Mr. Walsh, in your remarks—you can correct me if I misinterpreted—I understood you to say that it was the code that should be amended, rather than the new Bill C-2 provisions in the Parliament of Canada Act.
I confess that I didn't really understand that, because the point of the letter, we thought, was clear: there is an exception for public office holders in Bill C-2, but no comparable exception for ordinary members who have these trusts under the code. It seems to me that as long as the legislative provision remains, as enacted by Bill C-2, nothing the code can do can change that. In fact, if Bill C-2 is not changed, ordinary members, under the code, will not be permitted to have the trusts.
So I wondered if you could, in your written material, either confirm that I am correct or explain where I've gone wrong, and in particular, in aid of where the letter might need to be redrafted, what you see is the problem.