Some MSM reaction to the public funding cut
The Globe & Mail's Adam Radwanski has a thoughtful ( I think so, some others think it is stupid) piece here about the cut to public funding of political parties. One of our readers has a comment about it in entry below, and my position hasn't changed - we should finance political parties! I pulled a comment from Adam's comments as it sums up my position very well.
Some posters conveniently ignore a key point by Radwanski - "To scrap public funding without lifting the ban on corporate and union donations (and raising the cap on personal ones) means there's simply not enough money in this country for a multi-party system." That was the trade-off with the public subsidy program. And, as Jean-Pierre Kingsley the Chief Electoral Officer of the time pointed out, the system was reformed to "enhance the value of equality in the political and election processes. Specifically, the potential for large contributions [corporations, unions, etc.]to confer influence, or the public perception thereof, will be addressed."
Well said
Some posters conveniently ignore a key point by Radwanski - "To scrap public funding without lifting the ban on corporate and union donations (and raising the cap on personal ones) means there's simply not enough money in this country for a multi-party system." That was the trade-off with the public subsidy program. And, as Jean-Pierre Kingsley the Chief Electoral Officer of the time pointed out, the system was reformed to "enhance the value of equality in the political and election processes. Specifically, the potential for large contributions [corporations, unions, etc.]to confer influence, or the public perception thereof, will be addressed."
Well said
3 comments:
I think it's a sneaky ploy by the tories to scare off any party who might be stupid enough to want an election soon, especially the Liberals who are beyond broke.
Won't happen.
I am much more concerned about the tories plan to sell off federal assets. They are just second hand clones of the Harris tories, who did that to Ontario during the Dark Years.
Selling the family silver is never a good idea; it won't generate enough revenue to make a difference, and once gone, it is gone forever.
Watched Ignatieff for five minutes last night and he was horrible. He lectured the interviewer on basic economics and then talked about his own personal circumstances instead of the crisis unfolding for Canadians. That smirk of his is even more revealing than John McCain's. Both are quite distasteful to watch.
Just because the Liberal Party is in debt (in spite of the welfare they receive) is indicative of its incompetence. Why should I support such incompetence? The spin-off benefit of cutting off this welfare spigot, would be less money the pay for all the negative advrtrising that political parties indulge in. The political parties should raise their own funds from their own willing supporters and learn to proselytize on their own dime.
I have no problem with corporate or union $$$ going to political parties. I'd put a cap on it. Canada flourished as a democracy for well over a hundred years before the public trough was enlarged for political parties.
Post a Comment