Now that the Liberals have called an election for April 28, campaign spending rules have taken effect.
These rules strictly regulate how much parties and candidates can spend during the election campaign, which will run from March 23 until April 28. Political insiders say one of the biggest spending shifts they have seen in recent years is parties allocating more and more dollars to digital advertising.
“ There’s a larger percentage of the campaign budgets that are going to digital advertising,” said Brett Thalmann, a political strategist who served as deputy national director on Justin Trudeau’s 2013 Liberal leadership campaign. “That’s probably the biggest shift.”
Yet, campaign spending limits remain based on traditional conceptions of how campaigns are run.
Modest limits
Campaign finance rules are designed to limit the influence of money in politics. Rules governing how election money is raised apply both before and during election campaigns.
Individual donors — who are parties’ primary source of funding — can donate up to $1,750 a year per party to federal parties. And individuals can donate up to $1,750 per candidate to local candidates.
“The rules have leveled the playing field,” said Thalmann. “You have to have a wide network … you need a significant number of people to donate.”
Federal parties can also transfer funds to local candidates. There are no limits on how much parties can transfer, but election laws limit how much each candidate can spend during a campaign.
These limits are based on a riding’s population and population density. The spending limits are modest for all ridings — amounting to just a few dollars per resident.
In the 2021 federal election, limits ranged from a low of $89,000 in Charlottetown, P.E.I., to a high of $153,000 in Kootenay—Columbia, B.C. The Charlottetown riding has about 40,000 residents in a 46-sq. km urban riding, while Kootenay—Columbia has about 120,000 residents dispersed across 64,000-sq. kms.
The higher campaign spending limits in rural ridings such as Kootenay—Columbia are meant to account for higher costs of reaching a geographically dispersed population.
“If you’re in a very large, rural riding, transportation costs across the riding aren’t insignificant,” said Thalmann.
However, it is not possible for candidates to try to connect in-person with all the residents in rural ridings, says Cameron Bonesso, an Ottawa-based political consultant.
“It’s just not feasible in those ridings to be able to go door-to-door to speak to everybody, because there are times where you’ll be driving five, 10 minutes to just get to the next house,” he said.
Rather, digital advertising on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and YouTube has become a far more effective method of targeting dispersed voters with precision.
Bonesso estimates that about 80 per cent of campaign spending now goes toward advertising, which can take various forms.
Between Feb. 19 and March 20, 2025, the Conservatives spent $721,060 on Facebook and Instagram ads, according to Meta’s Ad Library. The Liberals spent $206,050 during the same period, and the NDP just $11,736.
However, like local candidates, the federal parties are also limited in what they can spend during an election campaign.
Their spending limit is based on the number of candidates a party runs. In 2021, the spending limit for a party that endorsed candidates in all 338 electoral districts was $30.1 million.
In that election, only two parties spent 90 per cent or more of their limit. And just four per cent of candidates spent 90 per cent or more of their limit at the riding level, Elections Canada reported.
Inflating expenses
Riding spending limits assume candidates in rural ridings may need to spend more to reach voters. However, the reality is most candidates are reaching voters using digital means.
The prices of digital ads are driven less by geography and more by factors such as competition for keywords, the number of advertising segments and platform selection.
“As soon as [the advertising] landscape and that environment is flooded, and there are more people occupying more space, you have to spend more dollars,” said Megan Buttle, president of data, digital and design at the political consulting firm Earnscliffe Strategies.
Thalmann agrees that digital ad prices are based on competition.
“If it’s competitive, especially if it’s a three-way race, the digital advertising cost might be higher because you’re actually competing and bidding up the price,” said Thalmann.
But Buttle notes that the ability to target ads to particular segments allows for more effective messaging.
“You really do have to understand, what does the rural audience look like compared to an urban [audience]?” she said. “What does the Gen Z audience look like compared to 65-plus? All of those things, you can really segment and target with unique messaging, with unique platform choices.”
Election spending laws have so far not changed to account for the entirely different cost dynamics of reaching voters through digital advertising.
What strategists say they are noticing is that the increasingly online world of politics can have its downsides as well.
The move to digital can amplify the “toxic political culture” associated with pursuing public office, says Thalmann, making it hard for parties to convince candidates to run.
“The attacks that candidates get, especially online, I think is a big deterrent.”
Leave a comment