Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2009 October
2009 September
2009 April
2009 March
2008 November
2008 October
2008 September
2008 July
2008 June
2008 May
2008 April
2008 March
2008 January
2007 December
2007 November
2007 October
2007 September
2007 August
2007 July
2007 June
2007 March
2007 February
2006 October
2006 September
2006 August
2006 July
2006 June
2006 May
2006 April
2006 March
2006 February
2006 January
2005 December
2005 October
2005 September
2005 August
2005 July
2005 June
2005 May
2005 April
2005 March
2005 February
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
My Links
Canadawide
Juan Cole
TPM
Daily Dish
CanucksCathie
E-Group
vanramblings
peace order and good government
Calgary Grit
True North
Gwynn Dyer
Public eye
declan
Sean
Progressive Blogs
Voice in the Wilderness
Tilting at windmills
sec 15
tyee
one damn thing after another
Antonia Zerbisias
Buckets of Grewal
Blank out Times
Accidental Deliberations
Heartlands
Rick Mercer
buckets too
Amazing wonderdog
The Maple Three
The Hive
Cindy Silver 7
Cindy Silver 6
Cindy Silver 5
Cindy Silver 4
Cindy Silver 3
Cindy Silver 2
Cindy Silver
Cindy Silver Sum
Cindy Silver 9
Cindy Silver PR
Cindy Silver (blogs Canada)
Cindy Silver (Blogs Canada 2)
Liberal Blogs
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
| The Ins and Outs of the In and out Scandal |
| 04.26.08 (2:37 pm) [edit] |
|
There is no clause that prohibits local ads from being identical to national ads. However, that is not the issue at hand. The issue at hand is whether the local candidates incurred the said expenses. Elections Canada, rightly, balked at the notion that money transferred to local ridings and then immediately transferred back constituted a local “expense”. After all, suppose my brother transferred money into my business account and I immediately transferred it back out. It would be a pretty neat trick if I was able to claim the act of transferring that money back into my brother’s account as legitimate business expense, but alas Revenue Canada would not kindly to such a ploy on my behalf. Conservatives thought Elections Canada would be more gullible. As to the accusation of exceeding election spending limits, if my brother was to transfer money into my business account and then I immediately transferred the money out, I could not then declare the money transfer as a business expense even if my brother went on to spend that money on materials that if had I purchased myself I would have been able to deduct as business expense. I did not make the purchase. I did not have any input as to what was purchased. My brother’s business is not mine and neither is a national party’s business the business of the local candidate. The Elections Act treats the two as different.
|
posted by: hollinm (reply)
post date: 04.26.08 (4:25 pm)
Your comments are disingenuous. The National Campaign has incurred expenses to prepare and then run the advertisements. Since local campaigns are not allowed to incur advertising expenses then how are they going to advertise in their local markets? S0 the National campaign contracts with an ad agency, incurs expenses for preparing ads which are then used by the local candidates in their individual ridings. Given the rules the national campaign passes a poriton of the costs to the local campaign for their portion of the cost of the ads. The Elections Act deems transfers between national and regional campaigns legitimate.
I worked for many years with a national company and I worked in one of their regional plants and each quarter our plant was charged for the advertising of the company. I had no say in what was advertised etc. and in fact the ads may not have even run in my local.
posted by: (reply)
post date: 04.26.08 (9:05 pm)
“Since local campaigns are not allowed to incur advertising expenses then how are they going to advertise in their local markets?”
This is false.
posted by: drnifxxbpc (reply)
post date: 07.15.08 (9:17 am)
etwxicmi jatzswf6ebf cjbehohnaw4