Pages

Monday, January 04, 2010

Tories Co-Opt United Way

Rural Sandi noted this in the comments of my last post. Below is a shot from the 2009 United Way Hockey Challenge (back last January), from Dean Del Maestro's website. You can see it in a few pictures, but this one is clearest (see white arrow on guy far left): the Tories have stuck CPoC logos on the United Way team jerseys. Pretty damned brazen, and I wonder if its entirely kosher.

13 comments:

  1. Been thinking about this. As a lawyer who has done a fair bit of legal work for charities, it is very very unwise for the Conservatives to have done that. The association of a charitable organization with a political party is very clearly prohibited under the Income Tax Act and could affect the charitable status of the United Way and the status of all charitable donations it received in that year.

    One could say that it was the UW who did it (i.e. they allowed themselves to be associated with a political party which is prohibited), but the Conservatives put them in the position by putting the logo on the jerseys.

    The UW is a big enough organization that I am sure this will be overlooked, so this is no big issue for UW, but it was plain dumb of the Conservatives.

    And it shows again the lengths they will go to politicize and show partisanship.

    Note as well that the UW receives millions of dollars from the federal government. And if KAIROS and various gay and lesbian event organizations are any indication, the CPC will cut your funding if you aren't helping them and their agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous4:42 PM

    According to this link, the CPC isn't even a sponsor, so how did their logo get on the Team United Way Jersey's?

    http://www.cadesign.on.ca/UWH/

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous4:47 PM

    Just noticed something, this might be a quid-pro-quo kind of thing. The Conservative's jerseyss have the United Way logo on their sleeves. Or so it appears, the pictures are fuzzy, but I think I can discern the UW logo on the right sleeve of the Con's jerseys.

    So its probably an innocuous memento kind of thing, where the logos of all the parties involved are on each team jersey.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "According to this link, the CPC isn't even a sponsor, so how did their logo get on the Team United Way Jersey's?"

    According to the Peterborough Examiner, the whole thing seems to be a bit of a Conservative advertising platform:

    “I made an awful lot of phone calls,” said Del Mastro. “Most of the major national sponsors I contacted directly and talked to them about the Peterborough and District United Way and how special our game was. They stepped up in a major way. Air Canada stepped up with two plane tickets anywhere in the world and we raised $20,000 off that alone.”

    That strikes me as a little dicey: a prominent MP leaning on corporations to donate money to a charity in his riding through a fundraiser where his party gets significant exposure. Isn't the right wing in the U.S. hammering on the Clintons because of donations to Bill's foundations? At least Bill's no longer a politician, with influence over how government stimulus spending, unlike DDM.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I first noticed it in the last couple of days. CHEX is Peterborough's TV Station (affiliated with the CBC).

    There was a United Way TV ad. In the "TV ad" the United Way Hockey was on the left side and the Conservative Party logo (not government logo) was on the right side. Today I saw it around 2:OO pm

    Who's paying for this - the taxpayers or the Con Party.

    I'm writing United Way and tell them and I am totally offended by this and WILL NOT donate this year.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Check out this photo of my MP, Patrick Brown, at a charity hockey game for the local hospital. His name is on the uniforms, on the big novelty cheque, and even on the boards behind him:

    http://hockeynightinbarrie.com/home/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/hnib-2009-377.jpg

    Brown claimed to have come up with the idea for 'Hockey Night in Barrie', which took place in 2008, when he attended one of Del Mastro's games and another one in Brockville. Brown called the 2009 game 'Hockey Night in Barrie II'. He seems to have forgotten the 'Hockey Night in Barrie' which took place in 2004, before Brown attached his name to the event.

    ReplyDelete
  7. My extended family - and I - are pulling our giving to the United Way. It was one stop for donating to various charities... Now all I see is Harper's lizard eyes...

    No way.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I'm writing United Way and tell them and I am totally offended by this and WILL NOT donate this year.

    I'm writing United Way and tell them and I am totally amused by this and WILL donate this year.

    ReplyDelete
  9. My extended family - and I - are pulling our giving to the United Way. It was one stop for donating to various charities... Now all I see is Harper's lizard eyes...No way.

    My extended family - and I - are extending our giving to the United Way. It is one stop for donating to various charities... Now all I see is Harper's kitten eyes...Way.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So, like Harper, Michael has no principles.

    Well, I'd rather give to another charity - there are many out there who don't spend as much on administrators and administration costs.

    ReplyDelete
  11. United Way? Perhaps you Liberals have been giving to the wrong charity. :D

    http://www.canada.com/news/2006+Liberal+leadership+aspirants+miss+debt+deadline/2405365/story.html

    ReplyDelete
  12. United Way? Perhaps you Liberals have been giving to the wrong charity. :D

    Well,the rules don't allow for anonymous donors (a la Peter MacKay) and Stephen Harper), or Belinda Stronach (a la Tony Clement) to pay for the debt.

    But thanks for the reminder that I should write some more cheques.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm actually getting a bit thrilled that the Connies are saddling another generation with deficits. Some of the obnoxious frat boys who worry about Liberal leadership candidates' unpaid debts are going to need a well-deserved lesson in hubris.

    ReplyDelete