I'm glad you can see my enthusiasm to be here. I've missed some colleagues, and this is for me a chance to be back in the action with all of you. It's a privilege to be here.
I share entirely your concern. That's why, certainly as a starting point, having the Right Honourable David Johnston as the commissioner, as I think Mr. Lukiwski and others noted, sets up the commission, because of his role, to have a high level of independence and integrity. He, in my view, is absolutely the perfect person to fulfill that role.
He too has shared reflections exactly along the lines of what you've noted, concerning a greater legislated independence. Ultimately, in some future amendments of some elections act in some different parliament—or perhaps later in this parliament, if your committee and others want to work on that kind of change—that is in my view the ultimate assurance of independence: to legislate a structure, with the appropriate spending estimates to allow them to function independently.
The best way we could act, absent that legislation, is to use the order in council process in a transparent way to appoint Mr. Johnston, as I said, because I think doing so greatly improves the legitimate and perceived independence of the commission. It ensures also that we resist inadvertently making comments that would give the impression, as I've tried to be very precise not to do here, that the government is directing the commission, or would presume to direct him, for example, concerning what kind of advisory consultative structure he should have. Those questions should properly be left to the commissioner. He should receive advice and input, obviously, from a wide range of people, including your committee.
Again, I would welcome your ideas. If the committee has specific ideas about how we can further strengthen that independence both substantively and in the perception of it, I think it behooves all of us to try to do that work together.