2006 election and its impact on government grant and contribution programs
By Chris Frantz, COO of Flagship Solutions
January 16, 2006
Will there be more or less money available to nonprofit associations after January 23rd? That is the question a lot of nonprofit association executives are asking themselves. The answer depends on who forms the government, the priorities of the team appointed to the Cabinet, and the makeup of the House of Commons. This is a good reason for representatives of nonprofit associations to follow the elections, the debates, the presentation of the platforms, and what is being said.
This article will attempt to provide general information to the reader. It should not be viewed as an attempt to convince people to vote one way or another, but should be used as an informative tool leading the reader to look for more information in order to arrive at an informed decision.
Whatever the result of the election, there will be short and long-term impacts that will affect the nonprofit sector.
The most important short-term impact that could follow an election is a freeze on all funding programs. It could be a freeze on the development of new programs or a freeze on spending within existing ones. However, it's important to note that contracts already signed and projects underway would not be affected.
The long-term impact could be an overall reduction or increase in funding programs. While changes to the amount of programs could occur, it is not likely that all grant and contribution programs would be eliminated.
The platforms and policy statements that are, on a daily basis, released to the Canadian electorate by the different parties provide some insight as to what may happen to grant and contribution programs for the nonprofit sector.
It is safe to say that none of the political parties running in Canada (with a real potential of winning seats) are located at the extremes of the political spectrum. Most are near the centre, with the New Democrats more to the left, the Conservatives on the right and the Liberals going from centre left to centre right. The Bloc Québécois and the Green Party are located to the left of the centre, although the Greens are more conservative on financial issues.
The Bloc Québécois and the Green Party will be omitted from the analysis below. The Bloc's main goal (as stated) is to represent Quebec to Ottawa until the province separates, while the Greens will most probably not be a major force in the next Parliament (if present) and still have yet to define some of their positions.
With this established, it can be said that a more interventionist government will usually spend more money on grants and contributions, while a party advocating a smaller government will want to be seen as taking less from Canadians, thus spending less on such programs.
All this being said, the lines between the different political stands is often blurred, and it is therefore difficult to state that one party's stated position means that they will, once elected, follow it. A party's position may change because of pressure from Members of Parliament who bring local concerns back to Ottawa, budgetary woes, or public opinion.
While policy statements are made, regional interest within a caucus can also change the party's position. Indeed, while a party may have adopted a certain position on a specific issue, Members of Parliament from a region affected by this position could force changes if they put enough pressure on the Cabinet. As an example, the compensation program for farmers affected with the plum-pox virus was put in place following pressure from Liberal MPs representing the area most affected. Other examples from the Liberal and Conservative governments could be cited.
The following is a list of issues of importance to the majority of Canadians. However, it is important to note that a lot of funding programs are not issue-specific and that while it may be the case that the election campaign will not negatively affect funding programs for healthcare-related organizations, for example, if job creation programs are eliminated across the board, it will have an impact on these groups.
- Healthcare
This is "everyone's favourite issue." Politicians know well that this is an essential issue for Canadians and that anyone proposing cuts in healthcare would face voters' wrath. Funding for healthcare research, monitoring programs, and delivery of services (although a provincial responsibility) will probably not be cut, regardless of which party forms the government.
- Training
Most parties have adopted a stance that showcases their support for training. Indeed, even the Conservatives mentioned the creation of funding programs for apprenticeships. However, with regular attacks on HRSDC (Human Resources and Social Development Canada) programs during the House of Commons' Question Period, the future of some of the job creation programs could be in doubt. A reasonable assumption would be that a Conservative government may want to review the different programs and see whether they would want to keep them or cancel them. A similar review of Foreign Affairs Canada programs took place between 2004 and 2005 and most programs were frozen while it took place.
- Regional economic development
A number of federal agencies operate regional economic development programs for the Western provinces, Northern Ontario, rural Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. The Conservative party has indicated that it would look at abolishing these agencies if they form the next government. All other parties (except the Bloc) are supportive of these agencies.
- Sport
Not really on the radar screen as of now. While the 2010 Olympic Games are important, it is not a pressing issue in this election and therefore most parties have not adopted a clear position on funding for sport activities. Two points however: the Conservatives have released a proposal whereby a tax credit would be given to parents for sport activities for their kids; and the former Minister of State for Amateur Sport, Paul DeVilliers, is not running in this election and this may partially be because of his oft-stated position that the present government has not made sport an important enough issue.
- Housing
Promises are once again being made on the issue of housing, however, while it is seen as an important issue, will the millions promised actually materialize once the election is over? This issue is seen as less of a priority for the Conservatives than it is for the NDP. The Liberals are somewhat in the middle as they are promising sizeable amounts - which they had cut in the past while fighting the deficit.
- Social issues
Poverty, unemployment, and urban concerns are important social issues that have not been well-addressed during this campaign. While the recent shootings in Toronto could have led to some discussions on social programs, the main topic became law enforcement instead. This will provide little comfort for those trying to propose new programs or actively working on the ground. The importance of local organizations and the impact of community work have not been highlighted.
Generally, if the same party remains in power, the government will stay the course and there will be no real change. Some minor program reviews will occur; some programs will be cut, but others will be created.
If there's a change in government, the possibility may exist that wide-scale program reviews will occur and freezes on new and existing programs may be imposed. Down the road, there could be a chance that some grants and contributions are completely eliminated (and the amount available to different organizations significantly cut) or new programs may be announced.
It is important to note, however, that significant changes will only come if a Conservative, Liberal or NDP majority government is formed. A minority government of any stripe would lack the clear mandate (and parliamentary support) to make drastic changes.
For further information, prior to making your decision, you could contact your local candidates and ask them about their respective party's positions. We also encourage you to look at their record, either through the Parliament's website (www.parl.gc.ca) or in the media archives. It is important to look beyond the political posturing of the Question Period and read some of the work undertaken by the diverse parliamentary committees.
Chris Frantz is the Chief Operating Officer of Flagship Solutions, which specializes in government relations and grant writing services.
