Voluntary Sector- Government Relations in Canada
Voluntary Sector- Government Relations in Canada
Information from “A Short History of Voluntary Sector-Government Relations in Canada (Revisited)” (Elson & Carmichael, The Philanthropist Journal, 2022)
Week 2: The Restructured Community Organization
Colonial Foundations of Community Organizations
European settlers introduced formal governance structures, processes, and services—social services, education, and welfare—into Canada.
These structures were predominantly shaped by faith-based organizations and local voluntary capacities.
Initial government support at provincial or federal levels was limited.
Citation: (Marshall, qtd. in Elson & Carmichael 2021).
Example: A historical illustration of The Hôtel-Dieu, or Catholic General Hospital, Montreal (1875) highlights the influence of Catholic institutions.
Indigenous–Settler Relations as a Framework for Understanding Nonprofits in Canada
This timeline offers a model for understanding the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous societies in Canada:
Developed via the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996).
Defines four overlapping stages instead of a linear progression.
Stages are not fixed temporally and vary by region and nation.
Discusses how charitable, faith-based, and voluntary organizations appeared at different developmental stages.
Transition in roles from cooperation to assimilation to renewal.
Indigenous Foundations: Separate Worlds & Early Cooperation (Stage 1 & Early Stage 2)
Pre-European settlement, Indigenous Peoples had advanced systems of governance, reciprocity, and collective care.
These Indigenous systems challenge Western nonprofit models.
Before 1500, Indigenous and non-Indigenous societies functioned relatively separately, fostering unique social welfare systems.
Indigenous practices were community-based social welfare systems, disrupted by later nonprofit models.
Citation: (Dally, F. ca. 1866).
Displacement, Assimilation & the Voluntary Sector (Stage 3)
The evolution of the modern nonprofit sector was intertwined with colonization, especially contributing to Indigenous displacement and assimilation.
Indigenous nations viewed as obstacles to colonization, a concept encapsulated in the phrase “the Bible and the plough”.
Faith groups collaborated with colonial forces, aiding the following:
Residential schools.
Forced relocations and cultural suppression.
Charities acted as agents of colonial expansion rather than neutral parties.
Social services were leveraged as mechanisms for control and assimilation.
This historical period significantly defined the sector's future power dynamics and authority.
Negotiation, Renewal & Indigenous-Led Futures (Stage 4 and beyond)
Contemporary Indigenous Peoples are actively reshaping the nonprofit sector, emphasizing self-determination, and ameliorating power imbalances.
Indigenous advocacy takes several forms:
Legal challenges.
Established National organizations.
Advocacy through international bodies, including the United Nations.
The goal: mutual recognition and respect for diversity and differences.
There's a notable disparity in funding allocation, with Indigenous-led organizations receiving less than 0.5% of foundation funding.
Requirements include:
A paradigm shift from merely serving Indigenous communities to supporting Indigenous self-determination.
Relinquishing control, funding Indigenous-led initiatives, and acknowledging historical harms.
Phases of Federal Government–Voluntary Sector Relations in Canada
Emergence of the federal state and moral charity.
Political and social reformation in late 1800s and early 1900s.
Post-WWII welfare state growth and the voluntary sector.
Fluctuating relations between the voluntary sector and government from the 1970s to present.
Current state and challenges of the voluntary sector.
(Source: Elson & Carmichael, 2022)
The Federal State & Moral Charity
Early Canadian social welfare was deeply influenced by moral charity and religious leadership long before federal governance took responsibility for social well-being.
Atlantic Canada
Introduction of the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 into the American colonies assigned municipalities/countries the duty to:
Collect funds for “relief of the indigent.”
Establish “asylums and other institutions” with funding from the province only in emergencies.
Poor Law administration in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia characterized by:
Lack of differentiation between deserving and underserving poor, akin to Dickensian models.
Support contracted to the lowest bidder, leading to at times humiliating treatment of the poor, including the practice of auctioning of paupers.
Lower Canada (Québec)
Social welfare governance followed French Catholic traditions rather than English Poor Law principles.
Paternalistic philosophy under King Louis XIV prioritized the general good and collective welfare over individual responsibility.
The Catholic Church was the primary administrator of social services (hospitals, schools, poor relief).
Funding predominantly from donations, fundraising, and crown subsidies.
Notable institutions founded as early as the 1600s included Hôtel Dieu, Bureau des pauvres, and Hôpital Général.
Upper Canada (Ontario)
Different legal and social approach to the Poor Law, emphasizing individual responsibility, family, and private contributions over state support.
Poverty often viewed through a moral lens as indicative of personal failure.
Charitable organizations frequently filled the gaps, later lobbying for government aid once needs overwhelmed their capacities.
Commonalities Among Regions
Initial shape of social services in Canada (education, welfare, health) predominantly influenced by faith-based organizations and local voluntary resources.
Aid was associated with moral status, framed for the “deserving poor”, thus reinforcing societal judgments about poverty and worth.
The Political and Social Reformation in the Late 1800s and early 1900s
Recognized as the “golden age of philanthropy” within Canada.
Emergence of varied reform movements, including:
Women’s Christian Temperance Union.
Dominion Enfranchisement Associations.
Social gospel movements, focusing on the moral against physical well-being.
(Citation: Moscovitch & Drover, 1987)
Impact on Indigenous Peoples Post-1812
Following the War of 1812, Indigenous populations were viewed as obstacles to colonization rather than partners.
Under Sir John A. Macdonald, colonial interventions peaked, culminating in the Indian Act of 1876, which undermined Indigenous sovereignty.
This era saw the implementation of policies advocating starvation, relocation, and cultural eradication while religious groups acted as facilitators of the colonial agenda.
The Golden Age of Philanthropy
Characterized by tight moral controls and significant worker exploitation.
Charitable actions conferred status upon benefactors while fostering moral dependency among recipients.
White, upper-class women used philanthropy as a platform for visibility and a voice in reform movements, including advocating for political representation and voting rights.
Example: Charity Organization Society (COS)
Established in Canada in 1881 advocating a scientific method utilizing friendly visits (later professional casework).
Introduced the notion of “the healing power of class”, suggesting class-based interventions could ameliorate social conditions rooted in moral superiority.
Expanded monitoring of the poor and campaigned against relief for the so-called undeserving poor.
Increased specialization in institutions (e.g., residential schools, asylums, and reformatories) formed part of the eugenics movement agenda.
Example: Settlement Houses
Evangelia Settlement established in Toronto (1902) where workers engaged in political campaigns and organized community service initiatives.
This exemplified the bourgeois “helping imperative” which upheld the societal views of the ruling class.
Influential figures like Josephine Lowell & Katherine Davis are associated with this initiative.
Late 1800s & Early 1900s Voluntary Sector Landscape
Citizens and religious institutions were main drivers of voluntary sector initiatives.
Government involvement came primarily about fulfilling obligations under the Poor Law but the prevailing view treated social services as mechanisms for controlling discontent rather than equitable access initiatives.
“Hands off” governmental approach characterized this era, except when political urgency prompted intervention.
Citation: (Armitage, 1988).
Pemsel Case (1891)
Landmark British legal ruling defining what constitutes charity under law.
Introduced the first modern legal definition for tax-related purposes in charity law, categorizing charities into four areas:
Relief of poverty.
Advancement of education.
Advancement of religion.
Other purposes beneficial to the community.
This ruling set a precedent for charity law in common-law countries, including Canada.
The 1999 Supreme Court decision reaffirmed the public benefit requirement, restricting private gains.
Notable criticisms have focused on the exclusion of certain groups (e.g., multicultural, advocacy) from charitable status leading to regulatory reforms since the late 1990s.
Charity, Power, and Early Coordination (1900–1920s)
Rapid charity growth facilitated enhanced status for benefactors but created moral dependence among recipients.
Efficiency demands resulted in centralized governance: Creation of the Toronto Social Service Commission (1912) aimed at coordinating charities and enforcing accountability through a systemic approach influenced by private sector management ideals.
Tensions emerged from bureaucratic control versus the autonomy of charities.
Dissolution of the Social Service Commission occurred in 1914.
Charities adapted by forming the Neighbourhood Workers Association to improve service coordination autonomously.
War, Tax Policy, and Charity Regulation (1917)
The introduction of the 1917 Income War Tax Act aimed to fund support for WWI veterans and families, allowing unlimited tax deductions for donations to recognized war charities.
The War Charities Act of 1917 aimed to regulate and prevent fraud through the registration of authorized charities.
Marked initial federal intervention in charity financing and regulation.
Tax incentives were retracted post-WWI with a 10% tax deduction for hospitals remaining as a legacy.
The Winnipeg General Strike (1919)
Workers demanded improved wages and working conditions, opposing the Taylorism method's efficiency-seeking underpinnings.
Taylorism was criticized for leading to the deskilling of artisans and enhancing labor exploitation.
Image of crowds gathered during the Winnipeg General Strike demonstrates the societal upheaval prompted by worker discontent.
The Great Depression (1930 -1939)
The economic downturn led to massive unemployment and food insecurity across Canada.
A devastating drought struck the prairies, exacerbating hardship.
The Employment and Social Insurance Act (1935) was enacted to provide relief amidst these challenges.
Image depicts individuals utilizing soup kitchens in Montreal during the Great Depression.
Limits of Voluntary Charity
The Great Depression overwhelmed local government resources, revealing the constraints of voluntary charity efforts.
As unemployment figures escalated, the federal government increased relief funding and enacted the Employment and Social Insurance Act.
Voluntary charities continued to offer essential services like soup kitchens and shelters amid government intervention.
1930 Tax Reform & Universal Charitable Giving
The 1930 amendment introduced a 10% tax deduction for donations to selected institutions.
This decision faced opposition from diverse charities which held differing interests.
Specific favoritism towards Catholic charities in Quebec was evidenced until government regulations adapted on May 28, 1930, extending tax deductions to all charitable organizations defined in common law.
This regulatory reform solidified the public welfare role of charities through fiscal policy.
The New Deal in Canada
Conservative Prime Minister R.B. Bennett introduced a series of proposals in 1935, including:
Progressive taxation.
Maximum workweek.
Minimum wage requirements.
Enhanced regulation of working conditions.
Unemployment insurance reforms.
Health and accident insurance inclusion.
Agricultural support strategies.
Key measures faced constitutional challenges and administrative roadblocks, undermining their successful implementation.
Despite this, Bennett’s New Deal signaled a shift towards recognizing state responsibility for social welfare, laying groundwork for later welfare programs.
The Rise of the Welfare State (post WW2)
Post-WWII economic expansions contributing to growth in the voluntary sector paralleled wider population increases and government service expansions.
Growth followed three policy streams:
Welfare state policy.
Tax and regulatory policies.
Advocacy and relational policy frameworks.
Memories of the Great Depression informed post-war priorities; social security emerged as a fundamental aspect of Canadian identity and values post-war.
Universal Income and Social Support Programs
Notable programs established include:
Unemployment insurance (1940).
Family allowances (1944).
Old-age pensions (1952).
Unemployment assistance (1956).
Cost-shared hospital assistance (1958), evolving into the Medicare Act of 1966.
The Welfare State
The term came into use around 1941.
By the 1960s, it referred to a structured industrial capitalist society leveraging state authority to alter market dynamics.
Definition cited: “a structure where state power was deliberately used (through politics and administration) in an effort to modify the play of market forces.” (Briggs 1967 as quoted in Moscovitch 2006)
Welfare State Activities
Three types of activities within the Welfare State include:
Provision of minimum income levels.
Provisions addressing economic insecurities arising from health issues, aging, and unemployment.
Expanding access to varied social services for all members of society.
Group Activities on The Welfare State in Canada Today
Students divided into Zoom Rooms for discussions on:
Welfare State operations in contemporary governance.
Identifying news stories illustrating current welfare state functions. - Investigating erosions such as funding cuts or privatization.
Voluntary Sector Transformation Post-Welfare State
Wave One (1974–1995): Growth of voluntary organizations post-WWII, now heavily reliant on government support, leading to government funding constituting around 50% of sector revenue.
Wave Two (1995–2005): Budgetary cuts initiated; funding shifted to short-term models, decreasing resources and limiting the sector's advocacy roles.
Wave Three (1995–2020): De-centralization, under-funding, and emphasis on a contract-driven approach for voluntary organizations oversaw a shift away from advocacy to service provision.
Neoliberalism and the Nonprofit Sector
Neoliberalism is an ideology emphasizing market principles, efficiency, and minimal state involvement in governance.
The 1990s experienced a retreat from direct governmental social service roles, transferring responsibilities onto nonprofits, straining the welfare state.
Nonprofit funding shifted toward competitive, short-term grants, inhibiting advocacy elements of nonprofit work, fostering dependency and inequality.
Neoliberalism as a Conservative Ideology
Influential neoliberal policies entail:
Liberalization (removal of regulations).
Deregulating capital markets.
Cutting trade barriers.
Diminishing state presence in the economy by privatizing public services and streamlining austerity measures.
Economic Decline and Social Welfare Expenditure
Post-1990 witnessed a noteworthy reduction in social welfare expenditures.
The declining economic growth contributed to calls for rigorous means testing and reduced social benefits (e.g., unemployment insurance changes).
Citations include critiques provided by Manning (1999) and Sharpe (2001).
Voluntary Sector Transformations Post-Welfare State
Historical legacies have reshaped the current state of community organizations.
Neoliberalism’s influence curtails government involvement, obliging nonprofits to meet competitive benchmarks impacting advocacy capacities.
Faith-based organizations’ historic dominance requires navigating past injustices while redefining legitimacy in community spaces.
Government and voluntary sector interdependence was initially seen as a means to address neglect, evolving into service provisioning over advocacy.
Private entities’ interests continue to dominate, leading to mission drift in community organizations as they navigate funding environments shaped by economic power.