But what you did was the right thing to do—you were a new Assembly Member and you were introducing yourself to people in Nelson. But the people in Nelson we're confused—they thought that there was a new Assembly Member and I'd somehow stood down. People didn't understand that they had more than one Assembly Member representing them with this dual system. That electoral system doesn't work and it needs changing. I think that that should be part of what is looked at, and I think the only way you can argue for more Assembly Members is if you also argue for electoral reform that is more representative of the society we seek to represent.

In a multi-Member constituency—and I suspect using the model that Laura McAllister proposes—the kind of constituency we'd have in Caerphilly, perhaps you and I would both be Assembly Members representing the same constituency. Well, that's fine, because then you've got a clear explanation of why you were there, what you were there doing, and I would also argue it would enforce parties to work together better than the current system does. And also, it would be more representative of the percentage of the vote, because currently, even with the D'Hondt system, this Assembly is not electorally representative of percentages. So, it currently doesn't work, and I urge—. I know committee members have taken a step back from taking these quite bold positions, but I argue for these positions—. As a backbench Assembly Member, I argue for these positions. I think you should be looking deeply at a fairer electoral system, more Assembly Members taking on more scrutiny roles, and that balanced across a more balanced Chamber, and I think we can win that argument publicly, especially with no MEPs and probably fewer MPs, too, in the future. I think that argument can be won if we are bold enough and we make those cases.

And also, if you've got a good representative democracy, there will be no need in future for direct democracy, because your representative democracy will be functioning. We can take the divisions on behalf of society. We don't have to pass those divisions on to citizens in the form of referendums in future—[Interruption.]—I would argue. I would argue. Mark Reckless, I'm not arguing on behalf of my party.

So, with these cases being made, my question to you, Dawn, is: your committee's got a consultation opening on 19 February—I found it quite hard to find the detail of that consultation on the website, so I think it would be helpful to make that more user-friendly. And also, how are you going to make this—? The words used in the consultation are not the kind of words that I would, for example, be able to share on Facebook. How are you going to get people responding to that consultation in the first instance? Because if all of these arguments I've put are going to be out there, it must be accessibly done, and I don't think that that first consultation is necessarily as accessible—notwithstanding the people's assembly—I don't think that that first consultation is as accessible as it could be.