On comparative costs

Following up on this morning's theme, there's been plenty of news about the Cons' waste of millions of dollars for political purposes through their MP expenses. But the MP and cabinet amounts look particularly appalling compared to the return on investment in funding for parties:

A Chronicle Herald analysis of the expenses shows that 47 of the top 50 spenders on "ten percenters" in 2009-10 were Conservative MPs.
...
The biggest spender on ten percenters last year was Conservative Alberta MP Brian Jean, who spent $116,423.43. Overall, MPs from all parties spent $10,182,707.71 on the mailouts.

Now, I'll plan to look at the numbers in more detail later on. But for now, suffice it to note that if we work downward from Jean's number and assume the Cons' 47 worst offenders averaged a little over $100,000 apiece in ten-percenter costs, then their expenses came in at roughly $5 million per year. And apparently the Cons have absolutely no shame about having spent that much.

Not coincidentally, $5 million is also approximately the amount of the NDP's annual subsidy as a party. So let's ask which looks like a better use of exactly the same amount of public money.

Is it a better investment to fund the entirety of the staffing, communications, research, policy development, organizational support and community engagement conducted by a national political party?

Or is the same amount better spent on nothing more than the mailing costs of junk mail from a third of the Cons' caucus?