Campaign cash: What changes to political fundraising laws mean for the Ontario election

The president of one of Ontario's largest teacher unions recently travelled through the north, stopping in ridings to back certain candidates in the upcoming provincial election.

"An OSSTFendorsement carries weight across the province," Karen Littlewood told a small crowd at the union's Lively office for the endorsement of the NDP candidates in Sudbury and Nickel Belt.

"We are fully committed to rolling up our sleeves and doing what is needed to get Jamie (West) and France (Glinas) re-elected."

A few years ago, the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation would have also kicked in a few thousand dollars to a local campaign along with an endorsement.

But this is the second election where unions, corporations and other non-persons are banned from donating to political parties and candidates, under changes brought in by the previous Liberal government.

The current Progressive Conservative government has also doubled the maximum annual donation from a citizen to $3,300, andbrought in tighter restrictions on how much unions and other "third parties" spend on advertising.

A $600,000 cap on third-party advertising in the 12 months before an election campaign saw a group of unions, including the OSSTF, called Working Familiestake the government to court and win, only for Premier Doug Ford to invoke the notwithstanding clause and overrule the courts.

"Sometimes it's hard to even keep up, I think we need what the changes have been over the years," said Littlewood.

"It's changed a lot. We've always been able to talk to our members ... We don't have that ability to have bigger outreach, so we have to really carefully plan what will we do and what will be part of our bigger election spend."

Sudbury businessman Gerry Lougheed, who is proud to have fundraised for all three major parties but has recently been closely tied to the Liberals, calls the rule changes "good safeguards," and hopes there are more to come.

"I think it's a flawed system, I'll be quite honest with you, but I think it's a reality we have to live in," he said.

"I would really like it if we didn't have to do fundraising and put it on the taxpayers' burden, which I don't think they ever will do. We do need to support people and we do need to write those cheques."

Lougheed saidmost political donors are either true believers in the cause, have a personal connection with the candidate or hopeto trade a donation for political favours.

"[A candidate] really has to stand back and say, 'Do I want that donation? Is that donation something that's going to somehow keep me owing that person?' And if that's the case, that needs to stop," he said.

"Access and influence historically has not served the public well."

PaulineBeange, a lecturer at the University of Toronto who specializes in political financing, believes that kind of transactional donation is rare.

"Sure they might like to rub shoulders. Do they think they are buying influence with a few thousand dollars? I don't think so," she said.

In general, Beange feels the recent changes are good for voters, although she suspects most will not notice, preferring to be "monitors," and "they sit up and listen when something happens," relying on the media and opposing parties to let them know when "nasty stuff" happens with political financing.

"If we want robust political debate, then parties have to be able to get funding," she said.

While election campaigns run on cash, collecting the most money doesn't necessarily mean getting the most votes.

In the hotly contested Sudbury riding in 2018, the third-place Liberals spent $97,000about four times more than the victorious New Democrats at $26,000.

In Sault Ste. Marie,the closest race in the northeast, the Progressive Conservatives topped the New Democrats by just 400 votes, but outspent them $44,000 to $14,000.