We can look at a bunch of different areas. Your question is multi-faceted, so we could go on.
Ridings change. They are often arbitrarily decided. I think the community itself is abstract. Historically, the local riding connection was quite abstract. It depends on how far you want to go back. In the 19th century, Canada had mixed member ridings. There were two members per riding, and they borrowed that from Britain. That changed over time.
What I'm trying to say is that the concept of the evolution of representation has changed over time. When we look at the current model of elections, we see there's no question that Canadians place value on local representation. If I have a problem because my CPP isn't coming through, then I can call you up and ask if you can help me out. There is a connection there, but I don't see how electoral reform of any of the models that are presented to the committee, whether it's a proportional system or an alternative ballot system, would somehow erode the relationship between individuals and their elected representatives. In fact, wouldn't it open it up?
We can see representation as an evolution, and not something that's been fixed over time. We see all the time that parties parachute candidates into ridings who don't have any organic connection to the riding. My point is that it's changing over time. There's no one direct, fixed moment when citizens say, “This is my riding and my representative.” My argument would be that it's fixed, and it doesn't mean it can't be changed.