The Chief Electoral Officer, with respect to these exceptions or these conditions he has to pass judgment on, indicated there's an absence in the bill of a requirement to provide, but he can ask for documentation, require documentation. He even suggested that he might want the “power to examine” in order to know whether something has been written off correctly, in accordance with the normal accounting practices of the bank, and that a binding agreement to pay isn't being used as just a constant way to kick something down into the future.
One would have thought this would be extraordinarily rare for the reasons that you're giving. Would you have any objections to the Chief Electoral Officer being given powers, written into the bill, to actually require documentation or to even examine?