Yes I'm happy to. The short and the long version of the issue of public financial contributions is simply one of giving Canadians who have more money greater access to the vote. Every time the government decides to increase campaign contributions rather than decrease them, which is what they should do, they're making a decision about whose voice should count more. I happen to think that every voice should count equally, so I am opposed to policies that increase the amount of money that any individual Canadian can give.
With respect to partisan poll workers, contrary to what I said to Mr. Richards in my previous answer, in this case I think it's really good to draw on American evidence. It shows that where the poll workers are partisan, it is more difficult for people for all kinds of reasons—there's lots of evidence for this—people who are of the non-dominant party, the non-incumbent party, to get access to the vote. They're more likely to be turned away. They're more likely to have their ID rejected as invalid. It looks to be as a result of political maliciousness that these things happen.
I organized a conference when I was at Harvard University in which we invited election scholars to have a conversation about which practices were best in Canada and the United States. It was widely agreed that the non-partisanship associated with the running of elections was the thing that Canada was best known for. This is something we should protect because it is something that the world should model. It's not something that we should reduce or change.