When a nonprofit organization receives money from taxpayers, it has to report on where the money went, why it was spent, and what benefits it facilitated.

Publicly financed organizations that receive donations and government support operate on the basis of trust. For example, Siloam Mission is popular because it makes a tangible difference for the homeless and people with a low income.

So, why do I bring this up? Well, the hunger strike/liquid diet of Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence has drawn attention to the poverty in that community. However, a report on Attawapiskat’s finances by Deloitte showed no documentation for 81 per cent of funds; this has also drawn attention to the issue of fiscal accountability, and is something I think should be talked about.

Now, the law is clear: Attawapiskat is entitled to funding from the government no matter what, as a special entity with its own autonomy. But, if it were a faith-based organization, a political party, or charity, and the board of directors kept track of funding like the Attawapiskat band council did in 2011, would you donate money to that organization?

Would you have confidence that your money would be used to provide food, water, and housing? I may not be great with numbers, but after what I’ve seen reported in the media, and after taking a look at the financial reports myself, I don’t know if Chief Spence can be trusted with one cent of the money she is responsible for administering.
Who is holding Chief Spence responsible for her budget? Most importantly, who is holding her responsible for the people of the Attawapiskat reserve that she is tasked with leading? Don’t they deserve to know where the money is going?

I know it’s an imperfect process. When a person is working with a bureaucracy, there is a waiting period. Naturally we can assume Attawapiskat has similar difficulties. But once money is received, the band must still organize and plan strategically how the money is going to be spent, and display the records to its own people. If there aren’t records, how can we know it’s being spent on those who need it?

Many of the people in Attawapiskat live on a limited income. And the purpose of effective administration of the reserve’s finances is to keep track of the money until such time as people who qualify need them. Now theoretically, when an individual receives money, the money is deducted from the account. Therefore, at some level, the money comes into the account from the federal government, goes to the Attawapiskat account, and then goes to individual “x” in Attawapiskat.

What has been made clear is that there is a discrepancy between the money that left the account and the amount that was dispensed to the persons. In other words, in order to balance the records you need to have proof that when money left the account an equal amount was received by qualifying individuals. So either the money isn’t being recorded properly or something worse is going on.

If all the information I have is wrong, then I’m sorry. But if the stories I’ve read are true, I think it’s tough to take Theresa Spence seriously; money came into her band’s account and seemingly just disappeared.

I wish that the reserve Theresa Spence leads could have better living conditions and more money too, and I think many Canadians want to see living conditions improve for the residents of Attawapiskat.

But what people want is to know that the money is actually helping – you know, actually making a difference, not being spent without records and seemingly—in the case of Attawapiskat—without results.