Liberal Party leadership contenders have failed to pay back their leadership debts.

No surprise there.

Nor is it a surprise the Elections Canada, in the person of Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand, has granted extensions:

Elections Canada has accepted debt paydown agreements totalling nearly $1.4 million from eight Liberals who ran for the party leadership in 2006.

But Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand is still reviewing a paydown plan submitted by party leader Stephane Dion. Dion, whose debt from the campaign was recently reported at more than $800,000, had the largest outstanding obligations from the campaign.

Toronto MP Ken Dryden was next, with $300,000 in loans to repay, all to himself as the lender, by June 3.

Deputy Leader Michael Ignatieff had a debt of $187,000.

Under federal election law, the candidates had 18 months to arrange paydown agreements acceptable to Elections Canada, or the debts would have been converted into campaign contributions.

I'll leave it to others to make allegations that the Liberals are being given special treatment.  I'd like to see the full set of extensions granted since the 2006 election to MPs from all parties before taking that step.

But with regards to the Liberal leadership contenders, I do have an immediate question.

How exactly are these paydown agreements structured?

In particular, there seems to be some very long payback periods covering a substantial amount of money.  Just about everyone has over a year to pay back the loans:

In a decision made public Monday, Mr. Mayrand said the campaigns of Maurizio Bevilacqua, Scott Brison, Martha Hall Findlay, Hedy Fry, Joe Volpe and Gerard Kennedy have until the end of 2009 to make good on loans and other debts. Deputy Leader Michael Ignatieff was given an extension until the end of June 2009, and MP Ken Dryden has until the end of June 2010.

Together, these losing candidates received extensions on $1.7 million in loans and other claims.

Are there goals to meet between now and the final payback date?  Monthly goals?  Quarterly?  And what if a goal is missed?  Does the amount simply rollover to the next goal date without any other punishment?

The reason I ask is that the Liberals might or might not be planning to trigger an election before the end of the year.  If Marc Mayrand has given the Liberals a green light on very loose payback plans, with no check on progress until the spring of 2009, then the Liberals might be able to take a vacation on debt repayment during a run-up to an election.

That would bother me.  That would bother me a lot.  To me, that would constitute special treatment.