There is no perfect political finance regime that absolutely prevents the interference of foreign monies in the Canadian political process.
As I believe the CEO said this morning, we are always looking for a balance between not encouraging political chill in the environment of political communications on behalf of political actors and, on the other hand—and Canadians feel very strongly about that—ensuring that foreign money doesn't enter our elections in any meaningful way that could impact outcomes or even impact individual vote calculus.
Creating this balance is a very difficult legislative task. The 10% in owned funds may still invite mechanisms or ways in which foreign money could, in a very indirect way, enter into it. It doesn't completely exclude that possibility, but we see the ways in which government legislation—in tandem with other pieces of elections legislation, such as regulated spending limits—has ensured that this sort of influence could only go so far.
The 10% provision needs to be read with the other elements of election law to determine the extent to which it can prevent foreign interference. It may be imperfect, but it may create some of that balance in allowing political expression for actors such as unions and corporations, which have otherwise—and I think quite rightly—been prevented from making monetary contributions in other ways.