Going back to an earlier exchange, I can remember this question coming up when the court case was going on and the government was considering this. There was a back-and-forth about where Canadians abroad would cast their ballots. I believe that when the decision was made that they would cast the ballot in the last riding they lived in, it had the advantage of being clear. You're not making a judgment. You're not asking people to say what their favourite riding is and where they feel the closest affinity. You're not doing that. You're asking what the fact-based...to eliminate any possibility of people trying to make judgments about where they ought to be voting and there being inconsistencies in the application of the accessibility to the ballot.
If we've made the choice to decide where people will vote, it puts us in a difficult spot for a Canadian citizen who has never lived in a riding in Canada.
I would love to give you a clear answer to this, but I think we're seeing a limitation in the value we chose to emphasize, which is clarity in the attachment to the last riding. You might have lived there for two weeks and spent your whole life somewhere else. I am a Cape Bretoner at heart. I will be forever, but if I moved away, I'd have to vote in Ottawa. I'd have to vote in this riding.
I think there is a policy gap. Maybe that is the right word. It's not easy to take that principle and apply it to someone who is a Canadian citizen but who has never lived here.