I think it's a bit of both, to be quite frank. I think the debate was more one of principle than one of practical concerns in the sense that I certainly see that during the writ period, our role is to inform voters about where, when, and how to register and vote and to make sure they have the correct information.
Motivating voters during that period is a tricky thing. It's hard to motivate without touching upon issues, and that is something for parties and candidates to do. It's not our role to define the hot-button issues for the election, the ones that trigger participation. So during the writ period, our role is to inform about where, when, and how to register and vote.
When you look at it more broadly, what we found unfortunate with the current legislation is that when you're engaging youth, for example, and you're speaking to groups that straddle the line, in CEGEP, for example, in Quebec, between 17- and 18-year-olds, you're not supposed to talk about the importance of voting to young voters just because they're 18-year-olds.
I think that's a bit unfortunate. I think we do have a role to play to educate the population, especially youth, outside of the election period about the importance of our democratic institutions and about the importance of voting. However, when the writs are issued, then our role shifts, and our role is to inform voters about their voting options.