You have before you someone who has often been mistaken for the speaker of the House of Commons. When I would meet people, all over Quebec, they would ask me whether I was not the speaker or the former speaker of the House of Commons. I would then have to tell them that there were two kinds of Parliament, and the other one was called the National Assembly.
For the purpose of the report on the estates general held in 2001-2003 chaired by Claude Béland, I had recruited a committee of non-partisan citizens of all stripes. One of their recommendations was to increase people's civic competence. The idea was to put great emphasis on education and citizenship, both among young people and among adults. When we see how many adults are semi-illiterate or struggle with societal codes, we realize that we have a lot of catching up to do.
You have heard from Professor Henry Milner who, at the time of the estates general, wrote a book titled Civic Literacy. He carried out a comparative study between civic literacy here in Canada and civic literacy in some northern European countries. The conclusion was very clear: here, civic literacy is weak compared with what it should be and what it is in countries with the same or similar standard of living.
For such a change to be made, it is clear that people must be educated. In my opinion, the lack of a referendum would not mean that clear and specific explanations on what the change will entail should not be provided. In fact, it would be easier for Canadians to understand what is happening, as Mr. Broadbent was saying, if a political consensus was reached or there was the largest possible political majority in this committee and in the House of Commons on this issue. It is important to know what would reassure people. All the political parties should agree on a change, and members should not pass the buck by saying that they will propose five options from which to choose.