Billionaire Oilers owner Katz gave $430,000 to Alberta PCs

[First Lady]

Someone on Twitter has pointed out that none of these donations show up on the list PC's released on April 22

http://www.votepc.ca/public/data/doc...l202012pdf.pdf

Donations can be accepted up to 2 months post election.

However, in my experience most large donors tend to do it before E-day so the receiver can get maximum use out of it.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Muta

Why do you continue to make a big deal out of nothing? Everyone is allowed to donate whatever they want, and if they can do it within the rules of the law, what is the problem?

Perhaps Katz gave $30,000 to each person that WANTED to give to the PC Party, but just didn't have the money. He gave them to money to donate, because he HAS the money.

I'm not sure what your issue is here. Katz didn't put a gun to these people's heads and demand that they give the PC's money. He probably asked if they wanted to.

Sure. And Santa Clause comes every Christmas and the Easter Bunny is real too.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by First Lady

You're sure? Which ones? I would certainly like to know.

Wildrose: http://efpublic.elections.ab.ca/afEF...fm?&ACID=10008

PC: http://efpublic.elections.ab.ca/afEF...fm?&ACID=10006

How about this couple?

Elmira Ibbotson 30,000.00 Cash
J. Gary Ibbotson 30,000.00 Cash

[Slava]

I'm just going to point out that controlling who gives a party how much money during a campaign isn't as easy as everyone here might think. Its not as simple as "just look at the cheques", although that would be the common thought.

I would love to see really tight election spending and finance laws. The thing is that for every party you have a slate of volunteers who are trying their best to adhere to these rules. They have days jobs and other responsibilities in their lives, so just by the nature of that system you have mistakes and errors. Can a fleet of volunteers who've never met, and don't speak to each other spread across the province be expected to notify every other constituency that they just received a cheque for $1000 to make sure that the person didn't write 87 of them?

It has nothing to do with the party in question, its just that its incredibly difficult to police this effectively.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Rerun

With regards to this, scolding is well deserved, no matter what the political stripe.

A meh attitude just ensures that stuff like this continues.

And a rah-rah attitude gets us where? Probably the exact same spot we're at right now. I've just accepted this is part of the game. Politics is a harsh game and its run on dollars. My man Clay said it best "Do you think I got the time to ask why a man's giving me money? Or where his money comes from? I'll take any mother ####ers money if he giving it away!"

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

How about this couple?

Elmira Ibbotson 30,000.00 Cash
J. Gary Ibbotson 30,000.00 Cash

Could be husband/wife or sibling situation.

Where are the 10+ as in the Katz case?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Sure. And Santa Clause comes every Christmas and the Easter Bunny is real too.

You're right, Katz put guns to their heads. He also threatened to kill puppies if they didn't take his money.



At the end of the day, it was within the law. You might not like it, but them's the rules. There's tons of political donations across every party, across every nation, across the world... people can donate to whomever they want.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Slava

I'm just going to point out that controlling who gives a party how much money during a campaign isn't as easy as everyone here might think. Its not as simple as "just look at the cheques", although that would be the common thought.

I would love to see really tight election spending and finance laws. The thing is that for every party you have a slate of volunteers who are trying their best to adhere to these rules. They have days jobs and other responsibilities in their lives, so just by the nature of that system you have mistakes and errors. Can a fleet of volunteers who've never met, and don't speak to each other spread across the province be expected to notify every other constituency that they just received a cheque for $1000 to make sure that the person didn't write 87 of them?

It has nothing to do with the party in question, its just that its incredibly difficult to police this effectively.

The Wildrose has a bookkeeper and accountant on staff; and auditors to consult with if need be. I would be incredibly surprised if the PC's finances are managed by volunteers.

Your point at the CA level is bang on.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by First Lady

This is a fine example of walking a very thin line on the legal aspect.

The limit per person or corporation is $30,000.00. So one could "gift" 30K to each of their children and they in turn donate; or a Corp can pay dividends and employees donate in their own names.

Laws broken; no. Morally questionable; yes.

In the Katz case, as I understand it, it was one cheque.... which should raise eyebrows, questions and alarm bells.

Should it?
First of all, what was going on was totally legal.
Everyone knows what was going on, and no one in any sort of postion of authority is making a stink about it (Including Electsions Alberta), so it's obviously not illegal.

Secondly, I think putting it in as one cheque is preferable to keeping it secret and just having a dozen $30k cheques showing up. That to me would indicate someone is trying to hide a donation. Writing one cheque is about as transparent as things get. Katz is basicly explicitly stating that there is a loophole and he's using it to make a very large donation.
Everything is legal, honest, and transparent. How does that raise eyebrows, questions, or alarm bells?

[Canada 02]

one cheque from multiple donors is allowed, according to Elections Alberta. Again, straight from the Globe and Mail Article. Did the OP even read the article posted?

Elections Alberta said some forms of cheque-splitting are allowed, using the example of a married couple who donate $60,000 with one cheque and ask for two $30,000 receipts.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Should it?
First of all, what was going on was totally legal.
Everyone knows what was going on, and no one in any sort of postion of authority is making a stink about it (Including Electsions Alberta), so it's obviously not illegal.

Secondly, I think putting it in as one cheque is preferable to keeping it secret and just having a dozen $30k cheques showing up. That to me would indicate someone is trying to hide a donation. Writing one cheque is about as transparent as things get. Katz is basicly explicitly stating that there is a loophole and he's using it to make a very large donation.
Everything is legal, honest, and transparent. How does that raise eyebrows, questions, or alarm bells?

The law states any single amount over $30,000.00 from any one person or contributor must be returned.

Receipts are issued on based on who gives the money. In this case it appears he sent in this cheque for $430,000.00 and then said "oh that's money from Tom, Dick and Harry". If in fact it wasn't from those people - then it is an illegal contribution.

As I said earlier, if he gifted the money to other people and they each indivdually gave - then technically that's not illegal.

[Bill Bumface]

I'm disappointed in the lack of arena talk. Katz donated an entire arena to the PC's, yet is whining and crying for another $100 mil from the city of Edmonton. It's pretty impressive how long and girthy his middle finger really is.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

one cheque from multiple donors is allowed, according to Elections Alberta. Again, straight from the Globe and Mail Article. Did the OP even read the article posted?

And also:

Elections Alberta said some forms of cheque-splitting are allowed, using the example of a married couple who donate $60,000 with one cheque and ask for two $30,000 receipts.

But Elections Alberta spokesman Drew Westwater said the provisions of section 34 are “in effect and would be applied” if an individual donor “asks for receipts to many names or companies.”

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

I'm disappointed in the lack of arena talk. Katz donated an entire arena to the PC's, yet is whining and crying for another $100 mil from the city of Edmonton. It's pretty impressive how long and girthy his middle finger really is.

I think you misunderstand the amounts here.

He donated $430,000 not $430 million.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Not the spirit of the rules. i know that sounds lame, but its true.

Except it's not. There's no 'spirit of the rule'. There's a rule, it's either broken or it isn't. We're not talking about little league baseball here, everyone knows that if you don't impose a restriction on aggregation like this in political donations that it's going to happen.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by First Lady

The law states any single amount over $30,000.00 from any one person or contributor must be returned.

Receipts are issued on based on who gives the money. In this case it appears he sent in this cheque for $430,000.00 and then said "oh that's money from Tom, Dick and Harry". If in fact it wasn't from those people - then it is an illegal contribution.

As I said earlier, if he gifted the money to other people and they each indivdually gave - then technically that's not illegal.

Except you said it should raise questions and alarm bells.
He did it in a transparent manner, Elections Alberta knows about it and have said it was okay. Where is the problem?
I kind of get the feeling that you'd have raised just as big of a stink if everyone in Katz's family had had cut a cheque for $30k. I'm sure the talk then would have been "Yeah, we all know where that money really came from, how shady is that? If he wanted to donate all that money why didn't he just cut one cheque himself".

The fact of the matter is there are any number of ways Katz could have done what he did, and he chose the most transparent honest way of doing it, yet that is somehow a probelm?

[Oil Stain]

And the provincial government still refused to give him arena money. You can't buy good help these days....

[Bigtime]

I have just one question, was it given on a giant novelty cheque? The answer to this will solidify how I feel about this whole thing.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Except you said it should raise questions and alarm bells.

Here is exactly what I said:

Originally Posted by First Lady

In the Katz case, as I understand it, it was one cheque.... which should raise eyebrows, questions and alarm bells.

One cheque is what should have raised the questions.

He did it in a transparent manner, Elections Alberta knows about it and have said it was okay. Where is the problem?

Elections Alberta doesn't know if it came in one cheque or 10.

I kind of get the feeling that you'd have raised just as big of a stink if everyone in Katz's family had had cut a cheque for $30k. I'm sure the talk then would have been "Yeah, we all know where that money really came from, how shady is that? If he wanted to donate all that money why didn't he just cut one cheque himself".

The fact of the matter is there are any number of ways Katz could have done what he did, and he chose the most transparent honest way of doing it, yet that is somehow a probelm?

I think I've been pretty clear; it's only a problem if there was only one source for the funds and he asked for 10+ receipts to people to whom never had the money in their hands.

As I understand it Brian Mason has now asked Elections Alberta to conduct a full investigation.

Personally I think the bigger story is the huge decline in donations to the PC and the fact that they ran a deficit.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by First Lady

Here is exactly what I said:




One cheque is what should have raised the questions.



Elections Alberta doesn't know if it came in one cheque or 10.



I think I've been pretty clear; it's only a problem if there was only one source for the funds and he asked for 10+ receipts to people to whom never had the money in their hands.

As I understand it Brian Mason has now asked Elections Alberta to conduct a full investigation.

Personally I think the bigger story is the huge decline in donations to the PC and the fact that they ran a deficit.

And yet you didn't make a thread about that. Interesting.