I would like to go back to your initial information.
You said that the elimination of the mandatory questionnaire had led to an erosion in the quality of data, in 3% of the regions in particular. I would like to point out that these are almost all remote areas. This tells me that Statistics Canada may provide us with erroneous data regarding the situation in an urban area. So there is indeed real erosion. Is the level of data quality erosion much more serious for the truly remote areas, especially if those 1,128 subdivisions on which you have no data are systematically remote areas? Does this mean that Statistics Canada can no longer provide us with reliable information on well-defined areas that may only represent 3% of the population, but perhaps 70% of the population that resides in the far north?