It is my sincere hope and belief that there is better. It has to do with this concept that when the first-past-the-post system was created in a two-party system, more or less, in a place where it would take you a month to get from this riding to Ottawa or more, and through several means of transportation that would take you outside of the country before you got back, people voted locally. They really did. It was a local decision. The news came late about the First World War to the Yukon. It took time. The thinking, the culture, was very local.
Now we have created a culture where we are connected not just as Canadians but globally. As we do that, people are becoming disenfranchised, because they don't believe the overall representation in Parliament reflects the overall vote. For better or worse, people have begun to identify that “popular vote” means something. That is why I think an adjustment to the system....
I'm not opposed to first past the post in many ways. It's simple. It's immediate. You can see it happen. There are aspects of it that I think are good, and I'm not trying, necessarily, to throw those out. For example, in Mr. Brekke's system, you could take it and say—not that he would necessarily like that—that we'll use first past the post within that first seat, and then we'll use a second vote on a party system, maybe preferential. I don't know, but it's possible to have a blend. When I say a blended system, I believe first past the post is definitely a part of that.