Politicial Finance Reform Fleeces Taxpayers

• Federal Liberals fleece taxpayers to deflect in-house ethical failures
  
• Prime Minister squanders opportunity to end political tax credit fiasco
  
• Draft legislation says political bankrolling more important than charitable giving

OTTAWA: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) has responded to proposals tabled yesterday by the federal government to change the structure and shift the burden of political and campaign financing. Draft legislation proposes to end union and corporate donations to political parties and leadership campaigns, increase the allowable contributions to political parties eligible for tax receipts and compel taxpayers to fork out an extra $150 million to support partisan activities over a four-year electoral cycle including $80 million in an election year.

Big Brother Boudria
" With this bill, Ottawa wants to force us to pay for the political process and with their appeal of the election gag law, they're still trying to muzzle taxpayers," fumed CTF federal director Walter Robinson. "These reforms are anti-democratic and the words of Thomas Jefferson should be heeded: it is indeed abhorrent and immoral to compel individuals to fund political positions with which they disagree."

Finance reform not the issue: Government's ethical conduct is
" For the government to talk about renewing public trust in the electoral system is surreal," stated Robinson. "The real issue is the ethical conduct of Jean Chretien's government from its sponsorship scandals to chalet rentals to quid-pro-quo golf course financing deals, these scandals are driving public cynicism towards politics, not who gives what to whom."

Stench of hypocrisy lingers in cold Ottawa air
" It is the height of irony, if not hypocrisy, to witness the Prime Minister's political deathbed conversion to banning corporate and union donations after he and his party have fared quite well for four decades from these same donors," added Robinson. "If the PM and Mr. Boudria really wanted to end the so-called big money influence in Canadian politics, they would have ended tax credits for political parties and election candidates entirely."

Is Paul Martin more important than the local AIDS hospice
" The feds also propose to double the maximum amount eligible for a 75% tax credit from $200 to $400 which is offensive in the extreme," said Robinson. "However, if you give $200 to the United Way, the local cancer centre, or an AIDS hospice, you receive a 16% tax credit. But if you stroke a $400 cheque to Jean Chretien or Paul Martin, voila, you get a 75% tax credit. It's bizarre."

"Only a politician could reason that fattening a party bank account by picking taxpayers' pockets is more valuable than charitable giving," concluded Robinson. "This isn't transparency, this is a broad daylight mugging of Canadian taxpayers."