Later, Liberal MP Peter Fragiskatos questioned Bahen on how her small team of four people could possibly do all the analytical and research work on charities they claimed to do.

Its hard for me to understand how an organization of four people can judge 250 organizations on a range of criteria, delve in and offer an enormous set of judgments. For us to look at that as MPs is a challenge, Fragiskatos asked.

To Bahen, the workload is similar to that of a financial or credit analyst.

When I worked on financial research way back in the day when I was young, there was a team of 38 people in the research department, and our research influenced 25 per cent of the daily volume on the Toronto Stock Exchange, Bahen explained. So this type of small team research coverage is very common in other sectors.

But the most aggressive line of questioning came from Liberal MP Adam Vaughn, who immediately questioned the oppositions assessment that CI conducted excellent work.

There's a double-edged sword

Based on what the opposition is saying, Habitat for Humanity, YWCA both in Vancouver and Toronto, Oxfam, the Canadian Humane Society, all are more of a risk to donate to than WE Charity based on the research that the opposition has declared as valuable excellent and impressive, Vaughn told Bahen, referring to the ratings CI had given to all the above organizations on its website.

Bahen responded that the three-star rating afforded to WE Charity was based on their financial situation and didnt take CIs concerns about WEs corporate structure into consideration.

Excerpt from:

Liberal MPs grill charity watchdog that has been critical of WE during latest committee meeting - National Post