Bill C-24 and Public Funding of Elections

[Progressive Tory]

I don't know if this has been discussed before in a separate thread, but I'm finding a lot of criticism over the per vote subsidy (which is 1.95 per vote, not 1.75).

This is not party 'welfare', as some people suggest, but part of Bill C-24; an act that made the election process more democratic. Prior to this, corporations, unions and wealthy Canadians (in fact, you didn't even have to be Canadian), had too much power over elected officials; so Jean Chretien made sweeping changes that would bring the election process to the grassroots, by allowing them to help fund their party. It was done democratically; the more votes you received, the more funding.

In this way, voters who couldn't afford to contribute to political campaigns, did so with their vote.

So: A little history

1. After growing concern over political fundraising and financing of parties and election campaigns, in 1974, the Canadian government introduced the Election Expenses Act, which set spending controls and demanded disclosure of where money was spent. It also introduced partial funding of campaigns with public money.

2. In June 2002, Jean Chrétien introduced a new ethics package that forced all ministers to disclose any political donations, including contributions for potential leadership campaigns. "In July 2002, Paul Martin came under fire after he said he could not reveal the names of people who donated to his leadership campaign." He later published the list. And in October 2002, "then Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper refused to release information on who donated to his leadership campaign. He later backtracked, and quietly posted a partial list on his party's website. But, he only posted 54 donors who gave more than $1,075 each, leaving out the names of 10 other large donors who refused to go public, and more than 9,000 people who gave less than $1,000 each."

There were other infractions by different parties which you can read in the linked story.

3. 2003 Bill C-24, restricted contributions to Canadian citizens and permanent residents and enforced a limit on the amounts given. Recognizing that these limits would hamper campaign fundraising ability, the bill further increased public money put toward the political process. There was now a direct subsidy given to the party. And the money given was directly tied to votes.

This was a good thing for Canadians, because it meant that we could now DIRECTLY help to fund our Party by casting our vote. Elected officials are therefore inspired to represent all citizens, because those small contributions can really add up.

4. Harper lowered the contribution limits and has found other ways to fund campaigns. (But that's a subject for a different thread.)

[Molly]

http://www.elections.ca/content.asp?sectio...;textonly=false

[madmax]

I don't know if this has been discussed before in a separate thread, but I'm finding a lot of criticism over the per vote subsidy (which is 1.95 per vote, not 1.75).

This is not party 'welfare', as some people suggest,

Cast your vote

Here Political Party Welfare