2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report

2012 FDA Global Electoral Finance
Audit of Canada‟s 10 Provinces
Executive Summary
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
Revised September 29, 2013

Prepared By
Mr. Stephen Garvey, Executive Director Foundation for Democratic Advancement, 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/nonregistered 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 (FDA) is an international independent, non-partisan
democracy organization. The FDA‟s mission is
to measure, study, and communicate the impact of government processes on a free and
democratic society.
Overall,the FDA works
1. to ensure that people become more knowledgeable about the outcomes of government
processes and can then make decisions that are more informed;
2. to get people involved in monitoring government processes at all levels of government
and in providing sound, practical, and effective suggestions. (For more information on
the FDA visit: www.democracychange.org)
To ensure its objectivity and independence, the FDA does not conduct privately paid research.
However, if you or your organization has an important research idea or are aware of an important
issue on government processes, the FDA is available to listen to your idea or issue and possibly help

raise public awareness by initiating and leading change through report research and analysis. Please
contact the FDA at (403) 669-8132 or email us at info@democracychange.org for more information.
An online version of this report can be found at: www.democracychange.org
For further information and/or comments on this report please contact Mr. Stephen Garvey at
stephen.garvey@democracychange.org

Table of Contents
Introduction 6
How to Read the Report 7
Chapter 1: Electoral Finance 9
Alberta 9
Analysis 14
British Columbia 16
Analysis 21
Manitoba 22
Analysis 27
New Brunswick 28
Analysis 33
Newfoundland and Labrador 34
Analysis 37
Nova Scotia 39
Analysis 44
Ontario 45
Analysis 49
Prince Edward Island 51
Analysis 54
Quebec 56
Analysis 63
Saskatchewan 64
Analysis 68
Chapter 2: Overall Audit Results 69
Chapter 3: Analysis 70
Chapter 4: Conclusion ` 76
Chapter 5: Recommendations 78

References 79
Appendix: Research Methodology 81
FDA Audit Team & Associates 86

Foundation for Democratic Advancement | 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report 6
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 81.

How to Read the Report
Chapter 1 focuses on the FDA‟s electoral finance audit of the Canada‟s 10 provinces. These chapters
are formatted in the following manner
1) Introduction to the audit.
2) Summary for audit results for each province.
3) Audit questions, legislative research and audit findings on each province.
4) Analysis of audit measurements and findings for each province.
Chapter 3, „Overall Analysis‟, pertains to the measurements and findings from the audit results and
findings for each province.
Definition of Key Terms
The Foundation for Democratic Advancement characterized the following definitions
Electoral fairness
The impartiality and equality of election law before, during, and after an election period. In the
context of the audit, electoral fairness involves concepts relating to election content in the media,
candidates and parties, electoral finance, and voters. In particular, this includes evaluating
impartiality and balance of political content in the media, equitable opportunity and ability for
registered candidates and parties to influence voters and government, equitable electoral finance
laws, and equitable opportunity and ability for voters to voice political views and/or influence the
outcome of an election.
Electoral fairness does not allow bias through, for example, legislation that gives a distinct electoral
advantage to one registered party over another, or laws that allow equitable access to media without
facilitating equal opportunity to take advantage of this access. In contrast, electoral fairness would
include a broad, balanced diffusion of electoral propaganda by registered political parties during the
campaign period, equal campaign finances (beyond equal expenditure limits) for all registered
parties according to the number of candidates endorsed, and the registration of parties based on
reasonable popular support (rather than financial deposit or unreasonable popular support).
Electoral fairness in any democratic process must include an equal playing field for registered parties
and candidates, distinguishable by voters according to a clear political platform, and a broad and
balanced political discourse in where information about electoral choices are clear and available to
the voting public.

Electoral finance
Electoral finance laws applied to registered candidates and parties before, during, and after an
election period. Electoral finance also encompasses campaign finance which is restricted to the
campaign period.
In the context of the FDA electoral fairness audit, electoral finance includes:
1) Caps on electoral contributions (or the lack of).
2) Caps on candidate and party electoral expenditures (or the lack of).
3) Procedures for financial disclosure and reporting of candidate and party electoral finances.
4) Procedures for the handling of electoral contributions by registered candidates
and parties.
Electoral finance does not include non-financial laws, regulations, procedures etc. such as those
relating to candidate and party access to media, civil rights laws such as freedom of speech and
assembly, rules on right of reply in the media, laws on the election content of media, and laws on
voter assistance.
Special interest-based democracy
A system in where either individual or corporate interests dictate government action, and factions
with the most economic and political power in society influence policies and legislation. The
electoral system is set up to allow special and minority interests to impact election outcomes
primarily through electoral finance and media access and exposure. In addition, people do not have
substantial political say on government policy and legislation between elections.
People-based democracy
A system where political power is invested in the people and the population as a whole to influence
government policies and legislation. The electoral system is set up in a fair and equitable manner so
that all people, within reason, have an opportunity to influence the election outcomes to the same
degree. In addition,people have mechanisms for substantial political say on government decision-
making, policies, and legislation between elections.

Chapter 1: Electoral Finance
This chapter focuses on Canadian provincial 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,
parties, and voters (see Appendix: Research Methodology for further explanation). The FDA team
audits from the standpoint of a peoples-based democracy.
The FDA focuses on six finance variables:
electoral finance transparency,
contributions to candidates and parties,
caps on contributions to candidates and parties,
campaign expenditure limits,
caps on third-party expenditures, and
legislative process for electoral finance.
The FDA chose these finance variables because they represent core areas of electoral finance.The
audit of electoral finance includes examination of Canadian provincial electoral finance legislation
and the application of legislative research to the FDA matrices. Matrix scoring is based on an overall
score of 0 to 10 out of 10.
What follows are the audit results and questions, legislative research, and audit findings for each
province:
Alberta
Tables 1 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for Alberta
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Alberta Audit
Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
Candidates & Parties
15% 1.5 1.0 66.6%
Caps on Contributions to
20% 2.0 1.0825 54%
Campaign Expenditure
Limits
22.5% 2.25 0.0 0.0%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.2794 22.35%
Legislative Process 10% 1.0 0.40 40%
Total 100% 10 4.76 47.6%

Electoral Finance Transparency
Are candidate and party finances transparent to the public?
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?
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?
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
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 Finances
and Contributions Disclosure Act, Article 17).
No party or candidate may knowingly accept contributions greater than these limits (Election

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 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
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?
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?
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?
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 4553).
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: 47.6 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
Tables 2 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for British Columbia
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
British
Columbia
Audit Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 0.5 33.3%
20% 2.0 0.25 12.5%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 1.25 50%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.25 20%
Legislative Process 10% 1.0 0.65 65%
Total 100% 10 4.91 49.10%
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?
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
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
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
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?
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?
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?
Are there public subsidies or other financial instruments for 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?
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
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?
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
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
Tables 3 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for Manitoba
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Manitoba
Audit Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 1.5 100%
20% 2.0 1.9493 97.46%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 2.25 100%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.0 0.0%
Legislative Process 10% 1.0 0.8125 81.25%
Total 100% 10 8.512 85.12%
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)).
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). Electoral
caps on contributions to candidates and parties
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
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
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;
Dis 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?
Research Findings
FDA researchers could not find legislation that regulates third party expenditures.
Legislative process
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 85.12 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
Tables 4 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for New Brunswick
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
New
Brunswick
Audit Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 1.0 66.6%
20% 2.0 1.0863 54.15%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 2.25 100%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.25 20%
Total 100% 10 7.211 72.11%
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).
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).

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
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?
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
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
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
Tables 5 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for Newfoundland and Labrador
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
NF Audit
Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 1.0 66.6%
20% 2.0 1.0 50%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 1.5 66.6%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.25 20%
Total 100% 10 5.125 51.25%
Are candidate and party finances only transparent to candidates and parties and not the public? Are
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)).
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 subsection
two.

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.
Research Findings
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?

Research Findings
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
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 51.25 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
Tables 6 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for Nova Scotia
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Nova Scotia
Audit Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 1.5 100%
20% 2.0 1.0513 52.5%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 2.25 100%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.3168 25.34%
Total 100% 10 7.743 77.43%
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 withthe
Chief Electoral Officer that contains all electoral expenses, invoices, receipts, vouchers etc.
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?
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).
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
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 thirdparty
spending?
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
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
Tables 7 Electoral Finance Audit Scores and Percentages for Ontario
Electoral Finance
Section Variables
% Subsection
Audit Weight
Numerical
Subsection Audit
Weight
Ontario
Audit Results
% Results
Electoral Finance
Transparency
20% 2.0 2.0 100%
Contributions to
15% 1.5 1.0 66.6%
20% 2.0 1.1934 59.67%
Limits
22.5% 2.25 2.25 100%
Caps on Third-party
Expenditures
12.5% 1.25 0.0 0.0%
Total 100% 10 6.880 68.8%
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?
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).
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.
2980 of 9300 = 0.1943
0.1934 of 1.0 = 0.1943

Research Findings
Campaign expenditure limits for all registered parties, individuals and organizations acting
on their behalf are multiplied by an indexation factor dependent on the percentage change in
Statistics Canada's Consumer Price Index over a five-year period. The current five-year
period is 2009-2013 (Election Finances Act, Articles 38 and 40.1; Essensa, 2009).
The expenditure limit for all registered parties, individuals and organizations acting on their
behalf is $0.60 ($0.74 today) multiplied by the number of electors in all the districts they run
in, or in the case of a by-election, the relevant district (Election Finances Act; Essensa,
2009).
The expenditure limit for a registered candidate, a constituency association endorsing them,
and any other organization acting on their behalf is $0.96 ($1.19 today) multiplied by the
total number of electors in their district. For example, in 2011 in the district of Brampton-
Springdale, the expenditure limit was $1.19* 87, 543 = $104,176.17. For those running in
select northern districts, the expenditure limit is increased by $7000 ($8680, currently). For
example, in 2011 in the district of Kenora-Rainy River the limit was $1.19 * 48, 369 =
$57559.11 + $8680 = $66239.11 (Election Finances Act, Article 38; Elections Ontario,
2011a, 2011b; Essensa, 2009).
Candidates who receive at least 15% of the popular vote for their district may be reimbursed
the lower of 20% of their campaign expenses or 20% of their expenditure limit. Candidates
running in certain northern districts will have their total eligible amount increased by $7000
($8680 currently). Political parties that receive at least 15% of the popular vote in any district
may be reimbursed an aggregate amount of $0.05 for every elector in the district. In addition
to these requirements, any candidate, party or constituency association seeking
reimbursement must file a financial statement (Election Finances Act, Article 44).
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 thirdparty
spending?

Research Findings
Ontario's 2009 mean total income is $29,980 (Statistics Canada, 2011).
Third parties must register and appoint a chief financial officer if they incur expenses of $500
or more. The chief financial officer must file a report concerning the third party‟s expenses,
contributions and receipts with the Chief Electoral Officer within six months from polling
day (Election Finances Act, Articles 37.5, 37.6 and 37.12).
Third-party contributors are limited to Ontario residents, non-charitable corporations that do
business in Ontario, and trade unions representing Ontario employees (Election Finances
Third parties must appoint an auditor if they incur expenses greater than $5000. The auditor
will report to the chief financial officer, and must have access to the relevant documents to
do so (Election Finances Act, Article 37.7, 37.13).
Legislative process
Research Findings
The Ontario Election Finances Act enforces electoral laws, with $50,000 as the maximum
possible fine for corporations and unions, and $5000 as the maximum fine for all others
(Election Finances Act, Articles 46-53).
The FDA determined that the maximum fine of $50,000 is well below its accepted effective
penalty of a minimum fine for corporations of $200,000 and/or a year prison sentence. Ergo,
FDA auditors gave a 25% score.
25% of 0.75 = 0.1875
Analysis
Based on the FDA scoring scale (see Conclusion chapter), Ontario received an unsatisfactory score
for its electoral finance legislation. The score means that Ontario's legislation has deficiencies that
could potentially benefit the wealthy segments of society and prevent the electoral process from
working in the interests of the majority.
Ontario has electoral finance transparency, reasonable caps on campaign expenditures, and public
subsidiaries that encourage broad political participation. However, it allows corporations and trade
unions to contribute to campaigns, does not apply caps on contributions that reflect the mean

income, does not regulate third party expenditure, and imposes minimal penalties against
corporations and unions for electoral misconduct. This could allow third parties to have a
disproportionate influence on the electoral discourse and election outcome. Additionally, high
contribution caps for third parties do not reflect the mean income; therefore, the funds for candidates
and parties might not be a sign of popular support. As is the case with Newfoundland and Labrador,
any of these areas can potentially prevent a fair and democratic election process in Ontario.

2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report

2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to 2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report

Similar to 2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report (19)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

2013--Revised 2012 FDA Canadian Provinces Electoral Finance Report