HAMILTON VOTES2018 Third-party ads may try to buy your ballot

Loophole allows new advertising category

Heads up, Hamilton voters: Political advertisers now have permission to try to buy your vote in the city election — with help from otherwise banned corporate and union donors.

The province changed the rules around municipal election spending last year.

Included is a ban on direct donations to candidates from corporations and unions that was celebrated as a way to lessen the influence of “developer dollars” on city politics.

But the changes came with lessadvertised loophole. The new rules allow a “third party” to register with the city clerk to independently raise and spend money on advertising in support of — or against — a candidate.

Corporations and unions can register as third-party advertisers, or donate to them instead.

The supportive advertising must be independent — co-ordination with candidates is illegal, if hard to police — but the third-party expenditures do not count toward the campaign spending limit of the candidate.

Claire Malcolmson, an organizer with the Campaign Fairness Ontario group that pushed for a corporate donation ban in the first place, expressed hope the changes — which include public reporting and auditing requirements — will still help “level the playing field” for local candidates.

“We were never so presumptuous as to think we would eliminate that (corporate) influence completely,” she said.

But there is no guarantee the rule changes will cut the overall amount of corporate or union support for candidates, said lawyer Jack Siegel, an expert in election law who represented former mayor Larry Di Ianni in a landmark, citizen-initiated court case over campaign over-contributions.

Siegel pointed out individuals linked to a corporation or a union can still legally make personal donations to candidates — and the maximum per person has jumped, from $750 last election to $1,200.

A single third-party advertiser, meanwhile, can in some cases spend up to $25,000 pumping the tires of a particular candidate — independently, of course.

“It (the rule change) is really more about transparency,” said Siegel, who suggested thirdparty advertising has always existed in past city elections — just unregulated and under the radar.

Now, registered third-party advertisers must track and identify donors, abide by spending limits and file campaign spending documents for public scrutiny — just like candidates.

That also means a third-party advertiser could face a compliance audit or court hearing if a hawk-eyed citizen finds evidence of illegal overspending, collusion with a candidate or inappropriate donations.

To be clear, the new rules only apply to advertising about election candidates — not election issues.

So feel free, for example, to pay for an election billboard about LRT overlooking King Street. Just don’t pay to promote the name of your favourite pro- or anti-LRT candidate unless you’ve registered as a third-party advertiser.

Third-party advertising plays a huge role in U.S. election campaigns, where well-organized political action committees (sometimes known as Super PACs) fundraise hundreds of millions of dollars without spending limits.

The Canadian government is mulling possible new limits on third-party advertisers after a record 105 complaints were filed about related activities following the 2015 federal vote.

In Ontario, new spending limits were recently set for thirdparty advertisers and 59 such groups or individuals registered for the May election. That list included many union and business-related alliances — but also individuals and quirky citizen groups with names like An Outraged Ontarian and Apathy is Boring.

So far, there is only one name — and no corporations or unions — registered on Hamilton’s third-party list.

“They told me I was the first and only, so far,” said Britney Guerra, a well-known local advocate for independent medical marijuana dispensaries. “I’m not sure how many people even realize this is an option.”

Guerra said she registered as a third-party advertiser mostly to familiarize herself with the local electoral process — with an eye to one day running for office herself.

But she hopes to independently advertise in support of Ward 3 candidate Ned Kuruc, whom the former dispensary owner feels has a “good understanding of small-business concerns.”

City election manager Tony Fallis said “three or four” other would-be advertisers have approached him for information about the new rules. More than one “expressed discomfort” with the amount of work and public reporting involved, he said.

Siegel said it is likely too early to judge if the new rules will dissuade would-be advertisers.

‘‘

We were never so presumptuous as to think we would eliminate that (corporate) influence completely.” CLAIRE MALCOLMSON