The answer is no.
My second question goes a bit to voter engagement, and Mr. Kerwin, you raised that good point. We've heard testimony from some witnesses that ID or administration requirements actually have nothing to do with engagement. People decide either before or after to vote.
I have a suggestion, Ms. Eng. We've heard a lot about groups—seniors, students, first nations—that some people are suggesting would be disenfranchised by the elimination of vouching, even though the Neufeld report, which outlined significant errors of over 50% in vouching transactions in 2011, did not connect those 120,000 vouching cases to those groups.
A question I would ask of you, and maybe put out to your members, is this. In terms of annex C of the Neufeld report, the list of the 39 IDs we talk about—a shelter, soup kitchen, student or senior residence, long-term care facility, and we talked about the letter or attestation from them—if Elections Canada actually were to leverage this, could you not foresee a program where we would reach out through your network to inform administrators, to inform band councils, to actually, when the starting gun goes off for an election, produce an entirely new address-driven piece of identification to actually increase voter participation in all of those disenfranchised groups under the current rules, if Elections Canada took it upon themselves?
Do you have any comments on that suggestion under the rules now?