Front Burner - ‘Don’t say oil on stage’: A WE Charity investigation

Episode Date: February 8, 2021

Strong corporate ties. A lot of attention paid to make sure donors were happy. Those were just some of the concerns that former employees had about WE Charity, as told to the CBC’s The Fifth Estate. Today, more on that investigation.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. We Day 2011, are you ready to change the world? At its height, the We Charity, founded by Craig and Mark Kielberger, was this organization that brought together thousands of young people across the country. There were these we days, like these rock concerts rolled in with motivational speeches. We want you to say on the count of three, we are Canada. One, two, three.

We are Canada! And they brought these big stars, Kendrick Lamar, Jennifer Lopez, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. And of course, well-known Canadians like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and members of his family. Who's ready to change the world? When are you going to do it? Well, that was until the charity said it would wind down its operations in Canada in September, not too long after a political scandal involving the Kielburgers' relationship with the Trudeau government. The team at the Fifth Estate has dug into the WE organization and questions about its elite connections, talking to former employees

and the Kielburgers themselves. Kate McKenna is here to talk about what they found. Hi, Kate. Thanks so much for being with me today. Hey, Jamie. I'm so happy to be back on the show. Yeah, it is a pleasure to have you back. So Kate, 12-year-old Craig Kielberger came to fame talking about the need to address child labor in the developing world. I actually remember seeing him speak in an auditorium back in grade school. And when he first started Free the Children, which later became WE, he said it was all about empowering youth to make the world a better place. And was that what drew the former employees that you talked to to the organization as well? so. I think a lot of the people that we spoke with say that they were really drawn to the mission of We Charity. Like, you know, you kind of mentioned Craig Kielberger speaking. I think a lot of people, former employees who we spoke with, were really inspired by the Kielbergers themselves and the idealism they promoted. For instance, we spoke with one former employee, Matthew Simone.

For me, it was a dream job. It was motivational speaker, getting to travel around to schools and to engage young people with trying to make change globally. So it was the perfect thing. Right. And I know by 2014, the organization had grown a ton, right? Like we was involved in over 10,000 schools and eight different countries. Where did the money come from to support that kind of growth? Yeah, I think it's really important to point out that at first, like this was a very grassroots organization. The basis of it was that it was

kids helping kids. But over time, they became more sophisticated in fundraising. They started doing these volunteer trips to help out with some of the projects, the infrastructure projects that Free the Children and then We Charity was doing overseas. And they also started kind of courting what they called a high net worth donors. So our sources, people who used to work for the organization, describe basically just really wealthy people who would come on these trips. And then the organization would try and convince them to donate to their work overseas through what they called an adoptive village program. American Nikki Gerlach says she too was inspired to help build Wee's work in Kenya. I think we always heard, whether it be from Craig himself or someone who's working closely with him, get them to Kenya.

Like the goal was to sell them on something, like anything. It could have been a school, like I said, Warhol, all those things, just planting the seeds. That's what Craig was about. And then in addition to that, they started taking on corporate sponsors, especially for their WE Days and WE School's curriculum. So they got a number of corporate donors specifically for the WE Day events. In this speaker's spotlight video, he shows how to convince executives that parting with their money meant making more money. The Kielburgers called it the WEconomy. Purpose is what makes

people passionate about your brand. It makes people fall in love with your company. 75% of millennials would take a pay cut to work at a company that gives greater purpose. I want to come back to the high net worth donors in a few minutes when we talk about their operations in Kenya. But if we could spend some time now talking about the corporate sponsorships, the corporate donors. And can you give me some examples of those donors, of those sponsorships? How did that play out? sponsorships? How did that play out? There seemed to be, according to people we spoke with, a lot of internal push and pull over some specific corporate donors. And one that came up a lot was Dow Chemical. So they are a big deal here, but they're a big deal everywhere in how they help out. So please join me in giving a round of applause to the chief executive officer of Dow. Andrew,

please come on up here. So I don't know if you know, but Dow Chemical is a big chemical company in the United States. And they have dealt with, you know, some controversy in the past. Like, for instance, they bought the company that was responsible for the Bhopal chemical disaster in India that left thousands of people dead as well as injured. Even the CEO of Dow said back in 2015, I think the chemical industry, those are two very bad words, chemical and industry, needed to be rebranded. So there were just concerns internally about why the organization was partnering with such a company

and whether or not they risked their reputation in doing so. There's this other example that stuck out to me. Sources told you that at a 2016 Calgary Wee event, a donor with ties to the oil industry actually got really angry that Wee Day featured David Suzuki. And can you tell me about what happened there? Yeah, absolutely. So basically, We Day's tour across Canada and parts of the show are the same in a lot of jurisdictions. So one of the parts of this particular show had like a little montage of Canadian heroes that played on the big screen. And David Suzuki was one

of them, you know, noted environmentalist David Suzuki. And it was only on the screen for a couple of seconds. But people who were there that day say that one donor got very, very angry about it. Sources who were there say the Kielberger brothers tried to calm him down. But after the show, Mark Kielberger in particular was really angry that the slide was shown at all. And then it was pulled for future shows. Right. I know our colleague Mark Kelly sat down with the Kielbergers for this investigation that you did together. And what did they have to say about that? Yeah, so we did ask them specifically about the Suzuki slide.

And they said that they pulled the slide because... I remember that when I was there. I actually spoke to the donor. And they were upset because a few months earlier, David Suzuki had compared the oil industry to modern-day slave traders. Based on our learning that year, the year the Fort Mac fires, we decided that we would remove that particular clip. Craig Kielberger said that he did a lot of learning about that particular episode and that the donor was very angry. He said that they were told that

they were very Ontario centric. And he responded by saying that Canada's complicated. Canada is really complicated. But the Kielburgers also made a point of saying that they did not knowingly at any point take sponsor money from oil companies in particular. I know that you guys were also sent an email that seemed to say that performers on the WE stage weren't allowed to say the word oil on stage. And can you describe this email to me? Yes. So early on in the investigation, we were forwarded an email by a former employee that was written by someone named Matthew Kennedy. And one line in it kind of caught our eye, and it said, don't say oil on stage. And this email was sent to the production team of We Days. was sent to the production team of We Days. So we reached out to Matthew Kennedy and he said that this email was essentially minutes from a meeting that they were having about a future We Day.

He said that that line meant exactly that, that they were not supposed to say the word oil on stage. We asked We Charity about that and they sent a letter to us saying that that rule does not exist, that that email was sent unilaterally by Matthew Kennedy without, you know, any sort of blessing from the high ups at We Charity. So we reached back out to Matthew Kennedy and we were like, is that true? And he said, no, there was no truth in that. I just feel let down and disappointed, to be honest with you. The idea that I, at that point in my career at WE, could be making such an important rule about what can or can't be said on stage at their biggest event ever at that point in their history. There's no truth based on that. These companies, Dow, what opportunities did they see

being connected with WE? Well, according to the former employees that we spoke with, the concerns was that these companies would be getting like a halo effect, like that they would be essentially buying goodwill from the charity. And former employees also say that it was sort of like an opportunity for these corporations to show their brand to a young and captive audience. And so we put that to Craig Kielberger of both of the Kielbergers, actually. And they responded, you know, that there was a vetting process in place that they wouldn't just accept any corporate donor. And that, you know, in their opinion, it's better for a corporation to give their money to a charity than it would be for them to take that money and then

spend it on fancy commercials or billboards. Right. Were you concerned the corporations were trying to use you to some extent? We were using the companies to fulfill a clear corporate mission and to say that we want you to be more purpose-led and purpose-driven. I just want to talk about this idea of having this captive audience of young people. There was this one guy that you talked to, another moment that really stuck out to me. And he likened the young people in the audiences to the product, like how users of Facebook are the product for advertisers. Right. Yes, we spoke to a former employee named Matthew Simone, who says that, you know, just like how Facebook sells advertising to users, these companies are sort of selling brand awareness to future consumers.

It's kind of like the Facebook of social change. Like when you're on Facebook, when you're on social media, you think I'm the consumer, but you're not. You're the product. You know, the consumers are the advertisers that are advertising to you. And I think in many ways we realized that day the students are the product for the corporate partners that were coming in on We Day. It was a chance for the organization to say look at the access we have to all these future consumers that you know

that you're now are going to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization. Empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you.

Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income. That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. Money for Cops. All right, so now I want to move on to the organizations, operations elsewhere in the world. And I know that you also took a closer look at their operations in Kenya.

And what kinds of things did they do in Kenya? They have this sort of, it's called Adopt-a-Village program, where they basically pair up with local communities and help build infrastructure projects. So in Kenya, you know, that was one of their biggest operations. A lot of A-list celebrities went there, like Natalie Portman, Demi Lovato. This has been the best birthday I've ever had in my entire life. Richard Branson. And they did some of their most significant overseas projects, like they built a hospital, they built a college, they've paired with a number of other local communities. And one of the big things that they did was they brought North Americans to Kenya to do what's known as volunteerism, like the volunteers would help build the schools or other infrastructure projects.

And they also invited really wealthy families to visit these projects and stay at some nicer properties that the charity owned. And for weed owners, the draw to Kenya, as seen in this promotional video, was supporting good work while having a great time. Once again, it has all the luxuries of home with that true African experience. And as we were digging into We Charity more largely,

we spoke with a number of former employees who did raise some concerns about some of what they saw happening in Kenya. And tell me a little bit more about the concerns that they raised and what they said they saw happening. Well, of the dozens of former employees, many of them had experiences in Kenya. And one of the questions that we heard a number of times was, were donors given the correct information about where their money was going? Right. And I know there were questions about a particular project. So an example here involving a borehole well, a clean water drinking project in Kipsongol,

Kenya, right? Yeah. So after I spoke with one former employee, they sent me like an email with a bunch of links in it. And in clicking those links, it appeared as though several organizations believed that they had all paid for a water project in Kipsongol, Kenya. And a couple of them appeared to be taking full credit for funding the borehole. So, for example, a student's group in B.C. posted online that they had made history paying for an entire clean water well in Kipsongol. line that they had made history paying for an entire clean water well in Kipsongol. Another group from Whistler said it paid for a clean drinking water project. Unilever also said it raised $200,000. And different sources on the ground confirmed to me that there's only one borehole in Kipsongol. So we had questions and we asked We Charity about it. They denied any donor confusion. Carol Mora has worked with the We Charity in Kenya for a decade.

A borehole is just one component. We have several other pillars. We have the masonry tank, the piping, the water kiosks, the programmatic aspects, the technical aspects. Sometimes it's a solar powered. And those things cost money too. So we asked them for like a little bit of clarity, like a breakdown of which donors funded the borehole. They refused to give that to us because they say it was confidential. So they also wrote us a letter asking us whether or not

we had ever spoken with a donor who felt that the charity misrepresented information. So we called some donors and the head of the UBC group that posted on Facebook saying it had funded the entire borehole, I called the person who was running that group, and he told me he was 100% sure that he was told by We Charity that he had paid for the entire cost of the borehole. We also called another group out west that seemed to be taking

credit for building the clean water system. And they sent us an email from We Charity that said that the group's donation was actually enough money to implement a clean water system for the community. And so then even after that, we looked and found additional online articles of new groups claiming that they paid for the water system. But We Charity denying the allegations, saying that they also hired a forensic accountant to go over where the donation money went. And the accountant says that all of the money was spent on projects. also allegations from employees that they were asked to make certain projects in Kenya look more complete or busier than they were in reality. And can you talk to me a little bit about that as well? Yeah. So we spoke with someone who we're calling Bruce. That's not his

real name. We've agreed to protect his identity because he fears professional repercussions for speaking out. And he is someone who graduated from post-secondary school and moved to Kenya to work for WE because he really cared about and was interested in the work that we was doing in Kenya. I saw an organization doing good for communities. But when he got there, he says he became more uneasy about the kinds of things he was seeing. But as I got more exposed, I think it became a balancing game. How much can you get away with in the name of doing good? One example he gave us was from a few summers ago. He says the charity was opening a women's empowerment center that had been paid for by a specific donor.

And he says that that donor was coming to visit, but the kitchen was not ready. It was just an empty room. So he says that he was told by Craig Kielberger directly to fill up the room to make it look more like a kitchen. I got like old serving trays, plates, spoons. I went to Kisaruni, which is just across the street, the girls' high school, and grabbed some stuff that they weren't using that day and found an empty room and built a kitchen for Craig. And, you know, then he sent a text to Craig Kielberger who said, Looks great. Add more. He wanted me to build an even greater extension of this kitchen so it looked even more real and authentic. So the guests would never even think about it not being a real kitchen. Now, Kielberger denies this.

He says that Bruce either didn't have the context or was misrepresenting facts. There was no request that ever came from me to say we needed to change anything other than what the donor wanted. Did this happen? No. Full stop. Did this happen? No. Full stop, no. Not as represented. And later, after our interview with the Kielburgers, staff at We Charity told us that Bruce and others

were merely putting up decorations in anticipation of showing the donor the kitchen. But after that, another source came forward and confirmed Bruce's story. That person was there that day and told us that the makeshift kitchen was dismantled as soon as the donor left. And I know that there were also concerns about a hospital there, right? One that was built and maintained by we donors. And can you briefly tell me about that? Yeah. So this is the Baraka Hospital. And we had two people who were former employees say that when donors toured the hospital, we employees would sort of rally and make sure that the hospital

was filled to look busy. And they told us that the people who were in the hospital were not necessarily sick. Someone sent us a screenshot of a text chain of we employees in Kenya from August 2017, and it was in regards to a donor trip that was happening. And one of the texts said, Beecham Group on way to Baraka in 10 minutes. Please ensure lots of patients. Thanks.

So, of course, we asked We Charity about this. They denied that they would ever take healthy people and put them in the hospital for the benefit of donors. That's another insult to myself and the team of professionals that work at Baraka Hospital. Which team of professionals will line up healthy people to pose as patients? That's an insult and I don't take it kindly.

And it has to be withdrawn. And after our interview, We Charity asked the person who sent that text to write us a letter. And they did write us a letter saying that we were misinterpreting her text. When we asked Bruce about this, he said in his estimation, that text was very clear and that this wasn't the only time he had been asked to make the hospital look busy for donors. Really, I got to see the impact that they were making in the community and it made me feel great about the job that I was approaching to start. But then there's the other end of how much can you stage before it's fake?

And they would push that boundary to the extreme a lot. And I know, as you've mentioned, We Charity has denied specific allegations related to the borehole in Kipsongol and the hospital. But what did the Kielburgers have to say to you about the impact that they believe that they have had in Kenya? Well, they definitely believe that the work that they've done in Kenya has helped thousands of Kenyans break the cycle of poverty. They very much defend the work that they did in Kenya. And one of their key messages is that because they're winding down their operations in Canada now, they'll need to stop partnering with new communities in Kenya. So although they're working on setting up an endowment to keep what they have going, it's unlikely, they say, that they'll be starting new projects. And they say that that is really too bad. We're sitting in an empty building.

That's up for sale. Your Canadian operation is mostly wound down. It didn't have to be this way. If at any point anyone had said, even just simply saying this is not the WE Charity scandal, this is just even that alone. We were politically mugged, but not just us. All these young people were politically mugged in the process.

Okay, so we've talked about the concerns with corporate ties and the concerns over attempts to try and make donors happy. But I want to come back to the reason why we're digging deeper into We Charity, and that's because of the political scandal over the summer. The Trudeau government gave the organization a $43 million contract to run a half billion dollar student grant program. And that decision, of course, as we all know now, spurred an ethics investigation. And that's because of an appearance of closeness

between the Trudeaus and we. The Prime Minister and his wife, Sophie, have appeared on the We Day stage many, many times over the years. Air Canada is the proud sponsor and official travel partner for We Day and a supporter of Free the Children. You can attend this summer's Take Action Academy or even volunteer overseas on Free the Children's

projects. And then it was revealed that Trudeau's mother and brother had been paid to speak at WE events and the former finance minister Bill Morneau had taken a trip paid by WE and had family connections to the charity. And of course, we all now know as well that Trudeau nor Morneau recused themselves from the cabinet decision to award we the contract. I made a mistake in not recusing myself immediately from the discussions, given our family's history. So it has been months now. What did the Kielburgers have to say about the fallout to that?

Yeah, I mean, one thing is for sure. They both said they definitely wished that Trudeau and Morneau had recused themselves. We felt that we were a political roadkill early in July, and it only got worse. It was really unfortunate that there wasn't a moment when a politician, any of them, any party, chose to stand up and say, you know what, that we shouldn't use a children's charity's name as a political football. That they were politically naive to how, like you just outlined, all of the ways that they were related to the Trudeaus and the Morneaus. And they say that they were politically naive to how that would be seen. to the Trudeaus and the Morneaus, and they say that they were politically naive to how that would be seen. I just want to pick up on that with you for the final question of today. You know, did Craig and Mark really not foresee the optics around being offered that contract?

So that is something that when we interviewed them, you know, Mark Kelly challenged them on that. He said, you know, if Kelly challenged them on that. He said, you know, if you put it all together, if you look at all of the family members who appeared on stage, you know, Justin Trudeau was there seven times. Many people are going to look at that and say, yeah, that looks like a pretty cozy relationship. And then in addition to that, one thing that we have heard from people is, you know, Craig has been in the spotlight since the 90s, you know, talking to important political figures. You know, these two brothers had some help, but they built this charity from the ground up. But again, they say

that they were politically blind to how things would appear. Mark, your point is valid because, you know, the optics weren't great. We understand that. But please also realize that we were working with politicians of all stripes, of all parties, in every region of this country. And frankly, in hindsight, let me be very candid, I wish we hadn't. Prime Minister Trudeau has never checked in just to see what was the outcome for you, to check in on you.

What would you want him to know? What would you say to him now, if you could? I don't think I have words. Okay. Kate McKenna, thank you so much for this investigation and for taking the time to come on and tell us about it. We really appreciate it. Thank you for having me. all right so we charity responded to the fifth estate's investigation on their website at we.org in a statement they said in part that they have, quote, always worked to the highest

standards of integrity and accountability. They also included more information about their projects, including in Kenya. You can watch the Fifth Estate's full documentary online at cbc.ca slash fifth. That is all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening. We'll talk to you tomorrow. Thank you.