It gets back to the point that Monsieur Proulx was making in our earlier discussion, that I don't think any of us are averse to discussing this issue, perhaps even in some depth.
I'll just throw this on the table. As is the case for the other one, if the end result is not that there either exists now sufficient sanction or that we're going to recommend some sort of sanction, this type of thing is just going to continue to go on.
My colleague and I were just discussing the issue of the Rick Mercer Report and what he uses. He has been asked to desist with that. He takes pictures out of the House of Commons from question period, presumably from debates or whatever, that run on CPAC, and then he distorts them. All of our leaders have been treated this way. It's extremely disrespectful, and it's against the rules. But if there are no sanctions that go with the rules.... Mr. Mercer has not stopped doing this. He just continues to do it, and in any likelihood, if there were a fine, it would probably be CBC that would pay it, and the taxpayers would pay, and they would just ask for a bigger subsidy, I guess. I don't know.
Maybe it wouldn't solve anything in this particular case, but my point is valid, I think, in that there has to be some sort of sanction at the end of the day. Otherwise this is just going to continue to snowball. I know that all parties, and certainly the whips, have discussed this whole issue of blogging and that kind of stuff, and of having access to certain videos, which we then see on blogs. That's the issue here. We're going to have to deal with it as a Parliament. But the end result is that if we're not prepared to say at some point that there's going to have to be some sanction to deter people from doing it, we can talk about it until the cows come home--which was Monsieur Proulx's point--and nothing is ever going to change. It'll only get worse.