Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Madam Minister.
In the time I have I want to start by publicly thanking the government for making the commitment that was in the Liberal platform part of the Speech from the Throne, and for saying more clearly in the Speech from the Throne what wasn't said in the platform, which is this: “To make sure every vote counts...2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.” I'll put on the record that I intend to hold you to the promise. I think this is the one chance in a generation to get fairer voting in Canada—and it isn't that we haven't tried before.
I have a few little historical factoids before I ask you a question. The first parliamentary committee to take up a study of proportional representation to replace first past the post was in 1921, and there was another in 1937. Our system of voting wasn't designed for 19th century Canada; it was invented when people thought the earth was flat. I would also add one more change made by Parliament that I think is even more fundamental to how we voted, which was in 1970 when, for the first time ever, the identity of the candidate became subservient to the name of their party. In the 1970s the first elections were held in which the name of the party was next to the name of the candidate on ballots.
I would note one quick thing. In my own riding, I've already done a survey of every household, and 82.4% of the Saanich-Gulf Islands residents who reported in the survey want proportional representation. That said—and here ends the thank yous—we have a problem, and that is the legitimacy of the process we undertake. There is more in our current media attacking the process to get rid of a perverse voting system than there is on why we need to replace it in the first place. Moreover, the legitimacy of the process is undercut by the very point my friend Mr. Christopherson made, which is that to do the right thing here may mean that a majority government of Liberals choose a voting system that goes against their self-interest. That tends to make people's cynicism rise above their willingness to suspend disbelief. I'm on the side of suspending disbelief. I'm on the side of getting a fair voting system out of this group of 11 MPs who can vote, and our chair.
I'd like you to give us your word—and people may think the word of a politician doesn't mean much, but I have a lot of respect for this minister—that you will fight for whatever this committee recommends when it comes time to take a report to cabinet?