Most Vancouver Sun readers will be aware of two prominent policy advocacy organizations that often appear in the Canadian news media, The Fraser Institute and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Many will also know that these two organizations generally represent opposite perspectives on many matters of public policy. The Fraser Institute being informed by a more libertarian, free-enterprise, corporate perspective and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives having a more socially-progressive orientation based in part on the notion of the common wheel and support for a blended government-private sector economy in Canada.
The article authored by the CEO of the Urban Development Institute, however, caused me to pause and consider the variety of advocacy organizations that offer us viewpoints aligned more or less with either of the two perspectives represented by the above two organizations.
I am hard pressed to think of advocacy organizations similar to the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives except, perhaps, the Council of Canadians. My recollection is, however, that the Council of Canadian offerings appear very seldom in the op ed pages of the Vancouver Sun or other other sources I regularly read.
On the other hand, there seems to me to be a huge variety of apparently different organizations that speak from a similar viewpoint to that of the Fraser Institute. Upon investigation of the Urban Development Institute, the overwhelming corporate sponsorship indicated on their web page makes it clear to me that this organization would likely operate from a similar perspective to that of the Fraser Institute. But there are many other such organizations that are familiar by their presence in the media; for example: the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, the C.D. Howe Institute, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute. There are others, but these are the organizations I most often see represented in the conventional media. My sense is that all of these Canadian-based organizations are significantly funded by the corporate sector, and their perspective certainly seems more oriented to that of the Fraser Institute than the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
I have begun to think of this perspective as having a shape-shifting presence in the media. The shape shifting gives appearance of a variety of perspectives being offered, but, in fact, they all come from a generally similar and well-funded viewpoint.
I have little difficulty with any of the above-mentioned organizations being free to offer comment from their viewpoint; but it strikes me that one perspective is more often represented than the other, regardless of the different labels.
Perhaps most interesting of all is that ALL of the above-named organizations -- regardless of sponsorship -- are registered charities for the purposes of Canadian taxation. As such, donations by their supporters are treated as charitable donations, not unlike donations to religious organizations or to many community-based organizations which actually do charitable work.
So, because funding support is tax deductible, these advocacy organizations -- corporate or socially oriented -- are all taxpayer supported to a significant extent. Having said that, it appears to me that organizations that offer a corporate or commercial viewpoint are significantly more represented and, based on the financial reports available, they are significantly better funded, including by the taxpayer contributions.
And unless readers are paying close attention, one might presume that we are getting a broader viewpoint than actually is the case.
No comments:
Post a Comment