Thanks. I guess that confirms some of my concerns with this. You've got all these candidates who could be running in an election, some of them without a hope of winning and certainly in no position to influence anything. They're a candidate; they're not in a position of power. I would think this provision could have the effect of keeping some people from even running in an election or in a nomination process, and I don't think that's what we want to do. We want to encourage participation in the democratic process. If someone is in no position whatsoever to have any influence, what could be the possible benefit of asking them to take these major financial steps? If they're perhaps in a riding where their party is going to get 2%, 3%, or 10%, they want to carry the flag in their riding, but they may not want to jump through these hoops that are set out.
I have one more question. If we're trying to eliminate undue influence or if we're trying to prevent someone from benefiting themselves, wouldn't that only apply in a case where someone was actually in a position of power, in a position to benefit themselves? I guess I don't see how a candidate for a political party would be in that position at all.