The Globe and Mail should exercise more careful governance of what it publishes about governance. Yesterday (June 1), Patricia Best made a number of incorrect assertions about the Fraser Institute. The first was that Mr. David Radler was a candidate for election to the Board of the Fraser Institute in 2005. In fact, Mr. Radler had withdrawn from the Board and was not a candidate for re-election.
Changes to the Institute By-laws mentioned by Ms. Best were undertaken following the introduction of Bill C22, governing not-for-profits, by the Government of Canada. If passed, Bill C22 would require the Fraser Institute to violate its promise not to release members’ names and addresses to others for any purpose. Accordingly, the Institute’s By-Laws were changed so as to protect the privacy of our members by changing their status to supporters unless they specifically wish to be included as members and therefore consent to their address being released upon request by another member.
Supporters may become members simply by requesting to have their status changed.
The Executive Advisory Board is a sub-board of the Board of Trustees of the Institute and reports to the Board. It has conducted the business of the Institute in the time period between the quarterly meetings of the Board for thirty years -- and done it well. Most Boards have such an executive committee for efficient governance.
All of this could have been ascertained by Ms. Best if only she had governed her enthusiasm long enough to call the Institute about the details.
The Fraser Institute
For the original article, go to The Globe and Mail website
(Article requires a subscription)