To the third question, I would certainly answer that, yes, I think this committee and probably other consultation forums that you've pointed out should be providing input on what those acceptable pieces of identification should be.
On the all-party consultations, I haven't had any briefings from Elections Canada at this point in time, so I'm not familiar with the various networks--if I can refer to them that way--in place to carry out consultations.
I can tell you that in my current position, we do carry out extensive consultations. I think these consultations are necessary to make sure that rulings or interpretations are the right ones, the best ones. Also, they contribute significantly to voluntary compliance. When people understand what a specific ruling is all about, and they have a chance to express their views, when they have a sense that they've been heard, and they understand your thought process, I think there's certainly a better chance of generating greater compliance.
My view is that consultation should be done prior to any ruling—I'm not sure if I missed your point—otherwise I'm not sure it's truly consultation; to me it's more information dissemination. But again, I can assure you that it's certainly been my practice, in my current position, to seek views from all stakeholders before making any general rulings or decisions.
With respect to information bulletins, I will have to come back to you on these. Again, I'm not familiar with what those bulletins entail, how they were designed, and where they flow from. I would certainly be pleased to come back before you again to discuss this matter further.