Alberta Grits are demanding an overhaul of the province's election finances disclosure law after Elections Alberta revealed the Tories haven't filed required financial reports for nearly two decades. "There needs to be a complete review and overhaul," said Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald. "Things have to be more tightly controlled and they have to be more rigidly enforced." MacDonald was stunned to discover yesterday that the Tory party failed to file mandatory reports to Elections Alberta since 1987 and no one noticed until he asked to see the documents.
Why is this surprising? A failed influence peddling scheme a few weeks ago gathered what, 2 days of press coverage and a sheepish withdrawl from the new premier. And not even a thread on CP!
What exactly are the rules regarding funding in Alberta.
I am thinking there are no reasons for the Torries to have put anything in place so I am just wondering what might be in there - its likely legeslation from the 1970's.
What exactly are the rules regarding funding in Alberta.
I am thinking there are no reasons for the Torries to have put anything in place so I am just wondering what might be in there - its likely legeslation from the 1970's.
MYK
The situation involves a secret "foundation fund" the party was allowed to keep after the financial disclosure law was passed in 1978, provided it filed annual reports on transfers from it. Deputy Electoral Officer Bill Sage told the Sun he failed to notice that the statements stopped coming.
Why is this surprising? A failed influence peddling scheme a few weeks ago gathered what, 2 days of press coverage and a sheepish withdrawl from the new premier. And not even a thread on CP!
Hey Lurch, what is this about a failed influence peddling scheme? I don't live in Alberta so I don't always hear what is going on...
Hey Lurch, what is this about a failed influence peddling scheme? I don't live in Alberta so I don't always hear what is going on...
The gist of it is that the party was holding its $500/plate fundraiser, but if you threw in a 'donation' of at least $5000 you were given personal access to the premier (for nothing more than friendly conversation, according to the party!). The purpose was to pay off leadership contest bills for a number of candidates.
The gist of it is that the party was holding its $500/plate fundraiser, but if you threw in a 'donation' of at least $5000 you were given personal access to the premier (for nothing more than friendly conversation, according to the party!). The purpose was to pay off leadership contest bills for a number of candidates.
INfluence peddling is a bit harsh. To be more charitable I would suggest it was a new administration that does not have a sufficiently calibrated "political optics" vision yet. This was just a bad idea that should have been killed before it got in the wild but the people in charge were distracted by setting up a government. It was an embarrassing lesson to learn but at least it was learned early.
INfluence peddling is a bit harsh. To be more charitable I would suggest it was a new administration that does not have a sufficiently calibrated "political optics" vision yet. This was just a bad idea that should have been killed before it got in the wild but the people in charge were distracted by setting up a government. It was an embarrassing lesson to learn but at least it was learned early.
I would love to have government listen to my thoughts, but I prefer to ddo it a bit more of the conventional way. Plus I don't have 5 grand kicking around. What a joke.
INfluence peddling is a bit harsh. To be more charitable I would suggest it was a new administration that does not have a sufficiently calibrated "political optics" vision yet. This was just a bad idea that should have been killed before it got in the wild but the people in charge were distracted by setting up a government. It was an embarrassing lesson to learn but at least it was learned early.
Harsh? Maybe, but anywhere other than Alberta and it could have been enough to seriously damage the government. They were planning to sell access to the premier - not sure what else you can call it but selling influence.
Harsh? Maybe, but anywhere other than Alberta and it could have been enough to seriously damage the government. They were planning to sell access to the premier - not sure what else you can call it but selling influence.
Yeah, it does come across that way....drop 5 grand and suddenly he is all yours? (that sounds kinda interesting worded that way ) - especially considering who can, in all likelihood afford that 5 grand in the first place...
Alta Tories haven't filed financial reports since '87?
) - especially considering who can, in all likelihood afford that 5 grand in the first place...
