There maybe was a bit of a misunderstanding. I don't think I said that a government is representative of a population. I said I believe in representative democracy, which is quite different.
My point was that we elect representatives and we entrust them to a certain extent to make these complex decisions for us, to gather all the evidence they need to gather, and the testimony we're hearing today is an example. Then, in this case, it's to come to some kind of consensus about what kind of a change would be good, even beyond a single party or a single government in terms of making a change of this order.
However, it's not the same as a referendum on whether to secede from Canada. For instance, clearly for a decision of that magnitude, you must consult the population in a referendum to get a yes or a no vote. Changing the electoral system, the mechanism by which we elect our representatives, is not a decision of that order.