I believe that that is a separate matter, as I briefly mentioned in my presentation.
The committee should consider—or review and perhaps even reaffirm—the option of two concurrent events being governed by two separate schemes. That is what happened in 1992. I would point out that that raises some issues for electors in terms of harmonization of rules between the two statutes.
It is up to the committee to determine whether it is appropriate to proceed to public consultations dealing with only one question but subject to two different legal frameworks.