I think the response of all the parties was similar, certainly some of the parties. As regards your party, I believe your leader indicated that he was still hoping that Mr. Mayrand would revise his interpretation. I know that was the view that I expressed on many occasions. Because it was, by the Chief Electoral Officer's own admission, within his ambit to interpret it either way, our hope was that one could resolve the issue simply, quietly, and without controversy, through a reasonable interpretation.
We know that in Quebec, where a similar issue arose, the Chief Electoral Officer did change the interpretation, however only after a controversy. We were hoping that the interpretation could change before a controversy occurred. Sadly, that did not happen, even after the controversy occurred.