Well, the guidance was looking at conflict of interest in terms of placing a public office holder in a conflict of interest. Rule 8 hasn't changed. The guidance is just that, it's guidance, and it's consistent with what the court instructed I must look at, in terms of it no longer being simply a “real” conflict of interest, but actually a reasonable apprehension of it.
Political activity may vary in terms of the different activities. I mean, the guidance was set up to provide lobbyists with some sort of criteria they can use to assess whether the activities they want to do on the political side may affect...and what they wish to do on the lobbying side. In terms of being prescriptive, that wasn't within the mandate, I felt, because what may be acceptable in one circumstance may not be in another.