Mr. Chair, let's try to keep things in context and leave aside the religious days belonging to Muslims, Jews or Christians. That is not the basic issue. The basic issue is that all of the political parties want to expand voter participation.
The evidence that the various witnesses presented to us, including the research that has been done on the subject, cannot categorically establish that the proposals to add two days, two Sundays, are going to increase the number of voters substantially.
It has not been proved, and so I would wonder: can we find other ways to increase voter turnout? Looking at the amendments proposed by the various opposition parties, you can see that this is precisely the objective we are trying to achieve.
The Chief Electoral Officer told us about the difficulties there would be in implementing these measures—very concrete techniques. We can have fine principles, but how will it work on the ground?
Setting an advance polling day immediately before the general polling day creates significant difficulties for election workers, who will have to follow two different sets of procedures and processes from one day to the next. We have been told that in very concrete terms.
In addition there is our difficulty in attracting election workers, which has been acknowledged. It is in this much more general context that we are saying yes to an advance polling day, but a week before the official polling day, so that this confusion and difficulty don't arise. We will therefore be proposing amendments subsequently today.
On the question of the $34 million that the government's proposal is going to cost, how could we better use that $34 million to increase the number of voters? That is the issue.