When it Comes to Foreign Aid, Are We Nuts?

Are NGOs nuts enough to collaborate more to engage Canadians?

On February 16 about 100 communicators from Canadian NGOs, Global Affairs and the Office of the Minister for International Development met in Ottawa for a one-day forum on communicating with and engaging Canadians about relief and development. I was asked to make some introductory remarks. I chose, as my inspiration, the words of Don Cherry, who I believe asked one of the most important questions facing NGOs in Canada today.

“Are we nuts?”

That’s the question Don Cherry asked on Twitter in 2013 about the over $49 million Canada gave to Haiti through foreign aid.

Cherry went on to say that he understands there are many needs in the world.

But, he asked, how can Canada afford to send money to other countries when people in this country are hungry, homeless and in need of medical care?

Tweeted Cherry: "We've got a guy dying in Toronto waiting three hours for an ambulance.

“We got people waiting 7, 8, 10 hours, if they're lucky, in a waiting room with one doctor for a zillion people.

“We nickel and dime our doctors, nurses and veterans plus a million other services.

“Yet we can send almost $50 million to Haiti."

Through his Tweets, which received extensive media attention, Cherry asked the question that is on the minds of millions of Canadians then, and now.

Are we nuts?

When I read his Tweets I thought to myself: That’s it. That is the question we, as NGO communicators, need to answer.

Are we nuts?

Of course, there are many other questions to answer and things to talk about—things like gender, equality, justice, peace, human rights and the best way to help people escape poverty, and many, many more.

Those things are all important, and deserve our best attention.

But those are not the things on the minds of most Canadians when they think about where the government should spend its money.

What’s on their minds are the many needs in Canada—and how we should be responding.

So when we say the government should provide more money for water projects in Ghana, Canadians ask: What about Indigenous communities in Canada with no running water?

When we say more funds should be provided for health care in Senegal, Canadians ask: What about growing wait times in hospitals in this country?

And when we say more foreign aid should be provided for people who are hungry in Africa, Canadians wonder: What about hungry children in Canada?

Or, as Don Cherry put it more succinctly: Are we nuts?

For me, there are two responses to that question.

First, Don, no—we aren’t nuts.

No, we aren’t nuts. Canada is a rich country. Of course there are needs here that should be met. But compared to the rest of the world, we are doing so much better than almost all other countries.

No, we aren’t nuts. Canada’s economic fortunes depend on a healthy global economy. When people in poor countries do well, Canada does better, too.

No, we aren’t nuts. If we want to live in peace and lessen the risk of terrorism, we need to address the issues that create conflict and terrorists—issues like inequality, injustice, and lack of employment and opportunity.

But yes, in other ways, we are definitely, completely nuts.

We are nuts enough to believe that Canada is rich enough and strong enough and generous to meet the needs of people who are hungry and poor in Canada—and in the developing world.

As we like to say at the Foodgrains Bank, using the image of the Great Banquet in the Gospels, there is room at the table for all.

Yes, we are nuts enough to think that we, as citizens of a wealthy country, have a human and moral responsibility to assist others—to extend a hand of help and kindness and solidarity to those in need—because we can.

It’s the most Canadian thing of all to do.

And yes, we are nuts enough to believe that we are all in this together—rich and poor, north and south, men and women, young and old.

The health of the planet we all call home depends on it.

And that brings me to our event today.

Today we are gathering for the first time as communicators from NGOs, Global Affairs and the Minister’s Office.

Today we have an opportunity to think outside our institutional and governmental boxes to find new and creative ways to engage Canadians.

Today we have a chance to set aside our various organizational plans, schedules and agendas—as important as they are—to focus on the larger collective goal of engaging more Canadians in our shared mission of creating a fairer, better, equal and more just world.

In saying this, I’m not saying it will be easy.

In fact, I’m sure it will be hard.

And yet, what is the alternative? To keep doing the things we’ve always done in the hope of a different outcome?

We know what that’s a definition for.

So today I would like to put Don Cherry’s question to you:

Are we nuts enough to believe we can collectively muster our supporters, and many other Canadians, to say to the government: Yes, we care—we care about needs at home, and also abroad?

Are we nuts enough to think that, together, we can come up with new and creative ideas, campaigns and ways of telling our story that will move the needle of public opinion just a little bit?

I hope so. I truly hope we are all that nuts.

Today we get a chance to see if I am right.

Let me conclude with the words of Daniel Burnham, the influential 19^th century American architect.

At a time when American cities were in midst of disorder and discord, it was Burnham who came up with a powerful new vision of what a city could be, and what it could look like.

"Make no little plans,” he said.

“Little plans have no magic to stir the blood and probably themselves will not be realized.

“Make big plans; aim high in hope and in work." 

So at the end of the day I hope we can say yes, we dreamed big, we made big plans, we aimed high.

And that we can also say to Don Cherry: Yes, we are nuts. And we want to invite many more Canadians to be nuts along with us, too.