I appreciate your saying that it simplifies things, but I'm assuming that I could give you any piece of legislation and the CBA could find 71 items they'd like to see change in any piece of legislation that exists.
Let's take the first section here. I don't see what the downside is of just leaving it in there. It won't really affect the vast majority of not-for-profit organizations, non-share capital groups. For the few that it does affect, why not have it in there? I don't understand.
I actually have started a charity for performing arts, for example, in the city of Burlington. It's an organization called PAB, and you can go to the website and check it out. We had a lawyer on our initial board, so he helped us out a little bit with that, but it's not like the director sat around and read the act on forming a new charity. We just did it. Isn't that really what's going to happen for the vast majority of charities in this country?
Then, (a), I don't understand why leaving some of this stuff in there for those it affects when it becomes an issue is.... I'll give you a chance to answer, and then I'm done asking questions. And (b), you showed us the act and you showed us the regulations. I'm of the view, sort of opposite to yours, that the act should maybe be simpler. Let's put things in regulations where the rubber hits the road on those things, because legislation is for the lawyers and regulations are for people who are actually operating the thing. Moving it from one piece of paper to another doesn't mean much to me. I would like to see less regulation in here, and put it out of legislation, sort of the opposite of what you proposed earlier.
I'll let you respond to both those issues.