Bloc Posts Another Above Average Quarter
The Bloc Québécois has posted another above average quarter of fundraising results, according to their quarterly return just posted at the Elections Canada website.
The party raised $221K from 2,688 donors in Q3 of 2009, higher than any other third quarter since 2005, except for last year's ... when the election campaign was underway. This represents something like 2.5 to 14 times the amount they raised in earlier non-election year third quarters, and follows on a historically strong first half of the year.
The most notable difference in 2009 is the explosive increase in the number of donors of $200 or less (2,512), which except during elections, had previously been quite low (from 170 to 570, but usually around 250) in all but the fourth quarter of most fiscal years. I think we can conclude that the Bloc has now implemented a monthly pre-authorized contribution plan, and appears to be having a fair bit of success in rolling it out this year. The amount raised from donors of $200 and less is shown in the dark lower parts of the bars seen here, while contributions from large donors are shown in the lighter colour.
If the Bloc is able to post even a typical non-election year fourth quarter of $330K, it will match its best ever fundraising performance since the elimination of corporate and labour contributions and the introduction of the public subsidy. On the other hand, if it continues to post these kinds of above-average numbers, it will be raising centrally at the levels last seen before the subsidy was introduced. Again the dark-coloured parts of the bars below show the amount raised from individuals giving $200 or less. The rest is from individuals giving large contributions, or from corporate or labour contributions (when they were allowed pre-2004).
Insta-pundits have often been quick to look at the Bloc's level of central fundraising, compare it in a ratio to the public subsidy their vote share has entitled them to, and conclude that the Bloc is "dependent" on the allowance funds.
However, I would encourage those wanting to undertake a more serious analysis to include riding association fundraising and candidate fundraising before drawing any simplistic, and possibly erroneous, conclusions. Of course that's a lot more work, and has the danger of possibly giving you the answer you didn't want to find.
The fact is that the Bloc has reorganized the way it structures its party financing several times if you read their financial statements carefully (especially the notes to the statements). Formerly, it credited ALL fundraising and membership dues originating from a riding to the riding association, in return for a central tithe and a service fee for each membership card processed, but reported all fundraising centrally. Subsequent changes to the legislation which required riding associations to report separately from the central party but introduced public funding, saw the party eliminate the central tithe, leave the fundraising in the ridings (where it was now reported), and run the centre using the subsidy and election rebate plus some year-end central direct fundraising.
Summing up all the riding association fundraising and adding it into the mix, however, shows that the total Bloc fundraising efforts actually increased during this time, although much of it was reported in the ridings. [Note that this chart was previously prepared by me in response to a request by the ThreeHundredEight.com website, and was first published there.] Notice that the dark coloured bars here are central fundraising, while riding association fundraising is in grey and the public subsidy is in white. I did not take the time to include candidate fundraising in the mix, but a more complete analysis would do so, time permitting. Note that you can click on the chart to view its full-sized version.
So, the question I have now, is whether the increase we are starting to see in central Bloc fundraising will be mirrored in lower fundraising totals for the ridings (which only report annually and not until the following May). I guess we'll have to table that question for later, but should it turn out to be the case, we might guess that the party changed its financing structure at least in part to avoid looking "dependent" on the subsidy to those focused on the central party's performance, but it's more likely for some other internal reason.
However, if it turns out that the increased central fundraising is additive to existing riding fundraising levels, I think we can conclude that the Bloc is positioning itself to survive in case the Conservatives are able to make good on their preferred option of eliminating the subsidy altogether.
Meanwhile the other parties' third quarter returns either have not yet been submitted OR have not yet been posted to the Elections Canada website. They are not due until the end of October. I wrote a look-ahead to the 3rd quarter results a few weeks ago here, in case you missed it.
The party raised $221K from 2,688 donors in Q3 of 2009, higher than any other third quarter since 2005, except for last year's ... when the election campaign was underway. This represents something like 2.5 to 14 times the amount they raised in earlier non-election year third quarters, and follows on a historically strong first half of the year.
The most notable difference in 2009 is the explosive increase in the number of donors of $200 or less (2,512), which except during elections, had previously been quite low (from 170 to 570, but usually around 250) in all but the fourth quarter of most fiscal years. I think we can conclude that the Bloc has now implemented a monthly pre-authorized contribution plan, and appears to be having a fair bit of success in rolling it out this year. The amount raised from donors of $200 and less is shown in the dark lower parts of the bars seen here, while contributions from large donors are shown in the lighter colour.
If the Bloc is able to post even a typical non-election year fourth quarter of $330K, it will match its best ever fundraising performance since the elimination of corporate and labour contributions and the introduction of the public subsidy. On the other hand, if it continues to post these kinds of above-average numbers, it will be raising centrally at the levels last seen before the subsidy was introduced. Again the dark-coloured parts of the bars below show the amount raised from individuals giving $200 or less. The rest is from individuals giving large contributions, or from corporate or labour contributions (when they were allowed pre-2004).
Insta-pundits have often been quick to look at the Bloc's level of central fundraising, compare it in a ratio to the public subsidy their vote share has entitled them to, and conclude that the Bloc is "dependent" on the allowance funds.
However, I would encourage those wanting to undertake a more serious analysis to include riding association fundraising and candidate fundraising before drawing any simplistic, and possibly erroneous, conclusions. Of course that's a lot more work, and has the danger of possibly giving you the answer you didn't want to find.
The fact is that the Bloc has reorganized the way it structures its party financing several times if you read their financial statements carefully (especially the notes to the statements). Formerly, it credited ALL fundraising and membership dues originating from a riding to the riding association, in return for a central tithe and a service fee for each membership card processed, but reported all fundraising centrally. Subsequent changes to the legislation which required riding associations to report separately from the central party but introduced public funding, saw the party eliminate the central tithe, leave the fundraising in the ridings (where it was now reported), and run the centre using the subsidy and election rebate plus some year-end central direct fundraising.
Summing up all the riding association fundraising and adding it into the mix, however, shows that the total Bloc fundraising efforts actually increased during this time, although much of it was reported in the ridings. [Note that this chart was previously prepared by me in response to a request by the ThreeHundredEight.com website, and was first published there.] Notice that the dark coloured bars here are central fundraising, while riding association fundraising is in grey and the public subsidy is in white. I did not take the time to include candidate fundraising in the mix, but a more complete analysis would do so, time permitting. Note that you can click on the chart to view its full-sized version.
So, the question I have now, is whether the increase we are starting to see in central Bloc fundraising will be mirrored in lower fundraising totals for the ridings (which only report annually and not until the following May). I guess we'll have to table that question for later, but should it turn out to be the case, we might guess that the party changed its financing structure at least in part to avoid looking "dependent" on the subsidy to those focused on the central party's performance, but it's more likely for some other internal reason.
However, if it turns out that the increased central fundraising is additive to existing riding fundraising levels, I think we can conclude that the Bloc is positioning itself to survive in case the Conservatives are able to make good on their preferred option of eliminating the subsidy altogether.
Meanwhile the other parties' third quarter returns either have not yet been submitted OR have not yet been posted to the Elections Canada website. They are not due until the end of October. I wrote a look-ahead to the 3rd quarter results a few weeks ago here, in case you missed it.
Labels: Bloc Québécois, Party Finance
posted by The Pundits' Guide at
9:02 PM
3 Comments:
Thought I would check that you are aware the 2008 riding fundraising totals are not included in the graph.
Remains to be seen, but I think the BQ is headed to equal last year's elction year central fundraising. And that's an over 50% increase over 2007, the conditions of which were very similar to 2009.
Mind you, its just getting back to their 2005 total. Any idea why that was so high?
Since the cerntral and riding association fundraising are such different animals in all the parties, I see no reason to expect that the EDA fundraising will have decreased at all with the central pary ramp-up.
Yes, the chart title does indicate that 2008 riding data is excluded ... mainly because it wasn't all complete at Elections Canada at the time I compiled the rest of the data.
In response to your other question, the variation between different years may be affected in part by the provincial election cycle, as another reader wrote in to remind me. There were Quebec general elections in 1998, 2003, 2007, and 2008, and PQ leadership contests in both 2005 and 2007.
How about that- right in the chart title: "Riding Data for 2008 not available". :)
Its a neat piece of work.
I think that even without concern over Conservative attacks on the public subsidy... the shortness of time between elections meant that over the cycles the BQ couldn't spread election costs over enough quarterly subsidies.
When the subsidies first came in they were breaking even with virtually no need for central fundraising. But that ended very soon with the 2006 following the 2004.
The period of time they could live off of minimal central fundraising is going to soon look like an ephemeral little blip.
Its also interesting to note that the new 2004 prohibitions against trade union and corporate donations dropped the Bloc fundrasising totals, but not as much proportionally as it did for the Liberals and NDP.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home