An Alberta MLA is calling for increased accountability from Alberta politicians who, he has calculated, expensed almost $8 million in taxpayer subsidized donations since 2006 but were not required to report what the money was spent on.
In an open letter to Premier Ed Stelmach, Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald asked for amendments to Elections Alberta legislation that would make it mandatory for politicians to publicly disclose details of expenses over $375.
“All donations over $375 are disclosed publicly, why not all the expenses? There’s a runaway problem and it can be fixed easily with an amendment to the law,” says MacDonald.
“Taxpayers have the right to know where this money is going.”
MacDonald analyzed Elections Alberta financial reports and found that the majority of the spending was reported by constituency associations of the Progressive Conservatives, who spent more than $7.5 million since 2006.
By comparison, the Liberal constituency associations spent about $302,000 and the NDP spent about $142,000. The more recently formed Wildrose Alliance spent $284,000 in 2010 alone.
Currently, constituency associations are required under Alberta law to report how much they spend, but are not required to disclose what they spend it on.
“It is alarming, it is unacceptable, and it erodes further public confidence in the democratic process,” says MacDonald.
Canadian Taxpayers Federation Alberta director Scott Hennig says “more information should be made public rather than less.”
Hennig points out that most tax credits for political parties are higher than those for charities—something that needs to be re-evaluated.
“Any donation you make under the amount of $1,400 you’re going to get a higher tax credit giving it to a political party than you would giving it to a charity,” he says. “But we’d like to see that evened out to a lower level, because most [charitable] donations are not $1,400 plus, they’re under $1,400.”
Hennig notes that the U.S. has much stricter financial disclosure rules than Canada, where politicians are required to report expenses and make them available to the public upon request.
MacDonald says that other Western provinces, including British Columbia and Saskatchewan, require politicians to provide details on all their personal expenses.
“Other areas do it. I can’t understand why we cannot,” he says.
“Alberta has probably one of the weakest financial compliance regimes in the country: no spending limits, there are very few details that are required, and the office of Elections Alberta has very little power to request additional information.”
MacDonald alleges there has been much resistance to tightening the rules, citing the controversial dismissal of former Elections Alberta chief electoral officer Lorne Gibson.
When Gibson released damning reports on Alberta’s electoral process and made more than 100 recommendations on changes to the system—including improved financial disclosure policies—his contract was not renewed and he was let go.
Gibson later sued the province for wrongful dismissal.
Premier Ed Stelmach has not responded to MacDonald’s letter which was delivered on June 13, but his spokesman Cam Hantiuk has said it will be reviewed “in the fullness of time.”
In an open letter to Premier Ed Stelmach, Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald asked for amendments to Elections Alberta legislation that would make it mandatory for politicians to publicly disclose details of expenses over $375.
“All donations over $375 are disclosed publicly, why not all the expenses? There’s a runaway problem and it can be fixed easily with an amendment to the law,” says MacDonald.
“Taxpayers have the right to know where this money is going.”
MacDonald analyzed Elections Alberta financial reports and found that the majority of the spending was reported by constituency associations of the Progressive Conservatives, who spent more than $7.5 million since 2006.
By comparison, the Liberal constituency associations spent about $302,000 and the NDP spent about $142,000. The more recently formed Wildrose Alliance spent $284,000 in 2010 alone.
Currently, constituency associations are required under Alberta law to report how much they spend, but are not required to disclose what they spend it on.
“It is alarming, it is unacceptable, and it erodes further public confidence in the democratic process,” says MacDonald.
Canadian Taxpayers Federation Alberta director Scott Hennig says “more information should be made public rather than less.”
Hennig points out that most tax credits for political parties are higher than those for charities—something that needs to be re-evaluated.
“Any donation you make under the amount of $1,400 you’re going to get a higher tax credit giving it to a political party than you would giving it to a charity,” he says. “But we’d like to see that evened out to a lower level, because most [charitable] donations are not $1,400 plus, they’re under $1,400.”
Hennig notes that the U.S. has much stricter financial disclosure rules than Canada, where politicians are required to report expenses and make them available to the public upon request.
MacDonald says that other Western provinces, including British Columbia and Saskatchewan, require politicians to provide details on all their personal expenses.
“Other areas do it. I can’t understand why we cannot,” he says.
“Alberta has probably one of the weakest financial compliance regimes in the country: no spending limits, there are very few details that are required, and the office of Elections Alberta has very little power to request additional information.”
MacDonald alleges there has been much resistance to tightening the rules, citing the controversial dismissal of former Elections Alberta chief electoral officer Lorne Gibson.
When Gibson released damning reports on Alberta’s electoral process and made more than 100 recommendations on changes to the system—including improved financial disclosure policies—his contract was not renewed and he was let go.
Gibson later sued the province for wrongful dismissal.
Premier Ed Stelmach has not responded to MacDonald’s letter which was delivered on June 13, but his spokesman Cam Hantiuk has said it will be reviewed “in the fullness of time.”
