I hear that, Minister, but what you're suggesting is that the application of equality to Quebec, given everything else, is an okay standard for you, that there is nothing unique, and that the motion meant nothing. Is that what the government is saying? Was it to pacify Quebec? Did it not really mean anything?
When we looked at that motion, we thought it meant something. To give effective protection to that is why we think we ought to be moving to the 24.35%. With great respect, all I'm hearing you say, Minister, is that everybody is equal. Well, the Yukon is not equal; and P.E.I. is not equal in terms of their Senate seats and their House seats. We have an asymmetrical country anyway.
So why would the government that brought in that important motion, that historic motion, not take the next step and give some meaning to it so that there is real protection behind it?