I'm not trying to say that you would advise your client to do something illegal so you would get 15% of the $1.3 million. I'm not making that argument. What I would like to ask when it comes to penetration, though, is if you would advise your client--any kind of client, public or private sector--that if you want to get this message across, you need this number of rating points to say that you've really saturated that particular target area in a way that your message penetrated?
One of the things about the Canada Elections Act is that to claim a local expense it has to be at fair market commercial value; it can't be exaggerated or inflated. Yet you have three ridings here that you worked on with your client--Trinity-Spadina, Toronto-Danforth and Vaughan--all clustered in the same general area, and radio ads don't recognize electoral boundaries. They don't stop at the edge of Trinity--Spadina and not creep into Toronto--Danforth. So your clients were billed, by your invoice, $49,900 for Trinity--Spadina, $19,000 for Vaughan, and $29,000 for Danforth.
What is the real market value, then, of getting the Conservative Party message into those three ridings if you yourself say that you can't avoid the spillover from one riding to another? Why are they charged such hugely disproportionate amounts?