OTTAWA, January 27, 2009—Ray Pennings, Director of Research for Cardus, expressed concern that Canada's federal budget provides a short-term solution to a long-term problem, leaving the fundamental questions facing Canada's economy unanswered. Said Mr. Pennings, "The government is responding to the public's exaggerated expectations of what federal spending can fix. This budget does not adequately address our over-reliance on credit, our demographic challenges, and the overall need to renew our social architecture." Cardus' analysis, by Pennings and President Michael Van Pelt, reviewed the budget with three questions in mind:Is the overall budget a reflection of short-term or long-term economic thinking? Is there a broader view of infrastructure beyond physical infrastructure? Is the budget fair and equitable for Canadians across our diverse landscape?Cardus concludes that although the budget buys Canada time to deal with fundamental economic questions, the strategy is not without risk. "We are borrowing from the future to maintain the ways of the past," said Pennings. "The success of this budget will be determined by how well we use this time to develop sound, long-term strategies, including answers to fundamental questions about how we organize society, and what we expect from life." Cardus is a North American public policy think tank, equipping change agents with best theories and practices of public life to renew North American social architecture. Cardus launched in October 2008 to expand on the work of its precursor, the Work Research Foundation. It has an annual operating budget of approximately $1 million and is a registered charity. -30- Media Contact: Ray Pennings (403)479-4590 rpennings@cardus.ca A copy of the proposal and background paper is available at http://go.cardus.ca/budgetanalysis.

In the midst of auto sector bailouts, forestry relief, banking assistance and stimulus spending on roads, bridges and other buildings, it's easy to forget about the economic importance of the non-profit sector. Yet it is a $112 billion industry employing 2.1 million Canadians and comprises 8.6 per cent of the nation's GDP.Its health is a matter of national interest and would be considerably enhanced through a simple increase of the charitable tax credit for individual donations in excess of $200 from the present 29 per cent to Cardus's proposed 42 per cent. What gets rewarded, after all, is what gets done and while bricks, mortar, timber, roads and metal are all important, nothing is as vital to a nation in the long run as its social architecture. Imagine Canada, representing dozens of charities across Canada, recommended three broad themes in its May 2008 position papers. These included "Tax Incentives to Stimulate Giving" and concluded that tax incentives are an important stimulus for giving. While the results (and consequently the exact costs) of this tax reduction measure are difficult to project, we know that charitable donations in British Columbia increased by 5 per cent in three years following an increase in the charitable donation credit. In the state of Arizona, a combination of tax credit and tax deduction in certain sectors saw charitable contributions triple in three years. That charities need and deserve help in these troubled times is a point few would dispute. In mid December, it was reported that the Salvation Army's donations were down 30 per cent. Even as challenging times place a greater demand on their services, many charities are struggling to pay the bills. Of Canada's 161,000 charities and non-profits, two-thirds report annual revenues of less than $100,000. Yet, they all combine to provide services, many of them essential, which enrich the social, physical, and spiritual lives of Canadians. And, if and when charities can no longer fail to attend to those among us who need their services, the burden of their care falls to governments, typically at higher costs in the long term. Some large charities urged Finance Minister Jim Flaherty to exempt charitable gifts of private company shares and real estate donated to charity from capital gains taxes. The benefits of that approach will primarily advantage large charities and large donors. The benefits of changing the tax credit, on the other hand, are most likely to be experienced by charities across the board. It also provides encouragement to many more of the 25 per cent of Canadian taxpayers who in combination contribute $8.5 billion (2006 data) annually to charities. A consensus has emerged among political leaders of all parties that economic stimulus is a current necessity. There are many more ideas being proposed than can be responsibly implemented, so there is an onus on advocates to outline the return on investment that the taxpayer will receive. Without more detailed government data, it is impossible to accurately project the cost of foregone tax revenue for this proposal. Back of the envelope guesstimates suggest $400-$600 million is required, a reasonable amount placed in context of a $30 billion stimulus package. But this loss of federal revenue is not money lost to the economy. Increasing the charitable credit ensures continued and increased spending by charities and protects the treasury from increased demands on social programs. There is no reason to fear additional support to this component of society will go to fatten executive bonuses or be frittered away on chartered jets, after all. People support different charities, depending on their religious, cultural, or aesthetic appetites. That diversity is also the strength of this approach as giving reflects our commitments to organizations that relieve poverty, promote education and advance faith-based or other benevolent motivations. A strong charitable sector including universities, hospitals and hospices, arts and sports groups, poverty and publishing programs, synagogues and churches, provides ways for Canadians to be their best and show compassion to the least. Charities are not vehicles for greed, excess or profit. They are the products of our generosity, kindness and creativity - vital components of a healthy society without which financial economies cannot thrive. This forthcoming budget is an opportunity for all sectors to reconsider their fundamentals. It would be a shame if we went through this collective exercise as a country and neglected those important organizations whose very existence defines and gives expression to who we are. Ray Pennings is Director of Research for Cardus, www.cardus.ca.

The Toronto Star covers the Cardus pre-budget submission on increasing the charitable tax credit. Stuart Laidlaw writes, "Ottawa should boost the tax credit for charitable donations in its upcoming budget as a way to stimulate the economy while helping those most hurt by its downturn".Read Toronto Star coverage here .

In the midst of auto sector bailouts, forestry relief, banking assistance and stimulus spending on roads, bridges and other buildings, it's easy to forget about the economic importance of the non-profit sector. Yet it is a $112 billion industry employing 2.1 million Canadians and comprises 8.6 per cent of the nation's GDP. Its health is a matter of national interest and would be considerably enhanced through a simple increase of the charitable tax credit for individual donations over $200 from the present 29 per cent to Cardus's proposed 42 per cent. What gets rewarded, after all, is what gets done and while bricks, mortar, timber, roads and metal are all important, nothing is as vital to a nation in the long run as its social architecture. Imagine Canada, representing dozens of charities across Canada, recommended three broad themes in its May 2008 position papers. These included "Tax Incentives to Stimulate Giving" and concluded that tax incentives are an important stimulus for giving. While the results (and consequently the exact costs) of this tax reduction measure are difficult to project, we know that charitable donations in British Columbia increased by five per cent in three years following an increase in the charitable donation credit. In the state of Arizona, a combination of tax credit and tax deduction in certain sectors saw charitable contributions triple in three years. That charities need and deserve help in these troubled times is a point few would dispute. In mid December, it was reported that the Salvation Army's donations were down 30 per cent. Even as challenging times place a greater demand on their services, many charities are struggling to pay the bills. Of Canada's 161,000 charities and non-profits, two-thirds report annual revenues of less than $100,000. Yet, they all combine to provide services, many of them essential, which enrich the social, physical, and spiritual lives of Canadians. And, if and when charities can no longer attend to those among us who need their services, the burden of their care falls to governments, typically at higher costs in the long term. Some large charities urged Finance Minister Jim Flaherty to exempt charitable gifts of private company shares and real estate donated to charity from capital gains taxes. The benefits of that approach will primarily advantage large charities and large donors. The benefits of changing the tax credit, on the other hand, are most likely to be experienced by charities across the board. It also provides encouragement to many more of the 25 per cent of Canadian taxpayers who in combination contribute $8.5 billion (2006 data) annually to charities. A consensus has emerged among political leaders of all parties that economic stimulus is a current necessity. There are many more ideas being proposed than can be responsibly implemented, so there is an onus on advocates to outline the return on investment that the taxpayer will receive. Without more detailed government data, it is impossible to accurately project the cost of foregone tax revenue for this proposal. Back of the envelope guesstimates suggest $400-$600 million is required, a reasonable amount placed in context of a $30-billion stimulus package. But this loss of federal revenue is not money lost to the economy. Increasing the charitable credit ensures continued and increased spending by charities and protects the treasury from increased demands on social programs. There is no reason to fear additional support to this component of society will go to fatten executive bonuses or be frittered away on chartered jets, after all. People support different charities, depending on their religious, cultural, or aesthetic appetites. That diversity is also the strength of this approach as giving reflects our commitments to organizations that relieve poverty, promote education and advance faith-based or other benevolent motivations. A strong charitable sector including universities, hospitals and hospices, arts and sports groups, poverty and publishing programs, synagogues and churches, provides ways for Canadians to be their best and show compassion to the least. Charities are not vehicles for greed, excess, or profit. They are the products of our generosity, kindness and creativity-- vital components of a healthy society without which financial economies cannot thrive. This forthcoming budget is an opportunity for all sectors to reconsider their fundamentals. It would be a shame if we went through this collective exercise as a country and neglected those important organizations whose very existence defines and gives expression to who we are.

On January 15 Cardus released a backgrounder paper on its recommendation to increase charitable tax credits in the 2009 federal budget. "This proposal provides incentive to ordinary taxpayers to support causes which reflect their passions and priorities, and produces a diversity of social institutions enriching the lives of Canadians," said Ray Pennings, Director of Research at Cardus. "This is good economic policy, and this is good social policy. It provides short-term economic stimulus and long-term benefits." Read the backgrounder and enter the pre-budget debate today. View it online here or download it now.

HAMILTON, January 15, 2009—Cardus, a think tank dedicated to the renewal of Canada's social architecture, is recommending that the federal government increase charitable tax credits from 29% to 42% as part of its stimulus package (Click here for News Wire Release). "Adopting this proposal will be a sound investment in Canada's social architecture," said Ray Pennings, Cardus' Director of Research. "The charitable sector is critical to the rich fabric of Canadian society, and provides taxpayers exceptional return on investment." Canada's 161,000 charities and not-for-profits (NFP) employ over 2.1 million Canadians and provide 8.6% of Canada's GDP. The services they provide—many of them essential—impact the physical, social, and spiritual lives of virtually every Canadian. Although approximately one third of the $112 billion in the NFP sector is spent by hospitals, universities, and colleges, more than half of the total funding in this sector comes from non-taxpayer sources. In 2006, more than 25% of Canadian taxpayers claimed charitable contributions totalling $8.5 billion. "The not-for-profit sector is struggling in these difficult economic times, even as their services are needed even more," said Pennings. The proposal by Cardus argues that given charities' success in providing social services, there are compelling arguments to be made for increasing the charitable tax credit as an effective economic stimulus. Every dollar forgone by the taxpayer is leveraged with more dollars spent in the economy by charitable organizations. There is inadequate public data available to accurately project the cost of the proposal, however Pennings indicated that his best "back of the envelope guesstimate" based on current donation levels is between $400 and $600 million. "This proposal provides incentive to ordinary taxpayers to support causes which reflect their passions and priorities, and produces a diversity of social institutions enriching the lives of Canadians," said Pennings. "This is good economic policy, and this is good social policy. It provides short-term economic stimulus and long-term benefits." Cardus is a North American public policy think tank, equipping change agents with best theories and practices of public life to renew North American social architecture. Cardus launched in October 2008 to expand on the work of its precursor, the Work Research Foundation. It has an annual operating budget of approximately $1 million and is a registered charity. -30- Media Contact: Ray Pennings (403)479-4590 rpennings@cardus.ca A copy of the proposal and background paper is available at http://go.cardus.ca/budget. See official News Wire Release

My grandfather George Jones of Harrington, PEI, and Rouleau, Sask., was the first to tell me about how, even at the heights of the Great War, the killing would stop for Christmas. I can no longer recall all of his exact words, but the phrase 'the German boys' was never spoken in the tone you would expect from a man who spent part of his youth avoiding death at their hands and who had taken one of their bullets in his thigh. He would only tell us happy stories about learning to speak French with pretty girls and how at Christmas the artillery and the sniper fire fell silent and you could hear 'the German boys' entrenched nearby singing carols in their language. The Canadian boys would sing back in theirs. When Christmas was over and the next day dawned, the slaughter would resume. You can, if you wish, decide that this is the height of hypocrisy. It is intellectually and morally bizarre after all that people could mutually understand that the day which celebrates the birth of Jesus was too holy for killing but that the next day and one before were not. I doubt that thought was lost on 'the boys' in the trenches. An alternative view, perhaps more hopeful, was put forward in the early 20th century by novelist and journalist G.K. Chesterton when he said 'Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult, and not tried.' No matter one's take, Christmas was a cultural symbol powerful enough to make people in the midst of an all out war the likes of which the world had never seen lay down their weapons at the behest of 2,000-year-old words attributed to an angel: 'Peace on earth, goodwill toward men.' Almost 100 years later, the most noticeable feature of Christmas Day remains the unique nature of its quiet. It is very clearly not the calm of Labour Day or Thanksgiving. Canada Day is really not quiet at all, but everything stops at Christmas; its quiet is as metaphysical as it is auditory. It is as if we are meant to be still and know something. When I was small and only people in emergency and vital public services had to work on Sundays, before we were 'free' - we were more used to quiet, more 'stillness.' It gave us time and it gave us space. At night it was dark and even in most cities we could see the stars and wonder or tremble depending on our predispositions. In the day, we did not have to peer through the yellow soup of smog to see the sun. Most of our lives now are dominated by noises of which we are no longer even concious - the whir of computers, the roar of 'white noise' that you can only hear when it stops: at Christmas. Few are so hideous as the battles my grandfather's and father's generations fought and are played out today by my children's generation in Afghanistan, but we are all fighting battles. Some are for power or for the ascendancy of our ideas. Some are for financial survival. Some are for emotional contentment. Some are fighting to mend that which within and around us is broken and, try as we might, we just can't seem to put back together again. Some of us are fighting to get what we want and believe it is actually what we need. Some of us are fighting just to hold back the tears. For Christians, Christmas is the alpha of the alpha, the moment when the Greek 'logos', the source of the principle governing the cosmos and human reasoning, became flesh and brought the promise of light and redemption. For others, it may have evolved to be about the generosity of sharing gifts as expressions of love with family and friends. All of these are socially virtuous activities that enhance our culture through a shared sense of the need to call a truce, even if for just one day each year, and acknowledge a shared appreciation for peace, for hope and for goodwill. To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, Christmas is, if false, of no importance. If true, it is of infinite importance. The only thing it cannot be is moderately important. We should make sure we treat it that way.

Journal of Commerce covers Senior Fellow Ray Pennings' speech at the Economic Club on construction in Ontario. Read the coverage here, and contribute to the emerging conversation on provincial competitive labour pools.

When you think about it, it's really all about rodeo, ridin, ropin, hangin in there, and toughin it out. Few events better illustrate the challenges evolving for our sense of shared culture as we transition into urbanity and away from values based in our rural roots. Calgary contains 1.1 million people, close to twice as many as were living within its boundaries a generation ago. Its bold new Centre City plan calls for a complete overhaul of its planning ambitions and for the importation of between 40,000 and 50,000 people over the next 20 years into its downtown core. The aim is environmental, cultural and infrastructure sustainability. To put this in perspective, the plan intends to convert a sprawling, horizontal city into one that is more vertical and with downtown density levels that will rival those in Manhattan. Demographically, its need for talent and labour has traditionally drawn people from across the country. However, as the impact of the baby boom's low level of reproduction become more evident in society and as other venues such as Saskatchewan and British Columbia become more competitive in terms of the net income and lifestyle they can offer, this too is changing. Statistics Canada trends in the past year show that while Alberta's population growth continues to be robust, it is at the moment entirely dependent upon immigration for that growth and is beginning to experience something rarely seen in its past, negative interprovincial migration. In other words, more native-born Canadians are leaving Alberta than are coming to it. This will have an impact on the city. Its look and its feel will evolve in a new direction although provided the promise it offers to ambitious newcomers is fulfilled there's no reason to think that the essence of its entrepreneurial energy will change. Suffice to say that is not the case in small town and rural Alberta or, for instance, large parts of the Maritimes. There, society looks much as it did 25 years ago. Population levels are relatively stable, stagnant is another way of looking at it, and opportunities for young people locally are less robust. This means that every year a certain number of people are drawn away by the jobs and excitement of the big cities and also that, due to the relative lack of opportunity, immigrants and their cultural influences are going to be less evident in these communities. The end result is that while 25 years ago cities such as Calgary were typically informed by the same set of cultural influences as were found in the rural and small-town communities that surrounded it, the same is not the case today and based on current trends will continue to be more and more disparate in the years ahead. Similar trends can be found in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver and other cities. This need not be a bad thing. But it is a thing. This brings us again to rodeo and its efforts to adapt its sport,“ professional and otherwise, to the emerging sensibilities of urban culture and how it views animals. Calf roping is now, for instance, termed tie-down roping and, even more significantly, it and steer wrestling was completely eliminated this past year from the events at the Cloverdale Rodeo in B.C. This followed an incident the previous year in which a calf was put down after its leg was broken. People who live in urban areas tend to view animals through the lens of their experience with them and that is primarily as pets. When one dies, it is a tragedy. People from rural cultures are also fond and sensitive to the humane treatment of animals but naturally view them through the lens of their experience, which is primarily as livestock and beasts of burden. In the rural experience, animals die all the time; the event is neither rare nor does it evoke the same sense of tragedy. Simply, it is nature. Maintaining a common language that can bridge the gap between urban and rural Canada will be a new and greater challenge than at any time in our past.