McLeod Group blog by Lauchlan T. Munro, July 20, 2020
Collateral damage from the WE student volunteer program scandal continues to pile up: allegations of racism and white saviourism, a board in meltdown, questions about “complex” and “unusual” organizational structures where money flows from the charity to the privately held for-profit business… The situation is so dire that WE’s founders, Craig and Marc Kielburger, have promised major organizational changes. That these changes were announced on the eve of the House of Commons Finance Committee’s first meeting to discuss the scandal will only serve to fuel skepticism.
Such skepticism is likely warranted. After all, even before the scandal broke, both WE Charity’s and ME to WE Social Enterprises Inc.’s websites went to great lengths to explain how their respective corporate structures and their interlinkages had already been vetted by the finest legal minds, including a former prime minister and a former Supreme Court justice. If everything was so great before, why the need for radical change now? And the fact remains that many of the recently announced changes, including the cancellation of WE Day events, had already been imposed by public health authorities and are in any case easily reversible.
What then might the WE organizations and the Kielburgers do to show that, this time, they really, really, really are sorry and really mean to change? To aid them in their reform program, I propose that WE and the Kielburgers adopt the following recommendations:
1. Denounce the ideology and practice of white saviourism. Use those words. Then adhere to the Code of Ethics and Operational Standards of the Canadian Council for International Co-operation (CCIC), like most Canadian development NGOs already do. This would mean systematically portraying people from the South as active agents in their own development, not as victims to be saved. Then get WE Charity to join the CCIC, so they can learn from and work with other development organizations.
2. As part of WE’s newfound commitment to “return to its roots”, decide whether WE is about promoting international development or promoting global citizenship among Canadian youth. There is a tension between the two. Promoting development requires more than youthful enthusiasm; it requires deep knowledge, patience, practical skills and cultural sensitivity. Promoting global citizenship is also a worthy goal, but it involves much more than (and often the opposite of) voluntourism and the celebrity culture of WE Day. Global citizenship involves critical thinking, the ability to ask tough questions about power, privilege and the role of outside actors in a nation’s development, and a recognition of the limits of volunteering as a vehicle of social change.
3. Publish the annual financial statements for ME to WE Social Enterprises Inc. for the past five years. And commit to publishing all future annual financial statements. Public corporations do this all the time. Private ones like ME to WE are not obliged to publish their accounts, but nothing stops them from doing so if they choose to. Just like US presidential candidates and their income tax returns.
4. Ensure that the published annual financial statements of WE Charity and ME to WE clearly state the flows of money between the two organizations, and between any other related organizations. It is normal for for-profit companies to fund charities, but WE Charity buys services from ME to WE. This recommendation should not be a problem, since the Kielburgers have already announced their “goal of a clearer separation of the social enterprise from the charitable entities”.
5. Publish a list of all speakers who have received $1000 or more per annum from WE Charity, ME to WE or any other corporate sponsor at any WE event in the last five years. The list should include the name of the speaker, the amounts paid, the dates and locations of the events, and the name of the corporate sponsor.
6. Require all WE employees to declare any close family or business ties to Members of Parliament or Senators. Publish this information on the website.
7. Publish the names of all WE employees, directors and owners who earn a total of more than $100,000 per annum, including from salary, bonuses, royalties, dividends, fees and other sources of income, from all WE entities combined. Ontario has done this for public employees for two decades.
8. Publish the texts of all corporate sponsorship deals, especially where the corporation owns or controls a media outlet. Bell Media, are you listening?
9. Waive any and all non-disclosure agreements that may have been signed by board members, managers and employees, so that they can speak publicly about the recent turmoil inside WE. Did those board members all resign over what happened in Kenya? Or was it about WE’s growing holdings in the Toronto real estate market? Perhaps we should be told.
WE’s leadership has accepted the need for their organizations to change. But hiring a compliance officer, reshuffling the board again and hiring more fine legal minds is only more of the same. Embracing the nine points above would mark a commitment to serious change, both in terms of WE’s approach to development and global citizenship and in terms of WE’s governance and transparency. But that would only be the beginning of a long journey of self-examination and openness to outside scrutiny. The question remains, are WE really ready for serious change?
Lauchlan T. Munro worked as a volunteer in Bhutan from 1985 to 1987. His annual salary can be found on Ontario’s Sunshine List. When he worked as a senior manager in the federal public sector, his travel and hospitality expenses were routinely posted online. He teaches at the University of Ottawa’s School of International Development and Global Studies. Photo: Bell Media.