Yes, there is another way to deal with it, and I'll mention it in a second, but Quebec essentially decided that even with the $100 donation limit, one person from a big business with thousands of employees could walk into the party offices and say these thousand cheques are from their employees, wink, wink. Maybe the party would report it, but to prevent that situation, a donation over $50 goes to Elections Quebec, which verifies it is from the person giving it and not someone giving it on another person's behalf, and then Elections Quebec forwards it to the party.
The other way to deal with that problem is to do what's done in the U.S., which is to require key identifiers of a donor to be part of what's disclosed. In this way, if you suddenly saw in the quarterly donations, or in real-time donations as in the Ontario disclosure, that 1,000 people had all given $100 on the same day from this company, that would be a suspicious pattern that Elections Canada could quickly audit.
The Elections Quebec system is slightly better because executives and their spouses and their dependants could all have different last names. It can be difficult to track funnelling, and it's just better to limit it to $100. You don't have to worry about funnelling so much, but an extra step to ensure it never occurs should be part of a democratic and ethical system.