Thank you.
I think we're trying to move this bill forward so that we can deal with necessary problems that have arisen, and yet we come back to the usefulness of the electoral list at the end of the day. I know that's not part of this bill, but we have to ensure that our bill is able to deal with the reality on the ground of people who go to vote.
We don't have a major initiative for enumeration, so it's somewhat of a hit and miss game, which is why I want to return to Australia.
I know that the obligation to vote in Australia is different from the obligation to vote in Canada, but these are both very westernized democracies, pretty much from the same stock of tradition in some ways. Yet we're finding that the movement of population in Australia is now at the point where 15% have to rely on declaration voting.
I want to return to this, because the problem we're going to find at the end of the day—and I certainly don't think this government should be positing a situation where rural voters are somehow more important than first nation voters or any other voters.... We have to make sure that anyone with a right to vote should be able to vote, at the end of the day. Many people, whether they're urban, rural, or first nation, might be in a situation where they've moved. That's why in Australia they have a declaration system.
Would it not be possible to have a declaration system here wherein the ballots are put aside and can be checked? Whether the percentage of the declaration voting were 15% or 10%, those would be the problem votes. Those are the ones we'd be looking for, if there were going to be any issues of fraud. We need to ensure that at the end of the day we are allowing people the right, if they're lacking or have moved, to vote with the declaration system.
What is the problem with that?