I want to go back to the youth issue. It troubles me a bit.
You didn't say this, but I believe it would be almost discrimination against young people to prevent them from taking part in the life of a political party. However, the act allows a parent to use the name of a one-year-old child, which is contrary to the spirit of the act. There is indeed no age limit. It was said that you need to be at least 14 to become a member of a political party and that, consequently, young people can give money from the age of 14. We won't start playing around with three or four-year-old children.
The government is currently very serious about children not having sexual relations before the age of 16. I believe that's discrimination in that regard. It wants the age of consent to be set at 16, but there's no problem when it comes to a 14-year-old who wants to give money to a political party. That was just a comment.
The other problem concerns signatures in order to become a candidate. We have to be careful. The number can be lowered to 50, but, if it's lowered to zero, anyone on the street can become a candidate. There would be no control. Someone has to be able to support a person who wants to run as a candidate. If the person who wants to run as a candidate can't gather 50 signatures, in the public's view, that person should not be a candidate because he or she doesn't have enough support. There wouldn't be all these people giving $1,000. On the other hand, if a person who wants to run as a candidate doesn't need 50 signatures, anyone can give him $5,000 because he wants that person to run.
So signatures are a form of protection, and I think we have to be careful about that.