An investigation by the Investigative Journalism Foundation and CBC has uncovered a network of companies that obscure the identities of top political donors in Saskatchewan. Over the past decade, seven companies connected to the Rawlinson family have donated more than $460,000 to the Saskatchewan Party. Critics argue the province's minimal regulations create a system ripe for corruption.
Unrestricted Political Financing
Saskatchewan is one of only three jurisdictions in Canada that allows corporations, unions, and associations from anywhere in the country to donate unlimited amounts to provincial political parties. This lack of restrictions makes it challenging to trace the origins of large contributions.
According to Duff Conacher, a democracy watchdog, the current system "is a recipe for corruption, waste of the public's money, trading of favors and other abuses of power."
Rawlinson Family Connections
Brandt Tractor, a core business of the Brandt Group, made the largest single corporate donation of $10,000 to the Saskatchewan Party in 2025. However, the next five top corporate donors are less transparent. Corporate records show these companies, registered in three provinces, are all owned by members of the Rawlinson family, which also operates a broadcasting network with six radio stations in Saskatoon and Regina.
The Rawlinson family has consistently supported the Saskatchewan Party through affiliated entities like Rawlco Radio and Rawlco Capital, which together donated $9,200 in 2025.
Lack of Transparency
Christopher Cochrane, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, noted that Canada lacks comprehensive data on beneficial ownership of companies. This allows individuals to use numbered companies to donate while keeping their names off the political donations register. "For all we know, there are dozens and dozens of numbered companies making donations. Any number of them could be controlled by one person behind the scenes," he said.
The Saskatchewan government maintains that its disclosure requirements provide sufficient transparency, but voters would need to pay for corporate searches to identify the true donors behind the top contributions.
