The mechanisms I mentioned should not be established outside the proportional voting system; they should be set up within it. It is all the more important that the Committee's findings include thoughts to the effect that, when changing the voting system, the mechanisms that will make it possible to achieve society's principles of equality and inclusion should immediately be made part of the system.
Majoritarian voting systems can, of course, include mechanisms, but they are not as well-equipped as the proportional system to implement them, because majoritarian systems work one riding at a time, each riding being a silo. It's very difficult to intervene comprehensively and have an overall vision. When people vote, they don't have an idea of the party's complete team, or of the proportion of women and racialized persons. It's something you don't see. But in a proportional system, or a mixed compensatory proportional system, it's something you can see. Even the parties will benefit from showing it to us more. That should be taken into account.
However, I'd like to draw your attention to the difference between majoritarian systems and proportional systems. Even if a country that uses a majoritarian system includes institutional measures, it only achieves an average of 17% representation for women, compared to 14% if it does not include a measure. That is certainly not a target. Add 10% to each of those numbers, and you get the effect that they have on proportional systems. It's the combination. So you have to act within the voting system, not outside it.