British Columbia votes on October 17th. And if you've been watching that province lately, you may have thought to yourself, "They're getting away with a lot that some people probably didn't vote for." So, how did people actually end up in power out there? Well, it's far more complicated than simply saying, "Well, residents vote." There are groups that hide in plain sight, yet they are extremely shadowy in how they conduct business, uh that are in play, advocacy groups that don't run candidates, don't endorse anybody, and don't legally have to tell you about where a single dollar of their funding comes from. Yet, they have an incredible and documented track record for winning elections. And by the way, many of those people pulling the strings, they don't hide their end goal, decolonize British Columbia. Do I have your attention? My next guest runs a civil accountability publication in Victoria called BC Politics Watch, which most recently was the first to report on how the BC NDP were moving to transfer vast swaths of land over to indigenous groups with no public consultation. They publish under a collective byline, he'll explain why, and he goes by David. David, welcome. >> Ben, thanks very much for having me. >> All right. >> Great to be with you on the show. >> All right, let's get into this. First and foremost, why the anonymity? >> Well, as you can tell, we're probably persona non grata around British Columbia at the moment. And questioning City Hall in Victoria has historically come with real consequences. Some of you may or may not recall, in 2024, a firefighter was suspended for writing a letter to Premier David Eby raising his concerns for the the opening of a consumption site in a family neighborhood. He was subsequently suspended without pay, and ever since then there's been a chill across the city from whether you like an Instagram post to signing your name to a petition that has now come with personal and professional consequences for people. Our publication has been called racist and anti-indigenous by MLA Grace Lore for raising the I'd say this you know what's happening with the land treaty here land treaties here in Victoria. So there are consequences and and that's why we're anonymous. >> Well, why should our listeners pay attention to this? Why should they care? >> Well, I think across Canada there's a lot of attention that's paid to politics at the provincial level, but what's happening here local government is is increasingly shaped by the public you didn't elect and it's it isn't the end of the line. It's the on-ramp. So you have local local politicians they get in the municipal level and they and then they progress to the provincial and then to the federal level. So what happens here in Victoria? It may actually be impacting federal politics. It all starts right here local issues. And we need more attention to that. It's not just the land. It's it's everything from rezoning to drug sites and we need to pay more attention to local politics. >> Okay, so I guess if someone looks at an issue and they say, "Hold on, this doesn't make any sense." Chances are there's a reason for that. So a lot to unravel here. Let's start with what's at the heart of it. How do these advocacy groups how are they able to influence groups sorry I guess if you look at this issue and say, "This doesn't make a whole lot of sense." Chances are there's a reason for that. So let's unravel this and we'll start with the heart of it. How do these groups how are they able to influence votes and voters? Because there's a loophole in the system. >> It is a loophole and I'm so glad you used that word because it is it's hiding in plain sight. So, the BC law, so this isn't actually Canadian law. It's it's unique to BC. We have a local elections campaign financing act. It is strict, but it has a loophole. And if a third-party group opposes a pipeline, for example, there there are caps on advertising ban. Let's be clear. And it's capped at 184,000, and that's across the province. Fine. But what what the cap actually covers BC law and bear with me for a moment. BC law defines election advertising as any transmission of a communication to the public. But read what the cap actually covers. The law defines election advertising as any transmission of communication to the public. But what they're not covering is the organizing forces behind them. So, none of none of the groups, you know, how many pages on how many volunteers they have, how many paid professional staff, whether they're full-time, part-time, they have hundreds of trained volunteers door-knocking, targeting neighborhoods, voter lists. None of that is is regulated. There's no limit or cap on that. And so, one of the groups I think we're going to talk about in a bit, they have built up voter lists over 20 years. And so, those numbers add up, and they add up especially at the local level where it it is not controlled, it is not regulated, and that's where the loophole and the scrutiny of that loophole is so important where it counts. >> So, it's like they they capped the cheapest thing in an in a campaign, completely ignoring the most valuable ones. And and that's that's a significant ground game, word of mouth influence. So, the loophole is that these advocacy groups can campaign around ideas, but not specifically for candidates? >> them from having as I said, volunteers, professional staff, full-time staff, and and door-knocking across neighborhoods. And and those voter lists are becoming increasingly more important is because this is where they identify who to target and the phone banks, their own data and their own website does publish does give you some insight into the scale of these non-profit organizations. One has claimed 42,551 live calls in a single campaign. I I don't have the time to make five, 10 phone calls, Ben, let alone 42,000. So, they're big. They're big and that's the loophole and and that's where it should be scrutinized. Okay, so we've set the table. Let's serve the meal. The advocacy group in BC that is the best at this, the top of the top, they're called Dogwood. Who are they? We got to give credit where credit's due because they are big and they have been around since 1999 in Victoria. Based off our estimates, probably about 15 to 20 staff. They have an annual revenue of 1.9 million dollars. So, nobody's getting rich in this organization. It's not as if they have a 20 million dollar revenue here. It's 1.9, but the it's the structural fact that everything that follows them is is where is is what matters. They're not a registered charity. So, Dogwood is is is a society and it is deliberate because charities face limits on political activity. Whereas societies, they don't. So, there's no Canada Revenue Agency return, nothing that we can see publicly. And there's no line. This is crucial. There's no line asking about money from outside Canada. There's no public filing at that. So, I this is I leave this to you to deduce where I'm going with this. >> Yeah, well that's they always say follow the money. So, where does the funding come from? >> Um, well, and just one thing, they're not they are say on the on the whole they are described as an environmental group in the conventional sense, but is really an electoral organizing machine. They get their funding what we used to see it, um, a lot of that was coming from the United States. They used to tell you and so prior to 2021 >> [snorts] >> on their annual reports they used to list their funders by name in their annual reports. And some of those American foundations that have been contributing to them historically were the Tides Foundation USA and they're based in San Francisco, the Bullitt Foundation in Seattle, Brainerd Foundation also Seattle, the Wilburforce Foundation, you guessed it, also Seattle, and the Westwind Foundation. They are all very prominent progressive environmental focused US uh, philanthropic foundations. And the last report that named anyone Ben was in 2020. So, they used to name them and then now and it's dropped off a cliff. We don't have any visibility on that and they are under no legal obligation to share that with us. They don't actually have to say where they're getting their funding. And so, that that's that's concerning to Canadians. >> It uh, from 30,000 ft from where I'm sitting it it sounds like foreign interference or American interference. >> I wish I could call the elbows up crowd, but um, we can't say that it is because they're following they're following the law. They were funded by American foundations as as we know up until 2020. Um, >> [snorts] >> but we have no evidence and neither does anyone else Ben because there's no filing that will contain it. And we're not describing a crime here. This is This is a loophole and I'd rather talk about it now and thank you for for bringing this up 9 weeks before an election rather than 9 weeks after the fact. >> Uh David, we were talking about uh listed funders of the group Dogwood at least up until 2021 and they all used to be listed as all about environmental advocacy. Has that changed? >> Definitely. And this is the part that that it is not necessarily being broadcast. At least I think it's on their website certainly, but this is the part I really want people to hear because the frameworks that we were talking about, they were all built for something else. That has shifted. Um in 2008, Dogwood's mission was about local control. So communities and First Nations, co-management, collaboration, and that kind of crossed from whether it was coal bed methane and oil tank oil tankers. But it has shifted and it's shifted dramatically since particularly since 2019, but even in the last year and a half or so. And and [snorts] today a sitting board member's his official bio describes the mission as to and quote I quote this. This is on their website then. To democ de democratize, decarbonize, and decolonize British Columbia. So those are the big three objectives and one [snorts] of them, only one of them is environmental. So big shift, noticeable shift and I think this we need to pay attention to. >> Yeah, uh from from their own annual report, decolonize BC. >> It it's there front and center. And it's and I'm going to read it from you. You can go onto their website. Dogwood is committed to dismantling colonial systems and ideas in BC. And then on their indige So So have a number of different pages. It's all there front and center, anyone can read it, look it up. Their indigenous rights page says, "British Columbia is a resource colony founded on land theft, white supremacy, and genocide." And their 2021 annual report describes the province, it goes further, as unceded, stolen indigenous territory. So that is how they characterize British Columbia and the people who live here. And and like anyone else, they're entitled to every word of it, and I want to be absolutely clear about that. But that is the characterization that this organization is making about our province. >> Yeah, this is uh remarkable. I want to be clear, it's my opinion, it's brazen and terrifying. So let's talk about what they do. Start uh start with the issues, anything we might have heard of. >> Well, they've been successful. They have been really successful, at least they claim to have been very successful. They claim on their website, and let's start out with again, they uh initially described themselves as an environmental advocacy group, but as I noted, the issues and concerns have shifted. Um but the environmental issues they were claimed to have to been involved with and impacted those decisions were the North Coast oil tanker ban. So that law came into effect in 2019. They began to campaigned on it from 2007. So they have some history, Ben. The Enbridge Northern Gateway, that was canceled, dead uh in 2016. The Fraser Surrey Docks uh coal port, in their own words, "After 6 years fighting a US thermal coal terminal, the [snorts] Port of Vancouver finally canceled the permit." So that is They also claim to have influenced BC's 2017 campaign finance reforms. They launched a campaign, a pretty smart campaign, Ben, pretty catchy. They ran a campaign called ban big money. And the province banned corporate and union donations. And so the track record is is real and it's proven. So which is why we all need to be aware of of their organizing. >> Yeah, I I want to I want to repeat this. Some of the biggest environmental stories of the past decade, the oil tanker ban Northern Gateway, Dogwood claims to have influenced them. >> And [snorts] and I I believe it. I people do not realize how big this particular group is, but also just the entire sector environmental advocacy with [snorts] with it's it's enormous and they're effective. But the one thing that really irks me the American tankers are still coming through, Ben. The American tankers are still in. So it's kind of selective it's almost selective campaigning. The Americans are getting through but the Canadian tankers are not. >> Okay, so we we've talked about individual issues. Let's talk more generally about elections. Do they make claims about their effectiveness there? >> They do. They do and and more than that, they actually name the MPs and and even in some cases the MLAs who they've beat. So they're this is I think I I need to find some can't find more recent data, but their 2016 report claimed that in 19 ridings they they worked in and they advocated and and volunteered in conservative candidates lost 82,000 votes. So they don't claim to have elected anyone, they claim to have beaten people. So that's an important something to distinguish and they and they name them. They name who they beat, but they don't name who they supported. >> Now how do they do all of this? >> They're organized. They're very open about it. They they they hire people and they hire full-time. So, right now, so they're headquartered here in Victoria in a small neighborhood called North Park. They um posted a municipal election campaign uh position for just under I believe it was $59,000. I think for a 9-year 9-month position. And then organizing coordinators, again, $59 to $61,000. And to compare those, just for comparison's sake, what a Victoria city councilor will make after this October election is $59,000. So, the people hired to shape who sits on council are paid the same rate as the people who sit on it. Except they're working full-time. They have hundreds of trained volunteers uh behind them. And and they don't they don't have to get elected to keep the job. >> Okay, so I want to see if I can envision this. You You've got entire election teams, machines, running independently, but parallel to the candidates that they actually want to elect. >> Yes. Precisely. And let's go back to what I said before. There is no rule against coordinating. So, the infrastructure and organization behind that is not capped. So, you could have 500 volunteers running around Victoria at door knocking. And they do. I don't know about this particular election if it's 500, but they do. And they're effective. And it's only the advertising which is capped. So, it's the pretty effective. >> Okay, so we got to recap this. Nonprofit societies in British Columbia are legally legally allowed to advertise during elections, and we have no way of knowing who's funding them, and it's entirely legal. >> Totally legal. Totally above board. And this is where the loophole matters. And it's not just one group then. There are roughly 12 registered third-party sponsors here in Victoria. We're a city of 90,000 people. So, you know, and they coordinate, I would say, also with other organizations. That's something we should probably mention. Um they share voter data with, and on their website, quote, "like-minded organizations" such as Homes for Living, which was registered in 2022. But, most of the donors for these organizations, the filings are anonymous. So, they're not breaking any rules. That is the rule under BC. Only contributions of only of $100 or more get named. So, this isn't a conspiracy. 12 organizations, each following the law exactly, and a voter in Victoria cannot find out who is funding them. So, it's all above board, Ben, and that's the loophole. >> I I think my last question is probably my most obvious one at this point. Why don't more people or organizations speak out against what groups like Dogwood are doing? >> They are and have been They've been litigious. Dogwood in particular, that they teamed up with four other environmental groups to sue former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney for defamation, alleging he twisted the results of a $3.5 million public inquiry to falsely claim that they were running a foreign-funded campaign of misinformation against Canada's oil industry. And that case has not been resolved. >> Well, thank you so much for joining us, David. We appreciate it. And if you'd like to follow uh David, you can go to BC Politics Watch on Twitter. Thanks so much for watching the show. Now, if you enjoyed what you saw, hit that subscribe button so you never miss another episode of the Ben Mulroney Show.