Every year, for almost 20 years, the Fraser Institute has done this to us. According to its annual Generosity Index, in 2022, Quebecers would still have been the least “generous” Canadians.1. No explanation, no context, but numbers that allow this ultra-conservative research group to continue to denigrate the state with the strongest social safety net in North America.
First the numbers. When it comes to charitable donations, the main difference between Quebec and the rest of Canada is not generosity, but probably religion.
In English Canada, religious organizations receive the lion’s share of contributions from individuals (40%), which is not the case in Quebec. Of course, some religious organizations strengthen the social safety net, but not necessarily. To be registered as a charity and thus be able to issue receipts for tax credits, religious-type organizations can limit themselves to “promoting religion”2, and governments do not document what the tax credit was used to fund. That being said, when we exclude religious donations in whole or in part, the Canada-Quebec difference is attenuated. But that’s not what’s important.
We are also told that Quebeckers give less because they are less wealthy than elsewhere in Canada. It’s true, major patrons are still rare here, Quebec inc. is relatively young. But things are changing rapidly. On this subject, I invite you to (re)read this wonderful column by Francis Vailles3 : the median total income of Quebecers now exceeds that of Ontarians. This increase in our collective wealth would explain the recent increase in our use of planned gifts, such as monthly payments and gifts bequeathed by will. Here too there is progress. But that’s not what’s important either.
Other item. The Fraser Institute does not take one-time donations into account: when a crisis arises, Quebecers give spontaneously. Major public campaigns are very effective here.
We are champions of this type of donation, but the Institute does not take it into account, just as it does not take into account donations in time or in kind either. But that’s still not the important thing.
The important thing, what really explains why we donate less to charities, is that we believe that the fight against poverty should not depend on the goodwill of wealthy donors, but on the state. Consequently, we agree to pay taxes, and this, more than elsewhere. And the results are there: there is less extreme poverty and less inequality here than in the rest of Canada…because the state plays its role.
I have had the chance, more often than not, to see that in times of crisis the private sector and civil society have a powerful capacity for action. During the floods of 2017 and 2019, they helped people, saved houses, brilliantly completed state action. But the State was essential: it ensured the health and safety of the victims as well as the essential protection of property and infrastructure.
Organizations like the Fraser Institute would like the state to be able to disengage through philanthropy. It would be a mistake.
The generosity of people must complement the action of the State and not try to replace it, it is irreplaceable.
It is absurd that homeless shelters or even soup kitchens depend on the charity of the wealthy to operate. It is up to the State to ensure that the poorest lack nothing.
If Quebec is the state in North America where there is the least social inequality, the least poverty among children, and it is the place where life expectancy is the greatest, c It’s thanks to the taxes we pay, not thanks to charity.
It is obviously desirable that people give to charities, but it is above all essential that they continue to support the action of the State through their taxes. This is, by far, what is most effective and it is here that the immense solidarity, the immense generosity of Quebecers is best expressed.