Thank you.
I asked that question because, while you're quite correct, Professor Wiseman, on what you stated about Saskatchewan losing seats, that was over 45 years ago.
I have consulted with the Province of Saskatchewan and I can assure you that they are not enamoured whatsoever with the possibility of losing seats. That's the difficulty I see in both of your recommendations that we reduce seats, because it's very easy to give, but very difficult to take away.
Things have changed in the last 45 years. We are trying to foster an environment of positive federal-provincial relationships on a number of different fronts. To start alienating provinces by taking away members, in my view, would not be the best approach to foster this type of relationship.
Again, I note that it has been many years since any province has seen a reduction in its members. While I can appreciate the fact that many Canadians may say, and I believe it to be true that they're saying, “Look, the last thing in the world we need is more members of Parliament. Look at the cost, look at the expense.” That's the same argument I hear time and time again in other areas, such as nobody's worth a $1-million salary or a $2-million or a $3-million salary. It's a very easy argument to make that it costs too much money.
I think what we have to be focusing on is the fact that we need a bill that, as Professor Pal has pointed out, closes the gap on representation by population and allows provinces who have experienced a faster population growth to be represented more equally. While this bill is not perfect—it doesn't give equal representation and there's still going to be underrepresentation in British Columbia, Alberta, and Ontario—it certainly closes the gap significantly.
The question may become, do we put a cap on it? Is it 260, as Professor Wiseman has indicated, or a different cap, but no more than 308?
That's going to be a debate that's going to go on for awhile. But I do know that the provinces that would have their number of representatives reduced—despite what you say, Professor Wiseman—would take offence because of it, because I have consulted with them and I know what their response would be.
Professor Sancton, I see your hand up, so I'll certainly allow you to—