Yes. To go back to my general point, when it comes to mechanisms, I'm not married to anything in particular. If we want to do first past the post, that's a possibility too.
It's just my observation that this has been the way things have been going. If the committee wants to go there, I don't have a particularly strong opposition to it, but preferential ballots is the way a lot of nominations have been going. It's the way a lot of people do argue for things. I have problems with.... I'm a supporter of first past the post in many situations myself, but I thought this might be what might engender the largest amount of support. In particular, having looked at the situation in U.K. with their committees, eight were unanimous—there was no contestation for the post—but some of them were very multi-tier candidates situations, with many candidates for the same post.
The other thing I looked at was how our parliamentary associations are run. Our parliamentary associations use the preferential ballot, so I thought that might be the easiest for members to carry forward. Also, even though we do it over many rounds, we effectively have a preferential ballot when we elect the Speaker of the House.