Thank you.
Minister, I welcome you, too, and I would ask you to get out your pen, because unlike my colleague, I have a whole bunch of questions. I think I'll just put them forward at the beginning and then give you a chance to answer them.
I'm sure it didn't escape your notice, but I am a woman in politics. I have to tell you that it's interesting that your opinion isn't that women in politics have trouble raising funds, because I'm here to tell you, after 10 years of public life, that women do have a problem raising funds. Sometimes it's the fact that they don't have the equity or credit history that a lot of their male counterparts have. So I'd be interested to know if this committee or you, when you wrote this, consulted with the real experts, such as bankers, to find out if that would be a problem.
I'd also like to ask about how this bill will impact the role of funds like the Judy LaMarsh Fund—set up in the Liberal Party years ago because of this impediment to women raising funds—which donate to female candidates, and something like Equal Voice, which also funds female candidates, again, because of the historic reality that women cannot raise funds.
You started by talking about some of the changes, and I am sure you didn't mean to mislead anyone, but from some of the wording in the bill and from some of your comments, you'd almost think that somebody can currently walk away from loans and that these can be done in secret. I guess I'd just like to put on the record that under the current law, the details of loans, including every loan in the name of the lender and the guarantor, must be, and are, publicly disclosed. So I would just like to put that on the record. That is the case, as it currently exists.
You listed, at the beginning, some of the efforts your government has made to enhance transparency and accountability in public life. But it's interesting. Are any of these initiatives ever going to address third-party advertising and spending? I look south at this, where we've all seen some of the effects of the political action committees in the United States. Nationally, we have the National Citizens Coalition, and I'm wondering how, if at all, there is any effort to address these kinds of expenditures—which I would tell you do impact the outcome of elections.
The other issue that I don't see covered right now, and which I think would be interesting to explore.... I can choose any number of floor crossings, but I think I would choose Mr. Emerson's, because his was probably one of the more recent floor crossings. Under this regime, how, if at all, would the Liberals—who were so upset with that floor crossing two weeks after an election—recover the money if they had taken out a loan? What would their recourse be to recover that money, because it seems to me they had legitimate umbrage? So I'd like to hear how you would address that, if at all, through this.
And my last question would be, are we sure this is charter compliant? Has that question been referred to an expert, and has that been answered?