Yes. I think there's an important balancing act in all of these discussions. Certainly, this committee is on the cutting edge of that, and I applaud your attempt. The balancing act is finding an electoral system that expresses well the political will and political convictions in the country—and in my view, various proportional approaches are the way to doing that—and Elizabeth, what you just mentioned, which is the comprehensibility of a system.
I happen to have a degree in mathematics, so formulae and complex ways of calculating votes and so forth are not dissuading to me, but I understand that it's an important selling job from the standpoint of parliamentarians to come across with a system that won't make people just tear their hair out and won't look completely opaque. That's really the cusp of the system.
For example, systems like MMP have certain disadvantages, but they seem very clear and comprehensible: you vote for a candidate; you vote for a party, and there are a couple of things you fill out. You can create larger districts with it, but it's not such an incredibly arcane approach that many Canadians might have a real problem in assimilating it.