Okay, good. I'm pleased to hear that, because to me the biggest challenge those members had was an inability to go out and raise money year over year.
Your idea of having the EDA and even the party involved when a candidate is chosen is wise, perhaps, because the legislation calls for that debt to fall back to the EDA after three years, so that check box makes sense. However, I think it is neat but unworkable for both nominations and leadership. Let me explain why.
What if you're in a nomination contest and an EDA or the party doesn't want a particular candidate in the race and disallows any kind of bridge financing? I could say the same thing for a leadership contest. With all due respect, in the current Liberal leadership race there are 10 candidates at this point. One of the criticisms we hear, and this is from Liberals themselves, is that you really should be a top-tier candidate, an elected member. What if the party simply refused to extend any kind of loan provision to those candidates and thereby put them out of bounds?