First off, I like the idea of per-vote funding, probably at the $1 mark. Ideally, the voter would actually be given a separate box: "would you like $1 from the consolidated revenue fund to be given to a registered political party*? if so, indicate which party below" (separate selection from voting, incl. under P.R.; you can "give" to party not on your ballot, *and additional option of "the [indep] MLA candidate I voted for".) - HOWEVER, if you are going to let this one slip through, despite all the misgivings out there about it, (A) the individual donation limit has to drop even further, (B) and/or the "tax rebate" for personal donations needs to either max out sooner (e.g. $100), and/or be a smaller percentage to start with (e.g. 50%).
Do you like this page?
Reactions
Sign in with
Facebook TwitterFinally: somebody should be setting the record straight on just how much “taxpayer subsidy” in the form of tax-credits on political donations, total & by party, over the past 5 years.
(and in doing so, my points about lowering the figures — to match this level — is a good idea… taking into account that increased personal donations may occur … afterall SOMETHING has to achieve REVENUE-NEUTRALITY these days!!!!!! I sigh at the end of the BC Carbon Tax’s legacy of being “republican friendly" )
Um, where is the “no cash-for-access events” clause?!
Um, 25% reduction in how much you are allowed to spend on a campaign isn’t low enough.
(how about instead of 50% reimbursements, 100% on the first $XX, 75% on the next $YY, 50% on the next $ZZ, 25% on the remainder – where each of XX, YY, ZZ, = ~$1000 range per candidate^)
{^in a world of P.R., we need to throw some bones to the independent local candidates}
Surely, the “you can’t spend 2017 corporate/union donations on the next campaign” [but you can use the money (to pay off debt from) on 2017 campaign" -nuance is very self-serving to the NDP (and their creditors).
- let Andrew Wilkinson make an Amendment removing this nicety (and toughening in-kind/union staff bans) and vote for the amendment! (does that ensure 3rd reading has these changes tabled??)
{But don’t let the BCLibs mess with the retroactivity – in fact, let’s screw the NDP and the BCL by playing them both strategically during committee: keep the retroactivity, lose the "pay your debt”.}