"In and out" is bigger than reported:
1. third party support through slush funds
2. "in and out" to create donations for tax credits
3. "in and out" for polling and research expenses
4. "in and out" to launder advertising expenses and claim tax dollars
5. "in and out" to transfer funds-resources from local to other region associations (as well as national) advertising (i.e. drain the non-winnable ridings of cash and transfer to contested ridings)
Cheers,
Coffee
It'll definitely be interesting to see if Elections Canada discovers more along those additional lines. I'm not sure you can count #5 as a problem though, since the Canada Elections Act clearly permits transfers to and from riding associations; the question in Conadscam is whether the money supposedly sent to the riding associations actually was transferred in any meaningful sense of the word.
"the question in Conadscam is whether the money supposedly sent to the riding associations actually was transferred in any meaningful sense of the word."
The question is on point. More specifically, did the association claiming the expense actually pay for and use the item.
In point five (5) above, the allegation is that the money flowed through the national office from one riding association to other associations - and the national association occurred the expense and billed expenses to a secondary ridings.
i.e. the money came from one riding, was used by the federal office, and then claimed by a third association.
The CPoC's EC fillings/claims don't match what happened, as above, and the CPoC knew, could be reasonable be expected to know, that the accounting did not match what happened.
That may be a possibility (if one that I haven't really heard discussed yet). I'm still not sure that would really be a different case from the in-and-out actions though: the transfer from the donor riding wouldn't seem to add anything since it would make for a genuine transfer of money for the central party's use.
Transfers A -> B -> C
Both "A" and "C" claim an expense... that's a double entry.
Commenting by HaloScan
