ISTR Fourth International Conference Dublin, Ireland / July 5-8, 2000 The Third Sector: For What and For Whom?

Kathy L. Brock kb21@qsilver.queensu.ca

Two key trends in the past thirty years have forced a fundamental rethinking of the interaction between society and government. The unwieldy growth of the welfare state and spiralling debts and north- south tensions contributed to the redefinition and streamlining of government. At the same time, the information revolution, rising education levels, mobilization of citizens with a growing consciousness of rights and entitlement led to higher expectations. This resulted in citizens, disillusioned by the impotence of their governments, turning to the representative nongovernmental organisations to defend their interests, promote their rights and deliver needed services, and besieged and belittled governments expanding links and forging partnerships for service delivery with these organisations in an attempt to balance tightening financial constraints and citizen needs.

The embedding of third sector organisations in the policy world is fraught with tensions. Accountability and autonomy become oppositional forces causing an uneasy relationship. Government agencies are concerned that their equity and efficiency goals and objectives be met when they enter partnerships with the third sector for the delivery of programs and services. Third sector agencies question the impact of accountability mechanisms on their independence and identities. Even if the relationship between government and third sector agencies seems to be based on cooperation, concerns about cooptation (for nonprofits) and capturing (for governments) may linger calling the legitimacy of the partnership into question. While current research reveals that these concerns may have been overstated in the past, the relationship between the governing and third sectors remains problematic.

Two means of improving the relationship between the governing and third sectors have been proposed recently in Canada. National voluntary organisations created the Panel on Accountability and Governance in the Voluntary Sector (PAGVS) which made a number of recommendations for improving accountability in the sector including the creation of an independent, government funded commission, loosely modelled upon the British Charity Commission, to oversee the voluntary sector. The proposed commission would: provide support and advice to organisations on improving accountability and governance; provide information and advice to the public on the third sector and its activities; and, ensure compliance by third sector organisations with federal rules governing their conduct. As a link between the third sector and government, the Commission would work towards resolving the tensions between accountability and autonomy. Not to be outdone, the Canadian government created a Voluntary Sector Task Force (VSTF). The VSTF sponsored Joint Tables of representatives from both sectors to examine how to build a new relationship between the third sector and government, strengthen the capacity of the third sector, and improve the regulatory framework. The Joint Tables outlined twenty-six options for strengthening the relationship between the federal government and voluntary sector.

The two endeavours represent a historic undertaking in Canada aimed at improving and facilitating the relationship between the federal government and the nonprofit sector. The reports borrow on other country models but offer new insights into mediating the relationship. Do they accomplish this goal? Does the process itself speak to the tensions inherent in the relationship or is it indicative of a new beginning as the federal government and voluntary sector organisations suggest? Do the reports adequately address concerns of autonomy, accountability and cooptation or capturing?

This paper answers these questions by evaluating the process and recommendations of the two initiatives. The first and second sections sketch the tensions inherent in third sector and government relations as discussed in the literature in various countries with special attention given to the US and Great Britain, and profile the Canadian case. The third section outlines the process which gave rise to the two Canadian reports and their findings. The fourth section offers an analysis of the extent to which the process and content of the two reports reinforce or alleviate the tensions inherent in third sector and government relationships. Some recommendations, such as the ones for a commission, may be evaluated by reference to the experience in other nations, but others are new innovations that must be evaluated on their own merit. The relationship between the governing and third sectors is still uneasy and trust must be built but the reports offer constructive means for building that relationship. The final section extends the analysis by drawing out the implications for the US and Britain specifically and other countries more generally. The Canadian reports do offer new insights into resolving the four tensions inherent in partnerships between the governing and third sector but also raise important questions about the nature of these relationships.

Back to Dublin Conference main page.