The debate over election-financing legislation is heating up, as members of the public continue to point out loopholes and call for stricter laws.

PC MPPs Steve Clark and Randy Hillier hold a press conference. Jessica Smith Cross / QP Briefing

PC MPPs Steve Clark and Randy Hillier hold a press conference. Jessica Smith Cross / QP Briefing

Jean-Pierre Kingsley, the chief electoral officer of Elections Canada from 1990 to 2007, testified at the committee studying Bill 201 at Queen’s Park Monday. Kingsley lauded the bill as “a very good piece of legislation” that deals with “the toughest nut to crack in all electoral democracies” — political fundraising — but suggested a number of areas where it could be more strict.

Kingsley said the bill’s contribution limits are effectively double the federal limits, as the bill would allow donors to give the federal max of $1,550 to more than one candidate, to a total of $3,100 per party, and more than one riding association, to a total of $3,100 per party, plus $1,550 to the party itself.

That adds up to $7,750 in an election year, which “sounds excessive,” he said.

“$7,000 or more starts to pique your curiosity,” he said.

Kingsley also suggested Ontario further restrict political actors’ spending in the six months prior to a fixed election campaign.

He said he was pleased to see the bill introduce spending limits for the six months leading up to a fixed election because the federal level’s experience has shown that fixed election date legislation leads to campaigning prior to the writ, creating what is, in effect, a prolonged election campaign.

However, he said he’d like to see the normal spending limits for the election period apply to the six months preceding it as well, in a fixed election year.

The bill, as it’s currently written, allows parties to spend up to $1 million in the six months prior to the writ for a scheduled election, on top of the $0.80 per elector in the campaign period. It allows third parties to spend up to $600,000 in the six months prior, plus $100,000 in the election period.

Kingsley warned that this will lead to political parties and third parties spending their entire pre-election limit in the one month before the writ, to achieve the greatest impact on the election.

“That, in my mind, makes them quite problematic,” he said.

That’s why he recommended what he called the “zero option,” where the election period spending limits apply for the entire seven months before election day, with zero additional spending allowed. However, if there is no political will to go that far, he recommended reducing the pre-writ six-month limit to one-sixth of the proposed amounts.

Kingsley also recommended that government advertising in the six months before an election be restricted to advertising about a public emergency, public health or a strict deadline that applies to a government service, such as a date by which to apply for a government benefit or contract. He holds a "personal" view, as a taxpayer, that government advertising should be restricted in that way at all times, he said.

Kingsley supports permanent public funding for political parties, to give them a stable source of funding. Under the legislation, initial public funding of $2.26 per vote would taper off. Stable funding is important, he said, so parties can properly develop policy platforms and communicate them to the public.

"We need political parties to be thinking not only about the next campaign, but what are we going to say in the next campaign," he told reports, outside of the committee room.

Kingsley is only the latest high-profile witness to call for stricter laws to the Standing Committee on General Government this summer. Ontario's Chief Electoral Officer Greg Essensa, former Harper chief of staff Guy Giorno, former Liberal cabinet minister John Gerretsen and a number of academics and activists have also called for aspects of the bill to be tightened up.

Two Progressive Conservatives on the committee, MPPs Steve Clark and Randy Hillier, held a press conference Monday afternoon, citing the witnesses they've heard from when they called for cash-for-access fundraisers to be outlawed in the bill.

"It's our expectation the bipartisanship we've seen already will continue throughout the committee meetings. It is our hope it does not change when it comes time to vote on proposals, recommendations and amendments during clause-by-clause," said Hillier.

"It's clear the Liberals have left serious loopholes in the legislation," said Clark. "You can hear that from the deputants who come forward at the meetings. There is no bigger loophole than cash-for-access fundraising."

Clark and Hillier said they'd like to see cash-for-access ended by prohibiting ministers from raising money from the stakeholders who do businesses related to their ministries.

Kyle Richardson, press secretary to Government House Leader Yasir Naqvi, released a statement that said the bill was sent to committee after first reading, and will be sent to committee again after second reading, to allow for changes to it through amendments.

“There is broad consensus across party lines on what needs to be done to strengthen and modernize election financing rules. That’s why we are moving forward with an open, transparent and credible process that includes engaging opposition parties, experts and the general public every step of the way," he said in the statement.

Election finance debate heats up, former chief electoral officer calls for stricter limits

Read this for free.