Okay.
This whole issue of the minister having the ability, under some method of disturbed leadership, of disenfranchising elected members is an issue that I'm struggling with right now. In some ways, it's contrary to what....
Allegations do not prove the case. The principle, I think, is that the people who elect someone should have a choice about that person and should actually have to live with that choice, to some extent. That's how we grow up in a democracy. The choices we make are the ones we have to live with. They're not choices that are simply determined after the election. People have a responsibility to make a decision before an election about the character and about the likelihood of the leadership achieving their goals.
Is that similar in first nations? Do you think that principle follows in first nations?