It's indeed an addition. We're keeping the $500 as it stands. I have two examples to give you. If I'm mistaken, I'll be pleased to make an adjustment.
Under section 21, if ministers do not recuse themselves in any matter that concerns them, they won't even be subject to the $500 fine, or any other fine, by the way.
According to clauses 33 to 37, every post-employment offence, particularly in the case of a former minister who shares with his associates information obtained during his employment and that is not available to the public, would not be liable to any fine, not even $500. In our view, the maximum fine should not be systematically imposed. In the case of information not of crucial financial importance, the fine could be set at $5,000. However, if it concerned a $4 billion submarine, the fine could then total $50,000.
Decisions makers could determine the amount of the penalty, to a maximum of $50,000. However, we're told that a person violating clause 21 and clauses 33 to 37, as currently worded, would not even be subject to the $500 penalty, as minor as it is. Am I mistaken?