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

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Slava

Thats what I thought. So basically the entire donation could still be legit...just distasteful.

If by legit you mean legal, yes it could be since the legislation is not so clear. It does not say that you cannot give a cheque for $430K, or $300K, or even $90K, and then receive back-dated receipts to spread out the money amongst your family and dependant employees, for the mere purpose of complying with the legislation. There is no mechanism to ensure, in that situation, that the money actually came from those other people.

If by legit you mean, a genuine donation meant to stop the scourge of the Wildrose as they were surging at the expense of the PC's, as Katz' staff has suggested, well, unfortunately we live in a world where some people might believe that. But that never happened. This was a massive donation in the weaning hours of the campaign just after the Wildrose screwed themselves due to two awful candidates. At the time the donation was made the Wildrose campaign was already imploding.

If by legit you mean merely distasteful, well, you have a gift for understatment.

The more I look into this the more I think it demonstrates corruption. We are being asked to believe that this single cheque did not raise any eyebrows such that even the PC leadership was not made aware? Not possible, not credible, not true.

If this is "legit" there are no spending cap limits for political donations in Alberta. The legislation itself is a sham.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Slava

Thats what I thought. So basically the entire donation could still be legit...just distasteful.

Not if it was one cheque.

Section 34 states that parties cannot “solicit or knowingly accept any contribution” that doesn’t actually come from the contributor’s pocket.

No way in hell that anyone believes all those people gave their money to Katz so he could write a single cheque. If he had given them the money and then they turned around and donated it would be an end run around the law.

[Slava]

I guess I just think that there are a lot of unanswered questions here. I know that on a Flames board with the guy in question an Oilers owner this will go over like a lead balloon, but I actually feel a little bad for Katz. He (likely) wasn't trying to circumvent any laws and realistically probably didn't know the rules well if at all.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Delgar

The more I look into this the more I think it demonstrates corruption. We are being asked to believe that this single cheque did not raise any eyebrows such that even the PC leadership was not made aware? Not possible, not credible, not true.

Reford is on record saying she call all large donors. She can't claim too much innocence when she would have called 4 Katz, the company and then all the key associates.

Originally Posted by Slava

I guess I just think that there are a lot of unanswered questions here. I know that on a Flames board with the guy in question an Oilers owner this will go over like a lead balloon, but I actually feel a little bad for Katz. He (likely) wasn't trying to circumvent any laws and realistically probably didn't know the rules well if at all.

It's the Party's responsibility to educate people.

IF it was ONE cheque and OVER the limit, it's the party's duty to return it. If the person says "oh well its for Jack, Jane and Joe"; the party should really be asking for separate cheques.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Delgar

If by legit you mean, a genuine donation meant to stop the scourge of the Wildrose as they were surging at the expense of the PC's, as Katz' staff has suggested, well, unfortunately we live in a world where some people might believe that. But that never happened. This was a massive donation in the weaning hours of the campaign just after the Wildrose screwed themselves due to two awful candidates. At the time the donation was made the Wildrose campaign was already imploding.

If by legit you mean merely distasteful, well, you have a gift for understatment.

The more I look into this the more I think it demonstrates corruption. We are being asked to believe that this single cheque did not raise any eyebrows such that even the PC leadership was not made aware? Not possible, not credible, not true.

If this is "legit" there are no spending cap limits for political donations in Alberta. The legislation itself is a sham.

Not sure exactly what the timeline was for the donation but if in fact it was at the end of the campaign, the PC's had already spent approx $4 million on the campaign and had only received approx. $1.2 million in contributions. They had gone massively into debt trying to stem the tide of what appeared to be a winning WR campaign, and they were probably desperate for money.

Definitely doesn't pass the sniff test.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Not sure exactly what the timeline was for the donation but if in fact it was at the end of the campaign, the PC's had already spent approx $4 million on the campaign and had only received approx. $1.2 million in contributions. They had gone massively into debt trying to stem the tide of what appeared to be a winning WR campaign, and they were probably desperate for money.

Definitely doesn't pass the sniff test.

How did they go into debt? If they had the money in the bank (which by all accounts they did) they didn't go into debt at all.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Rerun

Not sure exactly what the timeline was for the donation but if in fact it was at the end of the campaign, the PC's had already spent approx $4 million on the campaign and had only received approx. $1.2 million in contributions. They had gone massively into debt trying to stem the tide of what appeared to be a winning WR campaign, and they were probably desperate for money.

Definitely doesn't pass the sniff test.

All reports are that it did come in the "eleventh hour" that's why they don't show up on the list the PC's released on E-day.... or at least that's the most logical explanation. Less desirable explanation is leaving them off of that list on purpose.

I highly doubt the PC's are in debt. The financials released only cover from March 23 to June 23. The had money in the bank going into election and they also had 3-4 Billion (IIRC) in investments. So probably not in debt, but good hole in their investments. Their win also means fundraising will be easier for them.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Slava

I guess I just think that there are a lot of unanswered questions here. I know that on a Flames board with the guy in question an Oilers owner this will go over like a lead balloon, but I actually feel a little bad for Katz. He (likely) wasn't trying to circumvent any laws and realistically probably didn't know the rules well if at all.

Oh come on.

If he wasn't trying to circumvent the rules he was certainly trying to stretch them to the breaking point. Regardless of Katz the PC Party knows the rules.

[Slava]

I think that some people don't realise how ambiguous these laws actually are. The municipal laws for example, which are supposed to be much tighter now than they were before have all kinds of holes in them. If you take out nomination papers, raise a bunch of money and then never file the nomination papers are you actually a candidate for the election? Common sense would say yes, but in reality by the letter of the law no one knows.

Provincially you have all kinds of loopholes and differing values. An individual can only give $2000 during the campaign period, but then can give money to the constituency association in the same year. This year the boundaries of the associations were changed (potentially) and that added a bit of a wrinkle as well. Then you have differing values for being able to donate to the party itself, and as we see here you have situations where a husband can donate, as can a wife and the rest of the family.

I am wholly against these arrangements. Like I say, just make it a straight dollar amount per entity/person. Will campaigns have a hard time buying signs and leaflets? Yes, absolutely. But then maybe we'll see more of a focus on earned media by the parties. Maybe (and this is really off the wall) we could have more than one debate and less cheesy photo-ops by the leaders?

[Jacks]

Just heard on the radio that Redford said she may have called Katz after the donation but she doesn't recall. She said she phoned about 50 people and he may have been on the list. If she did call him she doesn't recall the conversation.



I find it hard to believe that she doesn't remember, right near the end of the campaign, calling Katz, his wife, his father, his mother, etc. all with maximum donations. Give me a break.

[FanIn80]

I skim through this thread, and I all I think is...

Wildrose fanbois.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

How did they go into debt? If they had the money in the bank (which by all accounts they did) they didn't go into debt at all.

By debt I meant that campaign contributions didn't even come close to covering expenses.

[Azure]

No way in hell she doesn't remember calling Katz.

When someone provides the majority of your campaign donations, you remember calling him.

No I'm beginning to think she's outright lying.

[Dion]

“Although I am the leader of the party there is an administrative process that’s in place. There are people who do that work and it’s important for the chief electoral officer to be able to deal with those people, to ensure they’re getting the full facts,” said Redford following a speech at Bow Valley College’s annual premier’s scholarship luncheon.

Redford said she made around 50 calls thanking donors after the campaign. She said she believed she spoke to Katz but not his other associates who had made contributions

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...174/story.html

[Azure]

Yeah, just no way she doesn't remember it.

I know exactly when I deal with our biggest customer. Everyone in our company knows it. She's lying.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

I guess I just think that there are a lot of unanswered questions here. I know that on a Flames board with the guy in question an Oilers owner this will go over like a lead balloon, but I actually feel a little bad for Katz. He (likely) wasn't trying to circumvent any laws and realistically probably didn't know the rules well if at all.

A politically active billionaire who doesn't know the limits? Plausible, but man do you have to stretch to get there.

The timing of the donation lends weight to the argument he was trying to buy funding for his arena. One wonders if he wouldn't have tried a similar donation to Wildrose if they hadn't imploded?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I skim through this thread, and I all I think is...

Wildrose fanbois.

Nice to see you took a break from furiously masturbating over Apple's latest "It's bigger... but smaller" commercial to chime in.

[puckluck2]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

I skim through this thread, and I all I think is...

Wildrose fanbois.

iphonic.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

A politically active billionaire who doesn't know the limits? Plausible, but man do you have to stretch to get there.

The timing of the donation lends weight to the argument he was trying to buy funding for his arena. One wonders if he wouldn't have tried a similar donation to Wildrose if they hadn't imploded?

Well at that time you guys figured it was all wrapped up? Surely he would've seen the same polling and written a cheque to the Wildrose if he was trying to buy influence.

[monkeyman]

I honestly don't know how anyone can still support this party.
• This donation Fiasco. Redford definitely knew where it came from, how could she not. At a time when the Party was in desperate need for money…
• They’ve set the province up for a massive deficit based on $99 oil?
• There was the London Olympic fiasco where they paid for and forfeited almost 100g's for booked rooms.
• There's the whole Gary Mar transgression and quiet reinstatement.
• She awarded a law firm with connections to her and her husband a 10 billion dollar law suite against tobacco companies.
• She says she's going to due away with the MLA golden pension only to have her party quietly introduce a transition fund and paid retirement savings for MLA's.
• She approved a pay increase for all MLA's earlier this year of what 30%?
• There was the whole MLA's getting paid for meetings they hadn’t attended in years.
• I'm sure there's more.