Budget due June 6 will phase out political subsidies

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says the Conservatives will introduce next phase of economic action plan on June 6, and will reinstate commitments of their campaign platform.

CTV News Channel: Jim Flaherty takes questions

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty answers questions on the June 6 budget, tax cuts for corporations and Canada's anti-corruption statistics.

CTV News Channel: BNN's Martin Baccardax

A Business News Network correspondent discusses how this budget is significant for Jim Flaherty because it is his first with a majority government backing. Meanwhile, arguments over strategy could be the reason behind the departure of Tim Hortons CEO Don Schroeder.

Watch: See all Videos in the Player

A A | Email This Email | Print | Comments (116) Tweet

Minister of Finance Jim Flaherty announces that the next federal budget will be tabled June 6th, on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Wednesday May 25, 2011. THE CANADIAN PRESS / Adrian Wyld

View Larger Image

Selected Comment

It will be interesting to see how all of the parties adapt to the loss of the per vote subsidy. I never really had a problem with it and thought it was a better scheme than allowing corporations to fund and therefore, control the major parties. If anything, this could force the parties from center and left to amalgamate as a matter of survival, creating a very large problem for the Conservatives. Be careful what you wish for, Mr. Harper.....

Redneck Albertan

Budget due June 6 will phase out political subsidies

talking about
Budget due June 6 will phase out political subsidies

Got something to say?

CTV.ca News Staff

Date: Wed. May. 25 2011 10:09 PM ET

The government will table its post-election budget on June 6, a document that will implement the Conservatives' promise to phase out political subsidies.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty made the announcement Wednesday morning on Parliament Hill.

"On Monday, June 6 our government will reintroduce the next phase of Canada's economic action plan, a low tax plan for jobs and growth," Flaherty said.

The document will include several updates to reflect election promises, but Flaherty said the budget will be almost identical to the document that was unveiled prior to the election. The original budget died when the election writ was dropped, and never went to a vote in the House of Commons.

This time, with a majority government, the government has little to worry about.

"We haven't had that luxury in what, five years, more than five years?" said Flaherty.

That means the Conservatives are pushing forward with an election promise to end political subsidies.

"We will include phasing out the per-vote political party subsidy as according to what was set out in the platform...which was a phasing out," Flaherty said when asked by CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.

New Democrat Leader Jack Layton lashed out over the elimination of the political party subsidies, suggesting the move was damaging to democracy.

"Take away public financing and essentially what you are saying is those with the best ability to raise money get to have their ideas heard by Canadians and the rest are essentially silenced," Layton said Wednesday in Ottawa.

"I don't think that's helpful for a democratic society."

The subsidy had guaranteed about $2 per vote in funding for parties that received over 2 per cent of all votes in the previous election, or 5 per cent of the votes in electoral districts where they ran candidates.

The annual subsidy is a $27.4-million expense for the federal government, the Conservative platform noted.

Layton said the NDP would oppose the budget, but had little hope it would be defeated.

Alice Funke, a political analyst with punditsguide.ca, told CTV Power Play's Don Martin that the NDP are the big winners in the phasing out of the voting subsidies.

"The NDP will still get in the first year of Mr. Flaherty's plan more money than they got before the election based on the increased numbers of votes they got," she said. "The Conservatives will take a small hit, the Liberals, the Greens will take a hit as well."

Bob Rae, the new interim leader of the Liberal party, said the Liberals would have to work hard to raise funds from party supporters to compensate for the millions in lost revenue.

Rae questioned the move, saying many democratic countries provide public funds to their political parties.

"It's odd for me when you even look at our friends in the United States where there is a great deal of public financial support for presidential candidates," Rae said Wednesday.

"The notion that there's public support for the political process and for political parties is widely accepted in a great many democratic countries around the world."

The budget will also set aside $2.2 billion to fund an agreement the government hopes to reach with Quebec to create a Harmonized Sales Tax.

The March version of the Conservative budget was dubbed a "Low Tax Plan for Jobs and Growth."

A news release issued Wednesday said the budget was designed to do the following:

Keep taxes low
Making targeted investments to create jobs and growth
Maintain transfer payments for provincial services like health care and education
Control government spending and eliminate the deficit

Comments are now closed for this story

Paul
said

Unreal, soon to have a totally corrupt government bought and paid for by corporations.I would rather have my political candates represent the public, not big corporations.Four more years and we will be in the same boat as the south, not that its a big surprise with harpers corruption.

PBW
said

Jack Layton "Take away public financing and essentially what you are saying is those with the best ability to raise money get to have their ideas heard by Canadians and the rest are essentially silenced," needs to get onto his party machinery and get them working the same way the Conservatives did. The Conservatives developed an efficient fund raising system. If conservatives are capable of this, surely a "progressive" party like the NDP can do the same or better. If NDP party members truly believe in their party, they will support it.

mike
said

i'm ok with cutting the subsidies as long as they actually take that money and give it back to people in lowered taxes. What about cutting out the refund of campaign money if you get x% of the vote.. that's the next big election scam

Richard and Esther Provencher
said

Finally the Subsidy to Go. Now it is time to qualify a National Party recognized in the House of Commons as one which places candidates in ALL PROVINCES and TERRITORIES.

George V.
said

In the previous election before the last one we didn't have an NDP candidate running in our riding, We thought that would be the end of the NDP signs.WRONG. Everywhere in the riding the face of Jack Layton appeared on election signs, the only reason being to collect the $2.00 per vote. The sooner we get rid of this practice the better. If you believe in your party and what it stands for a $5.00 or $10.00 donation which is tax deductible is not going to hurt anyone. I don't want my money going to the separatist or for that matter the socialists living in susidized housing

Doug ^^^ BC
said

This is good news,and long overdue.People who want their favourite party to have money, should send them their own money.I faill to see the advantage of liteerally forcing people to donate by using tax dollars.Under that system it isn't a donation at all.It's just another tax.In fact, the old system removes your right to protest against bad government,or the political system by not donating at all. BTW.Political parties will still be subsidized with tax dollars.When you send a $10 donation to a political party,the party gets the $10,and you get a very generous tax rebate.So the tax payer still contibutes most of the money the party actually got. There are a whole host of "charitable" groups that should be funded the same way.Then those charitable donations will truly reflect the will of the people,rather than the power of the special interest groups with the highest paid lobbyists. Excellent move,PM Harper.Excellent move.

Now a CBC Supporter
said

I never understood why the right wing was so against the CBC. I decided to watch for myself and see what the fuss was about. What I saw was views being expressed by all sides, some US television shows, regional stuff, stuff I didn't like, news etc. It then dawned on me, VIEWS FROM ALL SIDES! Any provider who gives equal time to views that the Right doesn't respect/accept/support must be stopped. I get it now.

Tom in Calgary
said

If the Tories really didn't want our taxes going to political parties they would remove the tax deduction for donations. For every $100 I donate I get back $75 in taxes. So the question is, who is really donating to political parties - me $25 - the tax payer $75. This will only increase when the subsidy is removed and we move toward the US system.

viral venus
said

It has not been made clear whether this government will continue the limits on individual and corporate contributions and continue the ban on contributions from industry lobby groups and other special interest groups. The last thing this country needs is political funding "american style" where a lobby group, industry, corporation or extremely wealthy individual can basically "own" the votes of elected officials by virtue of having almost completely funded their run for office.

Tye Food in ONT
said

Scrapping the $2 subsidy must be a good idea, the lefties are all in a lather over it. As a Conservative, I'm going to donate $ 29.95 plus HST to Flaherty so he can get a different tye. That green tye he always wears is horrid.

Pam in Waterloo
said

The "per-vote subsidy" is what allowed the Bloc to exist for so long without doing any fundraising whatsoever, and what allowed Elizabeth May to get elected. May took the subsidy and used most of it in her own riding to get herself elected. It didn't go to the riding associations based on votes, it went to the national party. Democratic? I think NOT. Audits of the Conservative party's fundraising showed that most of their money is coming from $50 and $100 donations from ordinary Canadians, not massive corporate donations. Many people who donate to the Conservatives are single income families with kids, or seniors--neither is considered rich by Canadian standards. THAT is democracy. The Conservatives got the most votes in the last elections so they actually stand to lose the most if the subsidy is taken away. If Canadians want other parties to exist, then they should roll up their sleeves and start fundraising. AND they should open their wallets and shell out what they can to support their beliefs. Put your money where your mouth is people. The CPC worked hard to get where it is--the lefties will just have to learn to work as hard. (I know--lefties hate the words "hard work" but they're just going to have to suck it up--reality bites!)

Raise - ottawa
said

Ah gee..imagine having to raise the money on their own...the green party have for the first a member sitting in the house...up until then they have received over $1.8 million pretty well every year..without anyone sitting in the house .. the Bloc who only represent Quebec use to receive more of taxpayers dollars...why would anyone outside of Quebec..have to send money to this party..and now only 4 members and will still get this year over a million...it's high time this subsidy is gone...

James
said

From Article:
"The subsidy had guaranteed about $2 per vote in funding for parties that received over 2 per cent of all votes in the previous election, or 5 per cent of the votes in electoral districts where they ran candidates."

We're not talking about those fringe groups or money going to someone you didn't vote for.

Capt Lance Usher (Ret'd)
said

To bad they will not look after injured Veterans, a pledge that should be the first they follow, but alas likely never will. A country (Canada) only remembers her soldiers when she needs them, not when she is done with them...

B in Ottawa
said

I am glad to see the per-vote subsidy go. It is not fair that the Liberals, NDP and separatist Bloc do nothing and still get their pockets lined with taxpayer dollars when the Conservatives go out and work hard to fundraise for their money. The other parties need to stop being lazy, and only a Conservative majority can do that, because when they were in minority the other parties banded together with the separatists to save their easy money. Sorry socialists and separatists, the free ride is over. Do now what the Conservatives have been doing for years and figure out a way to raise your own money.

MJ
said

This alllowsthe rich to get the power, as they will all vote for the Conservatives (well, not all of them, but the greedier of the bunch).

Duke
said

Cut, Jim. Cut deep. Cut wide. I want the fat slobs squealing when they feel the cuts bite.

Joe from Montreal
said

The typical Liberal or NDP voter does not contribute to their political party expecting tax dollars that they never contributed to in the first place to fund the parties. The Conservative party on the other hand actually obtain most of their funding from individuals. It just seems like half the country is freeloading on permanent vacation while other half works. Eliminating the party subsidies will keep Jack Layton from getting free money from voters in ridings where he just sticks any name on a ballot for the sake of getting votes without regard to competence, misleading voters and then hiding candidates - that is a slap in face in a democracy Mr. Layton. Question for CTV, why does the selected comment always reflect anti Conservative comments using rhetoric riddled with bumper sticker sayings?

Beth
said

A lot of voters pay no taxes at all due to a variety of reasons, (my 18 year old daughter being one of them because she is a student and only works part time), which means those who do pay taxes subsidize those voters who do not. If you really wish to support your political party, then forgo the Timmy's coffee one day and send that two bucks to your favorite party...keep your hands out of MY pockets so I am not paying for my party and yours.

M-Ray
said

Removing the $2/vote subidy has nothing to do with tax revenue waste - it's the most democratic subsidy. For Cons who don't beleive that, ask your favorite Con MP to add giving up the 60% campaign expenditure reimbursement for anyone getting over 10% of the vote in a riding. Most Cons & Libs spend upwards of $90K in an election, then get $54K back FROM THE TAXPAYER. At least the $2/vote goes to who you vote for! I'd like to see Harper answer that one with a straight face.

shawbrooke
said

The NDP need to ask everyone who voted for them to send them $2, or more if they can afford it. Make it easy, say through Pay Pal. At the current voter levels, the NDP should easily replace the amount they will no longer get from Ottawa. Say, if 1/4 of the voters who voted for them send in $6 - you get the picture.

Kevin in Calgary
said

So many of you people making comments are so narrow minded and uneducated. Why on earth would I want my Tax dollars going to the political parties I don't support! especially a party hell-bent on breaking up this country. if I want to support a certain party I will privately donate to that party. Once again you left wing minded minions just want the gov't to do everything for you.... Tax everything.... SAD

roy from ontario
said

ok how about this keep this keep the per vote but do nor allow any private donations from ANYONE. would yhat work?

Not Dead
said

Arby said "Get that horrid waste of taxpayer dollars off the backs of all Canadians.No more waste that does nothing to keep Canadians safer." So the 62% drop in long gun homicides since the introduction of the gun registry doesn't count them? How much do you value a human life at now? Then we can decide if by your standards all those women who aren't dead were worth it.

mark
said

About time! Next up the long gun registry. The biggest waste of money around that never solved or prevented a single crime but cost us billions in taxes!

Paul
said

If the Connies are thinking this will do away with the Liberals, think again. I'm certain there are enough Liberal supporters who would willing support them financially to ensure a good fight come next election. Keep your $2, the deficit is rising and will keep rising.

MikeB
said

Hey Jacko, if you really believe in democracy then go out and ask your supporters for donations! If they support you and your party, you will get money, if they don't support your lazy socialist group, then too bad. No surprise the NDP feels sucking tax money off the public is 'democracy'.

ouifyg
said

This is an excellent move for democracy! I hope Stephen Harper does more to stifle political opposition during his reign. Why do we need more than one party anyways? It's just a waste of money.

Windex
said

Will this not open this to more corporate funding etc and therefore more behind the door deals. Not liking this at all.

Wait Longer
said

Can't wait said "This will be the death knell for the Liberals....they will be declaring bankruptcy very soon. Wait for it." Actually the Liberals get more corporate donations than the other parties. The Conservatives get more individual donations because of some clever psychological tricks they employ in their letters to "the faithful".

sarah
said

lol...Jack Layton, always the socialist, gets it completely backwards once again. It's not those with the most money who get their ideas out to Canadians; it's those who get the best ideas out to Canadians who get the most money! But socialists always did misunderstand the marketplace...of ideas! Simply too funny!

Alexandria
said

Ending tax payer sponsored political parties does nothing to harm democracy. If you want to sponsor a political party send them a cheque once a year written on your bank account and leave my tax dollar to run the Business of the Country.Why should I pay for some person to try and get a job in Parliament. Remember Jack Layton run around saying he was applying for the job of Prime Minister he did not get hired but we paid anyway. Enough is enough. No more taxer payer money to Political Parties.Some Political Parties are like the CBC nobody wants them but we have to pay for them anyway.

Trent
said

I like the fact the parties have to earn there money from the people that want to be voted in. No tax dollars should go to any party for any election... If parties need this money then they shouls have a better product to sell to the Canadian people...

Scott
said

Try this one people.If you support a certain political party then send them a donation. If all of the supporters that voted for a party donated $5 each they would increase the party's war chest immensely. Assuming that those who currently support their choice of political party keep doing so.So let's stop complaining and act with our wallets as well as our mouths.

Stu
said

That's okay I've never donated to a party before so instead of my 2 dollars going to the liberal party, I will send them the maximum we are allowed. The conservative supporters are not as wealthy so it will hurt the conservatives but be a huge boost to the liberals. Great move!

Big A
said

Who cares what other countries do Rae! In any other context you would not want to follow the US !

MARG MM
said

To all those of you spouting about "big business will now run Government", nothing has been said about upping the amount that anyone can contribute to a political party. Removing the vote subsidy will only mean that ALL political parties will have to get out and work for donations. The Conservatives are very good at getting many,many small donations from supporters, which in the end add up to a lot of money. If you support a political party, get off your "duff" and go out and help them get donations. For too many years some polititical parties have relied totally on the vote subsidy, glad to see it being phased out. It is also a promise being kept, who can deny that????

CMQ
said

For those saying it is an end to democracy and hello to corporations is foolish. There are still caps on donations and now those who wish to donate to a certain party still can. The free ride is over is all and now parties will have to work for their money.

Steve in Vancouver
said

Getting rid of the vote subsidy will be good for Canadian democracy. Parties will have to align themselves more to the wishes of the people in order to get donations. lm betting the voter turn out will be better also. Some comments on here regarding CBC are right on. Time to get rid of mother corporation. CBC is way too expensive and is subsidized by over a billion dollars a year. Sell off some of their monster buildings and a large chunk of our debt would be gone. The CBC is irrelevant in a modern Canada.

Chris
said

James said, "Ending political subsidies hurts our democracy, by creating no reason to vote if you're not with the majority." There's ALWAYS a reason to vote. Eliminating this subsidy will stop stupidity. We need to eliminate a lot of bogus political parties out there. We should only have 3 federal parties, Conservative, Liberal, and NDP. Anyone wishing to start their own party can still do it, but now must raise their own funding. That's how democracy works. Why should I accept my tax dollars going to the Communist Party? Yeah, that's what I want... my tax dollars paying for the Marijuana Party's dope!!!

Jason from Calgary
said

Good now we can have the Corporations fund our Political Parties. Then if the Parties fail to meet the desires of those special interest groups, they will be hard pressed to be re-elected.

Nothing like legalized, mandatory, bribery to stimulate Democracy!

Wow
said

In left wing fantasyland, if you don't buy new jets then all that money automaticaly goes to feeding the homeless, because that's how government works. Never mind that the money is spread out over years and comes from the defence procurement budget, new jet's mean poor people will starve lol. I so look forward to more civic lessons, keep them coming lefties.

Selective memory
said

I love the people on here who talk as if the global recession never happened or was created by Harper himself. Typical left wing smoke and mirrors. Yes we are in the red now, but looks like most Canadians are smart enough to remember why that is and are happy with the way the government handled things, judging by the election results. Keep living in the 90's Lib's it's really all you've got.

bill in Ottawa
said

"The only thing the CBC promotes is second rate, out of date television shows and their own ridiculous left wing agenda." How did scrapping Canadian Television even enter the argument? I suppose we should also scrap Global and CTV - They're Canadian. They get public subsidies. I believe that we are seeing conservative staffers trying to influence debate and public opinion (our own version of the Chineses 50 cent army). As for the cut to the party subsidies; only the weak willed and small minded feel that they can do nothing to affect an outcome except throw money at it - that's sad. I don't need to pay a politician to have a stake in his/her agenda. They make decisions that affect us ALL - why should I have to suffer because someone else was able to pay for the party they wanted? Why should my vote not count?

Fred
said

"Flaherty/Harper wasted a 13 billion dollar Liberal surplus and then drove Canada to the largest debt and deficit in Canadian history"Yes they "wasted" the suprlus and "drove" us into debt. It didn't have anything to do with the massive global recession that we are only coming out of now. Remeber that? It's easy to run a surplus when times are good and your slashing things like health care and the military. Selective memory, a tried and true Lib tactic. Too bad no one is listening.

Kim in Calgary
said

I want to see the recent pay hike for all cabinet members et al, implemented by this party to be rescinded. Why should you get a raise when the majority of Canadians are not getting one?....funny how that was your first order of business! What a perfect way to cut out the excess within our system...only the sheep will believe you here

Mark in Wpg
said

@Everyone who commented this will reduce taxes: keep drinking that con kool-aid. They'll waste every cent this saves on stupid and totally unnecessary purchases. Another million for a fake lake? No problem! Billions wasted on fighter jets that will accomplish nothing? Sure! I can remember when this country had actual fiscal conservatives, Harper and Co are a poor knockoff.

don.h
said

i guess this means the ndp will have to run serious candidates in the next election.

Leo
said

The Canadians who pay taxes pay the $2 per vote subsidy to the political parties voted for by non-tax paying voters.

Robert
said

Re raising the OAS and GIS for seniors: The last time this was done was by the last minority liberal Government, They did not raise the threshold for the OAS and GIS and therefore any raise was clawed back when they reviewed earnings in the next July. Seniors and GIS and OAS recipients Please let Mr Flaherty know that uless he increases the threshold for these benefits you will receive diddeley squat.

Saskmike
said

$2.00 goes to the party that recieved the vote from you. I want my $2.00 to go to the party I voted for. If you voted PC, then your $2.00 went to that PARTY!!!! NOT THE OTHER PARTIES!!!!!!!!

Darlene
said

FINALLY!!!! an end to per-vote political party subsidy and what about those other funds the opposition get of tax payers money, don't stop here Mr.Prime Minister Harper. The Conservatives go out and get all their own money of support it is time the libs,ndp and bloc oh wait there is no bloc hahhahaha.
I do not want any tax payers money going to political parties what so ever.
Keep up the good work Mr.PM
God bless

Mohamoud, Ottawa
said

I would like to give the government the benefit of the doubt by putting them under probation and see how they run the affairs of the nation now that they have unhindered decision-making capacity that would either positively or negatively affect Canadians. I hope they choose a government that inclusive and looks after the interest of all Canadians.

Person
said

What I don't get here is why people are complaining that their tax dollars are going to other parties that they don't support. Just think about it as $2 of the taxes you pay going to the party you voted for.

The people that vote for the greens, or the marijuana party or the even rhino party pay taxes also and their tax dollars can go to the people they support.

If I care enough about a party to give them my vote I'm ok with them getting $2 of my taxes, at least that way I know at least some of my money is going be spent on something I support.

Biff
said

Gee, the NDP whining over the loss of free money. What a shocker.

GB
said

It's understandable why Cons are doing this at the height of their power and that the Libs don't like it. Libs did many, many similar things to entrench themselves over the years when they were in office:stacking the Senate, creating departments/Ministers, directives to department managers/RCMP on how they would view/enforce various things, unfair electoral boundaries, etc. Libs need to get over that a majority of Canadians rejected their view of what Canada should be. Sorry but most most do not want it to be an engineered, socialist utopia. I hear however they just selected Bob Rae to head their party. Yes, a fair and progressive national party that welcomes imput from all over Canada but only selects their leaders based on if they are rich white guys from Ontario or Quebec lawyers!

Pat
said

Now after the next election Layton will have to get a real job. No more riding the coat-tails of other parties.

Daniel
said

This is a goodbye to publically encouraged democracy falling to corporate controlled democracy.

Fake lakes and beatings for all
said

Are we ever going to see the Auditor General's report on how wasteful the Cons were with their fake lakes and the suspension of human rights during the G8 fiasco in Toronto? I guess that document will never see the light of day.

James
said

Who wouldn't donate 2$ to a party they're willing to vote for and possibly put into power? Ending political subsidies hurts our democracy, by creating no reason to vote if you're not with the majority. If you think your voice will be heard once corporations are doing all the funding, just look at their track record of working with others.

karen
said

Not a Flaherty fan because of the income trust scandal that robbed seniors of their retirement. However, I am happy to not have to involuntarily support a party aimed to break up our country. Now, with a majority why doesn't he cancel payments to Quebec, why do we have to donate $7,000 /person in Alberta to Quebec. Daycare is $7/day in Quebec - $600/mo. in Alberta, why do mothers get a break on daycare in Quebec at the expense of Alberta mothers & children. At that price I wonder how many stay at home moms shuffle their kids off to daycare for free food and an almost free babysitter. Quebec is so a 'have' province, it's just so corrupt the money isn't on the books. Enough already.

hb
said

For those of you that are worried it reduces democracy, this phasing out won't do that. It just hurts the parties that people don't want to support voluntarily. So why cry about this? if you love your liberal, NDP parties, you will donate to them. If you don't why be forced to pay for parties you don't agree with anyways. And Jim does not seem to introduce increasing corporate donation caps, so half the comments here don't have any merit

Joe the IGA Baker
said

I think cutting out the $2 per vote subsidy will be a good thing - especially since there is a cap on the amount that can be donated by anyone.This means each party will have to go out and hustle, talk to people and earn support from many of us common folk; and not just sit in Ottawa bloviating. --- The Liberals used to get massive donations from a few very rich supporters, and then handsomely reward these supporters after the elections. They didn't really get out and work much at all. So they will oppose this. --- The NDP demononize anyone who works hard and profits in this country, so they'll have to get real and change their tune if they want to raise much money. --- The Conservatives are actually the ones who relate most to a lot of us common guys and that's why they raise the most. Government for the people by the people.

MaryLS
said

@Not Pye Chart Re: "The $2 per vote subsidies were one of the most fair democratic funding mechanisms around." I have to disagree with this. The subsidy meant that parties had to do very little to connect with their supporters -- Bloc did nothing . . . very, very little fund raising done by them. As long as reasonable caps are kept on individual donations and corporate/union donations not allowed, big business will not control the agenda. Getting rid of the subsidy means that parties must pay attention to their constituencies. Also, with this subsidy in place, the smallest parties can never make headway. If people support your ideas, they can support you with a donation -- no matter how small.

NRM
said

Getting rid of the subsidy is a good thing. Now the Liberals will have to listen to the voters voices when they rebuild their party and platform, instead of being controlled by a small fringe of wacky lobbiests.

Scapping this vote subsidy will force the Liberals to adapt, or face certain doom (which any party deserves if they don't represent the greater population).

BA in The 'Peg
said

Let's all keep in mind that even without the per-vote subsidy, the political parties are still tax-payer supported as any contributions to Political Parties are about 75% tax-free, which means that money is not taxable income (like charitable donations). So, part of the common man's donation are tax-payer funded. And, this was a promise made by the Conservatives and part of their platform. We should all rejoice that at least ONE party follows through on promises made when they earn government!

bwjames
said

This is one of the worst stereotypes in politics. People assume right-wing politicians are less wasteful with money, but that hasn't been true in a long time. Mulroney, Reagan, Bush, BC Liberals and Harper have all spent money like it grows on trees.

Flaherty/Harper wasted a 13 billion dollar Liberal surplus and then drove Canada to the largest debt and deficit in Canadian history.

Per-vote subsidy is part of what makes Canadian politics fair and differentiates us from the dog eat dog USA style politics.

Small minded Conservatives at work again.

Mac
said

At least its a start !
1) this budget is not the failed one that led to the election - the Opposition used the budget as an excuse to go to the polls because they were power hungry not because they opposed what was in the budget
2)making parties stand on their own is best - I do not like having my tax dollars wasted on fringe groups in particular - ie the Communist Party, the Natural Law Party, the Marijuana party - Christian Heritage party etc etc - the are and will never be a force for change...
Mr Flaherty is not perfect but he is not as reckless as others - and the bottom line - regardless of his past budgets - he knows he HAS to make realistic change now - the economies wont survive otherwise ! not will the public !

Jas
said

I see the end of the world has already begun!!!

Catwoman 38
said

Well I guess it means allowing a person to donate more then $1100 a year to a party.Yeah, what 's wrong right wingers , the cat caught your tongue?

Jack - AB
said

The vote subsidy provided a level of fairness for all political parties in Canada. Now Harper is scrapping it in favour of private and corporate donations. Maybe Conservatives think it best for big business to run Canada? That's what Harper believes in. Maybe Tories can give more tax cuts and breaks to big business to help them make even billions more in profits? Big corporations and the rich giving money to the Conservatives will decide and control Canada's future for us from now on! I guess this should pay for MP salary increases which today start at $157K (9.3% increase from 2005). Plus the $100K or higher pensions they receive. Plus the $500K many of the politicians spend on "yearly expenses" which the AG offered to audit in 2009 but Harper said no way and told Sheila politician expenses were private. Many federal politicians are taking home over half a million a year when you factor in their $500,000 gov't expense accounts.

BorderlandsDave
said

Tell you what, I'll support one dollar in cut for CBC funding, in exchange for every one less dollar in corporate tax cuts and subsidies. I think thats very fair.
That way one of my pet causes suffers, and so does theirs. The winner would be the people of Canada who would see the deficit and debt eliminated, or at least reduced.

adrifter
said

Even though I am not a Conservative, I agree with eliminating public financing for political parties. They can raise their own money. However, I am concerned that money may buy elections in the future. I suggest there be a legal limit placed on how much each party could raise, if there is not already such a limit. At least that way big business could not buy a government they approve of, i.e. the Conservatives for ever.

Can't wait
said

This will be the death knell for the Liberals. They are so far in debt after all of the unecessary elections they have caused that without the subsidies they will be declaring bankruptcy very soon. Wait for it.

Colin
said

"What ever happened to democracy in Canada;"Nothing happened. Your party lost. Badly. What is so hard to understand about that? Were you so offended when Cretien spent 10 years doing the exact same things? Of course not, apparently democracy worked for you then eh?

FCS
said

"Unlike the CBC, non-tendered, billion-dollar fighter jets do nothing to promote Canadian culture"The only thing the CBC promotes is second rate, out of date television shows and their own ridiculous left wing agenda. It's irrelevant and socialist and so far from what most Canadians think about he country it's laughable. Much like the Liberal party itself.

Chris
said

The reason for the subsidy was to one make a level playing field and two to keep big corporation and lobbyists out of the democratic system. If Mr Harper is going to remove this the big questions is will he tell us Canadians who he really works for. In other words produce a list of every contribution to the party and member of the CP party. I won't be holding my breath.

Steve
said

It is ironic that a man who does not trust his own associates and keeps them on a short leash, asked the Canadian people to trust him and his ideas. Well Canadians did this time around and I hope to God we will not be paying dearly for this trust we gave him. The budget has to do more to help the economy and help the Canadians that struggle from day to day to make ends meet. Yes Mr. Harper and Mr Flaherty , there are Canadians that really suffer. Just FYI

Gord
said

As I have stated before, the $2 subsidy served the purpose of getting people out to vote. This is particularly true in areas where one party's election is guaranteed like Alberta. Take it away and what point is there in voting when you know the outcome? Civic duty? Sure, but a conservative goat would be elected over a real person here in Southern Alberta so now what is the point? Oh ya, political gerrymandering to one's advantage.

Goldens
said

What it means is that NDP members will have to actually work and raise money instead of spending time in Vegas. NS is the highest taxed(NDP), glad to see someone trying to reduce our taxes.

CBC NON NOT NOW
said

Cut public funding to the CBC. We've got hockey on TSN and the theme song to go with it. The CBC is not reflective of Canadian culture. It is reflective of the age of Ann Murray and Tommy Hunter, Don Messer, Pierre Burton, along with the ever so humble face of Liberal ideology, Peter Mansbridge. What is Cornation Street, the flagship of Canada? I feel the nausea coming on. When our grandparents are buried, can be throw this network into the museum of history? CBC-Radio is the only thing of modest value. Having an internet style interface on the likes of CBCNN does not make you contemporary or relevent.

Jazz
said

to all of those opposing this phasing out of political subsidies, why not put your money where your keyboard is? stop whining and actually shell out for what you want and what you believe in. i know that is not the leftist way of doing things (paying things yourself) but it makes sense.

Freddy, Vietnam
said

New spending in the new budget, 2 billion to Quebec. New expenditures in 2011, 500 million HST compensation for BC. New spending cuts, 27 million for the party subidy, 3 million to scrap the gun registry. Predicted deficit, 30 billion. Unemployment rate, April 2011, 7.6%. Unemployment rate, September, 2007, 5.9%. Strong on economics?

Jamie D
said

Excellent. However, it would have been interesting to see the conservatives struggle back from the early '90's loss without the subsidies they are demonizing.So: If history repeats itself again, in 4 years we should see the conservatives get thrown down to a few seats in the HoC, which at that point they will be screwed as they won't be able to use the subsidies to regain a foot hold.Sounds like Jim and the gang have found another war chest source. And since all things remain the same with voter contributions, you have to wonder where the Conservatives have banked all the donations from this time around. People in the prairies just aren't that rich enough to bankroll a political party.Are we going back to the old system of letting corporations inject money surreptitiously into campaigns again. This sure sounds like it is opening the door for that sort of thing. Alarm bells are a ringing with this one....

Mark
said

Wow the weirdo�s really come out when political articles are posted on this site. Let�s see, one comment about HST has no idea what this is about, another would cancel all funding to culture but probably loves the multibillion $ purchases for bombs and fighters, one is gung-ho for unitarily passing budgets without any opposition or question and has no knowledge of the impacts of the proposed 11 billion $ reductions to services to pay for bombs and fighters and finally the last loony (so far that is) believes that the budget is really about competitiveness amongst nations. Fiscal restraint? More like moving the buck from here to there and emptying everyone�s wallet except for big oil and millionaire friends.

hatrock
said

Re: Scott Henderson: "Disaster. It is far more democratic, to have a little bit of fairly distributed public political campaign financing, than massively insane corporate (and private) donations like the US. But essentially Harper wants to reap huge corporate donations, and set fixed elections like the absurd US election cycle."_________________________Scott, corporations and unions can no longer donate and Harper limited personal donations to $1100/year, so what are you talking about?

Ken - Calgary
said

What a spineless move! If this were less about ambushing your opponents then the 75% tax credit for political contributions would ALSO be abolished... however that would HURT Steve and the Cons...

Hey Steve... trying to pull a fast one on the voting public?

Less than 50% voted for the Cons, therefore, the majority of us are not stupid!

k markham
said

I think most Canadians don't understand why this subsidy is in place. Prior to this subsidy Canadians were in uproar because special interest groups had to much power in Ottawa due to the massive funding they gave to political parties. Political parties have to be funded in order to support true democracy. Is it the intent of this government to crush other political parties by cutting their funding, I suspect so, or is this government more in favour of political parties returning to the model of funding where special interest groups again control Ottawa??? We don't like to pay taxes, but paying $10 annually to support our democracy is a small price to pay. This may appear popular but take notice of what follows, you won't be happy Canada.

DAVE
said

More new taxes. KILLING US FASTER then before.

BC Guy
said

Hopefully Harper and Flaherty left enough money to pay for all those Conservative Senate appointments and perks; wouldn't like to see them have to resign because there wasn't enough taxpayers money to cover their hefty salaries and benefits. What ever happened to democracy in Canada; I thought if you lost in an election you didn't get to go to Parliament Hill. Guess we were right about Harper; Conservatives could care less about democracy.

Mark Smith (Montreal, PQ)
said

Low taxes, but they want to bring in the HST? Stop worrying about sales taxes, and cut my income tax already.

Raj
said

Its about time!! I do not want to fund any other parties, except those of my choosing

Paul
said

Finally a Budget that will pass with no interferences from the coalition. Yes Jack, that includes you, Now tell us how you are going to make all those changes in Parliament. Sorry but you have absolutely NO POWER. Just sit beautifully in your Opposition seat and cry.

Scott Henderson
said

Disaster. It is far more democratic, to have a little bit of fairly distributed public political campaign financing, than massively insane corporate (and private) donations like the US. But essentially Harper wants to reap huge corporate donations, and set fixed elections like the absurd US election cycle.

Jim - North Saanich, BC
said

At least it is a start and hopefully we'll see a great deal more fat trimmed later like the Long Gun Registry, the CBC and the MP pension plan as three obvious objectives. We have had all too many snouts in the public trough all too long much to the detriment of all Canadians. Too much has been spent for all too little over the years and if the next four years can start to turn this around, so much the better for all of us.

No doubt the Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition will beat his fists and shout loudly but he can yell down a well for all I care because I'm not listening and neither will a goodly number of others. I say to Finance Minister Flaherty, just get on with it! The sooner, the better!

Wayne (Waterloo)
said

The phasing out of the per-vote political party subsidy is more about what's in the best interest of the Conservative party and less about what's good for Canada. By doing this, they seriously hurt their competition and effectively reduce our options when it comes to election time. If they were serious about cutting government funding to political parties, they would have cut the tax breaks for political donations instead. There's a lot more money to be saved there. But that would hurt the Conservative party more than the per-vote subsidy. Cutting the tax breaks instead would be taking the high road. We get the low road instead. Par for the course...

Mario
said

The subsitties were brought in as a fair replacement to corporate donations as high as the hundreds of thousands. By capping those to 5k and bringing in the $2.00 per vote, it meant that all parties could fight an election fairly. Previously, it was always the Libs and the PC's that received the most corporate donations in exchange for contracts.

Patrick
said

Maybe while he is at it he can cancel the very generous tax credits for political donations. That money also comes from somewhere.

Intelligent Liberal
said

This is terrible news. Without political subsidies how can the political parties survive? Canadians love to subsidize worthwhile not for profit organizations, and what is more worthwhile than a political party? Cancer, schmancer, they get enough money. Have you any idea how much a Liberal convention costs? Harpers secret agenda isn't secret anymore, he wants to destroy the other political parties in the interest of his precious "jobs" and the "economy" and "tax savings".

fed up
said

Harper as ordered him to re-introduce the same budget that was rejected and that I believe it was done on purpose to rub salt in the open wounds of the opposition parties. And also to remind them that he will be in charge of the House Of Commons for the next four years. Harper I fear this man will abuse the powers that was given to him by Canadian voters who trust this man with there tax dollars and with the future of this great country.

RGO
said

@DO_IT_NOW - I find it interesting you did not mention to scrap funding for the F35 fighter jets - which would save BILLIONS. Unlike the CBC, non-tendered, billion-dollar fighter jets do nothing to promote Canadian culture.

Jim-Surrey
said

All sounds good except for the money for whining Quebec!Give them B.C.'s H.S.T. funds and remove BC from the tax ripoff plan and waive BC from having to repay what we don't want to begin with..............

Arby
said

Got to love it.The dippers are cringing.The next stage of business is to do is dump the useless long gun registry.Get that horrid waste of taxpayer dollars off the backs of all Canadians.No more waste that does nothing to keep Canadians safer.

Redneck Albertan
said

Frank Ness
said

Any chance we can phase out politicans

MikeInBC
said

Scrap subsidies to corporations that are making billions and are mostly owned by foreign investors. Also fix the problems with oil companies that charge us more than what their customers in the US pay for gasoline which is refined from our crude oil. Stop the transfer of Canadian jobs to foreign countries ie: the plan to refine tar sands oil in the US, and the shipment of raw logs to the US to be milled and sold to China and Japan.

Calgary Brad
said

Good!!!

Remember!
said

Remember, Flaherty has NEVER balanced a budget as Finance Minister in either Ontario or federally. NEVER. To suspect that he ever will is a pipe dream. Dream on Conservatives, dream on.

Not Pye Chart
said

The $2 per vote subsidies were one of the most fair democratic funding mechanisms around. There is no reason to remove them other than for the Canadian Reform Alliance Coalition (CRAC) to try an weaken the other parties. If the PC/CRAC party didn't think this would give them a leg up over the opposition parties they wouldn't do this. It is undemocratic and pure politics. The removal of this funding mechanism will NOT improve democracy. Look for more big-business control of our government. Standard Operating Procedure for this party.

BRING IT ON
said

Go Jim Go!!!Say goodbye to your Nannies as a new era of fiscal restraint "The Hidden Agenda" appears.Listen........I think I hear the sobbing now.Oh sorry that was you.

Michael from the real world
said

This is excellent news. Mark my words, by the time the next election rolls around, this government will have slain the deficit, despite the 'Dippers protests. Political subsidies will have lessened, and the nation will be more competitive, led by Aberta and Ontario per usual.

Mike in Pembroke
said

At that time Jack Layton will see just how little power he holds in the HoC.

Chris
said

Finally, a plan that makes sense and an ability to operate without the proverbial gun pointed at the government's head. I look forward to see what happens in the next 4 years.

Dave in Ottawa
said

Gee, I wonder if it will pass this time. I hope it doesn't trigger another election.

Montreal Marco
said

Best part of this, NO WHERE IN SIGHT, we will find Gilles Duceppe taking credit for getting Ottawa to give Quebec the HST money, I cant stop laughing, he was waiting and waiting every budget for this to be included so he can stand up, pump his chest like king kong and say the bloc is there for Quebec, look we got the money, stand behind us, hahaha now within 3 weeks of him gone, the money is transfer, sorry Gilles, you wasted enough time in Ottawa trying to break up our country, you got the wipe out you deserved for doing nothing for 20 years and we still have to pay you, bonnes vacances

DO_IT_NOW
said

Scrap Funding to CBC and save a billion.Scrap Gun Registry and save a billion.Scrap Funding to the Arts Community and just maybe balance the budget a year earlier.