Friday, January 14, 2011

Entitled to Their Entitilements

I was so pleased the other day when PM Harper said that the next election campaign whenever that may be one of the Conservative platform planks would be to eliminate the $2 a vote taxpayer subsidy,(a tax is what I call it).

As you expect the Libs and Dippers have come out whining and bawling and squawling not to take their entitlements away.  Boo Hoo Hoo!
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s opponents say his plan to campaign on killing direct financing for political parties is irresponsible, arguing the current subsidies are good for democracy.
The Liberals and New Democrats made it clear Thursday they have no intention of agreeing to repeal the subsidies introduced in the past decade, saying they ensure the ideas of voters are represented by vibrant political parties that no longer have to rely on “big money” from the business community.
So they claim to take away their entitlements is not good for democracy, well Tasha Kherriddin disagrees.
The result is not more democracy, as the opposition claims, but less. Taxpayers are forced to subsidize parties for whom they would not vote. They also subsidize incumbency, as parties with the most votes are favoured over parties with the fewest. And the restrictions don’t stamp out business or union influence; corporations in particular end-run them by having their executives make individual donations.
I believe that if enough people like a certain party, what they represent and  support a it with their wallets, that's the way it should be.  If a party can't raise funds on their own then may be that party is not resonating. Thus let the chips fall where they may.  It should certainly not be forced donations like we have now.  We should not be forced to donate to parties we don't like. 

If the PM campaigns on killing this tax, I think it will resonate.  Right now in a time of restraint in our own households, taxpayers expect our politicians and political parties should be doing the same.

So how will the opposition parties campaign on the why they should still be receiving their entitlements?  They're going to have a hard time explaining.  Just the  thought alone of being forced to donate to a party that's hell bent on breaking up the country, voters will agree that entitlement should go.

Parties should raise their own funds and not rely on the taxpayer. If they can't, the public is not interested in them, so they shouldn't exist, just plain and simple. At least one young Liberal agrees.
And while we're at it, let's end that irritating $2 per vote subsidy for political parties. If the Liberal party wants me to fork over some dough, it should have the grit to ask me personally.


  1. Lets see how many Liberals, NDP and BLOC supporters really support these parties. One thing that would surely happen, the party that can't raise money will find leaders who can!!! A "freebee" for the Liberals in their present dilemma. Cheers

  2. Each of the opposition parties is saying that as a party they're financially healthy and don't need the subsidy but the Conservatives are trying to stifle the opinions of what only can be referred to as fringe parties.

    That argument works against them and they really don't seem to get it.

    Judging by what's been happening lately (banning 'Money for Nothing' because someone complained and driving a renowned chef from a culinary competition because a group of 5 - 8 people threatened to protest) we place far too much credence in fringe groups once they start talking and less to the silent majority of Canadian voters.

    I'm sick and tired of such fringe groups and the political parties which stand by and do nothing.
    That includes the Conservatives.

    Awarding a cop-killer $9,500 doesn't sit well with me either.

    Take all of this subsidy money away from them and let them sink or swim.

    Maybe give it to the first party with the fortitude to stand up to these groups and effect change to reverse some of this crap.

    We shouldn't be forming policy based on hurt feelings.

    I don't want more talk, I want action.

  3. I don't want more talk, I want action.


  4. In my view, this is not so much about the $27M but about the principle of extricating the government from our lives, as was the case with the census. I like it, I applaud the PM for these type of principled stands.

  5. I don't understand why the Conservatives don't use more as a talking point the fact that by subsidizing the Bloc we are indirectly subsidizing the Parti Quebecois. The P.Q. aren't that great fundraisers and weren't even too popular until recently (though Quebeckers would love to have third option - come back Mario Dumont, we need you now). A lot of the people, resources and research are shared by the two parties. Hell, Duceppe would still like to head up the P.Q. if Pauline Marois would just get out of the way.

    Maybe the rest of Canada doesn't care or follow this too much, but this money makes a real difference in a bad way here in Quebec.

  6. I don't understand why the Conservatives don't use more as a talking point the fact that by subsidizing the Bloc we are indirectly subsidizing the Parti Quebecois.

    I agree. We would care more if Conservatives were more out spoken about it. Sadly I don't think enough people in ROC even know.


This is my home. I hope you respect it. I will not tolerate profanity or anything that is not suitable for family consumption.