I would agree with what I think is the premise of your question, which is that it is a challenge, certainly for the commissioner, to administer different pieces of legislation in terms of the Conflict of Interest Act that you're reviewing, as well as the members' code. Then there is a further problem with a different person administering the Lobbying Act and lobbyist registration. I think it would be preferable to harmonize different provisions in one piece of legislation. It may set out different standards for different officials, and I think that's fine.
But in the case you're talking about, I think it is problematic to try to explain to a member of the public how, for the same event, a lobbyist can be found to have done something wrong, but a minister has not done something wrong from exactly the same event. I don't know the specifics of that provision and that case, and I'm certainly not judging either the lobbyist or the minister involved in that, but I think it is very difficult to explain to the public how that could be.
I think in terms of good governance and your duty to the public to legislate in the public interest, the clearer the provisions can be—and if they can all be found in one piece of legislation—the better it would be for the public.