Interesting. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will ask the five political parties to give up the $1.95-per-vote subsidy that parties need to pay for staff and expenses. Opposition parties are likely to see the measure as a declaration of war only weeks after the election because of the Conservatives' commanding strength in fundraising. The president of the Treasury Board rejected that suggestion. “It would hurt us the most,” said Vic Toews, although he refused to confirm the measure publicly. Such a measure would cost the cash-strapped Liberals $7.7-million, the NDP $4.9-million, while the Bloc Québécois would take a $2.6-million hit and the fledgling Green party would be out $1.8-million. Stephen Harper's Conservatives, who won the most votes, stand to lose $10-million. But proportional to revenues raised last year, the taxpayer subsidy represents 37 per cent of the totals raised by the Tories. That's far less than the 63 per cent chop for Liberal coffers, 86 per cent for the Bloc and 57 per cent for the NDP. The Greens stand to lose 65 per cent of total revenues.You know, when Chretien imposed this scheme, he knew it was going to hurt the Liberals the most. That's why LeDrew called it "dumber than a bag of hammers." But he did it anyway, because he thought it was the right thing. Now, Conservatives are way ahead in the fund raising game, and so they've decided to eliminate the public funding part of it without eliminating the donation limits. It's the politically expedient thing.But that doesn't mean that it's necessarily wrong. What do you think about public per-vote funding? Because I'm not sure how I feel.