... then the substance (II)

Another extract from the statement by the former President of the PC Party, which was finally, this morning, posted to the web site of The Most Open And Accountable Government In The Universe:

The Elections Act, 1991, establishes that both candidates and political parties are subject to expenditure limits for their election related expenses, the purpose being to provide as level a playing field as possible in prohibiting any individual party or candidate from spending in excess of the legislatively permitted amount. For the 2001 St. Barbe by-election, the expenditure limits for both the political party and for individual candidates was $25,743. The reports filed on behalf of the PC candidate in the 2001 by-election and by the party indicated election expenses totaling $17,362. Even including the amount of $3,000 identified in the statement of facts released with respect to the Ed Byrne criminal proceedings, neither the PC candidate nor the party would have exceeded the legislated expenditure limits for the electoral district in that by-election.

Very good. Chief Electoral Officer, and former President of the PC Party, can read the Elections Act.

But you see, the thing is, the Elections Act also establishes:

306. (1) No person other than the chief financial officer of a registered party or candidate shall authorize election expenses for that party or candidate and no election expenses shall be incurred except by a chief financial officer or a person designated in writing by a chief financial officer for that purpose.

And you see, the thing is, the question is not whether the campaign expense limits were exceeded.

It's whether campaign expenses were properly authorized and reported.

Whatever the state of the other fisheries, the red herring stocks are healthier than ever.