Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report

2012 FDA Global Electoral Finance
Audit of Canada’s 10 Provinces

The FDA audit entailed a comprehensive audit of the electoral finance legislation of
Canada's 10 provinces. The audit is restricted to capturing systematic corruption. The FDA
measured exceptional legislation in Québec and Manitoba, very good in Nova Scotia,
acceptable in New Brunswick, unacceptable (passing) in Ontario and Newfoundland and
Labrador, and unacceptable (failing) in Alberta, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, and
Saskatchewan. The FDA believes that the legislation from Alberta, British Columbia, Prince
Edward Island, and Saskatchewan is systematically corrupt by favouring minority/special
interests over the interests of the people. The FDA identified major deficiencies in many
areas of these provinces' legislation including the addition of corporations and trade unions
in electoral contributions, high caps on contributions, no expenditure limits, public subsidies
which favor large, established parties, no regulation of third party expenditure, and/or low
fines on corporations and trade unions for electoral wrongdoing. In contrast, FDA auditors
measured zero deficiency in Québec's legislation. This measurement means that Québec's
legislation is working completely in the interests of the people of Québec. The FDA
recommends that the rest of Canada's provinces model their legislation after Québec's.

Electoral Fairness Audit Completed April 10, 2012
Updated April 13, 2012

Prepared by Mr. Stephen Garvey, Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, University of British Columbia
and Master of Philosophy in Environment and Development, University of Cambridge.

Purpose of the Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Audit:

The purpose of the Foundation for Democratic Advancement (FDA)’s electoral finance audit (the
Audit) is to determine a comprehensive grade for electoral finance in Canada at the provincial
legislative level of government. This Audit is an extension of the FDA’s global audit of electoral
fairness involving all countries that hold political elections. The purpose of the global audit is to
quantify electoral fairness, establish benchmarks for electoral fairness, identify areas of democratic
advancement and progression, and encourage democracy reform where needed.

The goal of the FDA's provincial report is to give the people of Canada and other stakeholders an
informed, objective, comparative perspective of the Canada's provincial electoral systems and provide
recommendations for reform of the systems where needed. Canadians may want to use this information
as a way to help determine their electoral choices in upcoming provincial elections. The release of the
FDA province report just prior to the 2012 Alberta Election coincides with this initiative.

The views in this electoral finance audit are the views of the FDA only. The FDA’s members are in no
way affiliated with any of the provinces' election administrators or any of the provinces' registered/non-
registered political parties. The Audit is an independent assessment based on objectivity, transparency
and non-partisanship. The FDA assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors in the measurement
and calculation of its audit results or inaccuracies in its research of relevant provincial legislation.

About the Foundation for Democratic Advancement:

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement is a non-partisan and independent democracy reform and
advocacy organization. The FDA's reforms center on increasing the voice of people in constituencies.
Members of the FDA embrace the following principles: progress, innovation, objectivity, and
transparency. The FDA's mission is to advance fair and transparent democratic processes wherever
elections occur, thereby bringing the people to the forefront democratic discourse. (For more
information on the FDA visit: www.democracychange.org)

© 2012, Foundation for Democratic Advancement
All rights reserved.
Foundation for Democratic Advancement
728 Northmount Drive NW
P.O. Box 94, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada, T2K 1P0

An online version of this report can be found at: www.democracychange.org
For further information and/or comments please contact the FDA at info@democracychange.org

Table of Contents:
Introduction 5

Chapter 1: Electoral Finance 6

Introduction 6

Alberta
Audit Results 7
Analysis 13

British Columbia
Audit Results 14
Analysis 19

Manitoba
Audit Results 20
Analysis 26

New Brunswick
Audit Results 27
Analysis 33

Newfoundland and Labrador
Audit Results 34
Analysis 38

Nova Scotia
Audit Results 39
Analysis 44

Ontario
Audit Results 45
Analysis 50

Prince Edward Island
Audit Results 51
Analysis 55

Québec
Audit Results 56
Analysis 64

Saskatchewan
Audit Results 65
Analysis 70

Overall Audit Results 71

Analysis 72

Conclusion 78

Recommendations 80

References 81

Key Definitions 83

Research Methodology 85

Appendix 1: Provincial Legislation Excerpts 89

Alberta 89
British Columbia 96
Manitoba 99
New Brunswick 102
Newfoundland and Labrador 104
Nova Scotia 107
Ontario 112
Prince Edward Island 115
Québec 117
Saskatchewan 120

FDA Audit Team and Associates 123

Introduction:

The FDA audit of the Canadian provinces' electoral finance legislation is based on non-
partisanship and objectivity.

The audit process entails three major components:

1. Research of the provinces' electoral legislation.

2. Audit of the legislation based on audit team consensus, and FDA matrices and scoring
scales.

3. Analysis of findings.

The value of scores in the FDA matrices are based on fundamental democratic principles of
legislative neutrality, political freedom, and political fairness, and the comparative impact of
variables on democracy. For example, if there is no electoral finance transparency then this result
will impact other sections such as the legislative process, because without financial transparency,
it will be difficult to enforce electoral finance laws and prevent and discover electoral finance
wrongdoing. Consequently, according to the FDA scoring system, zero financial transparency
will result in a zero score for legislative process as well.

The FDA research component is objective, because it is simply a compilation of the same
legislative and financial data for each province.

The FDA audit component is both objective and subjective. It is objective when determining yes
and no facts, such as does Province A have caps on electoral contributions—yes or no? It is
subjective because of the predetermined scores for each audit section, and the scores given for
each section. The FDA acknowledges that there is no absolute scoring system.

The FDA minimizes subjectivity through non-partisanship, the predetermination of scores based
on consensus of FDA auditors, the application of core democratic concepts such as the neutrality
of electoral legislation, political freedom, and political fairness, and the valuation of the
comparative impact of variables on democracy. In addition, the FDA has a minimum quorum of
five experienced auditors during audit sessions. For further discussion of the FDA methodology
please see the Research Methodology chapter on page 85.

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Report 5

Electoral Finance
This Chapter will focus on the FDA research and audit results of provincial electoral finance
laws with respect to the electoral fairness.

Chapter Summary: The FDA measured exceptional electoral finance legislation for Québec and
Manitoba, very good for Nova Scotia, acceptable for New Brunswick, unacceptable (passing) for
Ontario and Newfoundland and Labrador, and unacceptable (failing) for Alberta, British
Columbia, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan. The FDA believe that electoral finance
legislation in Alberta, British Columbia, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan is
systematically corrupt by favouring minority or special interests over the interests of the people.
The main deficient areas of these provinces are the inclusion of corporations and trade unions in
electoral contributions, high caps on contributions, no campaign expenditure limits, lows fines
on corporations and trade unions, and/or no regulation of third party expenditures. Québec,
having garnered the highest score attainable, provides model legislation for the rest of the
provinces. The FDA auditors found zero deficiency with Québec's legislation, which means it is
working completely in the interests of the people of Québec.

Introduction:

This chapter focuses on the Canadian provinces' electoral finance laws and the FDA's audit of
them in terms of electoral fairness. Based on the political concepts of egalitarianism and political
liberalism, the FDA team audits electoral finance laws according to their equity for registered
candidates and parties, and equity for voters (see Definition of Key Terms and Research
Methodology chapter for further explanation). Also, based on the concepts of 'one person, one
vote' and 'government of the people, by the people, and for the people', the FDA auditors assume
that a people's representative democracy will disallow corporations and unions from making
electoral contributions and spending as third parties, because corporations and unions are not
people. The FDA does not associate electoral expenditures directly with free speech, nor does the
FDA believe that freedom alone facilitates an optimal people's representative democracy. The
FDA believes that legislation must strike a balance between freedom and equality in order to
prevent the most powerful economical and political players from dominating the political process
and to reflect the will of the majority in government. The FDA team audits from the standpoint
of a people's representative democracy.

Further, the audit only captures systematic corruption as opposed to other forms of corruption
such as quid pro quo (something for something) and venal (bribery). The FDA defines systematic
corruption as legislated public processes that favour minority/special interests over the interests
of the majority. The FDA acknowledges that any system no matter how ideally formulated may
be subject to corruption through human misconduct.


The FDA electoral finance audit focuses on the following sections:

1. electoral finance transparency;
2. contributions to candidates and parties;
3. caps on contributions to candidates and parties;
4. campaign expenditure limits;
5. caps on third party spending;
6. legislative process.

The FDA chose these sections because they represent core areas of electoral finance. Based on
the concept of political liberalism (as defined in Research Methodology chapter), electoral
finance transparency is weighted the highest due to its importance in preventing corruption and
fraud, and informing the public on the sources of candidate and party funds. The FDA audit of
electoral finance includes research of provincial electoral finance legislation and the application
of the research to the FDA matrices. An overall value between 0 and 10 out of 10 determines
matrix scores.

What follows are the audit results for each section and sub-section of the provinces' electoral
finance legislation. It shows the matrix question, the individual audit scores, and the research
findings.

Alberta:

Electoral Finance Transparency

Are candidate and party finances transparent to the public?

2.0 out of 2.0

Legislative Process:

The Chief Electoral Officer may examine all financial statements and affairs of all
political candidates, election campaigns and registered third parties (Election Finances
and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 4).

All records must be maintained for a period of at least three years (Election Finances and
Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 10.1).

All documents filed with the Chief Electoral Officer are public records and available
upon request during normal business hours (Election Finances and Contributions
Disclosure Act, Article 11).

Any campaign funds not used are held in trust, to be used during the next election.


These funds may be transferred to the registered party that supported the candidates bid
for election in the previous election. If the candidate is not nominated for the following
election, he is to transfer these funds to the registered party or candidates that supported
his bid in the previous election. If funds cannot be transferred, they are transferred to the
Crown (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 12).

All contributions must be deposited in the account registered with the Chief Electoral
Officer (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 14).

Every candidate, constituency association and political party must have a chief financial
officer who is not eligible for election and is appointed prior to the party registering with
the Chief Electoral Officer. Contributions may only be accepted by the chief financial
officer or another person who is deemed authorized to accept contributions, according to
the records of the Chief Electoral Officer (Election Finances and Contributions
Disclosure Act, Article 29, 31).

A third party must register if it has or plans to incur expenses of $1,000 or more, or
makes advertising contributions of $1,000 or more (Election Finances and Contributions
Disclosure Act, Article 9.1).

Contributions to Candidates and Parties

Are contributions restricted to citizens?
Are contributions disallowed by foreigners, public institutions, and charities?
Are anonymous contributions set at a reasonable level?

0 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

No Party or Candidate may accept contributions unless they are registered. Requirements:
must be non-profit, funds must be deposited within a financial institution in a registered
account, must file a report of contributions and expenditures at the end of each tax year
(before April 1) (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 6).

No contributions to registered parties, constituency associations, and candidates from
non-Alberta corporations and trade unions, public post-secondary institutions, prohibited
corporations, school boards, Métis settlements, municipalities, and provincial
corporations (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Definition of
prohibited corporation).


No contribution of funds may be made if said funds do not belong to the contributor or
originate out of province. During a campaign period, a provincial party may accept a
maximum $150 per candidate from a registered federal political party (Election Finances
and Contributions Disclosure Act, Articles 34, 35, 36).

Anonymous contributions are not allowed in excess of $50. Those in excess must be
returned to the contributor. If this cannot happen, it must be paid into the general revenue
fund through the Chief Electoral Officer (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure
Act, Article 21.1).

Caps on Contributions to Candidates and Parties

Are there caps on contributions to candidates and parties?
Are the caps on candidates' and parties' contributions reflective of mean total income?
Are there caps on contributions by candidates to their own campaigns?
Are the caps on candidates own contributions reflective of mean total income?

0.25 out of 0.25
0.0811 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Alberta's 2009 mean total income is $35,250 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

In any year contributions may not exceed $15,000 for a registered party and $1,000 for a
registered constituency association (only during a campaign period) and $5,000 in
aggregate for registered constituency associations of each registered party (Election
Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 17).

In any campaign period, contributions may not exceed $30,000 to registered parties less
any contributions made that calendar year, and $2,000 to any registered candidates (only
during a campaign period) and $10,000 in the aggregate to registered candidates of each
registered party (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 17).

Contributions to a candidate may only be made during an election period (Election

No party or candidate may knowingly accept contributions greater than these limits
(Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 19).

Goods, services or gifts that do not exceed $50 are not considered contributions, and are


not to be transferred, but are recorded under the gross amount (Election Finances and
Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 12).

Contributions other than money must be valued at market value at the time of the election
(Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 44.31).

The unanimous decision of the FDA audit team is that 10% of personal mean income is a
reasonable limit to contribute to candidates and parties.

10% of average income is $3,525.

The maximum contribution is $40,000.

3525/40000 = .0881

0.0881 out of 1.0 (FDA Audit Team, 2012).

Registered candidates own contributions to their own campaigns are subject to the
contribution limits to registered candidates ($2,000 limit) (Election Finances and
Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 17).

Based on the 2009 Alberta mean total income of $35,250 (Statistics Canada, 2011), the
FDA auditors think that $2,000 is a reasonable limit on contributions by candidates to
their own campaigns. The FDA auditors believe that candidates would likely be more
willing to contribute to their own campaigns than to others, and that if candidates did not
have personal financial resources to cover the $2,000 limit, they have the opportunity to
raise electoral monies through contributions from citizens and corporations and fund
raising events. Further, a $2,000 difference in campaign contributions by candidates, for
example, will likely not determine the election results for a particular constituency (FDA
Audit Team, 2012).

Campaign Expenditure Limits

Are there campaign expenditure limits on candidates and parties?
Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments for candidates and parties?

0 out of 0.5
0 out of 0.25

Research Findings:

There are no electoral expenditure limits on registered candidates and parties (FDA
researchers could find no Alberta legislation that placed direct limits on electoral


expenditures). In contrast, the Canadian federal electoral system has candidate
expenditure limits on each constituency based on location and size of population, and
expenditures limits on political parties based on the number of candidates endorsed by
each party (FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Canada, Electoral Finance, 2011).

FDA researchers could find no legislation on public subsidies, ergo, conclude that there
are no provincial subsidies of candidates, parties, or third parties.

Caps on Third Party Spending

Are there caps on third party spending?
If there is third party spending, is it restricted to citizens only?
If there are caps on third party spending, are they attainable, reasonably, by all adult citizens?
Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments that create an equal level of third party
spending?

0.25 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.5
0.0294 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.25

Research Findings:

Alberta's 2009 mean total income is $35,250 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Third party expenditure is limited to $15,000 in one calendar year and $30,000 in year of
an election less any expenditure made that year (Election Finances and Contributions
Disclosure Act, Article 44.2(3)).

Those who may not register as a third party are: individuals that are not permanent
residents of Alberta; corporations that do not carry out business in Alberta; registered
charities; prohibited corporations; and trade unions or organized labor groups not defined
by the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act (Election Finances and
Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 9.1).

No advertising contribution may be made or used unless it is by someone registered as a
third party and subject to the same limits (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure
Act, Article 44.2).

The FDA assumes that all corporations and unions can afford the $30,000 expenditure.

$30,000 limit on third party expenditure in election year.


10% of income equals 3,525.

3525/30000 = .1175

0.1175 out of .25 (max score) = 0.0294

(FDA Audit Team, 2012).

There are no provincial subsidies of candidates and parties, and third parties (FDA
researchers could find no legislation on public subsidies).

Legislative Process

Is legislative process to enforce the electoral finance laws?
Is there an effective legislative process to enforce electoral finance laws?

0.25 out of 0.25
0.15 out of 0.75

Research Findings:

Alberta has comprehensive laws and regulations for the enforcement of the Alberta
Election Act. There are established fines and persecution through the Provincial Courts
that covers both offenses and violations to the Election Act and electoral corruption.
However, the Chief Electoral Officer is only person who has the power to proceed with
prosecution under the Election Act (Election Act, Articles 154-184).

The maximum fine for contraventions for registered parties is $10,000 and $1,000 for
registered candidates and constituency associations. The maximum fine for a general
offence is $10,000 for corporations and trade unions, and $1,000 for individuals.
Maximum fines for third party advertising violations are $10,000 for an individual and
$100,000 for corporations and unions. There are no prison sentences for electoral
infractions in Alberta. (Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act, Articles 45-
53).

Based on low general fines of $10,000 for corporations (except for third party fines), low
fines for registered candidates and individuals, and no prison sentences, the FDA auditors
determine a 20% score. (The FDA auditors assume that a fine $200,000 and/or 1 or more
years imprisonment is effective against corporations, and $5,000 fine and/or 1 or more
years imprisonment is effective against individuals).

20% of .75 = .15


The Court may order parties to bear their own costs for an appeal and/or recount.
Depending on the situation, costs may be paid by the Crown in right of Alberta (Election
Act, Article 148.1).

Finances Act does not apply to leadership conventions within political parties (Election

Finances Act does not apply to leadership conventions within political parties (Election

Total score for the electoral fairness of electoral finance: 47.7 percent out of 100 percent.

Analysis:

Based on the FDA scoring scale (see the Conclusion chapter), Alberta is in the failing zone for
fairness of electoral finance legislation. The scores reflect systematic corruption in Alberta’s
electoral finance legislation. Systematic corruption refers to legislated public processes that
favour minority interests over the interests of people as a whole.

Barring electoral finance transparency and reasonable caps on contributions to candidates,
Alberta’s electoral finance legislation favours the wealthy segments in society. The inclusion of
corporations and trade unions in electoral contributions and third party spending, high caps on
contributions to parties, no campaign expenditure limits, high third party expenditure limits, and
ineffective penalties against corporations and trade unions is evidence of this fact.

Québec, which attained a 100 percent score for electoral finance legislation, provides an example
and model of electoral finance legislation that reflects the interests of people as a whole. In
Québec, unlike Alberta, contributions and third party expenditure is limited to the electorate, the
Court imposes effective fines for corporate contraventions, and there are reasonable caps on
contributions and expenditures for parties and candidates.


British Columbia:

Electoral finance transparency

Are candidate and party finances only transparent to candidate and parties and not the public?
Are candidate and party finances only transparent to the government?

2.0 out of 2.0

Legislative Process:

Parties and constituency organizations must register to incur election expenses (Election
Act, Article 154).

Donations of money and the value of goods and services to parties and constituency
associations, as well as to candidates, leadership contestants and nomination contestants
where it is to be used for their campaign, are considered contributions (Election Act,
Article 180).

Loans that are write-offs, forgiven, or unpaid six months past their due date without legal
action by the creditor are considered contributions. In the case of loans given at less than
the prime rate of interest, the difference between the interest charged and that expected by
the prime rate is considered a contribution (Election Act, Article 181).
Election expenses include expenses used to promote or oppose, through direct or
indirect means, the election of a candidate or a party. This includes expenses used
for this purpose prior to becoming a candidate and any deficit incurred from a
fundraising function. Election expenses are nomination expenses in excess of 10%
of total election expenses. Nomination expenses less than this amount and personal
election expenses, such as family care, travel and lodging costs or disability
expenses, are not considered election expenses (Election Act, Article 183).
Registered political parties, constituency associations, candidates and leadership
contestants must have a financial agent. Financial agents can serve more than one
individual or group (Election Act, Article 175).
The financial agent must maintain records of all contributions, expenses and loans
incurred by the individual or group they represent for five years. The financial agent must
also document the particulars of expenditures greater than $25 and ensure that an
appropriate financial institution handles all money received or spent by the person or
organization (Election Act, Article 177).
All registered parties, registered constituency associations and candidates must appoint an
auditor. Auditors may serve more than one individual or group (Election Act, 179).


The financial agent must record a contribution's value, date of contribution, contributor
name, address and classification. For those donating more than $250 the record must
indicate contributor names, classification, and date and amount of the contribution. For
anonymous contributions, the agent must report a description of the function at which
they were collected, its date, the number of people in attendance, and the total anonymous
amount accepted. For any other contributions, the total amount and number of
contributors must be reported (Election Act, Articles 190 and 206).
Financial agents must provide records for each candidate to their political party within 60
days of polling. They must also provide records for a constituency association to their
party by February 15 of the following year (Election Act, Article 191).
The chief financial officer for a party or constituency organization must file a financial
report with the Chief Electoral Officer by March 31 regarding finances of the previous
year for the parent organization and any subsidiary organizations. This report must
include all of that year's political contributions, assets, liabilities, receipts and loans. The
report must also include contributions to one or more members of a party, its constituency
associations and its candidates if the total is greater than $250 (Election Act, Articles 206
and 207).
A candidate must provide a personal expenses report within 60 days of polling to a
financial agent, provided the candidate is not acting as his or her own financial agent
(Election Act, Article 208).
A candidate's financial agent must file a report with the Chief Electoral Officer within 90
days of the election. The report must contain election expenses, contributions, receipts
and income, and is available for public viewing at the office of the Chief Electoral Officer
during regular office hours for one year following the election (Election Act, Article 209).
The financial agent of a party or constituency association must file a report for the party
or constituency association, and any subsidiary organizations with the chief electoral
officer within 90 days after the polling day. The report must detail the expenses,
contributions, tax receipts etc. of a party, constituency association, and any subsidiary
organizations incurred between December 31 of the previous year and the end of the
campaign period (Election Act, Article 210).
If the financial agent discovers that information disclosed in any report has changed or is
inaccurate or incomplete, s/he he must file a supplementary report, subject to the same
requirements as the report it supplements, with the Chief Electoral Officer within 30 days
of discovery (Election Act, Article 212).
For all reports required by the British Columbia Election Act, the auditor of the party,
constituency association or candidate must make a report to their respective financial
agent, using accepted auditing standards to ensure that the report follows typical
accounting practices. The financial agent must grant the auditor access to financial
records deemed necessary for their audit (Election Act, Article 214).


Following the election, the Chief Electoral Officer must publish a report summarizing
political financing, including the information from election financing reports, election
expenses limits, advertising disclosure reports, as well as a list of all individuals and
groups who did not file the necessary reports, filed reports late, or exceeded election
expenses limits (Election Act, Article 215).
Independent sponsors incurring expenses greater than $500 during, or 60 days before, the
election period, must file a report with the Chief Electoral Officer that outlines
contributions, the value of advertising and the sponsor's assets. The records are retained at
the office of the Chief Electoral Officer for no less than five years and are available for
public inspection during regular office hours (Election Act, Articles 244,245 and 250).

Electoral contributions to candidates and parties

Are electoral contributions restricted to citizens?
Are electoral contributions disallowed by foreigners, public institutions, and charities?
Are anonymous electoral contributions set at a reasonable level?

0 out of 0.5
0 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

British Columbia's 2009 mean total income is $27,970 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Contributors can include individuals, corporations, unincorporated businesses, trade
unions and non-profit organizations (Election Act, Article 190).

Unregistered political parties, unregistered constituency associations, parties registered by
the Canada Elections Act and charities cannot make political contributions. Contributions
must be made from one's own funds. (Election Act, Articles 186 and 187).

Anonymous contributions can only be collected as part of a fundraiser specifically related
to the purpose of the group or individuals running it. Anonymous contributions are
limited to $50 and may total no more than $10,000 for a party or $3,000 for a candidate
in a calendar year (Election Act, Articles 186 and 188).

Electoral caps on contributions to candidates and parties

Are there caps on contributions by candidates to their own campaign?


0 out of 0.25
n/a
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

British Columbia's 2009 mean total income is $27,970 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Anonymous contributions can only be collected as part of a fundraiser specifically related
to the purpose of the group or individuals running it. Anonymous contributions are
limited to $50 and may total no more than $10,000 for a party or $3,000 for a candidate
in a calendar year (Election Act, Articles 186 and 188).

FDA researchers found no other caps on contributions.

Campaign expenditure

If there are campaign expenditure limits on candidates and parties, are they attainable,
reasonably, by all registered candidates and parties?
If there are public subsidies or other financial instruments, do they create an equal level of
campaign finances for candidates and parties?

0.5 out of 0.5
0.75 out of 1.0
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

A candidate, party, constituency association, or any of these in cooperation with a third
party must not incur expenses if they will result in exceeding the expense limit (Election
Act, Article 196).

For general elections and by-elections, the Chief Electoral Officer must adjust election
expense limits in accordance with a consumer price index. S/he will publish these limits
in the Gazette and inform the candidates, parties and constituency associations of the
changes (Election Act, Article 204).

For general elections, the total election expenses incurred by a registered political party


must not exceed $1.1 million for the 60 days prior to the campaign period and $4.4
million during the campaign period. If the campaign period is extended due to the death
of a candidate, election expenses for that district are increased by $70,000 (Election Act,
Article 198).

For all elections, prior to and during a campaign, the total election expenses incurred by a
candidate must not exceed $70,000. If the campaign period is extended due to the death
of a candidate, and the new candidate is nominated prior to new election proceedings, the
expenditure limit is $140,000. If the candidate is nominated after election proceedings,
the expense limit is $70,000 (Election Act, Article 199).

The FDA researchers found no public subsidizing of parties or candidates.

Electoral caps on third parties

Are there caps on third party electoral spending?
If there are caps on third party spending, are they restricted to citizens?
If there are caps on third party spending, are they attainable, reasonably, by citizens?
Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments that help create an equal level of third
party spending?

0.25 out of 0.25
0.0093 out of 0.5
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

Third party spending by individuals or organizations on advertising for a general election
may not exceed $3,000 for a single district, or $150,000 overall, for a single individual,
group, or by a collective, for the period 60 days before the campaign period to the end of
the campaign. For a by-election, spending may not exceed $3,000 (Election Act, Article
235.1)

$150,000 maximum expenditure for third parties.
10% of income = $2,797.

2,797/150000 = 0.0186.

0.0186 out of .5 = 0.0093.

The FDA researchers did not find public subsidizing measures for third parties.


Legislative process


0.25 out of 0.25
0.45 out of 0.75

Research Findings:

The British Columbia Election Act outlines contraventions to the Act and the
corresponding punishments, including fines as high as $20,000, two years imprisonment,
or both, though usually a $10,000 fine, one years imprisonment or both (Election Act,
Article 251-267).

The FDA auditors assume that $200,000 is a minimum effective fine against corporations
and trade unions, and $5,000 against individuals. The FDA auditors deducted 40% of the
score for low fines against corporations and trade unions, in consideration of the high
fines against individuals and lengthy prison sentences.

60% of .75 = 0.45


Analysis:

Based on the FDA scoring scale (see Conclusion section), British Columbia received a failing
score for its electoral finance legislation, which means that British Columbia's electoral finance
legislation is systematically corrupt. Systematic corruption refers to legislated public processes
that favour minority interests over the interests of the majority.

Despite electoral finance transparency and expenditure limits, British Columbia’s legislation is
biased. This is evident in the inclusion of corporations and trade unions in electoral contributions
and third party spending, no caps on contributions, no public subsidies to help create an equal
playing field for candidates and parties, high caps on third party expenditures, and low fines
against corporations and trade unions for electoral misconduct.

The FDA believes that British Columbia’s political establishment favours wealthy segments of
British Columbia and large, established political parties, and functions at the expense of British
Columbians as a whole.


Manitoba



2.0 out of 2.0
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

Registered parties are required to keep a designated bank account (Elections Finances
Act, Article 10).

The Chief Electoral Office can request financial information from registered parties,
candidates, constituency associations, and third parties. They have 30 days to comply
with the request (Elections Finances Act, Article 57 (2)).

Registered parties and candidates, constituency association organizations, and third
parties must preserve their financial records for at least 5 years from date of filing, and
maybe longer if the Chief Electoral Officer requests an additional period (Elections
Finances Act, Article 58).

Within 3 months of the end of each year, registered parties must submit audited financial
statements to the Chief Electoral Officer (Elections Finances Act, Article 59).

Contributions to individuals must include record of contributor's name and residential
address, date received, amount, and name of person collecting or receiving it. For
contributions over $100, the record must include the contributor’s signature (Elections
Finances Act, Article 37.2(1)).

Contributions to registered candidates, parties and constituency associations must include
a record of the contributor's name and residential address, date received, amount, and
name of person collecting or receiving it. For contributions over $100, the record must
include the contributor’s signature (Elections Finances Act, Article 37.3).

All electoral financial documents, statements, reports, receipts, invoices etc. filed with the
Chief Electoral Officers are public information, and the public may inspect and copy
them (Elections Finances Act, Articles 70(1)-70(2)).




0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Only individuals who are normally residents of Manitoba can contribute (Elections
Finances Act, Article 37.1(1)(a)).

Only individuals who are normally residents of Manitoba can receive contributions from
another individual (Elections Finances Act, Article 37.1(2)).

Anonymous contributions cannot exceed $10 (Elections Finances Act, Article 42).



0.25 out of 0.25
0.9493 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Manitoba's 2009 mean total income is $28,480 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

In a year, an individual can make two contributions in kind with a market value of less
than $20 to the same registered candidate, party, and constituency association and the law
does not consider those donations contributions. Any subsequent donations in the same
year the law does consider a contribution (Elections Finances Act, Article 40.1 (1)).

Electoral law considers contributions in the form of goods and services at market value at
the time of the donation (Elections Finances Act, Article 40 (1)).


In a year, individual contributions are limited to $3,000 to any combination of candidates,
constituency associations, registered parties, and leadership contestant (after the
leadership contest ends) (Elections Finances Act, Article 41(1.1))

Individuals cannot contribute more than $3,000 to one or more leadership contestants
during a leadership contest period (Elections Finances Act, Article 41(1.1.1)).

Individuals cannot contribute through monies received on behalf or from other
individuals or organizations (Elections Finances Act, Article 41(1.2)).

Electoral law considers loans to registered parties, candidates, and constituency
associations a contribution if the interest rate is less than prime, with the contribution
being the difference between rates (Elections Finances Act, Article 44.1(2)).

Loans from an individual or organization to registered parties, candidates, and
constituency associations are limited to $3,000 in a calendar year (Elections Finances Act,
Article 44.1(3.2)).

Maximum contribution is $3,000.

10% of mean income is $2,848. (The FDA auditors assume that income earners can spend
reasonably 10% income on contributions.)

2948 of 3000 = 0.9493



0.5 out of 0.5
1.0 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

In 2010, Manitoba's per capita income for individuals is $29,840 (Manitoba Bureau of


Statistics, 2011); in 2007, the top 20% of earners had 8.1 times more income than the
bottom 20% of earners (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Registered parties during a general election cannot have electoral expenses that exceed
$1.79 times the number electors on the voting lists in which the party endorses candidates
(Elections Law, Article 50(1)(a)).

Registered parties during a by-election cannot have electoral expenses that exceed $3.22
times the number electors on the voting lists (Elections Law, Article 50(1)(b)).

In an area of less than 30,000 square miles, registered candidates' election expenses
cannot exceed $2.72 times the number names on the voter lists for the electoral divisions
(Elections Finances Act, Article 51(1)(a)).

In an area of greater than 30,000 square miles, registered candidates' election expenses
cannot exceed $4.33 times the number names on the voter lists for the electoral divisions
(Elections Finances Act, Article 51(1)(b)).

Expenditure limits can decrease or increase based on any percentage change in the
Consumer Price Index for the City of Winnipeg (Elections Finances Act, Article 52).

Advertising expenses in a year of fixed date election and outside of the election period
are $250,000 for a registered party and $6,000 for a registered candidate (Elections
Finances Act, Article 54.1(1)).

In a general election, advertising expenses for a registered party shall not exceed $0.92
times the number of names on the voter lists for all electoral divisions in which party
endorses candidates (Elections Finances Act, Article 50(2)(a)). In a by-election,
advertising expenses shall not exceed $1.61 times the number of names on the voter lists
for all electoral divisions (Elections Finances Act, Article 50(2)(b)).

The total advertising expense of a candidate, whether incurred by the candidate,
constituency association or individual acting on the candidate's behalf, shall not exceed
$0.56 times the number of names on the voters list for the electoral division in which
candidate is part of (Elections Finances Act, Article 51(2)).

Advertising expenses are part of election expenses (Elections Act, Article 50(3)).

Registered parties are entitled to public subsidy each non-election year based on $1.25
times the number of valid votes received by each candidate endorsed by the party in the
most recent election. The maximum for said subsidy is $250,000, which is subject to the
total expenses paid by the party in the year (Elections Finances Act, Articles 70.2(2)).


During an election year, a registered party is entitled to a public subsidy based on the
following formula:

$1.25 × [(A× B/E) + (C × D/E)]

In this formula,
A is the number of valid votes received by each candidate endorsed by the party in the
general election;
B is the number of days in the year after the polling day of the general election;
C is the number of valid votes received by each candidate endorsed by the party in the
preceding general election;
D is the number of days in the year up to and including polling day of the general
election;
E is the number of days in the year.

If a registered party had at least one elected member in the Assembly during the previous
election, the minimum allowance payable to that party in an election year is $10,000, or
$600 in any other case (Elections Finances Act, Article 70.2(4)).

A registered candidate is entitled to receive a public subsidy if the candidate receives at
least 10% of all eligible votes cast in the electoral division in which s/he was a candidate
(Elections Finances Act, Article 71(1).

The public subsidy covers 100% of the following expenses:
(i) the reasonable child care expenses incurred by the candidate to enable the candidate to
campaign in the election period,
(ii) the reasonable expenses incurred by a disabled candidate in relation to his or her
disability to enable the candidate to campaign in the election period; and
(b) 50% of the actual election expenses, excluding donations in kind, incurred by or on
behalf of the candidate, to a maximum of 50% of the total election expense limit of the
candidate under subsection 51(1), as varied in accordance with section 52 (Elections
Finances Act, Article 71(2)).

A registered party is entitled to reimbursement of election expenses if it obtained at least
10% of all valid votes cast in the last election. The amount of the reimbursement is 50%
of the actual election expenses, excluding donations in kind, incurred by it or on its
behalf, to a maximum of 50% of the total election expense limits (Elections Finances Act,
Articles 71(3) and 71(4)).




Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments which help create an equal level of third
party spending?

0 out of 0.25
n/a
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

FDA researchers could not find legislation that regulates third party expenditures.

Legislative process


0.25 out of 0.25
0.5625 out of 0.75

Research Findings:

The Election Commissioner through his or her own initiative or at the request of another
person may investigate any act which violates the Elections Finances Act (Elections
Finances Act, Article 77.3(4) to 77.3.1(3)).

The FDA researchers found extensive legislation that enforces the Manitoba Electoral
Finance Act, including up to $50,000 fines against corporations, $25,000 fine against
registered parties, and maximum general fine of $5,000 against individuals (The
Elections Finances Act, Articles 78-91(5)).

The FDA auditors assume that a minimum effective fine against corporations is $200,000,
therefore, deducted 50% of the maximum score for low fines against corporations and
absence of imprisonment terms.

50% of .75 = 0.5625



Analysis:

Numerous areas of Manitoba’s electoral finance legislation stand out, and based on the FDA
scoring scale (see Conclusion chapter), Manitoba's score of 85.1 percent is exceptional. This
measurement means that Manitoba's electoral finance legislation is highly democratic and puts
the interests of the majority in Manitoba above the minority.

The FDA measured exceptional legislation in almost all aspects of the Manitoba's electoral law,
with the exception of third party expenditure and legislative process. The FDA believes that
reasonable caps on third party expenditure and higher fines for corporate electoral misconduct
would move Manitoba's score even higher.

Unlike Alberta and British Columbia, Manitoba disallows contributions by corporations and
trade unions to candidates and parties. However, with no regulation of third party expenditures,
corporations and trade unions could have a disproportionate influence on elections outcomes.


New Brunswick



2.0 out of 2.0
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

Contributions from individuals that total more than $100 for a semi-annual period are
disclosed to the public (Election Financing Manual).

All contributions from corporations and unions are disclosed to the public (Election
Financing Manual).

Registered political parties, candidates, and district associations must disclose all sources
of revenue and expenditures. They must submit financial returns to the Supervisor of
Political Financing. Financial returns are available to the public for examination (Election
Financing Manual).

All third parties are required to disclose their advertisements, which include name and
phone number of person who manages books and records, and signed authorization from
third parties for advertisements (Election Financing Manual).

Registered third parties must have a Chief Financial Officer (Election Financing Manual).

All third party advertising expenditure books are made available to the public for
examination, and details of contributions to third parties over $100 will be made available
to the public (Election Financing Manual).

Registered parties and candidates must have official representatives and agents who
manage electoral finances (Election Financing Manual).

Registered parties shall have licensed auditors (accountants practicing in Province)
(Political Process Financing Act, Articles 51-57).

Registered parties are required to submit two detailed financial returns a year: one for
first 6 months and one for last 6 months (Political Process Financing Act, Articles 58-64).




0 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Only individuals, corporations, and trade unions can contribute to registered parties and
candidates. Contributions can be made only to registered parties, candidates, and district
associations (Election Financing Manual).

Corporations that contribute must do business in New Brunswick, and trade unions that
contribute must hold bargaining rights in New Brunswick. There is no requirement that
individuals who contribute reside in New Brunswick (Election Financing Manual).

Corporations are deemed associated if they are controlled by one or related person.
Associated corporations can only contribute to one source (Election Financing Manual).

Associations and groups cannot contribute. However, individual partners in a partnership
may contribute in their own names (Election Financing Manual).

Contributions from individuals that total more than $100 for a semi-annual period are
disclosed to the public (Election Financing Manual).

All contributions from corporations and unions are disclosed to the public (Election
Financing Manual).



0.25 out of 0.25
0.0863 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5


Research Findings:

New Brunswick's 2009 mean total income is $25,890 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Contributions are limited to $6,000 to each party and any of its district associations per
year (Election Financing Manual).

Contributions are limited to $6,000 to one registered independent candidate per year
(Election Financing Manual).

Candidates may incur personal election expenses during the election period up to $2,000.
The Province does not reimburse these costs (Election Financing Manual).

The maximum contribution is $6,000 per party, and there are five parties in New
Brunswick, therefore the maximum contribution is $30,000 (5 times $6,000)

10% of mean income is $2,589

2589 of 30000 = 0.0863

0.0863 of 1.0 = .0863


Maximum candidate contribution is $2,000

2589 of 2000 = 1.2945



0.5 out of 0.5
1.0 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5


Research Findings:

Election expenses apply to the election period and to all expenditures before an election
for literature, objects or materials of an advertising nature (Election Financing Manual).

Electoral law does not consider volunteer service that is not part of one's employment a
contribution (Election Financing Manual).

Election expenses less than $100 incurred by an individual, but not reimbursed to the
individual, are not considered election expenses (Election Financing Manual).

Registered candidates and parties have expenditure limits.

Expenditures other than expenses incurred for advertising on broadcasting in newspapers,
periodicals, or other printed matter, are limited to $3,500 per year for registered parties
and $2,000 per year for registered district associations and registered independent
candidates (Political Process Financing Act, Article 50(1)).

During the campaign period, election expenses for registered parties shall not exceed
$1.00 times the number of electors in the total number of electoral districts in which the
party has candidates. The expenditure limit is set at $7,000 for each by-election (Political
Process Financing Act, Article 77(1)).

During the campaign period, expenses for registered candidates shall not exceed $1.75
times each elector in the electoral district s/he is a candidate. In no case in a general
election shall a candidate's expenditures be limited to less than $11,000 and exceed
$22,000. In a by-election, the expense limit for registered candidates is set at $2.00 times
each elector in the electoral district s/he is a candidate (Political Process Financing Act,
Articles 77(2)-77(3)).

Registered candidates receive reimbursement of their election expenses if they receive at
least 15% of the votes cast in their electoral district. Candidates who are entitled to
receive reimbursement will receive an amount equal to the lesser of:

1. the amount of the election expenses of the candidate or
2. $0.35 for each elector in the electoral district (Political Process Financing Act,
Articles 78(1)-78(2)).

Registered parties receive an annual allowance if they have representation in the
Legislative Assembly or had at least ten official candidates at the preceding general
election. The parties receive public monies based on the following formula:
(A-B) x (C/D) where
A is the amount of the appropriation authorized by the Legislature for making all of the


payments which are required under this Act to be made to all of the registered political
parties during the fiscal year;
B is the total amount paid under section 57 to all registered political parties during the
fiscal year;
C is the total number of valid votes cast for all of the official candidates of that qualifying
political party at the preceding general election; and
D is the total number of valid votes cast for all of the official candidates of all the
qualifying political parties at the preceding general election (Political Process Financing
Act, Articles 31-33).


Are there caps on third-party electoral spending?
If there are caps on third-party spending, are they restricted to citizens?
If there are caps on third-party spending, are they attainable, reasonably, by citizens?
Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments which help create an equal level of
third-party spending?

0.25 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.5
0 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.25

Research Findings:

New Brunswick's 2009 mean total income is $25,890 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Individuals, corporations, trade unions, charitable organizations, social groups etc. can
spend electorally as third parties (Election Financing Manual).

Only third parties that incur expenses over $500 are required register (Election Financing
Manual).

Third parties expenditures are restricted to 1.3% of the election expenses limit of
registered political parties that present a full slate of candidates in the 55 electoral
districts. (1.3% of $1.00 times the number of electors in all 55 electoral districts.)
(Political Process Financing Act, Article 84.15(1)).

In 2010, there were 520,872 electors on the New Brunswick voter list, which means that
in 2010, the law capped third party expenditures at $6771.40 (CBC News, “N.B. voter
turnout lowest since 1978”, October 1, 2010).

Electoral advertising expenses in a single electoral district or a by-election are capped at


10% of the province-wide limit (Political Process Financing Act, Articles 84.15(2)-
84.15(4)).

Third parties can receive contributions from individuals, trade unions, and corporations
only (Political Process Financing Act, Article 84.5).

1.3% times number of electors in all 55 districts.

In 2011, there were 520,909 electors (2010).

1.3% times 520,909 = 6771.817

10% of mean income = $2,589

2589 of 6771.817 = 0.3823

0.3823 of .0.5 = 0.1912

Legislative process


0.25 out of 0.25
0.375 out of 0.75

Research Findings:

Under the Provincial Offences Procedures Act, there are severe penalties in place for
violators of the election finance laws. Convictions can result in a fine ranging from $500
to $10,250 and jail terms of not more than 180 days (Election Financing Manual).

The maximum fine in New Brunswick is $10,250. The FDA auditors assume that the
minimum effective fines against corporations and trade unions are $200,000 and jails
times of at least one year according to the offense. Ergo, the FDA auditors deducted 50%
from the score.

50% of 0.75 = 0.375



Analysis:

Based on the FDA scoring scale (see Conclusion chapter), New Brunswick received a
satisfactory score for its electoral finance legislation. The score means that New Brunswick's
electoral finance legislation is working overall in the better interests of the people of New
Brunswick. At the same time, the FDA recognizes there is room to improve the legislation. For
example, it believes that corporations and trade unions should be banned from making electoral
contributions to candidates and parties, that there should be reasonable caps on third party
expenditures, and that the province should increase significantly the fines against corporations
and trade unions for electoral misconduct.

The FDA assumes that a lack of regulation for third party expenditures may allow wealthy
segments of New Brunswick to have a disproportionate influence on election outcomes, and the
minimal fines against corporations and trade unions may not be enough to discourage electoral
misconduct.


Newfoundland and Labrador

Are candidate and party finances only transparent to candidates and parties and not the public?

2.0 out of 2.0
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

Parties must disclose to the Chief Electoral Officer the existence of trusts (Election Act,
Article 271).

On reasonable grounds, the Chief Electoral Officer or representative can inspect books,
papers, and records of a candidate or party, enter and search premises, and make copies of
documents (Election Act, Article 274).

The Auditor General shall audit the financial transactions of the Chief Electoral Officer
(Elections Act, Article 276).

All documents filed with the Chief Electoral Officer are public records, and may be
inspected and copied by the public (Elections Act, Article 277).

The names and addresses of electoral contributors and the amount of contributions are
recorded by the chief financial officer of each party (Elections Act, Articles 299 (1) and
(2)).

Registered parties are required to record contributors (individually or in sum) and related
information who exceed $100 in contributions (Elections Act, Article 299 (3)).

During the campaign period, contributions over $100 to candidates or parties must be
filed with the Chief Electoral Officer (Elections Act, Article 299 (4)).

Publishers of political advertisements must maintain advertisement records for 2 years
and relevant information including the cost for advertisements and names of persons who
sponsored the advertisement. The records must be made available to the public for
inspection (Elections Act, Article 288 (3)).




0 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Only citizens, corporations, and trade unions can make electoral contributions (Elections
Act, Article 282 (1)).

Corporations must conduct business in the province, trade unions must hold bargaining
rights in province, and citizens must be natural persons of the province, whether or not
they are residents of Newfoundland and Labrador (Elections Act, Article 282 (2)).

Only registered parties and candidates may accept contributions (Elections Act, Article
282 (3)).

Contributions in excess of $100 must include the name of the contributor. (Elections Act,
Article 282 (5)).

Electoral law does not allow anonymous contributions in excess of $100 (Elections Act,
Article 283).

Contributions must be from the private funds of an individual, corporation, or trade union
(Elections Act, Article 285).

The FDA auditors assume that charities have to be non-partisan and thereby contribute
equally to candidates and/or parties. Therefore, the auditors gave full marks for sub-
section two.



0 out of 0.25


0 out of 1.0
0 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Newfoundland and Labrador's 2009 mean total income is $24,550 (Statistics Canada,
2011).

The FDA Researchers found no legislation that places caps on contributions.



0.5 out of 0.5
1.0 out of 1.0
0 out 0.25
0 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

2011).

The election expenses of a registered party must not exceed $3.125 times the number of
electors in the electoral district where the party endorses candidates (Elections Act,
Article 310 (1)(a)).

The by-election expenses of a registered party must not exceed $3.125 times the number
of electors in the electoral district where the by-election occurs (Elections Act, Article
310 (1)(b)).

The election expenses of candidates shall not exceed $3.125 times the number of electors
in the electoral district where s/he is a candidate (Elections Act, Article 310 (2)).

Regardless of Articles 310 (1) and (2), no election expenses of a candidate or party shall
be limited to an amount less than $12,000 (Elections Act, Article 310 (3)).


Election expense amounts in Article 310 are adjusted according to the Consumer Price
Index for the 12 month period and dividing the aggregate number by 12 (Elections Act,
Article 311).


Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments that help create an equal level of third
party spending?

0 out of 0.5
n/a
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

2011).

The FDA researchers could find no restrictions on independent third party electoral
expenditures, other than to identify both the persons buying advertisements and the
sponsor of the political advertisement to the publisher (Election Act, Article 288 (2)).

Electoral advertisements which have the consent or knowledge of a registered party or
candidates that promote or oppose a party or candidate are considered contributions to the
relevant party or candidate (Elections Act, Article 288 (1)(a)).

Legislative process


0.25 out 0.25
0.375 out of 0.75

Research Findings:

The legislation outlines various punishments and fines for electoral offenses. For
example, corporations are subject to a maximum fine of $10,000 for violating the


Elections Act and individuals are subject to a $1,000 fine or 3 months imprisonment or
both for general offences. For exceeding the election expenditure limit or related
misconduct, the offender is subject to a maximum fine of $10,000 or 3 months
imprisonment or both. Delivering false statements or false receipts carries a maximum
fine of $5,000 or 3 months imprisonment or both (Elections Act, Articles 316-327).

With a maximum fine of $10,000 and prison time of 3 months, the FDA auditors
deducted 50% of the score. The FDA auditors assume the minimum fine for corporations
should be $200,000 and minimum prison time of one year.

50% of 0.75 = 0.375


Analysis:

Based on the FDA scoring scale (see Conclusion section), Newfoundland and Labrador received
an unsatisfactory score of 51.3 percent. This score means that Newfoundland and Labrador has
numerous deficiencies in its electoral finance legislation and borders on a failed democratic state.
The FDA believes that this legislation is not working in the interests of the majority in
Newfoundland and Labrador.

Although there is electoral finance transparency and campaign expenditure limits, Newfoundland
and Labrador does not limit contribution amounts, offer public subsidies, or regulate third
parties. It allows contributions from corporations and trade unions and imposes minimal
penalties for electoral misconduct. The FDA believes that the shortcomings in these areas could
undermine a fair and democratic election process in Newfoundland and Labrador. Candidate and
party funds might not reflect popular support due to a lack of caps on contributions and
allowance for corporate contributions. The absence of third party regulations might allow for
wealthy segments of society to have a disproportionate influence on election outcomes.


Nova Scotia:



2.0 out of 2.0
n/a
n/a

Research findings:

The Chief Electoral Officer reports to the Assembly after an election (Election Act,
Article 163).

The Chief Electoral Officer shall retain election documents transmitted pursuant to
Article 160 until the appeal has expired, or in accordance with Government Records Act,
whichever is longer (Election Act, Article 165).

Official agents are responsible for recording contributions and campaign expenditures,
issuing tax receipts etc. for candidates, parties, and electoral district associations (Election
Act, Article 171).

Every party shall have a public accountant who acts as an auditor, and who must adhere
to the provided audit and reporting standards or face disqualification (Election Act,
Article 177).

Parties must fully disclose assets in its annual report to the Chief Electoral Officer
(Election Act, Article 192).

Electoral district associations must fully disclose their assets in an annual report to the
Chief Electoral Officer (Election Act, Article 194-198).

Candidates, parties, and electoral district associations must deposit all monies in a
designated financial institution disclosed to the Chief Electoral Officer (Election Act,
Articles 209-212).

Electoral law categorizes loans to candidates, parties, and electoral district associations
where the difference between a lower interest rate and the prime rate as a contribution
(Election Act, Article 215-219).


Within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year, a registered party must publish an audited
financial statement that is readily available to the public free of charge (Election Act,
Article 222).

Within 120 days of a by-election or election, a registered party must file a report with the
Chief Electoral Officer that contains all electoral expenses, invoices, receipts, vouchers
etc. (Election Act, Article 223).

Within 10 days of receiving parties' expense reports, the Chief Electoral Officer will
publish of the summary of the reports (Election Act, Article 223).

Invoices, receipts, vouchers etc. which are the part of the parties' expense reports are held
by the Chief Electoral Officer and s/he shall permit any elector to inspect them (Election
Act, Article 223).

Electoral district associations must file an annual financial report (Election Act, Article
227).

Candidates have 80 days after a by-election or election to file expense reports with the
Chief Electoral Officer (Election Act, Article 229).

The Chief Electoral Officer will publish a summary of a candidate’s expense report
within 10 days of receiving the report (Election Act, Article 229).

The Chief Electoral Officer shall keep invoices, receipts, vouchers from each candidate’s
expense reports for six months, and shall permit any elector to inspect them (Election Act,
229).

Candidates must file an annual financial report (Election Act, Article 229).

Parties, candidates, and electoral district associations that receive any contribution in
excess of $200 must disclose the source of the contribution to the Chief Electoral Officer.
The Chief Electoral Officer publishes the information (not including residential
addresses) for public viewing (Election Act, Articles 240).

Third parties must submit an election advertising report to the Chief Electoral Officer that
s/he will publish (Election Act, Article 284).


Are electoral donations/contributions restricted to citizens?
Are electoral donations/contributions disallowed by foreigners, public institutions, and charities?
Are anonymous electoral donations/contributions set at a reasonable level?


0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research findings:

Only individuals who are residents of Nova Scotia can make one or more contributions to
registered parties, electoral district associations, registered candidates, or registered third
parties (Election Act, Article 236).

No organization can contribute to registered parties, candidates, electoral district
associations, or registered third parties (Election Act, Article 236).

Individuals who are residents of Nova Scotia and are temporarily outside of the province
can make one or more contributions to registered parties, electoral district associations,
registered candidates, or registered third parties. This provision does not apply to persons
who are temporarily away for personal or commercial reasons (Election Act, Article 236).

Electoral law does not allow anonymous contributions (Election Act, Article 241).



0 out of 0.25
0.5342 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.2671 out of 0.5

Research findings:

Nova Scotia's 2009 mean total income is $26,710 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Total annual contributions to each registered party cannot exceed $5,000 and total
contributions to all electoral district associations and candidates of that party cannot
exceed $5,000 (Election Act, Article 236).

Total contributions to third parties cannot exceed $5,000 per year (Election Act, Article
236).


Candidate contributions to their own campaigns cannot exceed $5,000 per year (Election
Act, Article 236).


2761/5000 = 0.534

0.534 of 1.0 = 0.534

0.534 of 0.5 = 0.2671



0.5 out of 0.5
1.0 out of 1.0
0.25 out 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5

Research findings:

A registered party has an expenditure limit based on $2.29 per number of electors in the
electoral districts where it presents one or more candidates (Election Act, Article 259).

During a by-election, registered parties have an expenditure limit of $5,723.20 (Election
Act, Article 259).

During an election, a candidate must not exceed the following expenditure limits:

$5.72 per elector in any district with up to 5,000 electors

$4.86 per elector in any district with more than 5,000 electors and less than 10,000
electors

$4.29 per elector in any district with more than 10,000 electors


These limits apply to multiple candidates from the same party running in an electoral
district. The law views them as one candidate and they can divide the expenditure limit
between themselves (Election Act, Article 260).

Each fiscal year the province provides registered parties with $1.53 per each vote
received in the most recent election (Election Act, 191).

Elected candidates and candidates who garner at least 10% of valid votes cast receive
$1.43 from the provincial government. Multiple candidates from the same party are
viewed a one candidate, and may divide the reimbursement if they qualify (Election Act,
Article 267).


Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments that help create an equal level of third-
party spending?

0.25 out of 0.25
0 out of 0.5
.0668 out of .025
0 out of 0.25

Research findings:

Nova Scotia's 2009 mean total income is $26,710 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Third parties have an expenditure limit of $10,000 during an election (Election Act,
Articles 275).

No more than $2,000 of third party expenditure can be used to promote or oppose a
leadership candidate in a given electoral district (Election Act, Article 275).

Individual residents of Nova Scotia and corporations that are registered in Nova Scotia
can make third party expenditures (Election Act, Article 275).

10% of mean income is $2671.

Maximum expenditure is $10,000.

2671/10000 = 0.2671


0.2671 of 0.25 = 0.0668

Legislative process


0.25 out of 0.25
0.375 out of 0.75

Research findings:

Nova Scotia has an extensive legislative process to enforce electoral finance laws,
including compliance agreements. Fines range from $5,000 for individuals to $50,000 for
registered parties and imprisonment for up to one year. There are no specific provisions
for corporations and trade unions (Election Act, Articles 285-348).

Although Nova Scotia has effective penalties for individuals and registered parties, it is
deficient in fines applied to corporations and trade unions, and therefore, FDA auditors
deducted 50% from score out of .75.


Analysis:

Based on the FDA scoring scale (see Conclusion chapter), Nova Scotia received a very good
score for its electoral finance legislation. This score indicates that the legislation is working in
the interest of the majority in Nova Scotia. For example, Nova Scotia does not allow
corporations and trade unions to make electoral contributions, and the campaign expenditure
limits reflect the provincial mean income. However, the FDA identified certain areas of
legislation that are deficient and could potentially affect the election outcome by weakening
voice of the majority at the ballot box. Although campaign expenditure limits are reasonable,
contribution caps and third party spending by corporations and trade unions are not reflective of
the mean income and therefore favour wealthy segments of society. Penalties for electoral
misconduct against corporations and trade unions are also decidedly low and potentially
ineffective for preventing electoral fraud.


Ontario:


2.0 out of 2.0
n/a
n/a

Research Findings:

Only registered parties, constituency associations or candidates can accept contributions.
In registering with the Chief Electoral Officer, political parties, constituency associations
and candidates must declare the names of all individuals who may accept contributions
and the names and addresses of the financial institutions that will hold their contributions.
Parties and constituency associations must also declare their assets and liabilities
(Election Finances Act, Articles 10, 11 and 13).

Prior to registration, all parties, constituency associations and candidates must declare a
chief financial officer. It is the responsibility of the chief financial officer to create and
maintain an accurate record of expenses and contributions, to issue receipts, and file
financial statements with the Chief Electoral Officer (Election Finances Act, Article 33).

Candidates must appoint a licensed auditor at the time of registration, and by parties and
constituency associations within 30 days of registration. An auditor will provide a report
regarding financial statements to the chief financial officer, and has access to the
necessary records and documents from the candidate, party or constituency association
whom the auditor is working with (Election Finances Act, Article 40).

Before May 31 of each year, the chief financial officer of a party or constituency
association must file a report with the Chief Electoral Officer concerning the assets,
liabilities, income and expenses (excluding campaign expenses) for the previous year. In
the case of an election, the chief financial officer files a subsequent report with the Chief
Electoral Officer within six months of the poll containing all election-related income
received or incurred by parties, constituency associations and candidates during the
campaign. In the case of a by-election, only contributions and expenses of related
candidates, parties or constituency associations must be reported (Election Finances Act,
Articles 41 and 42).

Contributions greater than $100, in a single donation or in the aggregate from a single


contributor, must be reported by the chief financial officer to the Chief Electoral Officer
within 10 days of its receipt. In turn, the Chief Electoral Officer publishes the report and
its contents online (Election Finances Act, Article 34).

The public may view all documents filed at the office of the Chief Electoral Officer
during normal office hours. They are entitled to make copies of these documents, or
extracts of, at the cost of making such copies (Election Finances Act, Article 15).

The Chief Electoral Officer is responsible for publishing a summary of income, expenses
and reimbursement for all candidates and their constituency organizations both online and
in The Ontario Gazette (Election Finances Act, Article 2).


Are electoral donations/contributions restricted to citizens?
Are electoral donations/contributions disallowed by foreigners, public institutions, and charities?
Are anonymous electoral donations/contributions set at a reasonable level?

0 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Contributions to parties, constituency organizations and candidates may only be made by
individuals, their estate, non-charity corporations and trade unions (Election Finances
Act, Article 16).

Contributions may only be accepted from persons residing in Ontario, corporations which
carry out business in Ontario, and trade unions which hold bargaining rights for Ontario
employees (Election Finances Act, Article 29(1))

Funds from federal political parties are only acceptable during the campaign period.
These funds may only be accepted by a party, and may only total $100 per candidate
endorsed by that party. These are not treated as contributions, but are still sourced and
recorded with the Chief Electoral Officer (Election Finances Act, Article 20).

Affiliated political organizations may make contributions to their related parties,
constituency associations, or candidates (Election Finances Act, Article 26(3)).

Contributions which break the Ontario Election Finances Act must be returned.
Anonymous contributions are not allowed. If received, they must be given to the Chief
Electoral Officer for use in their role (Election Finances Act, Article 17).




0.25 out of 0.25
0.1934 out of 1.0
0.25 out of 0.25
0.5 out of 0.5

Research Findings:

Ontario's 2009 mean total income is $29,980 (Statistics Canada, 2011).

Contributions are multiplied by an indexation factor, which is the percentage change in
Statistics Canada's Consumer Price Index over a five-year period. The Chief Electoral
Officer publishes the indexation factor both online and in the Ontario Gazette. The
current five-year period is 2009-2013 (Election Finance Act, Articles 18(1) and 40.1;
Essensa, 2009).

During a calendar year or a campaign period (treated as a separate year), an individual,
corporation or trade union may donate a maximum of $7500 (currently adjusted to
$9300). The maximum contribution to a single constituency association or candidate is
$1000 (currently adjusted to $1240) or $5000 (currently adjusted to $6200) taken
together, per calendar year (Election Finances Act, Article 18 (1); Essensa, 2009).

Electoral law treats the personal funds of candidates used for their campaigns as
contributions and must be recorded as such (Election Finances Act, Article 18(3)).

At the discretion of the contributor, goods or services having an aggregate total of $100
or less, contributed by a person, corporation or trade union, are not considered a
contribution (Election Finances Act, Article 21 (2)).

Annual membership fees for parties may not be considered contributions as long as they
do not exceed $25 and membership payment records are maintained (Election Finances
Act, Article 30).

10% of mean income equals $2,980.
Maximum contribution is $9,300.


Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report

Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report

Semelhante a Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report (20)

Mais de Foundation for Democratic Advancement

Mais de Foundation for Democratic Advancement (19)

Último

Último (20)

Canadian Provinces-- 2012 FDA Electoral Finance Audit Report