Members of the committee, thank you so much for this opportunity to make a very brief statement.
The point I would like to speak to is that of a referendum, and I would like to explain why I question the need for a referendum. My first point has to do with the composition of this committee. When I look around the committee, you are members of Parliament who represent many parties. This is not a committee representing only one point of view. I think that's critical. The reason I think that's critical is that presumably in the course of your deliberations the diverse points of view of the Canadian population will come out, because you're not all of one mind. Hopefully, in representing the people you represent, the kinds of healthy debate and discussions that need to take place will be representative of what Canadians will be thinking and talking about.
The second point I want to make has to do with committee work. It is my belief that committee work is an effective way of doing business. Why? As a committee—and you are all being paid by us—you are our representatives. This is your job. Most of us have other jobs. We have families and so forth to look after. You also have families to look after, but this is your job. You have the time and structure to thoroughly investigate, to discuss and debate and hold consultation meetings such as this on the various models, so that the recommendation that comes forth for a new voting system for Canada can be an informed decision and not one based on uninformed opinion.
Thirdly, we can't have referendums on every contentious and complicated topic. I would then hold a referendum on abortion, on assisted end of life, and I could go on and on naming issues. Referendums are hugely costly and time-consuming, and it seems to me it would be much better to spend money and time on a carefully thought-out education campaign that makes clear the voting procedure and the reasons why the new system will ensure that every vote will count and be heard.
Thank you.