Charity Law Reform in Canada: Moving from Patchwork to Substantive Reform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the history of charity law reform in Canada, focusing on calls for a legislative definition of charitable purposes and changes to the political activity rules. It traces the trajectory of three periods of charity law reform advocacy in Canada since 1978, during which advocates have called not only for reform to the political activity rules but also more broadly for the modernization of Canadian charity law. Despite decades of charity law reform proposals, most charity law reform in Canada to date has constituted a patchwork of administrative and legal changes. Canadian charity law is at a crossroads after the broad recommendations of the 2017 Report of the Consultation Panel on the Political Activities of Charities and the 2018 legislative changes eliminating certain restrictions on charities’ political activities. It is time for more substantive charity law reform, drawing from multiple law reform proposals presented over the last 40 years, and from charity law reform in other jurisdictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".