Mr. Speaker, it actually addresses some of the questions that are raised by the Frank judgment, which is what we do as legislators. We look at the results of rulings, our different policy opinions and we come forward with legislative solutions to deal with such things.
In this case, there are some issues that are raised by the ruling. For example, how do we deal with electors living abroad in terms of which riding they would vote in? In Canada, one has to show proof of residency in a certain riding, if one is a resident of Canada and living in Canada, in order to vote there. That is a connection with the local MP.
We have had so many chats in this place, especially through the Reform Act, with regard to how we strengthen democracy. That connection with one's local MP is a very important part of that. One of the things the bill addresses is how we would ensure that those living overseas, those people who are caught under the Frank ruling, would have a proven link to their riding. Therefore, there are measures in the bill which deal with that.
We also have measures in the bill which deal with things such as could a ballot be sent to the wrong address? If somebody is getting registered in perpetuity, can we change that so we ensure ballots are not sent in the wrong direction? The bill deals with those sorts of practical things.
It is really a question of what the Frank ruling means. To us it means that, while this decision has been made, we certainly have to address the realities that it has presented to us, and there are several very good measures in the bill that would do that.
I also think the committee will hear some good witness testimony. My colleague will have an opportunity to continue this line of debate in that forum.