Tight schedule so must smack this idiot upside the head with all possible brevity, as he mindlessly reproduces a CPC missive (emphasis added):
Statement by Conservative Party on Convention Fees
The Party’s convention arrangements in 2005 fully respected the law.
The fees we charged our delegates to attend did not exceed the costs of running the convention. The fees covered such things as meals, hall rental, security and the like, and there was no net revenue earned by the Party. Consistent with interpretations of the Elections Act and the Income Tax Act issued by Elections Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency and applied many times in the past concerning the price of admission to political events, receipts for a political contributions were therefore not issued for any part of the delegate fee.
Hall rental? Security? Since when?
Mr. MacKinnon explained that a part of a convention fee can be considered an expense for the person attending. The price of a dinner, for example, would not be considered a donation. However, other costs, like microphones and speakers, cannot be deducted, he said.
So one would think that figuring out who's correct here would be fairly straightforward, no? Apparently not, despite the fact that Mr. BBS claims to have "studied the Election Act extensively over the last six months." And, apparently, learned absolutely goddamned nothing. How exactly does one study the Election Act "extensively" for half a year and still not know what constitutes a legal deduction and what doesn't?
Take it away.