Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I go back to my original statement, because this is really contradicting the intent of one of the major policies and tenets of this bill, which is to make sure that someone is accountable at the end of the day.
I'll give you an example from my home province of Saskatchewan. In the last federal election—I won't name the candidate or the party—a candidate ultimately declared bankruptcy. Included in his liabilities was an $8,000 personal loan from one of my constituents. Quite frankly, I think this guy is a scam artist, and that's why I'm not going to get into details about his name or the party. Had there been this provision in place, at least this poor, naive young kid who forked over $8,000 out of his own pocket would have had some opportunity to recover his cash.
The way this bill is now, if you have a candidate who, for whatever reason, either purposely or inadvertently goes bankrupt, and sticks someone—whether it be individuals or suppliers—with unpaid bills, I just don't think that's right. It's probably incumbent upon the parties to ensure that the types of candidates they're attracting, or at least running in a federal election, honour their obligations. If they don't, then I think it's incumbent upon the party to do so.
This is a very key provision of this bill—to make sure that no one has the opportunity to default on a loan. I think we have to defeat this for that reason, so I'll be voting against this. If the candidate doesn't come up with the cash, then the party or the registered association has to.