better than too much clarity because you might not like the clarity you get,” Schaper said.  

He noted that the charitable sector can do a better job of educating itself in terms of what constitutes “political activity” and said there would need to be much more discussion before Imagine Canada would push for specific changes to the law.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

A report released today by the University of Victoria’s Environmental Law Centre calls for sweeping reform of Canadian charitable law in line with other jurisdictions such as the U.S., Australia, New Zealand and England.

Current rules around “political activity” — defined by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) as any activity that seeks to change, oppose or retain laws or policies — are confusing and create an “intolerable state of uncertainty,” the report says.

“This has created a confused and anxious charitable sector and detracts from them carrying out their important work,” Calvin Sandborn, legal director of the Environmental Law Centre, said.

The report — prepared for DeSmog Canada — comes as 52 charities are being targeted in a $13.4 million audit program launched by the federal government in 2012 to determine whether any are violating a rule that limits spending on political activities to 10 per cent of resources. Those charities include Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation, Canada Without Poverty, Ecology Action Centre and Equiterre.

Australia and New Zealand, also common law jurisdictions, have modernized their laws in recent years to allow charities to conduct more policy advocacy in carrying out their missions.

The report, Tax Audits of Environmental Groups: The Pressing Need for Law Reform, calls for Canada to establish clearer rules about what constitutes “political activity” and provide a more generous limit on allowable “political activity.”

Canada’s Charities Law Urgently Needs Update: New @ELC_UVic report http://t.co/EUj828Va94 #UpdateCharitiesLaw #cdnpoli

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) March 25, 2015

“U.S. charity regulation is superior to current Canadian law because it is less vague and more respectful of the value that charities bring to public policy debates,” the report states.

Many European countries place no limit at all on a charity’s political activities.

Earlier this month, 18 Canadian charities called on the country’s politicians to enhance the ability for charities to engage in public policy debates.

“Our society has evolved and our legislation hasn’t,” said Eric Hebert Daly, executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, a group that signed on to the letter.

The new University of Victoria report calls on Canada to modernize the definition of what qualifies as charitable to rectify instances such as the CRA’s ruling that Oxfam can not have a charitable goal of “prevention of poverty.”

“In modern society the law should recognize that a poverty-relief organization can often relieve poverty more effectively by lobbying for affordable housing laws than by operating a soup kitchen,” the report says.

In October 2014, the Broadbent Institute released a report, which raised questions about whether the recent audits have been targeted at charities critical of the Harper government. The report said several right-leaning charities are reporting zero “political” activity while engaging in work that appears to meet the CRA’s definition.

There is a direct structural chain of command from the Minister of National Revenue to the charities directorate (which audits charities), the University of Victoria report notes before calling for the removal of any potential for political interference by establishing a politically independent Charities Commission like the one in England and Wales.

“Regardless of whether the audits are targeted or not, an obvious way to address this issue would be to reform the law to eliminate the potential for political control over CRA audits,” the report reads.  “This has been done in other jurisdictions.”

“The perception that audits may be targeted at charities critical of government policies creates a chilling effect,” the report says — adding that with such vague rules, charities can end up spending an “inordinate amount of energy and resources protecting themselves from an audit.”

The report also notes the contrasting treatment of business and charities under the Income Tax Act:

Since businesses can deduct advertising expenses from their income, they can lobby the public through advertising without any imposed statutory restrictions. A recent example has been the omnipresence of the multimillion-dollar [Enbridge] Northern Gateway radio, television, internet and newspaper ad campaign favouring the project. All of these advertisements would presumably be tax deductible and therefore subsidized by general taxpayers.

In contrast to companies’ tax-deductible political advertising campaigns, charities must carefully ensure that all activities of a political nature are kept within the 10 per cent limit. This contrasting treatment of business and charities under the Income Tax Act has the effect of encouraging businesses to take political action in support of commercial and private interests — while hindering the counterbalancing efforts of charities working to protect public interests.

The report provides the example of cigarette companies fighting smoking laws to defend profits while cancer societies advocated smoking laws for the public good (to prevent cancer). The “political activities” of the cigarette companies would have been tax deductible, whereas the charities advocating tougher smoking laws would have had to follow the ten per cent rule.

“This impairment of charities’ pursuit of the public interest has been magnified by the recent spate of audits and their repercussions on the charitable sector,” the report says.

Policy advocacy by Canadian charities has resulted in measures addressing acid rain, regulations on smoking, laws against drunk driving and regulations on toxic chemicals.

Canadian charities and non-profit organizations account for more than eight per cent of Canada’s GDP. As of the end of 2013, there were more than 86,000 registered charities in Canada.

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

Good public policy improves the lives of Canadians, and contributions from civil society groups can significantly improve the public policy that governments make. Despite the benefits of working well together — to both sides, and to Canadians overall — relationships between the sector and governments are not without challenges.

Note: the term "civil society groups" includes both nonprofits, which have no limits on their political activities, and charities, which have well-defined limits on their “political activities,” as described below.

In the last three years, many within the charitable sector have become concerned about Canada Revenue Agency audits focused on political activities, but few realize that controversy over the regulation of charities dates back decades in our country.

[view:in_this_series=block_1]

The current controversy revolves around 52 charites being audited in a $13.4 million program launched by the federal government in 2012 to determine whether any are violating a rule that limits spending on political activities to 10 per cent of resources. Some of those charities, including Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation, Canada Without Poverty, Ecology Action Centre and Equiterre, have gone public with the fact they are undergoing audits.

On February 6, 2014, CBC reporter Evan Solomon published a story and aired a segment on the television program Power and Politics about these audits. The news story raised the question of whether environmental charities critical of the government are being unfairly targeted for their “political activities” as defined by Canada Revenue Agency.

In October 2014, the Broadbent Institute further interrogated that question by releasing a report called Stephen Harper’s CRA: Selective audits, “political” activity, and right-leaning charities.

The Broadbent report examined publicly available CRA tax filings of 10 “right-wing” charities and cross-referenced these with their publicly available work. In each case, the charities had reported they had conducted no political activity between 2011 and 2013.

The Broadbent Institute’s report, which includes the Fraser Institute, the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies and Focus on the Family, provides examples of activity for each of the charities that the report’s authors argue meet the CRA’s definition of “political activity.” It’s unknown whether any of these charities are currently under audit.

Flashback to 1978: Trudeau Government Accused of “Muzzling Charities”

Controversy around charities undertaking “political activities” is anything but new. Thirty-six years ago, in February of 1978, the Trudeau government issued Information Circular 78-3. It warned charities that any political objects or activities would be understood as contravening the Income Tax Act, and could result in the revocation of an organization’s charitable status. The document took a broad view on what constituted political activities, and clarified that none of a charity’s resources could be devoted to them.

Charities, the federal opposition parties and the press reacted strongly to Information Circular 78-3, arguing it contravened the right of free speech, unduly constrained charities in their pursuit of improving society and ran against the democratic values of Canadians. 

An editorial in the Toronto Star from April 18, 1978, captures the tone of the response, calling it “outrageous” for the Trudeau government to “muzzle charities” with guidelines that “take the narrow view that while charities can directly aid the needy, for example, they can’t advocate changes in public policy that might benefit the needy [because] this is considered political activity.”

The Trudeau government defended its actions by claiming the information circular wasn’t a shift in policy, but rather only a reflection of the imperfect case law according to which purposes and activities of charities must be interpreted. Under ongoing pressure, the Trudeau government eventually suspended the circular. 

In 1987, the Mulroney government released Information Circular 87-1, which advanced the now familiar approach of allowing charities to undertake ancillary and incidental political activities that are not partisan and limited to expenditures of 10 per cent of a charity’s resources. The 1987 policy statement also required that charities report on both exempt and political activities in their annual information returns.

The mid-1990s to early 2000s saw an unprecedented amount of activity oriented to improving the relationship between the federal government and the charitable sector. It culminated in June of 2000, when the Chrétien government announced the Voluntary Sector Initiative, a five-year joint initiative between the sector and the government set up to improve their working relationship. Among the many outcomes of the initiative was a Code of Good Practice on Policy Dialogue (2002), which makes explicit why and how the federal government and the sector should work together on public policy.

In 2003, based in large measure on the work described above, and after open consultation with the sector, the Charities Directorate of Canada Revenue Agency updated its guidance on political activities with the release of CPS-022, which is still in effect today. It is substantially the same as Information Circular 87-1, but is more explicit and makes greater use of examples than previous guidance.

A close reading of the guidance reveals that Canada Revenue Agency permits more latitude in terms of political activities than many in the sector appear to believe (see: 10 Ways Charities Have Improved Canadians' Daily Lives). It would seem that at least some of the purported “advocacy chill” often cited in the sector flows from charities themselves not fully understanding the range of activities permitted by the regulator.

While some of the “chill” may be caused by charities’ own lack of understanding of the law, there’s no doubt part of it can also be attributed to the perception of a crackdown on the environmental sector.

While a robust regulator that conducts regular audits is an essential element of a well-functioning charitable sector, being audited is a stressful, time-consuming exercise that distracts from a charity fulfilling its mission. And when you have a government that has openly accused Canadian environmental groups of  “money laundering,” it’s little wonder environmental charities are feeling a little on edge at the moment. Only time will tell how the current audits will go down in the history books.

Obviously, the challenges presented by imperfect case law and an arcane regulatory regime around charities persist today. The Charities Directorate has recently launched a series of tools to help charities understand the rules. And the Pemsel Case Foundation was recently founded with a mission to foster better knowledge and understanding of charity law and regulation by the Canadian public and voluntary sector organizations.

A number of funders, including Max Bell Foundation, have taken an active interest in supporting charities who do public policy advocacy. I would hope these initiatives and others like them will help warm Canadian charities to the idea of doing public policy advocacy — because the potential rewards for all of us are enormous.

This article originally appeared in The Philanthropist.

Photo: Obert Madondo via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

A new report from the Broadbent Institute raises fresh questions about whether Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) audits are being used as a politicized tool to pressure critics of the federal government. 

The report, Stephen Harper’s CRA: Selective audits, “political” activity, and right-leaning charities, says several right-leaning charities are reporting zero “political” activity while engaging in work that appears to meet the CRA’s definition.

“We know charities that have been critical of policies of the Harper government are being audited by the Canada Revenue Agency. With mounting evidence suggesting bias in auditing decisions, we need to find out what’s going on here,” said Rick Smith, executive director of Broadbent Institute, a non-partisan organization founded by former NDP Leader Ed Broadbent.

Fifty-two charities are being targeted in a $13.4 million audit program launched by the federal government in 2012 to determine whether any are violating a rule that limits spending on political activities to 10 per cent of resources. Those charities include Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation, Canada Without Poverty, Ecology Action Centre and Equiterre.

[view:in_this_series=block_1]

The Broadbent report examined publicly available CRA tax filings of 10 charities and cross-referenced these with their publicly available work. In each case, the charities had reported that they had conducted no political activity between 2011 and 2013.

The Broadbent Institute’s review, which includes the Fraser Institute, the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies and Focus on the Family, provides examples of activity for each of the charities that appear to meet the CRA’s definition of “political.”

For example, on Oct. 22, 2012, the Fraser Institute released a report calling for the B.C. government to lift its moratorium on offshore oil and gas exploration, which appears to fall under the CRA’s guideline on what constitutes political activity, which states an activity is political if “the intention of the activity is to incite, or organize to put pressure on, an elected representative or public official to retain, oppose, or change the law, policy, or decision of any level of government in Canada or a foreign country.”

The report raises fresh questions about the CRA’s selection process for determining which charities are targeted for political-activity audits.

Other groups scrutinized in the Broadbent report are: Macdonald-Laurier Institute, C.D. Howe Institute, the Montreal Economic Institute, Canadian Constitution Foundation, Energy Probe Research Foundation, Frontier Centre for Public Policy and Institute for Canadian Values.

It’s unknown whether any of these groups are currently under audit.

The Broadbent Institute is calling for the establishment of an independent inquiry to examine CRA processes to ensure transparency and fairness in its decision-making criteria around political-activity audits and interpretations of “political” activity, and to ensure such processes are not subject to political pressures or interference. 

“Political activity is a critical part of many charities’ work. Progressive or conservative, blunting the ability of civil society to advocate and to engage in debate and, occasionally, dissent should concern us all,” Smith said.

Photo: Obert Madondo via Flickr

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

When Debbie and Allen Hall bought waterfront property on Lake Fanning in Nova Scotia, they looked forward to a relaxing semi-retirement with their six grandchildren swimming and playing in the lake.

But, a decade later, the Yarmouth-area lake is unusable because of scummy blue-green algae blooms, most likely caused by manure run-off from nearby mink farms. The Halls considered moving and taking a financial blow, but have now resorted to building a swimming pool in an effort to reclaim a fraction of the lifestyle they dreamt about.

“We used to think of the classic cliché of fun at the lake, running and jumping off the dock. Now there are massive blooms from late May until November and when they die off, the bacterial decomposition uses up all the oxygen and we end up with huge dead zones,” said Debbie Hall.

Nova Scotia lakes and rivers have been polluted by excess nutrients and phosphorus to the point that no one knows when — or if — they will recover and studies point the finger at fur farms.

There are now 150 mink farms in Nova Scotia and the industry generated $140 million last year with most of the pelts going to Russia, China and South Korea.

[view:in_this_series=block_1]

There were few regulations as mink farming expanded in Nova Scotia over the last decade and manure, extra feed and carcasses were thrown into wetlands while run-off from farms seeped into the Carleton, Meteghan and Sissiboo River watersheds.

“Now the wetlands are absolutely saturated with this crap so I don’t expect to see improvement in my lifetime,” Hall said.

Her fears are supported by the latest report prepared for Nova Scotia Environment by Michael Brylinsky of Acadia University.

Water quality surveys carried out between 2008 and 2012 showed lakes within the watersheds to be seriously degraded “primarily with respect to high nutrient over-enrichment resulting in the development of high algal concentrations,” says Brylinsky’s report, released in July.

Brylinsky identified mink farms as the likely culprits in a 2012 report and his latest report confirms that finding.

“These studies have also shown the degradation in water quality to be primarily a result of high phosphorus inputs resulting from releases emanating from mink farming operations,” it says.

Brylinsky found that, last year, water quality in monitored lakes did not change significantly.

New legislation and regulations governing fur farms have been introduced by the Nova Scotia government, but critics say they do not go far enough or set penalties. Those affected by mink farms are also angry that farmers have been given three years to comply.

The regulations include requirements for farms to have an engineer-approved management plan, surface water and soil monitoring programs, concrete pads for storing manure and compost and setbacks from property lines and water courses.

Jocelyne Rankin, water coordinator with the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax, does not believe the new rules will be sufficient.

One problem is that the Department of Agriculture, which is encouraging the booming industry, is responsible for enforcing regulations, Rankin said.

“The fox is guarding the henhouse,” she said.

The process will be complaint driven and, in small communities, residents are often reluctant to report on their neighbours, Rankin said.

Ecology Action Centre has teamed up with Mountain Equipment Co-op this summer to encourage outdoor enthusiasts to ask the Government of Nova Scotia to restore the province’s lakes and rivers.

Julia Bancroft of the Tricounty Watershed Protection Society questions why the regulations do not include consequences, such as making polluters pay.

“This is the third version (of the regulations) and they have watered them down,” she said, pointing out that mink farmers will still be able to compost on site.

“All the carcasses and manure and excess feed can be piled up and they call it composting,” she said, describing a stench and influx of seagulls at farms near her lakefront property.

Almost all the farms are in headwaters and tests show at least 10 lakes and 75 kilometres of the Tusket River have been affected, Bancroft said.

“They say it’s a green product and, yes, it is. All our lakes are green,” she said.

“You can’t bathe in the water, you can’t swim in it, you can’t boil it and you can’t cook with it. Nothing makes it OK.”

However, Dan Mullen, Nova Scotia Mink Breeders Association president, believes others have to take some responsibility for polluted waters instead of pointing the finger solely at mink farming.

“I don’t say we have zero impact, but there are many other impacts on the water system like old septic systems and run-offs from clearcuts,” said Mullen, who believes some of the opposition is coming from animal rights activists.

 Provincial regulations should help allay fears and set standards, Mullen said, adding he believes it is better to work with farmers, rather than setting penalties, as it will head off problems before they occur.

As the industry grows, there are also fledgling spinoff operations using mink manure, such a making pellets for organic fertilizer or burning it to generate electricity, he said.

“It is unprecedented in North America to have such a stringent set of rules about disposal of manure and carcasses,” Mullen said.

However, John Werring, David Suzuki Foundation senior science and policy advisor, who helped review Nova Scotia’s fur farm rules, said he believes the regulations are toothless.

“The initial regulations were sound and would have been effective, but, for some reason, government changed their whole opinion and went to results-based regulations, putting it in the hands of industry,” he said.

“They are not tough at all. They were originally, but they backed off,” said Werring, adding that it seems to be another case of corporate profit and government’s desire to create jobs winning out over environmental protection.

But for some, cleanup efforts and regulations have already come too late.

Barrie MacGregor is the former CEO of Yarmouth YMCA, which ran Camp Wapomeo on Lake Fanning from 1921 to 2009.

The lake was used for swimming and canoeing by the approximately 600 kids who attended the camp each year and lake water was treated and used for cooking, washing and drinking.

Blue-green algae first appeared in 2006/07 and, in 2009, the camp closed because the lake water was unusable, meaning water had to be trucked in while campers were taken to a different lake for recreation.

“The blue-green algae was the tipping point for the camp,” MacGregor said.

Others, such as Debbie Hall, would like to see Nova Scotians question the need for a mink farming industry.

“It’s fur. It’s a cosmetic industry. It’s not as if it’s for food,” she said.

This story was made possible through support from Mountain Equipment Co-op as part of its Homewaters campaign, which is dedicated to preserving Canada’s fresh water from coast to coast.

Image Credit: Lake Fanning by Debbie Hall

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

In early January, Vancouver’s Mayor Gregor Robertson announced that a part of the city’s iconic seawall would be closed for major repairs following damage from winter storms over the previous month. Mayor Robertson, in no uncertain terms, attributed the unusually serious damage to rising sea levels and climate change. “Seawall damage = cost of climate change + sea level rise,” he posted to his more than 30,000 Twitter followers, along with Vancouver resident John Woakes’ startling December 17 video of violent waves crashing past the beach and demolishing a walkway. 

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.