The question becomes...i. It's the intersection of the two. The rule hasn't changed, it's the interpretation that has changed.
When the court's decision came out in March 2009, it indicated that a conflict of interest is created not only when there's a real conflict of interest, but also an apparent conflict of interest. It also explained that in terms of looking at this conflict of interest in terms of how was the tension created between the public office holder's duty, which is to serve the public good, and a tension that might be created because of a private interest. There's been a lot of focus on political activities, but have they received gifts, have they received other.... The chalet in France for two weeks would be something that if it was in the private interest of the individual could put them in conflict. It's the proportion that they're then....
So getting someone elected is one example of advancing their private interests. It's the proportion of the degree that they work. In the guidance I provided where I'm saying you can obviously put the sign on the lawn, you can donate according to the political parties, you can attend the fundraising events and the barbecues because, yes, there's an argument that you're advancing the private interest of the individual, but you're not doing so to a higher proportionate degree, it then becomes the intersection of what they're planning to do vis-à-vis the lobbying of the individual.
The clarifications that I gave on the political activity show a continuum of how things are moving. So if you buy that ticket and attend the fundraiser, it's very different from lobbying heavily the individual or if it happens to be someone who's elected in the government, the minister and their department. I took the same sort of heavy example of where they're doing a lot of lobbying and sort of moved them up and down the scale. There are those, I do believe, who want to be in good stead and there are a number of lobbyists who have indicated--unfortunately not maybe publicly, but I'm getting a lot of comments either from my colleagues or from others--that they are happy with the guidance because it's giving them the freedom to choose which lobbying activities they want to do or which political activities or other avenues they'd like to pursue.