Spat over party subsidies underlines how they debase politics

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 30/11/2008 (6419 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The story is told of a distinguished gentleman asking a equally distinguished lady whether she would spend the night with him if he paid her a million dollars. She reflected and said that for a million she would do it.

He then asked whether she would accommodate him for a hundred dollars. She indignantly retorted, "What do you think I am?" He responded, "We have determined that. Now we are haggling over the price."

Up to now nobody would have predicted that either the Liberal or NDP parties would form a coalition with the Bloc Québécois, a party whose avowed objective is to dismantle Canada.

Now we are told that the Liberals, the NDP and the separatist Bloc are contemplating a threesome in bed with one another because the price is right. What is the price?

The Harper government has announced the introduction of legislation to discontinue funding the annual expenses of political parties. Before the last election this would have meant a yearly loss of $10 million to the Conservatives, $8.5 million to the Liberals $2.8 million to the Bloc, $5 million to the NDP and $1 million to the Greens. Until now, except for allegations of illegal fundraising or spending, there has been little controversy over the fact that public monies are being used to finance political opinions.

It was not always so. Before the mid-1970s the use of public funds to finance political parties was unheard of. Agitation for political funding came mostly from the NDP, which claimed the playing field was not level because the free enterprise parties were funded by big business.

Ultimately a modest intrusion took place and contributors were allowed tax refunds if they made political contributions. But this proved to be the thin edge of the wedge. Shortly thereafter, government began to make reimbursement of election expenses and then the Chrétien government introduced legislation that gave political parties yearly contributions to finance their ongoing affairs.

The parties have now become critically dependent on these funds to maintain their administrations.

So much so that the reaction to the Harper legislation has been nothing short of hysterical.

Loss of government funding has combined the opposition forces as no other issue could have done. There is even talk of a coalition either composed of or supported by the Liberals, the NDP and the separatists, which would oust the Conservatives from power.

On what principle have the opposition parties found common ground?

Tommy Douglas used to say that when somebody was arguing that it was not money but principle that was involved, you could rest assured it was money.

On the question of whether or not public money should be used to fund political parties, the great majority of Canadians would vote against funding. Most people are shocked when they find out that their tax dollars are being used to finance separatism or any other ideology with which they disagree.

Indeed, the use of public money for this purpose is arguably contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedom and one judge of the Manitoba Court of Appeal, namely Charles Huband, made such a finding. The matter was pursued to the Supreme Court of Canada and significantly the court did not rule in favour of the government. It gave technical reasons for dismissing the case which had been brought by the Manitoba Progressive Party so the substantive question has never been decided.

Since all political parties were being heavily funded, the chance that a political issue would emerge was remote. The Harper administration should be congratulated for doing the right thing.The state should no more be involved in promoting political opinions than it should be involved in promoting religious opinions. If a party cannot generate financial support for its position, it has no business being in the field.

It should be noted the NDP or its forerunner the CCF elected governments in four provinces without political funding. The democratic process has not been enhanced, indeed it has been debased by public funding of political parties.

 

Sid Green is a Winnipeg lawyer and

a former NDP cabinet minister.