But broadly, Chair, just in terms of the intention, I'm totally in agreement. And I was impressed by Professor Becker's attempt to go at this a different way, which is to track your proportionality rather than start from some opposite thing of “imagine the House is 5% this way and 10%...”. That actually answers the wrong question. This answers the question we're actually going for, which is the trade-off question that we keep talking about: “If you do this, you have to trade off that”.
I'm in favour of it broadly. I wouldn't mind a bit of time just to see if there's a third condition that would be helpful.