The very real issue of crown donations to the CMHR
Prairie Topiary posted recently in defence of the $1 million donations from Manitoba’s four big crown corporations (MLCC, MPI, MB Lotteries and MB Hydro) to the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. He makes some great points, and even has the Hack nodding his head in agreement (I always knew that guy was a closet NDP-sympathizer).
However, I respectfully disagree with PT’s opinion that this is a “non-issue” for a few reasons:
1. The government meddling. PT correctly points out that if the crowns were private corporations they probably would have been strong-armed into making a donation anyway. But they’re not private corporations. They’re arms-length operations of government, and that arm isn’t very long.
Gary Doer appoints the board members of these companies, and he picks the chairperson. And it was Gary Doer that encouraged each of them to make a “donation” to the CMHR. Do you really think they had a choice?
I don’t object to government funding for the Museum (although I would like to know when it will end, and just what we’re getting for it), but if Doer wants to boost his contribution then it should come directly from the provincial government.
2. The secrecy. Every other major donation to this museum has been trumpeted in news releases and celebrated at cheque-signing ceremonies. But there was no word about these donations until the media uncovered them. Even now that the story is out, there’s still no mention on the websites of the four crowns.
And what was the explanation from MLCC Chair Carmen Neufeld for the lack of publicity?
We’re not looking for huge recognition for the cheque we’re cutting. We’re looking at this as something we should be doing because it’s good for the province. We’re not looking for a big splashy thank you. It’s the right thing to do.
Yeah, sure. Then you have MPI scrambling to explain which line of business their donation is coming from, like it really makes a difference.
It’s clear these companies were hoping the donations would slip by unnoticed. And to return to PT’s earlier point, I guarantee that if the crowns actually were private corporations they wouldn’t just let $1 million donations go unannounced.
An outright ban on charitable contributions and sponsorships from crown corporations just isn’t feasible in our province. These companies make up a huge portion of the business sector, and are near the top of the prospect list of every non-profit in town. However, the crowns should all have clearly defined and publicly available donation policies to guide these decisions in the future.
Related:
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: canadian museum for human rights, gary doer, province of manitoba
I may be fixating here but I am still really wondering about the ongoing operating revenues & costs for the Museum. As mentioned previously, I wonder how many families will be repeat visitors vs. somewhere like the Manitoba Museum where kids want to spend a rainy day.
Second, the structure seems to have a major glass component - R (insulation) values for glass are nowhere near as high as those of insulated walls. While this may make for a great aesthetic, it may well drive up the costs of heating not to mention increased consumption of natural gas/fossil fuels.
If most of the attendance comes from “online” and “virtual” visits, will this and now the proposed UFG site further strain Winnipeg’s ability to fund existing gems like Assiniboine Park, the Manitoba Museum, etc.? I hope all these places will create some sort of synergies vis-a-vis attracting visitors. Otherwise, they will strain an already tight pool of funding monies.
I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.
If the suggestion to make the donations came from the Premier, you’re right that the board chairpersons might have felt pressured to proceed with the donation. That’s different than the entire boards being directly forced to do so — if the donations were completely not feasible, the board members would have the power and duty to donate a smaller amount or nothing at all, as is their job.
Having said that, I am not particularly concerned if the Premier makes such a suggestion to a board — as I noted in my blog, crowns are there to achieve social ends and donating a relatively small amount to an important and high-profile project fits well within their mandate.
Despite my non-alarm, your point on crowns having donation policies or guidelines (maybe they already have?) is very well taken.
On the issue of anonymity, you’re right that one would have thought the crown sponsors would have wanted to get better mileage out of their donations in the form of recognition. However, supporting the community doesn’t always mean having to get high-profile recognition, and the crowns likely sensed that some people would try to make this a political issue (and, in hindsight, they were right). In any event, I think that not seeking recognition for donations made is aside from the central issue of whether or not the donations are appropriate in the first place.
Proud & Unapologetic Ex-Winnipegger’s point on Winnipeg’s other attractions is an important one — no one wants to see the CMHR duke it out with other attractions for funding or visitors, so that one’s gain is another’s loss. I do know that the Manitoba Museum and other attractions are working closely with the CMHR, with the belief that they’ll be sharing pieces of a growing tourism pie. I know from my travels that attractions in other cities often work together through such things as joint marketing and entrance fees and transportation links between attractions. I’m sure that the CMHR is looking at models used elsewhere in its planning.