Bigger stakes, bigger money

The Star reports on one of the unusual effects of a campaign that spans two calendar years, as the time frame may allow for twice the usual fund-raising:

Federal candidates and parties will be able to double the money they're permitted to raise during this current election campaign because it falls in two calendar years, circumventing the goal of new campaign financing rules...

All parties pay for their election spending by fundraising before, during and after a campaign. But historically, the most effective time to raise funds is during the campaign period, which may make this technicality more important...

The new rules, which came into effect at the beginning of 2004, limited the amount a corporation or union can give to a political party to $1,000 each year. Individuals can now give a maximum of $5,000 to a political party each year. But the year-long period defined in the law is a calendar year, stretching from Jan. 1 to Dec. 31.

And since the current election period straddles 2005 and 2006, the parties can raise up to $10,000 from individuals and up to $2,000 from corporate and labour interests.

The article speculates, and not without some justification, that it'll be the Liberals who gain the most from the ability to double up on fund-raising. But neither the NDP and the Cons seems likely to benefit much based on their representatives quoted in the article, and it's anybody's guess as to which of the two opposition parties has the most to gain from the added money.

While I'd like to think the NDP will be able to make up some of last year's fund-raising gap during the campaign, the effect could well be to instead double the Cons' current lead in funding. And if the two main parties win an unexpected advantage from the timing of the election, that would be an unfortunate side effect to a set of campaign finance rules which otherwise seem helpful in cutting down on the role of cash within a campaign.