The Yukon Party is calling for the Liberal government to close what it calls a political donation fundraising loophole.

In question period Monday, the concern for Outside interference in Yukon elections was brought up by Yukon Party MLA Brad Cathers.

He accused the Liberal party of hiding the source of $100,000 in donations through a funding loophole in the 2019/2020 contributions year.

“Last week, the premier tabled a letter from the chief electoral officer entitled ‘Foreign interference in Canadian democratic institutions’. In that letter, the chief electoral officer clearly states that one aspect of a strategy to prevent foreign interference in Yukon elections is strengthening political financing rules,” Cathers said.

“Prior to the last election, they faced questions about using the ‘Other Revenue’ loophole to hide the source of over $100,000 in donations to the Liberal party.

“Now that the chief electoral officer has weighed in about the need for changes to our campaign financing rules, will the premier finally agree to close the loophole that the Liberal party has previously used to hide the source of political donations?” the Lake Laberge MLA asked.

The loophole the Yukon Party is referring to is a category in the annual revenue report of each party.

The category in which the suggested loophole resides is titled “Other Revenue”.

It includes proceeds from fundraising activities, donations received at meetings and rallies held for political purposes, membership fees, event registration fees and loans or income from investments and other sources.

Under the category, all of the non-contribution revenues are combined and reported to the chief electoral officer.

According to Cathers, the disclosure of funding sources directly corresponds to the potential of electoral fraud having an influence on Yukon governance.

“This loophole should be closed in the interest of public transparency.” Cathers told reporters after question period Monday.

Despite there being no evidence of wrongdoing, Cathers believes there’s always potential that a problem has not been identified yet.

“The Yukon Party looks forward to the additional ideas the chief electoral officer has to prevent interference through the loophole.”

The Yukon Party believes there doesn’t need to be a ban on donations from corporations and unions but instead is working toward implementing a cap on donations.

NDP Leader Kate White believes campaign financing in the Yukon has been problematic for some time.

Yukon elections run on money that political parties raise through their own fundraising events. and the money is used to support their campaign.

Despite the complete legality of the Liberals using the Other Revenue category to support their campaign, the controversy remains.

“Yukon Liberals have previously hosted fundraisers out-of-territory in Vancouver, Rogers Arena, I think for hockey, and you just don’t know who goes because it falls under ‘other donation,’” said White.

The concern for out-of-territory donations is legitimate among both the Yukon Party and the NDP because they believe the public has a right to know where political parties get their money.

“The NDP have always fundamentally believed that Yukon elections should only be influenced by Yukoners,” said White.

She firmly endorses the idea that only Yukon residents should have the ability to support the party of their choosing instead of corporations and businesses backing political parties.

Though it’s legal, and many parties participate in it, the NDP chooses not to accept funding or donations from corporations, businesses, or unions as it strives to represent individuals in the community.

In the past, the NDP did accept union donations, which White admits were a large source of their funding.

However, in a change of heart, the party collectively decided to stop the practice and only accept donations from individuals.

In the territory, there is no cap on donations.

White and the NDP strongly believe it’s challenging for a party to not feel influenced by a large donation from a specific company.

“I think it’s up to a government to say that they’re not influenced by a $50,000 donation from a mining company, or an oil and gas company, if we want to go back to the Yukon Party,” said White.

“It’s impossible to say that you wouldn’t be influenced by that money, especially when it’s like a huge portion of what your campaign financing is.”

In 2020, the NDP generated $91,163 in funds from 509 monetary contributors and had a whopping $0 in the controversial Other Revenue category.

Premier Ranj Pillai spoke with reporters after question period.

He pointed out that, according to a document supplied by the government titled “Total of Revenue Reported by all Registered Political Parties in 2020”, the Yukon Party claimed three times as much Other Revenue ($66,060) as the Liberal party ($22,549).

“So, in 2020, the Yukon Party raised three times what we did under the category of ‘Other’, and so I don’t know today why that’s being brought up focused on us,” said Pillai.

“I tabled a motion that’s supporting a process to review our electoral boundaries. And I’m committed to that so I want to make sure we have the proper boundaries in place, I want to make sure that we have the proper rules in place and I want to make sure that there’s no interference.”

Pillai continued to attempt to turn the tables and shine a spotlight on the Yukon Party’s fundraising activities.

“One thing we’ve always been focused on when we talk about fundraising is to ensure that taxpayers’ money is not used in those processes,” the premier said.

“And what we clearly know is that the Yukon Party, over a period of time, would use taxpayers’ money to travel to host fundraisers.

“And so I think my other question about that is, ‘Are you going to pay that money back? For all the times you used it?’”

In January 2014, while in Vancouver to attend the Mineral Exploration Roundup, then-Yukon Party premier Darrell Pasloski and two cabinet ministers boarded a yacht the party had chartered for a fundraising cruise in the city’s harbour. For $300 apiece, guests were promised a gourmet dinner and access to the three politicians.

“They spent their time flogging tickets to this exclusive event and floating around the harbour in a yacht raising money for their re-election,” then-Liberal leader Sandy Silver said at the time.

On Monday, asked about the source of the $100,000 that Cathers was referring to, Pillai replied, “All of our processes follow the rules, and I think he’s speaking back over a number of years of reporting.

“Under ‘Others’, it can be everything from hosting events to a number of different things. So we’ve always followed rules; we’ve always ensured that we have integrity in the processes that we do.”

Pillai was also asked about closing the loophole that the Yukon Party insists exists.

“What will happen is Member Services Board, which has representation from all three parties and the chief electoral officer will work on a number of pieces.

“One is a report that’s coming forward so the chief electoral officer will make the report, and I think if Maxwell Harvey feels that there’s portions of the reporting structure that he’s uncomfortable with, then he’ll identify that in the report.”

Pillai also brought up an issue Harvey raised that dates back to 2014.

“There is an anomaly in 2014. And it was just on the eve of the last election, and it was an order-in-council that was put through by the Yukon Party and I’m trying to find out – we’re going to look into see, it was kind of an odd thing. And I know the line that he used was that it was an outlier and problematic.”

Harvey’s report is expected to be released in late April.

“We will work with the Members’ Services Board, or other committee as assigned, for input and guidance prior to any public release of the report,” Harvey stated in the letter to Pillai dated March 13.

Harvey’s report may identify ways to close the loophole or tighten restrictions on it.

When the letter was released from the chief electoral officer, the office found there was no conclusive evidence of foreign interference in Yukon elections.

“While there is no evidence of foreign intervention in Yukon elections, it is a growing risk that must be recognized and managed,” Harvey wrote.

By Morris Prokop
and Cassidy Bronson
Star Reporters