Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Thursday, November 27, 2008

Flaherty to announce axing of $1.95 per vote subsidy to political parties

Talk about one big honking poison pill for the Opposition Liberals... how on earth would they go to the electorate over that one? "We're taking the Government down and forcing an election because they want to take away our money."

This is the sort of democratic reform we really need in this country. Let the political parties stand or fall on the merits of their policies, not based on votes from people who simply vote for the party they've always blindly voted for. (and I say that as someone who's voted for three different federal parties, including the Liberals)

UPDATE: Rumours have been swirling that the NDP might just support this measure... and according to a quote in the Globe & Mail, the rumours just might be true...
"NDP Jack Layton said his party will co-operate with the belt-tightening, but added Canadians want more.

“We know that for every billion spent [on infrastructure] you create 11,000 jobs and that's what other countries are doing,” he pointed out.
From all the other reports I've read, there's been hardly ANY negative quotes from anyone in the NDP on this move... not at CBC, CTV, Globe & Mail, National Post... with just one fairly neutral quote from the NDP President in the Toronto Star.

I find that rather interesting, don't you? If we have the NDP's support, perhaps won through other consessions to be made now or early next year in a stimulus package, this could be yet another stroke of brilliance from the Harper Team.

UPDATE II: Just for fun, you might want to wander on over to the Liblogs and watch them writhing on the ground, foaming at the mouth over this one.

Labels: , ,


  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 10:07:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Reid said…

    I'm not surprised the NDP support this. It hurts the Liberals. And in Jack's quest for Stornaway all's fair.

    We're taking the Government down and forcing an election because they want to take away our money."

    Actually the quote should be, "We're taking the Government down and forcing an election beause they want to take OUR ENTITLEMENT TO YOUR MONEY away from us."

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 10:18:00 a.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I can not even begin to say how much I LOVE THIS IDEA!!!!!!!

    Let's scrap political welfare in this country!!!!

    In fact, it doesn't go far enough. We need to loosen and eliminate many electoral regulations so that all parties can fundraise and fight a better fight without EC breathing down their necks.


    Mike Wisniewski

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 10:32:00 a.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Yeah, I just checked Liblogs, and nobody's foaming at the mouth over this measure. Sorry, buddy.

    And wouldn't this be bad for you guys too? I mean you got over 5 million votes last election; that's almost 10 million dollars for your party from taxpayers. You'll probably survive with your fundraising from other areas, but there's no denying that's a huge dent in your treasury.

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 10:48:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Archie said…

    The Liblogs sound like a bunch of spoiled children that have had their allowance taken away and they're crying for their bottle.

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 11:53:00 a.m. EST, Blogger Kyle Lahnakoski said…

    If you don't want your political party to get "your" $1.95, then don't vote!

    How about each voter's $1.95 in tax go to the party they vote for? Maybe we can let each opt-out of providing the $1.95 to thier party? How many people will take advantage of that?

    Of course, the people that do not pay taxes should not be allowed to vote. ;)

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 01:02:00 p.m. EST, Blogger Mark Francis said…

    The Conservative party is the largest beneficiary of the political tax credit, which sees donations to political parties reimbursed at least 50% using public money. I don't see Flaherty suggesting that that huge subsidy be revoked. Far from being hit the hardest, the Conservative Party will be the best situated party if this change goes through.

    Furthermore, campaign expenses at the riding level are also routinely reimbursed for the larger parties with public money.

    If the Conservatives really were that concerned about our money, they wouldn't have wasted $300 million on a useless election.

    Having political parties based only on private donations drastically the financial participation of low income persons, and families with dependants to provide for.

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 03:23:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Another person who somehow feels that more donations = better ideas.

    If you really feel that way, why do we bother with all this election stuff anyway, hm? Why not just put the gov't of Canada up for auction, and the party that can pay the most wins. Hey, that even helps out government financing.

    Get real.

    I want my vote to go to a political candidate that's concentrating on how to best run Canada, not on how to best run their telemarketing centre.

    Take *all* private funding out of politics. Then you'll have something democratic.

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 08:23:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous AMD/Haliburton/Blackwater said…

    The reason for the funding in the first place was to take the corrupting influence that corporations wield via the pocketbook or is that just fine by you? If so, I'm wondering which logos would look good sewn on PMSH's suit to spice up Question Period? Yeah, I know, it's a NASCAR thing so that's gotta be good, eh?

  • At Thu. Nov. 27, 09:42:00 p.m. EST, Anonymous Joe said…

    While I agree with the attempt to rid Canadian politics of corporate and union influence peddling I also would like to rid Canadian politics of the corruption of taxpayer subsidized entitlements. Political parties only become answerable to the voters when they have to ask that same voter for money to run for office. So long as the party can simply skim the taxpayers at the muzzle of a gun the party needs meet only its own desires. Witness the Liberal party. One of the big reasons it has not gone through its much needed restructuring is because it is operating under the illusion that funding for the party will always be there. Politics like the game of life is best played in the marketplace. Run an idea up the flag pole and if enough people agree and are willing to give money to said cause then the idea moves forward. Otherwise that same cause withers and dies on the vine with no one but its originator to weep for it.

  • At Sat. Dec. 13, 09:23:00 a.m. EST, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    What do you guys think about Harper keeping the public subsidy for political donations?

    If his goal was truly to eliminate all forms of public subsidy of political parties, he would remove that as well. By leaving that policy in place, and removing $1.95-per-vote, he will now receive the lions share of taxpayer money in funding his party. Is this fair? Should Conservatives get more money than other parties from the Canadian taxpayer? I assume you will all say yes.


Post a Comment

<< Home