I think one of your greatest challenges in the dealings of the subcommittee is that you're dealing with definitions that were meant and designed for a relationship between an employer and its employees. It is difficult. I think you hit it right on the nail that there's an absence of a single figure of authority that would represent the employer that could impose the sanctions or disciplinary action. Basically, these definitions were designed in an employment relationship. Now you have the challenge to transpose that into a context where you're all equivalent, and there's no one to make a decision and to take sanction.
The question you may want to ask yourselves is whether that definition is the right one, rather than starting with the definition. I was heavily involved in the drafting of this policy, and I admit that I did a lot of copy and paste, mainly on our own in the House administration, where we manage the harassment prevention policy. The policy we have at the House administration is heavily modelled on the Treasury Board and other employers. So that's the context. It's an employer-employee relationship, and that policy was designed in that context.