I was just going to say that what we're dealing with here are just a number of different variables. You have to decide and you have to prioritize them. We're trying to take into account the pressures that you face, the very real pressures as an MP in representing people, and the differences between rural and urban regions, and then the difference between representing Brampton West and Davenport—which I think has perhaps even half the population of Brampton West. So that's different. You have to reconcile those principles.
But it seems to me that the principle that's been driving this committee's work is the notion of proportionality among provinces. And it hasn't been about compensating rural members for their issues in terms of the differentials from one district to another district, and so on. If you want to somehow incorporate that into the act, I guess you could. Or you could try to take, as I'm suggesting, administrative measures to accommodate that through greater resources.
When I hear about constituency offices, does it have to be the case that everyone gets that same number of people in a constituency office? Maybe the people in rural constituencies need two or three constituency offices with more resources, and maybe that would be the case for the north or suburban regions.