I think historically the major changes from an ethical point of view were brought when ceilings were put on expenditures. At that time it was a minority government, so you had to have the backing of other parties to do it.
That came out of the Watergate hearings in the U.S. It was in the same period. Canada did the right thing. It basically put a ceiling on expenditures. The U.S. went the other way, trying to cap the amount of contributions. The bottom line is if you cap the amount of contributions, you're going to have runaway election expenses. The only way to have elections that are competitive and fair is to have a cap, a ceiling that represents the cost. We have to stop being naive. An election across Canada costs a lot of money, so the cap has to be reasonable in that sense, but the cap makes sure you don't have runaway expenses. In that sense Canada did the right thing. In essence it came about at that time from cooperation between the parties.