Procedure and House Affairs Committee on April 30th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Madame Latendresse, four minutes, please.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is quite general. When you asked to come here to testify, you all received a letter from the clerk, together with a list of questions that you were going to be asked. Once again, Ms. James has just talked about consensus. But one of the questions went like this:

“Finally, have you talked to your colleagues about these proposed changes, and if so, did they agree?”

From what I understand, no one here consulted Ms. Sitsabaiesan about the changes you are proposing. You did not consult her, but you say that you are in agreement. If everyone affected by these changes is not in agreement, we clearly cannot talk about a consensus.

The role of this committee is to report what was said at the commission in order to determine what can be done to improve the situation as much as possible. If there has been no consultation or agreement between everyone concerned with the changes, it is basically very difficult for us to make any decisions, because it is clear that there is no consensus.

I would like Ms. Sitsabaiesan to tell us again why she was opposed to the first version of the map and why she proposed changes to her new riding, which she supports.

I would like to know which communities of interest would be affected and why you proposed this new map.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Thank you for the question.

The originally proposed maps of 2012 saw a community called Malvern cut in half. Malvern has been identified by the City of Toronto as one of the priority neighbourhoods to ensure that it builds as a community. There is a lot of investment into that community by the city itself to make sure that a sense of community is built for larger Malvern.

Secondly, the community of Morningside Heights, directly north of Malvern, was also cut in half. Morningside Heights is a relatively newer community, a younger community that hasn't had the opportunity to establish strong roots and its own identity. The community of Morningside Heights today is reliant on Malvern for all of its community services. It's a neighbourhood of houses and some schools. There's even a brand new school that's being built in Morningside Heights today, as we speak, which is set to open later in the fall. So this community hasn't even had a chance to create its identity. It's not fair to a young, thriving community, where we are seeing the most change in population development. Population growth in Scarborough is actually in the north part of Scarborough, in Rouge River, in the Morningside Heights area, and it doesn't make sense to divide these communities in half.

Both Malvern and Morningside Heights need to be kept together because Morningside Heights is dependent on Malvern for all of its service delivery, that is, immigration, health care, child and youth programs. Everything that Morningside Heights depends on is in Malvern.

[Alexandrine Latendresse, NDP, Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC]

It's fair to say that

the argument presented by the people who participated in the commission’s public hearings. The members of the commission saw the logic that underlay that proposal. Having people attend hearings and propose changes is the normal process. That is what the hearings are for.

My impression is that saying that the commission was involved in

gerrymandering, or political interference,

adversely affects the commission’s reputation and the work it has tried to do here.

I have difficulty stating that there is consensus on the way this has happened and on what the new ridings should be. I feel that the commission really is doing its best. It is very difficult, as we have been able to see. The situation is similar in a number of places in the sense that the first map is quite different from the second one. The process requires members to come to us now to show us why these changes are necessary. But there must be consensus. You have to consult and you have to agree on the changes proposed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We are past our four minutes. Thank you very much.

That finishes that round, and we will suspend for a moment while we change our panels.

Thank you all very much for attending today and sharing with us your thoughts on your ridings.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Let's call the meeting to order, please. Thank you.

We're still here looking at different pieces of Ontario.

Mr. Woodworth, you're here all by yourself today.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I am.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I hope that means we can be prompt and efficient and get this finished.

We will give you five minutes to make your presentation, and then the members will ask you very hard questions.

Perhaps you would like to go ahead for five minutes.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I shall, and as you know, five minutes is barely enough for me to clear my throat, but I'll do my best.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I did share that with the clerk.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

The proposal, first of all, is outlined on the photograph. The current suggestion is that the south part of the current Kitchener Centre riding, everything south of Fairway Road North, would be placed into the Kitchener South riding, with property across the river in Cambridge.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Maybe you could point it out on our big maps with the laser pointer.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

It will be a little difficult, but we're talking about a line that currently runs approximately east-west—my hand is too shaky from this distance—but approximately east-west like this. All of this was currently in Kitchener Centre. The commission's proposal would put everything south of that line into the new riding of Kitchener South.

When I looked at the development patterns I realized that the east side of Kitchener in here has been totally undeveloped—it is slated for development—whereas the west side of that line consists of established neighbourhoods.

In keeping with the principles of the adjustment act, that communities of interest, or communities of identity, or historical patterns should be maintained if possible, it seemed to me that a very minor adjustment to what the commission did would be possible, placing the undeveloped portions of that area into Kitchener South, and leaving the developed, established neighbourhoods, which already have a community of interest and of identity with Kitchener Centre, in the Kitchener Centre riding. It's a very minor adjustment.

The demographics that I've been able to discern are that this would take about 2,500 to 2,800 people out of the Kitchener South riding and keep them in the Kitchener Centre riding. The result of this would be that whereas the commission's proposal would leave Kitchener Centre with 3.56% less than the median quotient, under the proposal I'm making, Kitchener Centre would be 1.18% less than the median quotient. Under the commission's proposal, Kitchener South would be 8.04% less than the median quotient for Ontario, and under the proposal I've made, it would be 10.71% less than the median quotient—and still well within the 25%.

I have spoken with the other members of Parliament whose ridings adjoin Kitchener Centre, they being Peter Braid and Dr. Harold Albrecht, and both of them are satisfied that this proposal is acceptable. I also spoke with the mayor of Kitchener.

I have one minute left? Thank you.

Sorry, I thought you were telling me to stop.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

No.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

The City of Kitchener's concerns are that there remain three urban ridings within the City of Kitchener and five ridings within the region of Waterloo. The mayor was not concerned with the fine-tuning of that, which is what my proposal in effect represents.

I think that is it. I would just say that I'm relying on the rather minor nature of this and that the intent is to keep existing communities that already identify with Kitchener Centre in Kitchener Centre, and leave the new and growing communities that have no such identification with the new riding of Kitchener South, which will need the growth.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you very much, Mr. Woodworth.

We'll go to Mr. Reid for five minutes. Let's see if we can do one round.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I noticed you reduced our time. I guess you're anticipating more consensus from this panel than from the last one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

I'll always add time as needed.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

All right.

Kitchener South is actually a new creation, is that correct?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Yes, it is.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

You mentioned that the new riding is about 8% or 8.5% below the provincial median, and your change would lower it to 10 point something lower than the provincial median.

That raises a question. The boundaries commission knowingly made it smaller than the median by a reasonable amount. Are they doing that in anticipation of substantial population growth? Is that where the population growth is happening in Kitchener?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

That is partly the answer, yes. There is significant population growth in that area, specifically, as you can see from the aerial photograph, in the area that I'm proposing to leave entirely to Kitchener South.

However, some of it would be south of the commission's boundary lines and some of it north. They were in effect dividing that population growth between Kitchener South and Kitchener Centre, and by keeping the established neighbourhoods in Kitchener Centre, I'm saying that we're quite close to the median. We won't need that population growth. Put it all in Kitchener South and let it bloom into the full riding.

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Okay. The area that you're proposing changing, as I understand it, is the area that's centred on Chicopee park. I'm looking at the map—and you'd know this better than I would—and it looks to me as though the river is a natural divider. They've moved away from that for a road, but maybe you confirm whether I'm right or wrong. All I'm doing is looking at the map, and it looks as though the river is a pretty substantial divider, whereas the road, which is Fairway Road, I think...?

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Yes, it's Fairway Road North, and—

[Scott Reid, Conservative, Lanark—Frontenac—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I don't know if Fairway Road is a major divider or not. Are there multiple lanes, limited access, and the usual things that make a highway into a substantial divider?