Political Party Financing In Canada

This document discusses party financing in Quebec with an analysis of the financial report of parties 1977-89, initiatives and challenges to the Ontario party and campaign finance system, paying for the politics of British Columbia, the evolution of political financing regulation in New Brunswick, and party financing in Alberta focusing on low-impact legislation.

In 2004, Jean Chrétien’s Liberals banned unions and corporations from contributing financially to political parties. In 2008, opposition leaders were prepared to defeat the Conservative government over its proposal to eliminate public subsidies to parties. In Money, Politics, and Democracy, Lisa Young and Harold Jansen lead a distinguished group of political scientists in exploring the issues that led to the showdown. Are publicly funded parties compatible with democracy? What effect have campaign finance reforms had on the balance of power between parties and donors, on the relationship between national parties and local organizations, on electoral competition? This timely volume reveals that the financial centre of gravity for political parties is shifting between national and local organizations as individual donors replace unions and corporations. To survive financially, parties must now maximize their seats and votes. Contributors show that campaign finance reforms have shaped party organization and electoral competition, contributing to successive minority governments.

This document contains papers on the following topics, an evaluation of disclosure arrangements in Canadian political finance; some evidence on the effects of incumbency in the 1988 Canadian federal election; official agents in Canadian elections; electoral competition, campaign expenditure, and incumbency advantage; capital-intensive politics; public funding of political parties, candidates, and elections in Canada; independent candidates in federal general elections; large contributions to candidates in the 1988 federal election and the issues of undue influence; and an economic analysis of the funding of political parties in Canada.

In 2004, Jean Chretien's Liberals banned corporations and unions from contributing financially to political parties. In 2008, opposition leaders were prepared to defeat the Conservative Party over its proposal to eliminate public subsidies to parties. In this book, prominent political scientists explore the underlying issues that led to the showdown. Are publicly funded parties compatible with democracy? What effects has party finance reform had on elections and on the balance of power between parties and donors and between national parties and local organizations? Contributors show that campaign finance reforms have shaped party organization and electoral competition, contributing to successive minority governments.

This book provides information about how policies and practices regarding public financing abroad, focusing on North America and several Western European countries, can help Americans develop their own ideas about reform possibilities.

The two studies in Interest Groups and Elections in Canada explore the nature and influence of special interest groups. They consider different aspects of the question, "In the context of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, how can the laws intended to secure a fair electoral process be reconciled with freedom of expression?" Janet Hiebert reviews the limits on interest groups adopted in 1974 and amended in 1983, profiles the groups involved int he 1988 federal election, and discusses relevant legislation and jurisprudence in the provinces and abroad. She concludes that spending limits for parties and candidates will only be effective if there are also restrictions on independent expenditures during elections by groups and individuals. Brian Tanguay and Barry Kay assess the influence attributed to locally oriented interest groups, including by members of Parliament, and conclude that these organizations have less influence on the political process than is the popular view. The authors conclude that dissatisfaction is a key variable explaining the role of these interest groups and their activities during elections.