No, I concur. As I said, I don't think that your leader did anything wrong. He was very forthright during the election: I'm looking at doing this in order to advance the social democratic ideals in which I believe. It gave him a legitimacy in my eyes that I thought Mr. Dion did not have.
I think if a Liberal leader were to go into a parallel kind of election saying, “Look, we want to win. We want a majority. We'll settle for a minority, if it's what we can get, and if we're low enough, we'll look at the possibility of a coalition”, then I'd think that's a legitimate basis on which to do it.
It does seem to me to be something that voters were right on at the moral level. I'm not arguing that the coalition would have been illegal; I'm just saying that there was something fundamentally wrong from the point of view of the participation the Liberals had in this, because they hadn't been clear. I'm really saying that I would encourage all participants to go into the next election being as forthright as your own leader was at that time.
I'm basically out of time, so I won't ask you any more questions.
Once again, I very much like the book, except for the cover art, which I think does not do justice to the seriousness and thoughtfulness of the text contained within.