My second question is also related to previous questions. It's about sponsorship.
I've always had this policy. I wrote it down pretty soon after I got elected that I would present to the House in the usual way any petitions submitted to me by my constituents, whether or not I agreed with them. I think that's pretty important because it's important to my belief in how we should be representing our constituents.
My concern, and I think this concern can be addressed, is there's always this confusion—and I think people have a different understanding of what it means for a member of Parliament to stand up to present a petition. There are, I think, a significant number of people who believe that means the member of Parliament supports the petition. That's why I felt I had to write things down and be very clear.
Do you think it's necessary to state very clearly that a member who sponsors a petition does not necessarily support it? Where in the e-petitions process would you do that? For example, if this e-petition process were set up and the petitioner did come to me as their member of Parliament, because the petitioner was my constituent, I feel I would be obliged to be the sponsor, but I don't want to have this big page somewhere with this petition, and then the words “Sponsor: Ted Hsu”, unless there's another line that says Ted Hsu is sponsoring this petition because it was started by his constituent and he has a duty to do that, and he doesn't necessarily support this petition.
Would that be an appropriate safeguard?