Again, I think we should go back to the point that the penalty for a breach of the substantive provisions of the act would be a matter between the Prime Minister and the particular public office holder, and the Prime Minister is accountable to Parliament for what actions are taken.
So to use an extreme example, if there is a minister who has violated a provision of the Conflict of Interest Act, and the commissioner gives a recommendation to the Prime Minister saying that the minister should not sit in the House and vote on those matters, and the minister refuses to follow that and tries to sit in the House and vote on those matters, I suspect that person would not be a minister for very long. And if he or she continued to engage in that behaviour, I suspect the Prime Minister would have a pretty interesting time in the House.
Just to draw the point, that is the mechanism intended here.