Close loopholes in reform plans

Ontario’s Liberal government has done well in lowering what individual donors are allowed to give a political party. With annual contributions limited to a maximum of $1,200 — down from almost $10,000 — it will be harder for the rich to buy influence in the halls of power.

This makes for a healthier democracy. Unfortunately, an otherwise commendable package of election finance and political advertising reforms contains some significant loopholes.

For a start, controversial cash-for-access fundraisers would still be allowed under the government’s proposed amendments to Bill 201. It’s difficult to excuse. To fully repair the public’s battered trust in the fairness of political fundraising in Ontario, Premier Kathleen Wynne would do well to stop this dubious practice.

When corporate elites pay for the privilege of privately wining and dining key political leaders, such as the premier and cabinet ministers, it feeds a perception that decision-makers are available for hire. This is especially the case for members of Wynne’s administration, given her party’s record of repeatedly cashing in at exclusive dinners hosted by corporate interests seeking to influence government.

It’s true that Ontario’s other political parties have also indulged in fundraising dinners or private meetings with big-money donors. But New Democrats and Progressive Conservatives are both seeking amendments to the government’s election finance bill that would stop such fundraising. It’s the correct way forward.

The government’s steadfast refusal to ban cash-for-access fundraisers is difficult to explain other than in terms of rank selfinterest; as the party in power, the Liberals understandably attract considerable attention from those hoping to buy influence. That, however, represents a poor basis for meaningful change.

Another area where government reforms fall short lies in the realm of advertising. Several welcome improvements are proposed, including firm spending limits on political advertising done by so-called third party interest groups, such as business organizations and the union-funded Working Families coalition.

In addition, as reported by the Star’s Robert Benzie, government advertising would be banned in the 60 days before the start of a scheduled election. That’s fair, as far as it goes.

What’s missing is a move to restore the Ontario auditor general’s power to veto any government ad deemed partisan in nature. As the Star has noted in the past, the Wynne administration made a serious mistake when it changed the province’s landmark Government Advertising Act to remove the auditor’s ability to block taxpayer-funded partisan pitches.

Again, rank self-interest looms as the inescapable motive for watering down the auditor’s oversight.

There’s still time to get this right. Bill 201 is to go before a legislative committee for clause-by-clause debate next week and the opposition parties will be pushing for additional reform. By banning cash-for-access fundraisers and restoring the auditor general’s veto on partisan government ads the Wynne administration would effectively defuse critics’ accusations that self-interest guides these proposed new rules.

Conversely, by continuing to allow big-money donors to sway politicians, and governments to keep spending taxpayers’ dollars on ads deemed partisan by an independent auditor, Wynne risks sapping public confidence in her reforms.

Given the great deal that’s good in Bill 201, it would be an immense shame if it were perceived as a partisan half-measure.

Ontario’s election finance and political advertising reforms risk sapping public confidence