I will admit that personally, I was not closed to the idea that you examine the promises or the financial framework of the political parties. We would all be able to refer to the same person for all of the financial platforms.
To help my thinking along, I talked things over with colleagues. The exchange you had with my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie shows me to what extent this proposal is grotesque and dangerous, even for your own independence, since you must be shielded from any political intervention.
Since I have been a professional politician for close to nine years now, I can tell you one thing: during an election we are anything but objective. I often remember with pleasure — and I even congratulate myself — some of the formidable, if not epic, debates I had with the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.
Once we are elected, our tone gets quieter, which is not a bad thing. I'm sure that the volume will be turned up again in two and a half years, and that is part of our DNA in this profession.
My question is the following: what do you think of the fact that a political party can ask for such a thing?