What this is trying to address is the issue of not going through the appropriate process for discontinuance when it is a seasonal service. Essentially, what this would do is create an obligation for larger communities, even if it is a seasonal service, to go through that consultation process in the case of a discontinuance or a reduction in service.
Is 10,000 an arbitrary number? It is, because it's a round number. Could it be amended to reflect smaller communities? I believe that's where you're going, Mr. McGuinty, and I would certainly support that. Essentially, what we're saying is that when there's a seasonal service being offered in communities of a certain size, there is an obligation, when there is a reduction or discontinuing of service, to go through a consultative process.