Wow . . . only Conservatives ?

The Liberals, who invented corruption, will be mighty pissed off when they learn they are being deprived of this opportunity.

Good job MSM for finding this loophole. I am sure that now all parties will quickly pass legislation to close it. (Snicker)

Given their fundraising problems, it may have been in the best interest of the Liberals to ask their media buddies to keep this quiet. That way they wouldn't have to continue soliciting support from children and dead people.

*
A similar piece of stellar reportage by Toronto's Red Star,
headlined... "Driver dies after clash with police."

Here's what actually happened courtesy of the National Post...

"The boyfriend called police shortly after 6 p.m. on Sunday
to report that his distraught girlfriend had left in a vehicle
and was reportedly armed."

"Two hours later, plainclothes officers found her in a car,
stopped at a traffic light at Bloor Street and Prince Edward
Drive."

She had shot herself in the head.

*

CTV is beginning to out-suck the CBC.

If it is a true loophole then it should be shut.

The Libs cant raise money to save their lives....the faster they do thi sthe better.

However, I cant remeber the lberal structure, I wasnt sure whether the ridings had more autonomy in that money in the riding association doesnt make its way up to national coffers.

I think Tory ones do.....but I could be wrong.

One way or another, lock it down....as well I would be curious if this is how it was originally written or if this was an ammendment that was added?

I commented on the article mentioning that Liberal and NDP supporters could use it to and accused them of bias. They posted my comment but snipped the accusation of bias.

Also, to make it even worse, the loophole was not created by the CPC. The liberals created it in 2004 when they lowered the $2000 limit per riding to $200. And there is no evidence that the loophole has been used by any party.

This post is proof positive that right wingers are way too THIN SKINNED! - They can dish it out but they sure can't take it!!!! Get real ... the reported used the CPC in the report because you do happen (unfortunately) to be the party in power for the time being! Sheeeeeeesh ... lighten up a bit!

I wrote a respectful comment that has not been posted, and I wrote feedback on the article. I suggest others so the same. The fact is this limit is set to reduce unnecessary redtape, not to allow violations of donation limits. This article is pure slander

Yeah right whatever.....

I guess the loophole exists - BUT if you wanted to claim the tax benefit, wouldn't CRA be suspicious of someone who submitted more than $1100 in total contribution receipts?

There may not be any "proof" its been used, because a) no one is actively looking for it, b) it would take a lot of Access to Info requests, and c) probably needs a forensic audit.

Hey, leftass, there was no need to metion *any* party specifically because this can be used by *any* party not just the one in power. Get it now. It's one thing to be 'thin skinned' but another to be completely 'moronic'..learn to comprehend the point better.

leftdog,

You don't get it do you? the media would not have said "a liberal supporter could.." if the liberals were in power.

They sniped at the CPC in a hard news story. This is manipulative, partisan and dishonest.

But given that you're a leftard, I don't expect you to understand.

Atrocious reporting.

Firstly on the Liberal bias by stating only Conservative Party supporters would donate more more than the legal limit.

Secondly, on calling it a loophole. There is no loophole. Loopholes are legal ways of getting around the spirit of the law. Donating $60,000 in $199.99 increments is STILL ILLEGAL!!!! Therefore no loophole exists.

Forget about complaining to CTV. Here's the address of the CRTC.
http://www.crtc.gc.ca/RapidsCCM/warning.asp?lang=E

I mentioned a few of the more obvious liberal scams, Adscam, Joe Volpe, the forgivable loans, etc. that would actually have fit quite well into the loophole story.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is NOT a loophole. It is illegal to donate more than the maximum amount to any one political party. What CTV (and the G&M) is insinuating is that there was intent to commit criminal activity by conservative party supporters, colluded by the government.

This is implicit slander, for which a class-action suite ought to be brought.

Less implicit is the shrill suggestion by these addlepated sycophants that anyone that gives to a political party must be barcoded, that a database must be set up for every person that wants to give a dime to a political hack, that the sums must be totaled and that people be declared honest, not presumed so.

This is utterly appalling. Their default presumption is guilt, without evidence of criminal activity, without being charged for a crime.

I bet this came to their attention after an LPC apperatchik spotted the hole the day the reforms were released and mentioned it to "Ginger" Oliver at a local LPC fund raiser.....shall we audit LPC and CPC for this?

Which party do suppose has already used the loophole?...want to start a pool?

I simply don't trust ANY political party.Subsequently,I don't usually trust any individual who is naive and stupid enough to blindly trust any political party.
All the more reason I find the following post to CTV both hilarious and disturbing with it's stink of liberal arrogance and entitlement.

"Let's keep in mind that this isn't a government-created loophole but one put in place by the political Conservative Party while in (temporary) power."

It is time to find an alternative to this infantile,divisive,paralyzing and extremely wasteful party system,IMO.

And no...I don't see any loophole here either.But then the political left seems to have much different definitions of legal and illegal than I.

Further, if this example of obvious bias ever actually became a story itself in the MSM, it would likely be spun as an indication of how the Prime Minister and CPC have a poor relationship with the media. The talking head would gravely intone that it's all because the PM doesn't like the MSM for some unfathomable reason...

Gaak.

The original Globe and Mail article, referred to by the CTV is here.

Only the truly blind would deny that the CTV has deliberately torqued the story, written by their affiliate, to be a hit on the Cons.

i went over to the G&M i looked at the comments on their site, Unfrigginbelieveable. The G&M has just succeeded in accusing the tories of unscroupulus activity & got away with it by enciting the typical, Bush harper, Cons are crooks, Harper liar, goes on & on.
few comments re: applies to all.
Then i got to the bottom, "Comments Closed"
Damage done

CTV has changed the story to remove the CPC logo and change the text to "a political party supporter"

well done all

Bart,

Can you read?

The Grope and Wail had "anyone can" and the propagandist scum at CTV had "a conservative can"

See the difference?

If the law allows for it, then it's not illegal.

One line of my comments to CTV was posted but edited. Most of the post was missing. Guess they didn't like comments such as 'blatantly biased anti-Conservative reporting' and 'CTV IMHO means Con The Viewer'. They even cut 'Why wasn't the Liberal party used in this report?'
Seems they are a bit touchy.

Puhlease. It's the CPC Accountability Act with a hole in it, thus they used the CPC as an example. The link is easy to see, save for the nutbar confirmation bias.

The CTV has been a part of classic left-lib MSM for as long as I can remember.

As far as campaign finance restrictions go, they all suck. The Charlottetown Accord proved that you can't buy elections. This is just classic poor legislation and the unintended consequences thereof.

Conservatives need to learn that there is no right way of doing the wrong thing.

"Accountability Act with a hole in it,"

Yeah, because wherever there is the Liberal party you better shut tighter any possible holes in case money starts flowing through it to more Liberal bag-men..... A party that can sign up dead people (Volpe Ghosts..cough cough)has to be controlled like children.... LOL

Extra, Extra, read all about it!

Consevatives moved to take advantage of LOOPHOLE in May!

All for $4399.78 more:

http://www.democraticreform.gc.ca/eng/media.asp?id=1380

For those who say it's the CPC Accountability Act, I suggest some fact-checking. It is not their Accountability Act; the Liberal Senate, which worked on it for a year, drastically revised it, taking out most of the accountability procedures - including removing the section that would have made the Senate accountable to an external reviewer.

Therefore, to state "It's the CPC Accountability Act' is invalid.

The fact that CTV has now changed the story to acknowledge that it enables ALL political parties to donate to local ridings separately from their party donations, doesn't change the fact that their original intention was to damage the Conservatives. Not to report facts.

If I had something so utterly f*cking stupid to say,I'd call myself'anon'too.

Hey folks, check it out: as of 2:20pm the Conservative 'C' is off the web page, replaced with a loonie -- a good start.

As well, the story itself appears to have been rewritten age and the article has been somewhat rewritten, removing the words "A Conservative supporter..." Now we have: "A political party supporter could theoretically donate more than $60,000 over the legal limit under a recently discovered loophole, according to a newspaper report." ...it goes on from there.

Good job to everyone who worked to get this corrected.

CTV just changed their story! Now it has a picture of a loony instead of a conservative party logo, and it begins:

A political party supporter could theoretically donate more than $60,000 over the legal limit under a recently discovered loophole, according to a newspaper report.

You don't think it was all the abuse they took in their viewer comments, do you?

I scooped you by 1 minute, Kate.

In an unrelated story, :)

Journalists are being evicted by RCMP officers from the lobby of the hotel in Charlottetown where the federal Conservative party is holding its annual summer caucus.

Plainclothes Mounties, and the hotel manager, told reporters that the Prime Minister's Office had requested all media be barred from the premises, where the Tories began three days of meetings this morning.

The notice came after Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor gave a relaxed and cogent defence of the government's Afghanistan policy to a small group of reporters in the hotel lobby.

The Conservatives have set up a media room in a Government of Canada office across the street from the hotel, and have promised to bring MPs to the building for interviews "where appropriate."

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070801/journalists_evicted_070801/20070801?hub=Canada

(TP) CTV reporters are actually Liberal Party of Canada agents who are using the cloak of journalism to disguise the true nature of their mission, according to a series of comprehensive examinations by citizen bloggers and media think tanks.

What was once just a widely-held suspicion seems to have been confirmed by by the existence of dozens of incidents in which CTV news stories closely resembled, to the point of being almost identical, the talking points of the Liberal Party of Canada.

In some cases "reporters" pre-released as news talking points that later proved to be central pillars of the LPC'S next campaign.

According to PMT, a prominent international media think tank, Canada's journalism has fallen into disgrace because of some unique factors, including the omerta among Canadian journalists preventing them from reporting on the nature and practices of its most obviously partisan and activist reporters, and the unwritten rule among Canadian journalists that you should never mention the known personal relationships -- whether involving friendship or marriage -- of reporters to high-ranking members of the LPC.

PMT suggests that the combination of the lack of any law in Canada banning party insiders from posing as reporters has combined with reporters' silence about their own party affiliations to create a "perfect storm of journalistic fraudulence" at CTV.

Oh I'm sure there is a pamphlet on how to hide political donations through loopholes and dirty tricks to be found in every con MP's riding office. It'll be found right next the pamphlet on delaying tactics in committee or how to make your competition appear to be a bigger slime ball than you are.

Does Joe Volpe and his friends at Apotex know about this?

Okay kids: If a supporter gives $199 x 308 ridings, and the supporter has a wife and six kids and they give the same ($199 x 308 ridings x 7), how many bags do they have to leave under the restaurant table?

My annoyance at this story was tempered by my curiosity about how long it would last once SDA pointed out the bias. Good work.
As for those who claimed it didn't matter; well, CTV changed it, so draw your own conclusions.

The media serves up reports on actual Liberal malfeasance and fictional Conservative malfeasance -- and call it balanced reporting. They would like to be able to report on actual Conservative malfeasance, but they have to work with the material at hand.

Bravo SDA!

It's nice to see that our efforts can actually effect change even if it's small.

Is it too much to hope that they've learned a valuable lesson and will avoid similar mistakes in the future?

"Update - SDA gets results!"

Good job, Kate!

Hey LeftLapDog... if it was just a matter of thin-skinned right-wingers, then why did CTV change it? Looks like they blinked.

Has CTV done one story on the illigal un accountable slush fund that liberal Daltoon McLiar is presently using to spray my money at every lib bagman/special interest group jerkwad in Ontario?
Even one?
Liberals caught stealing again, so of course CTV finds it their duty to make up a story of how only conservatives can find a loophole that the liberals created.

Please sue them to death.

If anyone knows loopholes it's Liberals, problem is they've run out of loopholes, used them all up and have no power to create any more. More's the pity and wow, are they sore heads.

So, before getting your shorts in a knot, tell me, how many liberals will donate to every riding, especially in AB. It seems they don't even donate to their own MP. Same goes for conservativs in Ont. Who, would donate to all ridings in Quebec. But, the 200.00 rule was handy for PMSHs leadership. Most of his donations were under that amount. How do you keep track of how much is raised by passing the hat, bucket, etc. at dinners, speeches etc. And, who has an extra 61,000 to waste (other than liberals trying to hide illegal cash grabs)
However, I do know that many alberta conservatives donated to Ont conservative riding associations.

excellent catch kate. i wonder how we could compile similar bias'es of the media and submit them to the CRTC and call for a inquiry similar the one being conducted against the BBC for there less than unbiased slant. not sure if it could be directed to the private sector but the CBC could certainly use the scrutiny.

CTV(tass) has stepped right into CBCpravdas shoes.

CBCPravda , all liberal all the time.

when is Tass news agency putting out the apology?

Good work SDA! The CTV are gushing from their gills about the fate of Conrade Black right now. Show their envy with every word. They are pathetic.

Someone just got their ass handed to them by a dog breeder-artist from small town Sask.Come on MSM,keep on under estimating the power of the blogs.Especially one where the host is smarter than the shysters and thats what they are.CTV should move to Florida where all the rag sheets exist.Then they could report on alien abductions and honest reporters and the latter being proof that no one should take them seriously.

CTV has become a joke. From Sandy's silly editorializing and Carleton School of Journalism lead-ins, to Lloyd's slightly glazed smile and the obvious anti Tory, Bushchimphitler etc. etc. slant, I cannot sit through the National anymore. Their programming is simply restreamed dreck from the US with Idol (a US spinoff). Stop watching folks. Better news is on the web or (I never thought I'd say it) the CBC and better yet on TVO.

The best revenge is to turn the idiots off. Let them broadcast their badly researched crap in their echo chamber. Slip in a DVD. Cancel your Globe subscription. Read a book. Conrad's bio of a certain well received US President is good.

Why are journalists allowed to breathe our air?

Thanks for pointing out the post Kate. I made sure I sent my comments in.

One thing that continues to annoy me is the anonymous postings by "reporters" for CTV. I though that reporters would be proud to display their stories with their by-line. In fact, I think it should be a requirement to indicate who wrote a particular article. If an editor significantly edited a piece that should also be reflected.

That being said - I don't get paid to blog, so you don't need my whole name. (As long as we are clear on my hypocrisy.)

*
"leftbot said... This post is proof positive that
right wingers are way too THIN SKINNED!"

yup... that's why ctv changed the article -
not because they got caught with their pants
down, but because some silly conservative's
feelings were being hurt.

they're so considerate that way.

what a dope.

*

CTV had their business 'guru' reporting on Cameco a few days ago, she mentioned that they had some water problems at one of their facilities, actually the new billion dollar Cigar Lake mine flooded and production will be delayed at least two years.
Then she explained how uranium had risen from $8.00 an ounce to $130.00 an ounce in the last few years. That would be fantastic if true, too bad it is priced at $130.00 a pound, not an ounce.
She looked about as sharp as the edge of town.

Good one Kate.

Is there any doubt that had not this been outed, that the torqued version of this story would have had big play on the CTV National News at 11 tonight?

Those on this thread who claim this was a tempest in a teacup have been proven wrong.

(wnc: I concur that Rinaldo's editorializing is over the top and also that the CBC is, on a relative scale, a better news source than CTV/Grope and Flail.)

I've noticed that as of late, CTV is spinning its wheels and is acting more and more like the idiots at CBC. Who in the msm can we trust anymore?

I think Leftdog was right. Just look at the insults fly! Righties can dish it but they sure can't take it! lol

I notice their comments section has been paralyzed at 22 for some time now.

Now why might that be?

Pete: take what? you are brain dead. this is all about dishing it out to liberals, not taking any. you can return to your alternate universe now.

Pete doesn't even have to practice missing the point or finding someone else that shares his talent.

I protest Kate's clear anti-Liberal bias. Individuals don't donate to the Liberals - just people like Power Corp, big banks, and miscellaneous advertising firms.

They steal the rest from the West and public coffers and well you get the picture.

Does that mean that the CTV thinks conservatives are a bunch of loons?

CBC/CTV all the same, all Lefty, all the time, working like hell to get the Corruption Party back in power.

CTV 's legal "expert" is Paula Todd, what's to say?
CBC feeds us crap from the likes of Avi Lewis. What's left that isn't Left?

CTV(tass) will listen more than CBCpravda- Tass relies on advertizing not megahandouts like Pravda. just stop buying their advertised goods, when the mess tips over in a year or so, maybe even pravda will get the picture.

Best to just grab your news from the net...makes it easier to read thru the bs. Please tell me Paula Todd isn't their legal expert Liz J. YeeGads

It takes a country to raise a citizenry.

Thank you, Kate, for your boundless work thereto.

Attend closely, yea children and Leftards. Verily hath Torstar Communications Ltd. released its earnings for the quarter.

"The company's Metroland group of community newspapers should also see growth, while the Toronto Star continues to endure "challenging revenue trends," Prichard said.

Torstar said revenue at its newspapers and digital unit grew C$5.3 million to C$281 million. At its book publishing unit, revenue was $116 million, up from C$114.6 million a year earlier.

The newspapers and digital segment's operating profit was C$37 million, up from C$34.9 million. However, excluding the impact of the Weekly Scoop, which stopped publishing in June 2006, the operating profit actually fell $1 million, Torstar said.

That happened because savings from lower newsprint, labor and pension costs weren't enough to offset the Star's lower revenue and spending on new markets, products and the digital business."

Meaning nobody is reading the Toronto (Red) Star.

SuPrize suPrize!

CTV are a bunch of maroons. And, the accountability act is a joke.

Considering the amount of power and money at stake do you really think that a bunch of jackals are going to follow either the letter or the spirit of all your little rules and guidelines?

No one needs an "accountability act" to watch over their own money when they keep it in their own pocket.

Congratulations on getting the crazies to change this one! Ridiculous that they could get away with it in the first place....

Media bias in action (check the end of the post):

"Training the ANA: MND O'Connor tells the simple truth"
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/08/training-ana-mnd-oconnor-tells-simple.html

Mark
Ottawa

Loophole or not, bias or not, this does benefit the CPC, because they are the party of voter based cash support.

In the old world, the Libs counted on corporate donations and have not yet figured out that liberal voters are not liberal with their cash. Liberals depend on and expect government largess, and it is not a two way street. The NDP counted on union dues for their primary source of support, so realistically the only party to get support of this nature (though very unlikely) is the CPC.

And remember, the original electoral financial reforms were put in place by JC principally to handicap PM, the tories merely reduced the amounts. This is one place where JC's vindictive nature has backfired big time on "Canada's Natural Governing Party". HA HA HA

Never before has the common citizen had so much power in calling the media's bias and spin into question.

Keep it up MSM ---- some day you may be hit with a lawsuit.

Way to go Kate and sda. CTV is starting to look like a dead skunk in the middle of the road.

It doesn't matter your party affiliation, the CBCs and CTVs and Pravdas of the world are a danger to us all. Just ask the citizens of the former USSR, Poland, Czech Republic, ect. Their media pulled-the-wool-over-their-eyes for decades. Paid dearly for it --- and are still paying for it. I would hope nobody wants to join them.

Was the same original story in print ?? Would take a tanker of white-out !!

I think "Leftdog" is probably some pissed off journalist that that's disappointed that this absurd and blatant attempt at smearing & propaganda didn't succeed.

It's so nice knowing that the way news organizations are losing money across the board that soon these useless, biased, elitist dicks will be flipping burgers somewhere.

Now the CTV is in a flap over the Charlottetown meetings...poll up:
Should the RCMP have been used to remove media from hotel lobby?

Water cannons, dogs and fiberglass batons should have been used to remove the media from the lobby.

I'm sick of the news media blubbering about how hard done by they are. Get over it you jerks.

Maybe when you stop your attempts to sway public opinion politically then maybe people will stop hating you.

Don't news agencies have ombudsmen (ombudsperson) who are supposed to deal with this type of thing.

I know it's probably a waste of time, but surely she is so eggregious that is deserves a report.

I will send an email with a link to this site and a screen capture.

Crazy!

VF,did you happen to catch the National,re:RCMP removal of "journalists?"...Travers column tomorrow should be a dandy!They showed him being turfed(and who better?)..he was yelling something about the "Gulag"..highly insulted and pissed off.Too bad Jimmy Boy,after the filth you spit out,it's a wonder you were allowed in the province!

I haven't read all the articles so someone may have already brought this up. The liberals website constantly lets thier readership know that they can contribute the maximum to 1, A candidate of thier choice,2,the liberal party as a whole,3,any of the liberal leadership candidates. If you could really contribute the max to every candidate I am sure the libs would be all over it. So on this story I have to call shenanigans.As always I may be wrong but.......What this story does highlight is the ongoing problem with the media as unofficial oppposition that has taken root in Canada. It is no wonder that the conservative party is still in a dead heat with the "natural governing party",every story accentuates the "good" liberals and denigrates the "bush-like neo-con" consevatives. I hope Harper does something about the cbc,ctv is out of his reach.

Maybe MSM is thinking that they can raise their profile by having activists and reporting on the their own activists.

Good idea! Go MSM go! Really, what do subscribers and advertisers know about journalism.

Lori, the CBC Ombudsman, er Ombuds-toady, is an EMPLOYEE of the CBC, who, BTW, also used to work for the CBC as a journalist, I believe.

So, just how objective is Vince Carlin? It's still worth a paper trail--send a copy of your CTV complaint to Bev Oda too--but the chances of ever having the MSM admit a wrongdoing are about zilch.

E.g., In nearly three decades of filing complaints with the CBC (paper trail, remember), I've been assessed correct exactly NO times! What are the odds? It's pretty well a game now to see how they'll spin their smarmy, brain dead answers. If I were a grown up--I don't think journalists are these days: most are spoiled brats--I'd be altogether embarrassed to have my organization send out the drivel they do to cover my sorry butt.

The reason they used the Conservatives as an example instead of the Liberals is because the Liberals are only running in 307 ridings, not 308. The reporter realized this, but he just didn't want to have to redo all of that complex multiplication again.

Is this true?

The Harper government rejected opposition calls yesterday to give Elections Canada new tools to detect multiple donations to a political party's riding associations that could cumulatively exceed the legal limit by more than $60,000.

"For God's sake, this loophole has to be plugged," New Democrat MP Pat Martin said. "We can't go into an election campaign with this kind of imbalance. It could be happening all over the place."

The Globe and Mail reported yesterday that Elections Canada cannot track or cross-check donations to riding associations of less than $200. As a result, a donor could send dozens of contributions to riding associations that, put together, widely exceed the legal limit of $1,100 a year.

With 308 ridings across the country, a series of $199.99 cheques to each one would total $61,596.92, and could go undetected.

Print Edition - Section Front
Enlarge Image

More National Stories
Scouting's new motto: Be prepared for diversity
Die hard or get soaked, as Street Wars wash over downtown
Journalists booted from Tory retreat
Slain couple's pickup ditched a week ago
Ottawa refuses to close donation loophole
Website lists Montreal event as place to ogle little girls
Go to the National section
Conservative House Leader Peter Van Loan issued a statement yesterday reminding Canadians that exceeding the $1,100 limit is illegal.

"This is no more a loophole than the fact that someone can break the law by fraudulently misstating their income on their income tax," he said. "In both cases the law is broken and individuals are subject to serious consequences for doing so."

The Liberal Party said it has internal controls in place to prevent a donor from breaking the Elections Act. It said it uses a centralized receipt system that tracks all donations, regardless of their amount or destination.

Still, Liberal officials acknowledge that the loophole was created by their 2003 reform to the Elections Act. Party officials, however, said the likelihood of people abusing it is greater now that the Conservatives have lowered the annual maximum donation from $5,200 to $1,100.

Meanwhile, some of the Conservative MPs gathered for their annual summer retreat in Charlottetown said there were reasons why 60 per cent of them were not included on Elections Canada's roster of people who donated more than $200 to the party last year.

Environment Minister John Baird said he used to donate $1,000 to the party every year in addition to donations to his own election campaigns. But when he was the minister responsible for shepherding the government's centrepiece Accountability Act through Parliament, "I did not do any fundraising personally ... as I didn't want to be singled out for passing the hat one last time under the old rules."

Conservative MP Steven Fletcher said his lack of a donation might have been an oversight. "Also I'm not a wealthy individual," he said.

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Rona Ambrose looked surprised when she was told that she did not appear on the databases.

"The SPCA is our first [place] to donate," Ms. Ambrose joked.

Conservative MP Dave Batters said the main reason he did not donate in 2006 was that his wife took two months off from her law practice to help him out on his election campaign.

Almost all Liberal MPs, except Ottawa-area MP David McGuinty and new recruit Garth Turner, are listed by Elections Canada as Liberal donors in 2006. The Liberals were helped by the fact that the entrance fee to last year's Liberal leadership convention in Montreal constituted an official donation to their party.

NDP Leader Jack Layton gave $5,200 to his party last year. The 27 other MPs in his caucus also donated more than $200 to the NDP, according to Elections Canada.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe gave $2,500 to his party. Of the remaining 47 Bloc MPs, all gave more than $200 except for Serge Cardin, Roger Gaudet, Raymond Gravel, Yvon Lévesque and Thierry St-Cyr.

As a one-time Conservative fiscal supporter, I think that there might be a bit of a panic in CPC's accounting department as people like me have been returning their pleas for contributions without a check inside, but with a terse note pointing out the true cost of the Income Trust fiasco, and the fact that the Halloween surprise was based on "facts" that have now been shown to be nothing more than propaganda.

As soon as Harper and Flaherty see the light and get back to keeping promises, the CPC's problem with cash flow might be alleviated.

"As soon as Harper and Flaherty see the light and get back to keeping promises, the CPC's problem with cash flow might be alleviated."

I don't think they have a cash problem. I suspect the Conservatives don't want the loophole closed because they're using it. Does anyone remember just 6 months ago when the Conservatives fianally fessed up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations they didn't report? After months of denying it. Harper himself gave more than allowed. I looked up the figures they didn't report. An additional $539,915 in previously unreported donations, an extra $913,710 in "other revenue," and an additional $1.45 million in "other expenses" which they never explained. On top of that there was 700,000 in additional donations to riding associations. They said they didn't know about the rules that had been in place for decades and didn't realize they had to report it.
Sure.

tracking donations. how many years have we been tracking the lieberal kickback scheme and when are we going to track the refund owed the Canadian Taxpayer by the Liberal Party of Canada

"Dat is not fair, we take dat money unner da table when mssr cretian wuz in powar, we do not owe dis pipples annie ting" Borat Dion

If anyone knows loopholes it's Liberals

Should I infer that the Libs are the party for lawyers and accountants while the conservatives are tilted towards engineers and blue-collar types?

Not to slight any particular stereotype, but which of the two groups actually *make* stuff?

I'd rather try to teach accounting to an engineer than try to teach engineering to an accountant, if you know what I mean.

Sammy mentioned Jimmy Travers got booted out of the of ye olde Hotel Charlottetown, must have been a big boot for his big ass. Oh to have been there to cheer!
Wonder if he and Gloriaceous Gallaway, she was pissed too, went off to cry in their beer and write the nasties, all lies of course.
They were there to act like the nincompoops they are, proving repeatedly they're journalists of a very low caliber, showing their biases with every utterance.

The old Slop Pail will be churning for days.

Loophole, yes. Legal, yes. Evidence this has actually been done by anyone, in any party - zero.

MSM garbage and incompetence on display.

Shamrock.

Do you consider tax evasion a loophole? Do you think that it's only illegal if you get caught?

Why would penalties and possible jail time be the price to pay for a loophole if it wasn't illegal?

It's illegal. However, Elections Canada won't investigate unless someone complains that someone is violating the rules. In other words, you can probably get away with it. Just like some forms of tax evasion. But it doesn't make it legal.

The best way to combat the MSM is to make every biased report have a dollar value that is considered a contribution to the party portrayed in a possitive light or in a negative light then the value is considered a contribution to the other parties divided by the number of seats each party holds. The hatchet piece with the Conservative logo could have a value of say $1,000,000.00. Divide the million dollars by the number of seats of the opposition and that is the amount of money CTV donated to the political process. A neutral comment would not be considered a donation since all are helped/hurt equally. Factual reporting of misdeeds of MP's, Ministers or governments would be in the public intrest and not considered a donation. If the dollar value exceeds the donation level set by parliment then CTV is held in contempt of Elections Canada laws and suitably punished. Maybe the loss of broadcast license for a considerable length of time would be adequate to get their attention.

Joe.

Interesting idea. Who would have the job of determining if an article was biased or not? Would that also apply to articles that are clearly marked personal opinion pieces? Articles are written by people and most people are biased in some form or another - whether intentional or not. That will always be the case as long as people report the news. It's a Free Press. I don't want some gov't agency controlling the news or fining news outlets or shutting them down for not reporting it the way they think they should. Voice your opinions if you don't like the way they report things. I don't want to live in a country where the gov't censors the news in the way you're suggesting.

Actually Leslie the intent would be to stop the hatchet pieces like the one in this posting. When the media could use generic but uses specific in order to hurt one party or benefit another the broadcasters complaints commision should have no problem sorting it out.

I still don't think we need someone investigating this. CTV reported that the loophole was found because Tory MP's made several donations under the $200. that didn't show up as donations. This comment might insinuate that the Conservatives are taking advantage of the loophole. Perhaps it is biased to mention how they found it but it wouldn't upset me if they insinuated the Liberals were doing it because they found that they were making donations under the $200. that didn't show up. I certainly wouldn't think it worthy of complaining about media bias if those were the facts.

Under existing rules there already exists a broadcast standards committee. I am simply suggesting that this panel be given real teeth and vetting powers to examine complaints by parties slandered by biased journalism such as what we see this post. I would simply add extra incentives to keep reporting fair. Actual misdeeds like the Liberals stealing money would not come under this review only attempts by the media to slant the news in favour of one party or another.

Most people can read or hear the news and decide whether it's biased or not. The Globe and Mail is biased. The National is biased. The Sun papers are biased. Local papers are biased. Newscasters on the Radio are biased. How large would this department have to be to take all the complaints coming from the left and the right on media political bias? Some complaints would be legitimate. Many would not. How far would it go?

In an ideal world only the actual facts would be reported with no slant. It's never going to be that way. I don't want a gov't department trying to control bias. We have enough gov't control. I'm fully aware that the media is slanted in one way or another and take that into consideration when reading the news. I don't need the gov't protecting me from biased news reporting but I respect your right to feel otherwise.

Theres a loon on the back of the canadian dollar but thats the bird varaiaty more intellegent that any liberal