Which of the following should be a government priority?

A) Fixing potholes

B) Health care waiting lists

C) Helping battered women

D) More money for political parties

For most of us, we would choose either A through C.

Sadly, NDP Premier Greg Selinger, has chosen D. 

Yes, even though his party is raising record revenues without a third funding scheme (known as the "vote tax"), Mr. Selinger claims his party needs the money. Few know the true story behind the push for more tax dollars, so here it is...

In September 1999, Gary Doer swept to office with a majority government; bringing an end to Gary Filmon’s eleven-year run.

Just months later, at a closed door NDP party meeting, Doer tried to sell his party on the idea of banning donations to political parties from unions and businesses.

We know this because an NDP Youth newsletter described what happened behind closed doors.

Sadly, Doer didn’t propose the ban out of a conviction that businesses and unions shouldn’t be able to influence the political process (as many believe), the NDP Youth newsletter noted Doer kept pointing to the fact that the Progressive Conservatives were more dependent on business donations than the NDP were on donations from unions.

In other words, Doer wanted to change election rules to suit his party.

Eventually, the NDP must have agreed with Doer because they used their majority to pass a law banning union and business donations; effective January 1, 2001.

Everything seems to have gone smoothly until 2008. That’s when Doer brought in a bill to provide a third form of funding to political parties – commonly known as the “vote tax.”

The vote tax provides political parties with $1.25 for every vote they received during the previous election. As you can see, Doer’s party would stand to gain the most from the party financing scheme as his party had receive the most votes during the 2007 election - convenient idea indeed.

Unlike existing political party funding schemes, this one discriminated against independent candidates who obviously don’t belong to a political party and wouldn’t receive funding.

Speaking of the two existing public funding schemes, here’s how they work.

First, political parties are currently reimburse for 50% of allowable election expenses. In other words, when a political party spends, say, $1,000,000 on attack ads, brochures and lawn signs, Elections Manitoba eventually cuts the party a cheque for $500,000. 

The second form of assistance political parties receive is through generous tax credits people receive for making donations to political parties. If you make a donation to the NDP or PCs tomorrow for $100, you can get a tax credit for $75 at income tax time. In other words, that $100 donation only really costs you $25. By comparison, charities receive a tax credit that’s a fraction of the percentage that political parties benefit from. 

When Doer presented the new “vote tax” funding mechanism in 2008, he claimed it was needed as political parties could no longer receive donations from unions and businesses.

Yet somehow, Doer’s own party had run (and won) election campaigns in 2003 and 2007 without such a third form of funding.

So what was the real reason?

Money.

Doer’s NDP had fundraised more than the PCs during the first five years of the ban on business and union donations, but the PCs not only caught up, they raised more than the NDP in 2006 and 2007; about $800,000 more.

Thus, instead of cracking the whip on his party to raise more donations, Doer used his majority government to pass a law giving his party more money. Talk about lazy.

However, as McFadyen’s PC’s refused the money, Doer’s NDP followed suit; recognizing the bad optics of taking the funds while the province racked up huge deficits and his government dragged their feet when it came to supporting charities like Osborne House that help battered women get back on their feet.

Fast forward to 2012 and Premier Selinger has asked UofM Professor Paul Thomas to review the “vote tax” and tinker with the plan as he saw fit. Of course this “need” still ignores the fact Selinger’s NDP raised more in 2011 (the most recent year for which data is available) than ever before.

So there you have the history behind the “vote tax.”

As you can imagine, the new welfare scheme doesn't sit well with us, so we met with Professor Thomas and presented the following - /media/Paul Thomas Presentation.pdf

Party Donations: 2002-2011

Source: Elections Manitoba ("Net Income" Figures)