Certainly, there's always a chance that a different commissioner would interpret something differently. We would assume, though, that a specific guidance from a commissioner would set a bit of a foundation, and you wouldn't expect that to vary too much in the future. I think that the interpretation the commissioner has given to “friend” is consistent with what we see as the use of “friend” in other contexts where conduct is being regulated. There's nothing in the way she has come at the definition that would be different from what we see in the notions of other professional bodies that have codes of conduct of a similar nature.
While it's true that the act doesn't define “friend”, we think the commissioner's guidance has been sufficient to allow most public office holders to understand where the lines are in the act. The commissioner's guidance for us appears to be consistent with the sources that we would look to, were we to try to create a definition for “friend”.