NDP money woes

36 posts / 0 new
Last post
robbie_dee
NDP money woes

Alex Ballingall, "NDP takes out $12M mortgage on Jack Layton building," Toronto Star 14 January 2019

Quote:
OTTAWA—Facing an ugly balance sheet and a drop in supporter donations, the New Democratic Party has mortgaged its national headquarters near Parliament Hill for $12 million.

Property records show the party inked the mortgage for the Jack Layton Building with the Bank of Montreal on Aug. 30. The mortgage included an “assignment of rents” agreement, a form of collateral that says revenue from tenants in the building at 279 Laurier Ave. W. in downtown Ottawa can go to the bank if the party can’t repay the loan.

This is the first time the NDP has mortgaged the building since it bought the property for $3.5 million in 2004, the party says.

“The Jack Layton Building was purchased in whole as an asset for the NDP. Using an asset is common practice,” NDP national director Melissa Bruno told the Star in an emailed statement Monday.

“The NDP is focused on working hard to make life better for Canadians because we believe this is not as good as it gets and that we can do so much more, together.”

On the plus side, if the NDP bought the building in 2004 for $3.5M and now it can carry a mortgage for $12M it looks like the Party made a pretty shrewd real estate move. Assuming a maximum commercial mortgage ratio of 75% the building must be worth at least $16M today, which means the party almost quintupled its investment over 15 years.

On the downside the Party is going to have to do a lot of fundraising to pay that nut off and if fundraising was really going well maybe it wouldn't have needed such a big mortgage. Is the reporter really correct that this is the first time the Party has mortgaged the building? I am surprised it did not see fit to do so in previous elections, if "using assets" to finance election campaigns really is "a common practice" as Ms. Bruno says.

robbie_dee
WWWTT

Thanks for bumping robbie_dee or I would have missed this important thread!

So the Toronto star did a title search in Ottawa, or they know a real estate agent whom through their agency has access to the data. Wow! Fucking dirty games looking for shit to smear with!

The Toronto star is a garbage news provider. 

They must be seriously worried about their liberal imperialist masters to stoop this far to try to find anything to smear The NDP 

I remember the same being done to Mulcair when he was leader of the opposition 

Debater

The Toronto Star is one of the only non-Conservative media outlets remaining in Canada.

Would you prefer that *all* our Canadian media support the Conservatives?

robbie_dee

I'm not sure why conducting some basic investigative reporting about the financial status of a major Canadian political party in the run-up to a federal election is  "fucking dirty games looking for shit to smear with".  But it sounds like you'd rather attack the messenger than talk about the fact that the NDP is leveraging its assets to make up for lackluster fundraising, with apparently rather unclear prospects as to how to pay it back.

WWWTT

Debater wrote:

The Toronto Star is one of the only non-Conservative media outlets remaining in Canada.

Would you prefer that *all* our Canadian media support the Conservatives?

Spoken like a true anti NDP liberal hack!

Oh and by the way liberal imperialist =conservative imperialist. 

Debater

The Toronto Star endorsed the NDP in the 2011 Election.

WWWTT

robbie_dee wrote:

I'm not sure why conducting some basic investigative reporting about the financial status of a major Canadian political party in the run-up to a federal election is  "fucking dirty games looking for shit to smear with".  But it sounds like you'd rather attack the messenger than talk about the fact that the NDP is leveraging its assets to make up for lackluster fundraising, with apparently rather unclear prospects as to how to pay it back.

What you call messenger, I call imperialist servants. 

The imperialist invention of western democracy is controlled by money. You either don’t know this or are diverting away from this with this stupid game your playing. You pick whichever one it is. 

WWWTT

Debater wrote:

The Toronto Star endorsed the NDP in the 2011 Election.

Oh ya sorry I forgot, that was the election when Jack Layton, then leader of the NDP won and became prime minister of Canada. How can I forget?

josh

The Bank must figure the NDP is credit worthy because it anticipates it will be under new leadership after 2019.

robbie_dee

josh wrote:

The Bank must figure the NDP is credit worthy because it anticipates it will be under new leadership after 2019.

The NDP is probably hoping for that. A return of fundraising prowess for the NDP would be a happy outcome for the bank, too, but if that doesn’t happen the bank can also just take the building.

I think it should be a serious concern for Party members that the NDP may be leveraging its long established assets to fund an election campaign that’s been scheduled for four years. If things don’t work out it’s not just a bad election result there’s potential for long term damage to the party as an institution as it labors to pay off its debts rather than organizing and rebuilding. And what if the result this fall is an unstable minority? What will the NDP do for money if it has to fight a second election six months after the first?

WWWTT

Those are legitimate concerns robbie_dee. But there’s no guarantee in politics, let alone for the federal NDP. 

Western democracies are fixed around money money money. Intentionally to make it harder for socialist political parties who never have the deepest pockets. Using a property is actually a good practice. 

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

What I want to know is whether the traditional membership is no longer donating (if so, is the NDP not actually ready for an off-white leader?) or is the "expanded" ethnic membership not actually willing to contribute to the party's success (or perhaps lacking an understanding of the need)?

(I actually suspect there's some combination of factors at work here.)

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

What I want to know is whether the traditional membership is no longer donating (if so, is the NDP not actually ready for an off-white leader?) or is the "expanded" ethnic membership not actually willing to contribute to the party's success (or perhaps lacking an understanding of the need)?

(I actually suspect there's some combination of factors at work here.)

I am sure that the Quebec numbers are worth exploring, given the spike in membership for a few years. Is that the expanded "ethnic" vote you are referring to?

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Quote:

I am sure that the Quebec numbers are worth exploring, given the spike in membership for a few years. Is that the expanded "ethnic" vote you are referring to?

No, I am referring to the influx of new NDP members during the leadership race who supported Jagmeet Singh, and made him the leader of the NDP. I'm hoping they don't think that was the end game.

The Quebec numbers may also be worth exploring, though. What was the impact of Mulcair's ouster in La Belle Province?

Debater

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

The Quebec numbers may also be worth exploring, though. What was the impact of Mulcair's ouster in La Belle Province?

Mulcair's outster seems to have caused about a 10-point drop for the NDP in Quebec since 2015.

(Eg. from about 25% in October 2015 to about 15% now).

robbie_dee
Sean in Ottawa

I think we knew that, however, seats have won on a shoestring before.

 

josh

Well, then they won’t have to worry about spending a lot of money.

Mighty Middle

Adam Radwanski of the Globe and Mail tweeted

"As another New Democrat put it to me recently, this may be the sort of federal election in which the NDP treats it like running 30-40 by-election campaigns"

https://twitter.com/aradwanski/status/1094665168640970752

robbie_dee

High court won't hear NDP expenses case over mailings, offices (CBC)

Quote:

The Supreme Court may have just killed off the NDP's last legal hope to end a dispute with the House of Commons over payments to political staff, leaving the party's financial picture even gloomier.

The high court declined Thursday to hear an appeal from the New Democrats over a $2.7-million dispute with the House of Commons about salaries paid to political staff after the 2011 election.

The party was hoping the court would agree to overturn a 2014 order by the Commons' board of internal economy that the party repay the salaries. The board is a committee of MPs from all parties with official status, which oversees financial and administrative matters for MPs, including the hiring of staff to work in Ottawa and constituency offices.

***

Many of the NDP MPs affected lost their seats in 2015 but were still required to repay the costs. Some argued successfully to reduce or eliminate their bills, as they were able to prove the staff members in question were legitimate parliamentary staff and not partisan workers.

Heather Bradley, spokeswoman for the House of Commons administration, said Thursday she doesn't have a tally of how much is still owed but that the Commons is still working with the members involved to recoup the funds.

Since the last election, the NDP has struggled to raise money and in 2017, the most recent year full information is available, its liabilities exceeded its assets by more than $3 million. It also ran a $1.4-million operating deficit in 2017. Last year the party mortgaged an office building it owns in downtown Ottawa for $12 million to free up cash.

It's 2018 financial statements were due at the end of June but the party has received an extension from Elections Canada so the current state of its finances is not known.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

With so little time left before the election, the party should accept that it's not going to have a lot of money to fight this campaign and should at least try to do the one thing that can beat the big money parties-that is, to actually try and inspire passion and enthusiasm among those who will be needed to work for the party and those whose votes the party seeks.

The path to survival is the path of inspiration.

"Respectability" is useless in a year like this.  

Aristotleded24

Ken Burch wrote:
With so little time left before the election, the party should accept that it's not going to have a lot of money to fight this campaign and should at least try to do the one thing that can beat the big money parties-that is, to actually try and inspire passion and enthusiasm among those who will be needed to work for the party and those whose votes the party seeks.

The path to survival is the path of inspiration.

They should also accept that, ouside of seats with traditional NDP demographics, that Ontario is lost to them and they should focus what limited resources they have in areas they can either hold or the few seats they may actually win.

robbie_dee

Adam Radwanski, “Low budget, high stakes: NDP hopes Singh’s campaign shift isn’t too late,” Globe and Mail, September 2, 2019

Quote:

Jagmeet Singh won’t be touring the country during this fall’s election campaign the way leaders of major national parties normally do.

Rather than chartering a plane for the entire campaign – as the Liberals and Conservatives will, and as the New Democrats have done in the past – Mr. Singh’s NDP will rent one hourly, here and there. Instead of jetting to different corners of Canada each day, he will spend extended periods busing around battleground areas, including the better part of a week in Ontario to begin the campaign.

Members of Mr. Singh’s campaign team will occasionally spin that approach as a sustainable one, with fewer carbon emissions.

But it is less environmental choice than financial necessity – one reflection, among many, of the unusually rough shape in which the NDP enters this race and how it’s trying to adapt.

 

Debater
robbie_dee

Bump. We are now in a minority parliament but, as one of the CBC commentators pointed out last night, it will be difficult for the NDP to vote down pretty much anything the Liberals propose now, because the party won't be able to afford another election. I'm guessing that Jagmeet will be staying, too, if for no other reason than that the party can't afford a leadership convention right now either. Thoughts?
 

Mighty Middle

For the 3rd quarter of 2019 (covering the period from July 1 to Sept. 30 & part of the election), the NDP only beat the Green Party (in terms of fundraising) by $50K

The New Democrats raised $2,646,792 from 20,873 contributions, the party's best quarter in nearly four years. But the total is considerably less than the $9.1 million raised by the NDP in the third quarter of 2015. Over the first three quarters of this year, the NDP has raised just $5.3 million. In the first three quarters of the last election year, the New Democrats raised three times as much.

With $2,596,173 raised from 21,277 contributions, the Green Party had its best fundraising quarter ever, beating its record set in the 2015 election by more than half a million dollars. The Greens have raised $4.8 million so far this year, also a record for the party.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/quarterly-fundraising-2019q3-1.5342383

The difference between the NDP & Greens is only $50K

The Conservatives raised $10,143,752 in the third quarter of 2019, the best quarter by any party in Canadian history. The Liberals raised $7,276,261 from about 53,341 individual contributions.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Has the NDP set up a Sanders-style fundraising mechanism yet, in which people can be signed up for small but long-term monthly donations?  That approach would do a lot to stabilize the party's fundraising picture.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Ken Burch wrote:

Has the NDP set up a Sanders-style fundraising mechanism yet, in which people can be signed up for small but long-term monthly donations?  That approach would do a lot to stabilize the party's fundraising picture.

About two decades ago I think.

 

brookmere

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Has the NDP set up a Sanders-style fundraising mechanism yet, in which people can be signed up for small but long-term monthly donations?  That approach would do a lot to stabilize the party's fundraising picture.

About two decades ago I think.

Early 1980s, in BC at least.

robbie_dee
pietro_bcc

The framing tha pundits have put forth is that the NDP can't afford a leadership race. But given how poor Singh has been at fundraising since becoming leader, another way of looking at it could be we can't afford not to have another leadership race because Singh clearly isn't inspiring people to join the party and donate.

Pondering

pietro_bcc wrote:

The framing tha pundits have put forth is that the NDP can't afford a leadership race. But given how poor Singh has been at fundraising since becoming leader, another way of looking at it could be we can't afford not to have another leadership race because Singh clearly isn't inspiring people to join the party and donate.

There is no point in having another leadership race when there aren't any obvious better choices available. That is, shuffling leaders on the chance that the next one might get better results is a crapshoot. I think the worst thing the NDP could do is bet on "leader shuffling" to cure it's ills. The NDP needs to take a breather to examine its structure. Members are unhappy and want a greater say. The grass roots are weak. The riding associations are disrespected. At the convention before the 2015 election 6 riding associations proposed cannabis legalization but the committee changed it to reaffirm the policy of the day which was decriminalization. That right there might have made the difference between winning or losing in 2015. It was Trudeau's first tactic for labeling himself a progressive. The NDP turned themselves into dinosaurs by refusing to support it. 

On the other hand there is danger in giving members too much power. I would say there is a high risk they would support so-called "decriminalization" of prostitution which would pretty much mean giving up winning government. This is not New Zealand. The campaign demonizing the NDP would be tailor-made to deliver a majority to Trudeau. 

So how much can members to trusted not to destroy the NDP's chances of winning power? It's all very well to be noble and choose the path you think most righteous but right now climate change is destroying the world as we know it. That has to take precedence over the interests of all groups. Neoliberalism is preventing us from dealing with it effectively. To me those two issues must take precedence over all else.

melovesproles

On the other hand there is danger in giving members too much power. I would say there is a high risk they would support so-called "decriminalization" of prostitution which would pretty much mean giving up winning government. This is not New Zealand. The campaign demonizing the NDP would be tailor-made to deliver a majority to Trudeau. 

So how much can members to trusted not to destroy the NDP's chances of winning power?

I can't tell if this is parody or not?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

melovesproles wrote:

On the other hand there is danger in giving members too much power. I would say there is a high risk they would support so-called "decriminalization" of prostitution which would pretty much mean giving up winning government. This is not New Zealand. The campaign demonizing the NDP would be tailor-made to deliver a majority to Trudeau. 

So how much can members to trusted not to destroy the NDP's chances of winning power?

I can't tell if this is parody or not?

Pondering, you can't seriously be arguing that the party has to support continuing to throw sex workers in jail to win elections.  That said, I doubt that's the main item on the rank and file's agenda-taxing the rich, free or nearly-free college, and a right to housing would probably be much further up on the list.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

melovesproles wrote:

On the other hand there is danger in giving members too much power. I would say there is a high risk they would support so-called "decriminalization" of prostitution which would pretty much mean giving up winning government. This is not New Zealand. The campaign demonizing the NDP would be tailor-made to deliver a majority to Trudeau. 

So how much can members to trusted not to destroy the NDP's chances of winning power?

I can't tell if this is parody or not?

I think it is but it wasn't meant to be.