In the counter-example I used—with respect to the official languages regulations pertaining to part IV of the Official Languages Act—regions with high demand are identified on a more case-by-case basis: either based on a percentage of the local population or using a real number. There are different thresholds that vary depending on the types of services and communications, but either a percentage or a specific number—a target—is used, which ensures that if the situation on the ground changes, any adjustments needed can be made.
Obviously, I had to keep my remarks brief, given that I only had five minutes, but it is clearly possible to review the designated regions every five years, as specified in the draft regulations. However, I am still concerned we might designate certain regions while losing sight of others—even those with a certain degree of vitality—where census data does not necessarily allow us to understand what is happening on the ground. Despite Statistics Canada's good will—and I am aware of the various questions, even short ones, that have been added to the census to gain a better understanding of where official language minority communities are located—people who could make use of these services are still not being captured. That was my comment.