Electoral Reform committee  —that another system yields naturally more women. It doesn't, and I'll point you to another example.

Electoral Reform committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll simply say that in Ontario there has been a dramatic increase in the number of female MPs, and that's been done under a first past the post system. If the parties are serious about making sure that women are well represented, then they should run more women as candidates.

Electoral Reform committee  It's coincidence; it's not causal.

Electoral Reform committee  It's coincidence.

Electoral Reform committee  Run more women as candidates.

Electoral Reform committee  I'll say this about what would likely happen in that kind of scenario. If the government unilaterally changes the rules by which Canadians elect their Parliament, and if this is accepted, you are going to be setting a precedent whereby the next government can change the rules also—it's as simple as that—and we're going to wind up in a situation in which potentially any government that is not happy with the result may roll the dice, change the system again, and may win big or may win less big.

Electoral Reform committee  I always see complications with the other systems. At the end of the day, I'm not sure what they bring to the table that's fundamentally different, if you have a larger riding and have three members of Parliament for it and all three of them from different affiliations, rather than one riding that has a member of Parliament for it who is directly accountable.

Electoral Reform committee  Mr. Deltell, I'll give you a single example: the riding creation, in 1917, and the electoral system distortions at the hands of the Conservative government and the Unionist government. Otherwise, in most cases, there is justification for the policies that were chosen by governments and supported.

Electoral Reform committee  What I meant was that we want a Parliament that will support a government, where the government is responsible and where it can get the support of a majority in Parliament. Whether it comes from one party or a variety of parties doesn't really matter. You want to have a system that is as stable as possible.

Electoral Reform committee  Depending on what is being proposed, the Supreme Court would have to make a decision and determine whether it applies or not. I think it's very hard to predict at this point what they would finally decide. I find this Supreme Court particularly difficult to decipher anyway. But I think the Jennings test does compel the government to make its case to the people, because we would be moving away from precedence and we'd be moving away from an established practice in this country that has lasted far longer than this country.

Electoral Reform committee  There is no argument against the convention. When the Supreme Court of Canada was asked in 1981, they said these conventions matter and the Government of Canada has to abide by those conventions, the government has to work to build substantial agreement among the provinces. The government, therefore, had to abide by that rule.

Electoral Reform committee  All right, I'll come back to it.

Electoral Reform committee  Peter Hogg said, in his Constitutional Law of Canada, “there is a stronger moral obligation to follow a convention than a usage, and that departure from convention may be criticized more severely than departure from usage.” Convention matters.

Electoral Reform committee  We don't have any data on cynicism. It's important to recognize that. As a trained historian, I tend to put things into context historically. Having read what politicians experienced in the past, I don't have the sense that people are more cynical today than they used to be. There were times in history when prime ministers lost in their own ridings.

Electoral Reform committee  I like this committee a lot.