Should Canada have kept the Per-Vote subsidy?

This article is a stub.  Please help by expanding it.  (login or create an account to edit the article) 


Each year, political parties were given $2.04 for every vote that they received in the previous national election. This question is a place to discuss if this was fair and beneficial.

The Per-Vote Subsidy is now being phased out, being reduced by $0.50 each year from 2011 to 20141.


The Per-Vote Subsidy should be kept

The Per-Vote Subsidy should be eliminated

The Per-Vote subsidy allows for a more even playing field and prevents high ticket political donations from having an undue influence. It helps political contributions match the voter interest. The Per-vote subsidy forces tax payers to contribute to political parties that they may not agree with. Political donations should come directly from the voter rather than being a taxed benefit.


Per-Vote Subsidy

Was the Per-Vote Subsidy a fair and valuable method of funding political parties?



The Per-Vote Subsidy was fair and democratic and should have been kept.


The Per-Vote Subsidy was as good or bad as any other method.


The Per-Vote Subsidy was unfair and it is good that it was eliminated.
1 Votes left

jVoteSystem developed and designed by



1. Per-Vote Subsidy: Huffington Post

  • No comments found
Add comment

This page is compiled and maintained by the ChoiceStorm community.  

Login or create an account to edit this page or make corrections.

See How you can help to learn more

© Copyright 2013 ChoiceStorm