The Liberal government introduced election financing legislation Tuesday that aims to change how provincial politicians can raise money for their campaigns and how citizens can affect democracy with their pocketbooks.

The legislation comes after the government came under fire for ministers being tasked with soliciting hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations, while companies that received government contracts and subsidies had donated to the Liberals.

Under the new rules, corporations and unions would be banned from donating money or guaranteeing loans for political parties and politicians. To make up for that loss, the legislation proposes an allowance for parties of $2.26 per vote received by its candidates in the last election, to decrease slightly each year, to 75 per cent of its 2017 level by 2021. It will be reviewed by cabinet after five years.

When asked about the need for subsidies, government house leader Yasir Naqvi told reporters that "democracy is not free." He then quipped: "I just gave you your line, didn't I?"

Under the proposed rules, individuals' donations will be capped at $1,550 to a party each year, plus up to $1,550 to constituency associations and nomination contestants of a party, to a maximum of $3,100 in a year. In an election period, individuals can donate up to $1,550 to a candidate, to a maximum of $3,100 to the candidates of a single party — but there will be no additional opportunity to donate to a party with an election or byelection, as there is today.

All told, it means an individual could donate a maximum of $7,750 to a party, its candidates and riding associations in an election year, and a maximum of $4,650 in a year with no elections. In a year with both a general election and one or more byelections, the limit would be by higher. Generous individuals could donate up to limit to each party.

The bill would also limit third-party advertising. Third parties must register with Elections Ontario in order to produce advertising that either supports or opposes a candidate or party, or advertises on an issue associated with a particular party or candidate during an election campaign or in the six months prior to a planned election. They could spend $100,000 during election campaigns, to a maximum of $4,000 per electoral district, and can spend six times that limit in the six months pre-writ.

The responsibility of determining what advertising is considered political would fall to the chief electoral officer.

The legislation contains “anti-collusion” measures, modelled after federal legislation, aimed at preventing third parties from working around the rules. For example, a third-party advertiser is prohibited from breaking up into multiple groups, each with its own advertising spending cap. As of Tuesday afternoon, it remained unclear how the anti-collusion measures would affect Working Families, a coalition of unions that produced anti-Progressive Conservative advertising in recent elections.

The proposed spending limits are $0.80 per elector for political parties and $1.28 per elector for candidates, plus a $9,310 bonus for candidates in Northern Ontario.

The government is proposing to send the bill to committee after first reading, to initiate public consultation hearings over the summer.

And judging by the opposition, there will be plenty of people calling for the rules to be made more strict.

After question period Tuesday, PC Leader Patrick Brown called on the government to “close the loopholes” in the legislation, starting with the issue of paid volunteers. While corporations and unions would be banned from donating directly to a political party, they would still be allowed to pay their staff to “volunteer” to election campaigns, under the proposed rules, he said.

Brown offered an example, by way of a hypothetical wind company. “If a wind company that gets huge contracts with the government wants to donate hundreds of employees to work on a campaign, it’s a donation in kind. There has to be some rules on this," he said, adding that federal election rules would consider it a donation in-kind, subject to a contribution limit.

Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner had the same objection, which he explained simply: “I don’t think there should be a restriction on volunteers, but if you pay a volunteer, that should be considered a financial contribution."

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath, on the other hand, is not so concerned.

“I would just be worried we don’t make changes that cut people out of the process or prevent people from participating in elections, I think that’s the most important thing,” she said.

Horwath and Brown both accused the Liberals for acting their own self-interest.

"The reason they wanted to retain control of this process, in a departure from past where all parties set the rules for our democracy, is they had a game plan where they want to leave some loopholes in place," Brown said "I challenge the Premier to do the right thing and clean up these loopholes."

Horwath criticized the process but supports many key aspects of the bill. However, she said she was concerned that the structure of individual contributions includes "loopholes" for people to ratchet up their contributions, and she would prefer a hard cap on contributions.

To contact the reporter on this story:
jsmithcross@qpbriefing.com
416-212-5816
Twitter: @jessiecatherine

Election financing legislation introduced; opposition criticizes ‘loopholes’

Read this for free.