Mr. Siegel, it has been mentioned that banks would not necessarily be drawn to making loans or handling all the paperwork in this. If we look especially at proposed subsection 405.5(4), because of the individual's—whether it's a loan, whether it's a guarantee, a surety, or the individual's contributions, all within the limit—Would you explain to the committee where you see a major problem in that sense? And how would banks know if they're participating in something illegal without having a detailed statement from the guarantor? Because the bank has no way of knowing if he's already given a contribution of x number of dollars. The bank has no other way of knowing if he's already endorsed somebody else. I have a suspicion that if I or a candidate were to go to a bank and request a $50,000 loan, banks wouldn't necessarily be interested in handling 50 guarantors.
So we'll start with you, Mr. Siegel, and maybe you can answer for everybody else.
Mr. Chairman, my question is for Mr. Siegel, but Mr. Gardner and Mr. Hébert-Daly are also free to respond.
According to proposed subsection 405.5(4), contributions, guarantees and endorsements must respect the limits that apply to an individual. How will a bank go about determining that the individual who guarantees a loan is not acting illegally, since the bank has no way of knowing if this individual has already contributed an amount equal to the limit or has already acted as a guarantor for another candidate?
If a candidate is asking for a $50,000 loan, a bank will not necessarily want to have to deal with the paperwork for 50 individual guarantors.
I would ask Mr. Siegel to begin, because he is the one who looks most like a banker, even though he seems rather reluctant.