Thank you.
There was a case, and reference was made to it, in Alberta in 2017, where the same people behind the longest ballot initiative in the last couple of elections were the plaintiffs. They were successful in convincing the Alberta court that the $1,000 deposit was unconstitutional, as infringing section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but they were unsuccessful in a second argument in that same case about the 100 signatures. The judge said that was not unconstitutional; it was perfectly reasonable. Now we're talking about taking it a step further and floating the idea that perhaps there should be 100 unique signatures, which is clearly another hurdle for candidates to overcome.
In your opinion, Mr. Kingsley, would that survive a charter challenge, either as not infringing section 3 of the charter altogether or, if it did, as being a reasonable infringement, a reasonable limitation?