The per-vote subsidy in Canada is for each registered federal political party that received at least 2% of all valid votes the last general election or at least 5% of the valid votes in the electoral districts in which it had a candidate. The per-vote subsidy, gives the party each year of $2.04 per vote received in the last election.
In reality, this move would handicap parties with a lower-income voting base that means that only those with the best ability to raise money get to have their ideas heard not the others. People who can’t afford to contribute to political parties would be cut out of this whole process.
Furthermore, it would concentrate influence in the hands of those with deeper pockets, instead of giving voters a voice. It runs against democracy. Sadly, parties trying to break through would have practically no means.
In fact, those who make political contributions tend to be individuals that have more disposable income. The poor, by and large, do not make political contributions. People that have more comfortable means, are more likely to make political contributions:
According to McMaster University political scientist Henry Jacek, political contributions tend to come from the wealthy, and not the poor. It is also clear from other jurisdictions in the world that political donors typically are people that have more disposable income.
Also, according to political scientist Ned Franks of Queen’s University, the elimination of the per-vote subsidy will mean that political parties with a rich support base will now be far better off than parties whose supporters are poorer or who are not the type to make political donations. He stated that the move greatly favours the Conservative party: “There’s only one party who benefits, and — surprise, surprise — it’s the Conservatives.
The public support for the political process and political parties is widely accepted in a great many democratic countries around the world indeed.
The elimination of the per-vote subsidy could also have the effect of further reducing an already low voter turnout by removing an incentive that encourages many Canadian citizens to vote. The per-vote subsidy ensures that a voter’s participation at the ballot box will at least still make a difference even if their preferred riding candidate has very little chance of winning or is assured of a win.
In fact, this move is motivated by a desire to cripple all other parties, not by concern over taxpayer dollars.
Unfortunately, this move represents a partisan attempt to bankrupt the other political parties and further increase their own party’s financial advantage.
Quite frankly, this is a direct attack on the democratic process.
Comments and opinions of Editorials, Letters to the Editor, and comments from readers are purely their own and don’t necessarily reflect those of the owners of this site, their staff, or sponsors.)