Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Since we are talking about the importance of our institutions, I would like to thank my colleague, who belongs to another political party. She had the insight to see that there was a problem in an area she knows, obviously, extremely well, and she put forth a series of proposals.
I completely support the draft amendments presented today by Ms. Guarnieri. I think this is going to address some serious concerns.
I would like to summarize the situation. A university is engaged in a fundraiser of $700 million. The university could very well be paying someone over $250,000, which is the limit proposed here. However, a donor to this university will receive the only information that matters. If someone wants to make a donation to a certain university and sees that the five top earners make over $700,000, $800,000 or $900,000 per year, this person may find those amounts to be completely outrageous. Therefore, the donor would have access to the information he or she needs to make an informed decision. As for everyone else, it is not up to us to decide what is a reasonable salary.
I find this is an extremely good thing.
As Mr. Chong did previously, I will ask whether we could amend or improve this bill. I will ask our caucus to support your bill with the amendment you have just proposed.
My question is on the amendment to the very last part, which adds a few words on the compensation of the five managers or employees. Does the definition of employee include people who might have been hired as contract workers?