Well, I suppose you could look at it that way, except I wouldn't go so far as a little shrimp or something. I've been before committees where they said, “How many shrimp will it take to make an offence?”
I said, “Look, you are being silly.” I've said that a normal courtesy cup of coffee is okay, unless it is drilled into the person every day.
You have to look at this with a little bit of common sense. It took me a couple of years to find out there were all these receptions on the Hill because nobody ever reports them. Generally speaking, for members, they are probably okay because if you're walking by and getting a glass of wine or something I'm not going to complain about that. But what I do have problems with is a significant spread being put out targeting the people who are the problem. I know there have been a number of misapprehensions about exactly what we're saying in my office. It gets a little complicated because the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying is putting out guidelines that interface to some extent with my rules.
I may as well beat my horse here. There is a problem between the Lobbying Act, the members' code, and the act, in that the same terminology is used to mean something different. In my act, a public office holder is a minister, a parliamentary secretary, a Governor in Council appointee, or ministerial staff. In the Lobbying Act, the term “public office holder” is used to mean a whole bunch more people, including members. When statements are being made under the Lobbying Act or under my act, they are talking about different people.
Anyway, that's one of my hobby horses.