On the question about the exception, the exception is not about the amount; it is about the fact that an activity that is going to take place during an electoral campaign that is fundamentally about politics is being excluded. That is what is wrong. Given the almost impossibility to really narrow it only to that, what you're giving rise to is people playing games, and that in itself is wrong. If you need the money, raise the ceiling, but for Christ's sake do it straightforwardly and do not invite people to play games. That's my first point.
With respect to the second issue about the candidates or nominating people and so on, the fact of the matter is that an election is a huge undertaking that requires basically almost 200,000 people to be engaged. To think that Elections Canada can have that list alone and supply all those bodies, I don't think is reasonable. I don't think that's practical and I don't think that's true.
The other point is that it's not because somebody has participated in a party or whatever that he has no merit. It's not because you engage in politics that you don't have merit or qualities. Elections Canada chooses people on the basis of merit, and that's fine. But basically to say because a candidate recommended someone, the person doesn't have merit, I think that's wrong. Basically you need to place Elections Canada in a position where it can choose, but it is normal and I think it's right for the parties and the candidates to be able to suggest names for those positions.