Chair, I'm happy to start.
I would say that the fundamental premise underlying this is that we assume that any restrictions that are placed on the right or the opportunity to vote should have a reason behind it. There should be evidence to demonstrate that this is necessary.
To the best of my knowledge at least, the provisions in Bill C-23 aren't correcting a problem. There's an administrative problem with how things are recorded when people vouch, but there's not a problem in terms of ineligible voters being allowed to vote or at least there's no evidence of that problem. So I would say that with other changes that have been made in the past that are more restrictive, I'd have to look at the evidence that existed there, but I would say that no, we wouldn't have supported those changes either. I can't speak to what the CCLA did or didn't do at that time. I wasn't with the organization at that time.
We're talking about people's right to exercise their democratic will, so we should be correcting a problem if we're placing more restrictive parameters on their ability to do that.