In his presentation, Mr. Croken suggested that for economic reasons it would probably be acceptable to do the two together, except that the same problems might not arise in a similar context in Prince Edward Island, with 97,000 electors.
When Mr. Essensa's predecessor testified the other day, he talked about the referendum that was held in Ontario. And you touched on that point indirectly. He explained that it was much more an administrative sort of referendum. It was a question about the election method that should be used. So the politicians did not get as actively involved.
Take the example of a possible referendum in Quebec dealing with the yes or the no. In a former life, I was an election campaign and referendum campaign organizer, and I find it hard to see what could be done to apportion or divide up the expenses. It would be somewhat chaotic to ask our official agents to determine which part of our trip outside the riding should be allocated to the election and which part should be allocated to the referendum. If I understand correctly, you prefer to keep it separate.
In any event, when the witness was questioned last week, I understood that in Ontario, when it was administrative as it was in the past, the situation was different. However, it was a fairly divisive referendum, if you will...