Understandably the public's eyes generally glaze over when they are asked to review the slew of electoral systems and their copious amounts of acronyms like FPTP, MMP, STV, AV, IRV, etc... Understandably, the names of the electoral systems are unfamiliar to most voters.
I don't recall the public ever being asked to review more than two options, one of which was the familiar status quo.
But a lack of interest by the public does not mean that governments should ignore issues it deems to be important. I think if a government deems that it is important to deal with an issue, it should go ahead and deal with it regardless of how popular or unpopular the issue is with the general public.
Do we elect representative governments to deal with those things that are of concern to us, or those things that aren't?
We've all seen this argument. That the government should just go ahead and institute MMPR because the people are too thick and dull-witted to ever endorse this. Sorry, but I don't buy it. When I go to the polls, I'm electing a representative, not a third parent.