Typically when MPs talk about communities of interest, there's some sort of historical evidence or commercial activity, a cultural connection that says the community is distinct in a certain way and that distinction is more drawn to a neighbouring community than it is to an adjacent one.
The argument around population is certainly valid, but when we refer to communities of interest, we as a committee try to understand because this is the argument we will have to make to Elections Canada to change what is often a complicated jigsaw puzzle, as you've said. I'm trying to understand that community of interest, and why it makes sense going one way and not another.