Thank you very much, and thank you, Mr. Corbett, for coming today.
I don't think there's any question that the whole set-up and rules for Elections Canada are incredibly complicated. We belong to political parties, and you rely on your party a lot to provide you information, but even so, I find that at the end of the day you're pretty well alone. You have to figure out if you are doing the right thing or not.
So I certainly agree with you that in the majority of cases, I'm sure, where things have gone wrong it's not because of any deliberate action; it's just because it's so darned complicated. There are so many details, it scares the hell out of me. You always feel as if you're doing something wrong, and you probably haven't done anything wrong. Anyway, if that was the intended effect, it's certainly working.
I'm more interested in the informal complaint compliance process than what happens when you get to a formal investigation and maybe a prosecution, because when that happens I think another process takes over and you probably get a lawyer or something. But when it's still informal, I wonder if you have a protocol. And I'm thinking of a similar system. In most workplaces there are harassment policies, and usually there's an agreed-upon harassment policy in terms of what happens when a complaint is made. You try to resolve it informally before it goes to any formal investigation, but nevertheless there's a very clear protocol.
So, for example, when you say you send out these cautionary letters, do the people getting them know they're cautionary? It reminds me of Revenue Canada; you get this stuff and you don't know. We all deal with casework, and is this the beginning of their line where they're being easy or is it at the end of the line? For the person receiving it, it's incredibly difficult to know.
And even the little interchange here between you and Mr. Reid--around this table there may be some understanding of what these notices are on the Elections Canada site. We can wink-wink, we know what it really means, but the average person out there wouldn't have a clue.
So I am interested in what kind of protocol or process you have that provides an informed process for people, so people know where they are, where they stand. I think that's a huge issue for people, that you have the knowledge of where you are in that process and what your rights are, particularly if there are two parties involved.
Ms. Redman raised the question of confidentiality. If two parties are involved or two candidates, even if it's in the same party--maybe it's opposing parties--what happens then in terms of disclosure in this informal context? If you could respond to that, it would be helpful.