a quick perusal of the Elections Canada website tells a more fulsome story. The new election legislation requires detailed reporting of the financial status of every party beginning in 2004. The most recent annual financial update of each party gives us a glimpse into the precarious state of the Liberal Party treasury.
According to Elections Canada, in their last annual filing, the Liberal Party of Canada was $34,818,257.32 in debt, by way of 13 bank loans. The Bloc Quebecois has more than $10 million in outstanding loans, mostly from the Caisse Desjardins. The NDP has several modest loans outstanding, totalling a little more than $3 million.
The Conservatives are debt free.
Might explain why no one seems able to track down a copy of the cancelled Liberal Party sponsorship “refund” cheque.
I wouldn’t trust much that Sheila Copps writes. Just reading her column reminds me how thick she is. She evidently doesn’t know what the word “fulsome” means. Doesn’t the paper edit her stuff?
I asked that same ?, read CTV blog Taylor. 23/12/05. with all of the liberal ads where is the money coming from, and where did they get the 1.4millon. Now can we all say APPOINTMENTS.
Now we see the results of the Liberals being caught out on adscam. How much of that money really flowed into Liberal coffers. And now, all these Toronto and Montreal ad agencies are not doing work for free so expect even more expenses.
Wouldn’t that be a nice christmas present for Canada for the Liberals to declare bankruptcy? One can only dream.
enough
If they aren’t re-elected how will they be able to steal the money they need?
I have a slight problem with Sheila’s figures:
http://www.thiscanada.com/2005/12/24/114-million-from-deadbeats/
It may be that she’s working off better or newer figures, or that the Liberals quickly had an amended 2004 Return slipped onto Elections Canada’s web site.
Of course $15.5 million in loans outstanding isn’t anything to shout about either, but somehow it doesn’t have the cachet of, say, $34.8 million.
From the Toronto Star:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1135378221663&call_pageid=970599119419
“Once the last turkey leftover is choked down, the self-appointed surrogates of fear and loathing will be at each other’s throats. Paul Martin, that paragon of reckless pragmatism, will beat the straw out of Stephen Harper, Gilles Duceppe and George W. Bush while the Conservative’s libertarian champion wrestles the nanny-state to the ground.”
I was really not aware Geroge W. Bush was running in the upcoming election. This article only get much much more stupid…
“He’s(Harper) also spouting nonsense.
Trimming the GST and sending parents minimalist daycare cheques speaks more eloquently to individual choice versus state programs than it does to sound tax policy or a commitment to early-childhood education.”
So… “trimming the G.S.T” is NOT “sound tax policy”?
“Not to pile on, but Conservative promises on the Senate and Quebec are even more worrying.”
Adscam giving the Bloq the strength it now enjoys today, is of little concern?!?!? This is the poorest example of blatently biased reporting I have read this election. So far.
Yea but who is more fiscally responsible, 34 million vs. debt free. We better hope Harper gets in to see just how bad they have cooked the books.
Sorry- but every time I read anything coming from Shelia Copps, I detect the stench of Cretien.
(And I remember her place at the trough. Oink, oink).
it is not who wrote the article, but what the article states.
re Harper’s comments ont he Senate–Martin anounced that he is in favour of an elected Senate a few days before Harper did–why is the Red Star going after Harper for the same thing that Martin annonced? I am for EEE, but Martin has always been for an appointed Senate–does the Star not read the drivel coming out of Martin’s mouth before they slam Harper? As for Harper’s Quebec promise–they already have some of this under the Liberals–talk about spinning and negative reporting
look the point of the article is showing the liberals cannot manage there own books, They have been manipulating your hard earned (tax) money for too many yrs. They will not even let Auditor General Fraser do her job & checkout the special programs accounts. We are lucky that she found out about ADSCAM.
Another example why we should all vote for Stephen Harper instead of that liberal crook, Martin.
One thing that piqued my interest in the Pricewaterhouse Cooper audit posted by Eric Sorenson was the explanation as to what exactly the Liberal Party is. During the Gomery Inquiry, much was made about how the Liberal Party (Quebec), not the Liberal Party of Canada, was the recipient of the ill-gotten gains, that it was divorced from the Liberal Party of Canada. The audit puts the lie to that spin – the Liberal Party (Quebec) is as integral a part of the Liberal Party of Canada as the federal component. It’s all one.
The Liberal Party says that the “Refund cheque” was sent in a “Brown envelope”…it should be there! Right! Speaking about brown envelopes who did receive them? Martin won`t say…did he receive one in his riding? Why does the MSM ignore the fact that Martin won`t comment.Better still the CPC should press this and demand an answer. Kate this would make a great column for the CBC Roundtable! (If they would allow it)
OT….In todays National Post Ipsos Reid says that the race is neck and neck and the CPC would win if a election was held today.
In todays Glob & Maul Strategic Counsels Allan Gregg says that the Lieberals are leading in the polls and Canadians like their campaign better??…figures coming from a Lieberal hack!
George,
Dont worry about the star, nobody south of steeles east of the 427 or west of Kingston Rd is going to elect a con.
905 – absolute battleground (bye bye belinda)
519 – COns in lead
613- Cons even or in lead
705 – cant say.
416 – this is a writeoff with the exception of maybe St Pauls, maybe Don Valley West….but dont count on either
Assuming no fundamental change in trjectory and momentum Libs are in for a surprise….they should have gone with a short campaign.
BillBC
I agree with you …she has no principles.
Who would you rather have running the country? A party that can control its own spending and run a surplus or a party that is so far in debt that it will need another Sponsorship Program to stuff envelopes with deposits to get out of debt?
I know what I want… Now if some smart media type could spin that on the CBC or in the Toronto Red Star I would love to see it 🙂
Maybe the next CBC Politics round table, some smart CPC member could bring that up? Just a thought.
The Liberals are in a heap of trouble on all fronts it looks like. Not only are they broke but they probably can’t borrow any more money from those 13 banks they already owe almost $35 million to.
And, even today, there’s another example of how the MSM is turning on them, and in particular, their leader. Give Don Martin’s column in the National Post a read if you haven’t already.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=ce2d9c1d-1aca-4246-8a06-de6cc09bdf7e&p=1
Gotta love it. It’s particularly enjoyable watching an enemy self-destruct on the battlefield. The best Christmas present I could ever wish for.
The Liberal debt load makes patronage nepotism a certainty. No amount of liberal shot spinning can earase this glaring fact. The Liberal party is owned by its debtors!
I hope they all have to sell a kidney to pay their tab.
Kate, Thankyou so much for all of the hard work you have been doing. Without the bloggers there would be no one to hold this bias election accountable. Merry Christmas and a Happy 2006 to you and all the bloggers that visit your site.
Here’s hoping that this country will start of the New Year with a new party at the helm!
“As we enter the home stretch of the campaign, all political parties will have to spend, spend, spend on advertising to bombard us with their messages. Are the parties seeking more loans to pay for huge advertising budgets? How deep in debt are they willing to go to get your vote? What happens to the debts for the parties that are unsuccessful in the election?”
Interesting….what happens to the debts of the party that is is elected?
Maybe Sheila knows! That would be something.
Sheila…pour me another T…….S….and lay me that old GST love agin….yea yea yea……like Copps arent doing well from their old days….go tell it on the mountain……..same old song…too old like you…Sheila tequila….but not better….
Why d you think they leaked IT info? All those people who profitted can now kick back some of their ill gotten booty to the Libs, who obviously are in dire straits. Oh joy. The Toronto Star isn’t a newspaper. It’s a daily Liberal newsletter.
Hey, maybe the Liberal Party of Canada can repossess one of Paul Martin’s tax-evading, over-polluting, federally-supported, Bahamian-registered ships to pay off their debts.
Just a thought from a rational Canadian.
Never underestimate the willingness of Canadian banks to lend to the Liberal Party.
No one has mentioned that Power Corp and the Desmarais family can provide support to the “Libranos” without any problem!!! Merry Christmas to All!!!!!!!
“$34,818,257.32 in debt, by way of 13 bank loans.”
Let’s get the names of those banks. Canadian banks – the same banks which Paul Martin was in charge of for 9 years as finance minister – have made record smashing profits this year, while closing branches and hiking service fees. This story is bigger than Income Trust and possibly even Adscam if a few more dots get connected.
Of course, I’ve been blogging about this story – the incestuous GDP-killing relationship between banks and the Liberal Party of Canada – for months:
Banks Have Snouts Deep In Liberal Trough
RBC nails new bank profit record
Royal Bank of Canada has shattered the profit record for Canadian banks…
Scotiabank’s annual profit tops $3B
Bank of Nova Scotia joined bigger rival Royal Bank of Canada in the $3-billion annual profit club with a jump in earnings powered by busier lending in Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean.
TORONTO (CP) – The Bank of Montreal and rival Scotiabank posted fatter fourth-quarter and year-end profits Tuesday driven by solid lending gains in their mainstay Canadian operations.
http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/11/banks-have-snouts-deep-in-liberal.html
“With respect to banking, you will recall that the 1998 MacKay Task Force review of the financial services sector found that there was at that time too little competition in the provision of banking services to the small business market. Extensive surveys of our members since 1998 have shown that there has been little, if any, improvement in banking services to small- and medium-sized businesses.”
http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/11/liberal-economic-plan-is-dud.html
http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/08/banks-pretending-to-not-suck-in-leadup.html
OTTAWA – Members of the Liberal government attending their annual summer caucus retreat last week were treated to an open bar and platters of food during a private party paid for by the Canadian Bankers Association.
…
Howard Wilson, the Ethics Counsellor, declined to comment on whether it was appropriate for the Liberal caucus as a whole to accept a party from a banking industry group…Asked about the ethics of a governing party accepting a private party from bankers, Mr. Wilson laughed and said: “I really don’t have a comment on it.”
http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/08/bank-mergers-liberal-secret-agenda.html
“Based on the findings of CFIB�s nationwide survey, the major banks have not demonstrated their ability to better serve their small business clientele.”
http://anonalogue.blogspot.com/2005/07/no-bank-mergers-please.html
ErikS: Sheila Copps has the correct information. On http://www.elections.ca, go to Financial Reports/Registered Parties. Then, select the 4 main parties, and select the “details” option (middle of 3). Select “Part 2c – Operating Loans” and you should get a table showing the numbers Ms Copps talks about.
The Liberal amount is $34.8M. However, the LPC financial statements (see link at thiscanada.com/ErikS post above) reflect a liability amount of roughly $17M of which roughly $15M are loans.
I think that both sets of numbers are correct. The $34M most likely reflects a revolving line-of-credit arrangement that allows the LPC to borrow for continuing expenses (they spent close to $34M in 2004), while the year-end reconciliation (after the election rebates & the per-vote allowance) results in a total liability amount of about $17M.
The strange thing in the Liberal annual statement is an unexplained (i.e. no Notes attached) amount of $13M in “Accounts Receivable”. My guess is that this amount is the balance of “election rebates” that the party expects to collect once the review process is complete.
If you add Receivables to Liabilities, you are at about $30M which is not far from the Operating Loans taken out by the Party (according to Elections Canada) and mentioned by Ms Copps.
I hope this helps. I’d like to know how you got access to the Liberal Annual Report (since it is not publicly available), and if you could similarly point us to the other party reports.
Just to clarify — The LPC appear to have been about $3M in deficit for 2004 (difference between revenue and expenses). Ms Copps may have assumed the operating loan amount for actual debt.
The balance sheet loan amount corresponds roughly to their receivable amount. I am puzzled as to why the party has over $13M in (presumably election rebate) receivables a year after the elections, but since the Annual Report cleared an audit, I am willing to accept it.
Anon – I don’t have their annual report, just the Banance Sheet and Income Statements publicly available off the Elections Canada web site. The Liberal one in question is here:
http://www.elections.ca/fin/rep/2004/liberal_2004.pdf
Cheers, Erik.
Ask Sheila if she paid for her “Blackberry” when she was Heritage Minister. Ask all of the Lie-beral’s that same question. RIM, the Lie-beral’s, the TPC program, go figure. Remember when Sheila screeched at John Crosbie, “I’m nobodies baby”. Well ain’t that the truth?
Crosby had said “calm down baby” and it had got her enraged to the point of climbing on chairs ans screaming “Im nobodies baby” she named the first book of her planned three part biography the same.the series is to be called “Lord of the Wingtips”
Crosby’s best was to Allen McEchren(sp?) the finance minister , who he said , “aren’t we having a gay old time” , McEchren went nuts to as he was a closet version of Svend like former NB premier Hadfield. older queens than Sir Elton.
There’s a lot of speculation that the Conservatives will launch a “shock and awe” campaign of TV ads, based on their greatly superior financial state, and the Liberals will be unable to match them. Unfortunately, that isn’t going to happen. They’ll spend nationally the same amount as the Liberals – $.70 per voter. And they’ll get back from the taxpayers 60% of that expense.
What will be of great interest is if this campaign ends up being followed closely by another one. The Conservatives would be in a far better position to outspend the Liberals in that one. Which is why the Liberals were so desperate to avoid a spring election – they needed the extra time to fundraise.
Look, animal cruelty isn’t funny, but bonsai kitten isn’t cruelty, it’s just bad taste. Cruelty is the puppies rescued by the SPCA and a quick thinking RCMP officer before their owner disposed of them in a bonfire. Cruelty is leaving puppies out to freeze like the guy did in Ladner, BC this month. Cruelty is taking a “Cat, free to good home” and putting them in a catmill to train your Pitbull (look it up and hope you haven’t eaten recently). And it gets way-way-way worse. It isn’t about no leather and no meat, it’s about treating animals with a modicum of decency and keeping their suffering to an absolute minimum. If you want to help stop real animal cruelty (in BC, at least) go to endanimalcruelty.com and do something about it.
Hmm, how did that end up in this thread????