That's right. I agree.
When I say “public debate”, we're not caught in this situation that other countries are of people being for and against. We're very lucky. Most Canadians are “for”, so once you have a really big national consensus it becomes so important to say, “What are the roots of this national consensus? How does it work? How can we make it work better? How can we get to the roots of the problems? Why do we have these problems?” Somehow they have been lost, perhaps because of a technicality, but that technicality wouldn't have held had the theories been clearer and more popularly understood.