Bill C-377 (Historical)

An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle

This enactment changes the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle to “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

An Act to Change the Name of the Electoral District of Châteauguay—Lacolle

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am greatly honoured to serve the good people of Perth—Wellington. My riding name makes sense. It is Perth County and Wellington County. It is very straightforward, and I am very proud to represent the good folks of Perth—Wellington and to rise to debate Bill S-207.

Being the member of Parliament for the great riding of Perth—Wellington, which includes the city of Stratford and the great Stratford Festival, of course I am inclined to quote Shakespeare, who said this most eloquently in Romeo and Juliet:

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet

To make a play on words, what is in a riding name? That which we call Châteauguay—Lacolle by any other name would something, something. I am not very good at iambic pentameter, but members get the point. There is a consideration here, as riding names should reflect the communities they represent. In this case, it has been noted that Lacolle is a neighbouring municipality that is not actually in the riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle.

I have to hand it to the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle for her persistence on this matter. If memory serves me correctly, I believe this Parliament marks the third time she has attempted to introduce this bill. In the 42nd Parliament, it was Bill C-377, and I was on the procedure and House affairs committee when we reviewed that bill. In the 43rd Parliament, first and second session, it was Bill S-213. Now, in the 44th Parliament, it is Bill S-207.

I do not want to make light of this change, because I recognize that it does reflect the riding and the communities in it, but I would be negligent in not pointing out that we are already getting into redistribution for the next redistribution. The fact is that we are now nearly seven years into debating this riding name, and we would have to go through the process of amending it, with the costs associated with that not only in the House of Commons and federal institutions, but also at Elections Canada, for potentially as little as 18 months. It seems these resources could be addressed elsewhere.

I would draw the attention of the House to the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle's original plan for a private member's bill. This is one that I would have supported wholeheartedly.

Immediately after the 2015 election, there was obviously a lottery. I placed high in the 200s. I did not have the opportunity to debate my bill, but the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle did. According to The Hill Times, at the time, the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle was “planning on putting forward a motion, M-125, Financial Literacy, that seeks to have the House Finance Committee study and report back on the implementation of the National Strategy for Financial Literacy to see if its meeting its current goals, evolving, and has the right measures in place to evaluate its progress.”

That is a motion I could get behind. Just imagine if six and a half years ago, the government had financial literacy in place and had been able to benefit, for the last six years, from a national financial literacy plan. Imagine how much further ahead we as Canadians would have been if the Liberals had taken up a commitment to being financially literate with the nation's finances. However, here we are six and a half years later, and sadly Motion No. 125 never saw the light of day and the member went ahead with Bill C-377 instead.

I am not going to imply that the member was told to do otherwise and go with a different PMB. We all know that often the House leader and the whips on the government side will encourage members, gently or otherwise, to go in a different direction. However, it is interesting that the member, immediately prior to the replenishment, the night before, opted not to go ahead with an important motion on financial literacy in Canada and went with changing the name of her riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

I note that the name does roll off the tongue, especially for an Anglo who tries his best in our second national language. It nonetheless seems to be a PMB that lacks a purpose in the sense that we are not likely to have an election campaign before the new ridings come into place. We will not have that opportunity.

I will leave my comments there.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

It's true; many people are history buffs. These traditions and practices were ways of solving everyday problems that led to the conventions and traditions we have today.

Getting back to what we're doing here in the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs, I'm going to tell you another brief story.

The committee also deals with members. I introduced my Bill C‑377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, during the 42nd ^x Parliament. I didn't do it on a whim. There was actually an error in the name of my riding.

It was a very delicate matter for the people at home. Châteauguay is Châteauguay. The municipality of Lacolle isn't even part of my riding. The municipality that's part of my riding is Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle. There's a big difference between the two.

I'm going back over this because, at the time, a commission was responsible for constituencies, for making new subdivisions and considering suggestions for new names. The members for Châteauguay and the adjacent riding at the time hadn't done their job. They hadn't verified the matter and it was too late by the time of the 2015 election. Elections Canada told us it was too late, but we nevertheless immediately solved the problem.

That caused a number of misunderstandings among citizens. As I said, the citizens in my riding have better things to do than to follow politics and electoral boundaries. The people of Lacolle thought they were part of my riding, whereas they were part of the riding of Saint-Jean, I believe, but I may be mistaken. It definitely wasn't pleasant for the people of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle.

I therefore introduced a bill to that effect and was criticized at the time by certain members of the Bloc québécois and the NDP, who felt it wasn't important. I'm not the one who decides what's important for the citizens of my riding. I listened to them. It was important for them. I was also pleased to be able…

I see Ms. Normandin has raised her hand. I'm prepared to allow her a few minutes. She may want to correct me on the matter of the riding of Saint-Jean.

Criminal Code

[Karen Vecchio, Conservative, Elgin—Middlesex—London, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I also want to say that right now, we have an outstanding bill sitting in the Senate, Bill C-377, put forward by the hon. Rona Ambrose. It is an opportunity for our justices to actually be engaged and trained on sexual assault. The government has not pushed that item whatsoever. Regardless of whether the government has put in more or fewer justices, they are not being trained properly. Bill C-377 has been sitting there for the last year and a half. The government could be doing better, especially in working with Senate colleagues, if it is serious about making sure that people alleged to have committed sexual assaults are actually convicted and go to jail. We need to have that sensitivity and empathetic understanding of what is going on for the victims of this crime.

As for Bill C-75, seeing that it is a hybrid bill, I cannot support what the government has done with regard to reducing sentences and convictions when it comes to those people who have victimized someone through sexual assault.

Motions in amendment

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, early in its mandate the government introduced a bill to repeal Bill C-377, but did not repeal it right away. Then, what we heard on Friday was that every assault by the government since then on collective bargaining, whether the tight restrictions it wanted to put on collective bargaining in Bill C-7 for RCMP members or the back-to-work legislation it rammed through on Friday, should somehow be forgiven because it repealed Bill C-377.

Early in its mandate the government brought in the child benefit, which did something for low-income families. The funny thing is that that is not in keeping with the government's theme either. Looking at the changes to parental leave under EI, how are low-income families going to be able to access that? They already have low incomes and cannot afford to live on 33% of their income. The extended parental leave time is for who? Is it for low-income families that want to spend more time at home with each other, or is it for the high-income families the government said it was taking on when it eliminated the original UCB?

This is the thing. Early on, the Liberals implemented a couple of their election commitments to workers and low-income families, and that is now supposed to forgive everything else they do for their Bay Street buddies and big multinational companies. The evidence does not bear out that they are serious about helping real Canadians who are struggling every day.

An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to Bill C-377, but I must admit I would have preferred to talk about subjects that are truly of interest to our constituents in the Montérégie region.

The consultations held by the hon. member for Châteauguay—Lacolle and her Liberal colleagues from the Montérégie region in February 2016 revealed that the locals have other priorities than changing the name of the riding. They are concerned about support for low-income groups, improving access to high-speed Internet, infrastructure, agriculture and protecting supply management in its entirety, trade, and the environment.

Why are we debating a riding name change today when the hon. member had the opportunity to do so during study of Bill C-402? She could have introduced a bill that truly reflects the needs of the people of the Montérégie region. In fact, I introduced a bill to combat poverty and support low-income groups, but it was defeated by the members across the way.

Does it make any sense to hold consultations to find out what matters to one's constituents, then ignore them by failing to introduce a bill or move a motion that is in line with their expectations? The answer to that question is self-evident. Nevertheless, I understand that changing a riding name is a symbolic gesture that matters to us all. That is why I will support Bill C-377.

I am especially proud to announce that, in 2019, my riding will bear a new name, Saint-Hyacinthe—Acton, a name that better reflects the reality of the riding I represent. I am sure the people of Acton Vale will identify with the new riding name more than the old one. By changing the name, I want to highlight the vitality of the people and businesses of Acton Vale. They make our wonderful riding proud. Acton Vale is so dynamic, in fact, that it was named Montérégie's industrial city of the year in 1992, a title that attracted national attention to our region.

I must admit, I am already looking forward to rising in the House in 2019 and hearing the name Saint-Hyacinthe—Acton. In partnership with the Centre d'histoire de Saint-Hyacinthe, we have documented the history of the name of the riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot to learn more about our rich history and propel us forward by proposing the new name of Saint-Hyacinthe—Acton.

I want to thank the entire team at the Centre d'histoire de Saint-Hyacinthe and all the volunteers who for decades now have been working hard to promote, share, and study the rich history of our town and the region of Saint-Hyacinthe. Ever mindful of innovation, the Centre d'histoire wants to acquire, process, and preserve archives, documents, and artefacts from individuals and organizations, while also sharing them.

The centre has over 500 archival holdings and collections totalling more than one linear kilometre of text documents, nearly 285,000 graphic documents, and 140,000 maps. The Centre d'histoire also has the archival holding of the Seminary of Saint-Hyacinthe, which was founded in 1811. These holdings, which include nearly 70 linear meters of textual documents and over 7,000 photographs, are an undeniable source of information on teaching. For music lovers, the Centre d'histoire also has the holdings of La Bonne Chanson, founded by Father Charles-Émile Gadbois in 1937 at the Seminary of Saint-Hyacinthe.

I thank the Centre d'histoire de Saint-Hyacinthe for all its work and dedication to our community. The people of Saint-Hyacinthe can be proud to have such a centre that really cares about preserving our collective memory.

Getting back to the name of the riding of Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, it no longer holds the same meaning as it once did. The riding I represent covers all the municipalities in the Maskoutains RCM and Acton RCM. I therefore think it is important that the riding include the name of both RCMs so that the people of Acton feel just as included as the people of Saint-Hyacinthe.

Since the riding was created in 1860, it has gone by the name of Saint-Hyacinthe, Saint-Hyacinthe—Rouville, Bagot, and now Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot.

This rich history has made me so proud to represent my constituents in Saint-Hyacinthe and Acton Vale in the House since 2015.

As I already mentioned, I look forward to rising in the House from 2019 to 2023 and to hear myself referred to proudly as the member for Saint-Hyacinthe—Acton.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-377, an act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle. I have a lot of respect for the member for the riding. We served together for a period of time on the operations and estimates committee. While we did not always see eye to eye, I believe we did a lot of great work on that committee, whether it was Canada Post or other acts, so I do appreciate her work.

That being said, this bill is not something I can support. Those watching at home on CPAC are probably asking themselves what this bill is about, and why Parliament is debating this instead of important issues of the day, such as the question we discussed earlier in question period of why there is a known ISIS fighter walking free on the streets of Toronto after happily broadcasting how he murdered innocents abroad while fighting for ISIS in Syria. Why is he busy doing press conferences in Toronto instead of being in jail?

What about the constitutional crisis created by the Liberals in their poor handling of the Trans Mountain pipeline issue? Why are we not discussing that? Why are we not debating the issue of the border crisis in the member's own riding, where we have a flood of illegal immigrants coming in from the United States? I notice that over 20% of her riding is made up of seniors. Why are we not debating palliative care or seniors issues instead of this? None of that is going to be debated. The bill is solely about changing the name of the riding. Seriously, it is just a name change.

If people are at home watching CPAC right now, they are probably a bit more engaged than regular Canadians and would know that last week we passed changes to the names of other members' ridings. The chief government whip had a bill passed, which has already gone through the House and is with the Senate, so that MPs can change the names of their ridings at will. They would not need a special private member's bill; they can just change the name.

My colleague from Calgary Signal Hill wants to change the name of his riding to Calgary West. He can go ahead and do it. I have joked in the past about changing the name of my riding from Edmonton West to Edmonton West Edmonton Mall, to honour West Edmonton Mall, the world's largest mall, which is in my riding. I mention that because, again, just last week we were able to change the names of over a dozen ridings, and it took the House just 60 seconds to do so. My point is that we do not need a private member's bill to change the name.

When MPs first get elected, at the beginning of the legislative period, they draw numbers for the order of introducing private members' bills. Those with low numbers get a chance to get their private members' bills heard and debated in the House. I drew a relatively low number and introduced Bill C-301, a bill that would reduce taxes for all seniors across the country. Unfortunately, the bill was shot down by the Liberals.

Because of time constraints, only about half of the members of Parliament will get their private members' bills introduced, debated, and heard in the House. Only about half of us get a bill through. The member for Châteauguay—Lacolle was lucky enough to have that, but, instead of introducing a bill that would actually help Canada and her constituents, she wastes valuable legislative time to debate a bill to change the name of her riding, which is not even needed, because we have procedural rules to change it.

I see that today the Liberals brought closure on a bill once again, this time to limit debate on Bill C-76, where we are debating the ways we are going to conduct our elections. The Liberal bill would allow foreign funds from Tides U.S.A. to flood into Canada to alter our electoral outcomes and attack our democratic process. The bill would allow people who have not set foot in Canada for over two or three decades to still be able to vote and help decide our electoral outcomes.

We have only one hour of debate on the serious issues that affect our democracy, and yet we have just spent four hours to discuss a name change that could have been done simply with an email to the government whip. Again, I have great respect for this member, but I believe it is a great waste of Parliament's time, and it just shows once again the mixed-up priorities of the Liberal government.

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

moved that Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the third time and passed.

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to speak today to debate the importance of my bill, a private member's bill, Bill C-377, for my constituents in the riding called, for now, Châteauguay—Lacolle.

This is an important step because every time I address my constituents, either when I am asked to speak on their behalf or when I knock on doors and introduce myself as the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle, I am asked why the name of the riding is still Châteauguay—Lacolle, when Lacolle is not even part of the riding.

I have already spoken at length about the reasons why and how the mistake was made in our riding name. During the last electoral boundaries readjustment in 2013, those who were in charge of correcting the riding name simply failed to do so. I am here today to correct that mistake. I was made aware of it during my nomination process for the 2015 election.

As a longtime resident of Châteauguay, I was pleased to see that our new riding included 14 other wonderful municipalities. However, I was dismayed to discover that the Lacolle in Châteauguay—Lacolle referred to the border crossing in our riding rather than the municipality of Lacolle, which is part of the neighbouring riding, Saint-Jean. How must the residents of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, who are my constituents, have felt when they realized that the name of our federal riding did not refer to their community, but to the border crossing?

When I visited the representatives of each of our municipalities to talk about the issues of concern to them, the riding name was obviously one of them. People suggested new, more appropriate names. I would like to point out that it was the late Jacques Délisle, who was the mayor of Napierville at the time, who was the first to propose replacing “Lacolle” with “Les Jardins-de-Napierville”. Everyone quickly agreed to his suggestion. The name made sense and was meaningful to people in our region. I have already stated in the House the many reasons why the riding name should be changed to “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

However, I would like to reiterate what I think are the two most important reasons behind this choice of name. First, the RCM of Jardins-de-Napierville includes nine of the 15 municipalities in our region. They are Sainte-Clotilde, Saint-Patrice-de-Sherrington, Napierville, Saint-Cyprien-de-Napierville, Saint-Jacques-le-Mineur, Saint-Édouard, Saint-Michel, Saint-Rémi and, of course, Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle.

The residents of the other six municipalities, which are Saint-Urbain-Premier, Sainte-Martine, Mercier, Saint-Isidore, Léry, and of course Châteauguay, identify with the Grand Châteauguay region. As a result, everyone will see themselves in the name “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

Yes, we are proud that we enjoy the best of all worlds in our riding, both urban and rural. When I meet citizens at the door, the grocery store, or a town hall and they ask me when the name of the riding is going to be changed, I am so delighted to say that we are getting it done.

However, now it appears that we face opposition in this House to the name change my citizens so desperately want. Indeed, I was confident from the words expressed by my fellow members at the second reading stage and at the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that Bill C-377 had the support of all parties in the House. Apparently, as shown by the dissenting voices of last week, that was not the case.

Now I dare hope, knowing how important it is to my constituents to see themselves in the name of of our great and beautiful riding, that every member of this House will vote with me, in one voice, to say yea to the name of “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

(Bill C-374. On the Order: Private Members' Business:)

May 3, 2018—That Bill C-374, An Act to amend the Historic Sites and Monuments Act (composition of the Board), be now read a third time and do pass—Mr. Aldag.

(Bill read the third time and passed)

(Bill C-377: On the Order: Private Members' Business:)

May 4, 2018—That Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be concurred in at report stage—Mr. Graham.

(Motion agreed to)

Business of the House

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all members of the House for their understanding and flexibility as we adjust the schedule and voting a little in order to honour our late colleague Gordon Brown.

With that in mind, I would like to ask for unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing Order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-374, An Act to amend the Historic Sites and Monuments Act (composition of the Board), standing in the name of the Member for Cloverdale—Langley City, be deemed read a third time and passed; Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, standing in the name of the member for Châteauguay—Lacolle, be deemed concurred in at the report stage; that any recorded division requested on the motion for second reading of Bill S-218, An Act respecting Latin American Heritage Month, standing in the name of the member for Thornhill, be deferred to Wednesday, May 23, 2018, immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business; and that the recorded division on the motion for third reading of Bill C-48, An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia's north coast, be further deferred until the end of the time provided for Government Orders later this day.

An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

moved that Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be concurred in at report stage.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, as reported (without amendment) from the committee.

Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

The Parliament website informs us that the two last bills that the member spoke about are Bill C-377 and Bill C-364, which are between two and four pages. He must therefore have worked hard to prepare the speech he gave today about a bill that is 556 pages long.

Procedure and House Affairs

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the 57th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding Bill C-377, an act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.

The committee agrees that the riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle's name be changed as presented.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Brenda.

My riding has a lot more than 50 characters in it, but the title is shorter than that. Also, I'm sure we'll all agree, except for a couple of people, that this Bill C-377 is far better than the previous Bill C-377.

I have a couple of quick questions.

Who was your predecessor, and why did they not object to the name change at that time?

When the last redistribution happened, I was working for the member for Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, who might be in the room at this time. They wanted to change the name to Bay d'Espoir—Central—Notre Dame, which in French is Bay d'Espoir—Central—Notre Dame, which is another whole issue. We petitioned the committee at the time—I think it was PROC—and it was changed.

Why wasn't it done at the original change in 2013? Do you know?

[Brenda Shanahan, Liberal, Châteauguay—Lacolle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Chair.

Let me just say that as a first-time member of Parliament, it's been my honour to serve as an official member on—I was just counting—four committees to date, including my current one, but this is the first time that I am appearing as a witness. It's really a thrill. Thank you so much.

Of course, it's about my private member's bill, Bill C-377, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle to...well, you'll soon find out. We've got to keep a little suspense here.

Today marks an important milestone in my first initiative after my election, to change the name of our riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville. I have undertaken this initiative at my constituents' request.

The reason behind the initiative is that the name Châteauguay—Lacolle is inaccurate. If you consult the map of our constituency that you have before you, you will see Châteauguay. On the border to the south, you will also see that the municipality of Lacolle is located outside the constituency of Châteauguay—Lacolle.

I have a theory to explain why the commission chose the name at one time. The fact remains that, for people who live in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, which is a completely different municipality, there is a major difference between Lacolle and Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle. The municipality located in our territory is Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle. That municipality has its own history, its own institutions and its own raison d'être.

Even before I took office, the residents of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle had talked to me about this concern, and I pledged to do whatever I had to do to remedy the situation. It is not easy when one is new in politics, given that one doesn't know the system through and through. Nevertheless, I did my research. With that in mind, I am honoured to present my private member's bill for study in committee.

As if it were not enough that the name “Lacolle“ is being erroneously used to designate Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, we have also noticed several times that, even today, for the constituents of both ridings, the name Châteauguay—Lacolle leads to confusion. It also creates misunderstandings for certain stakeholders. The names “Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle” and “Lacolle” are often used interchangeably by various stakeholders, including the national media. This is mainly because the Lacolle border crossing, Quebec's busiest crossing into the United States, is located in Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, not in Lacolle.

Many citizens of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle have told me that they do not like the name Châteauguay—Lacolle. It hurts their municipal pride and their sense of belonging. We can all understand that.

After much thought and many conversations with citizens and stakeholders in the region, the name Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville emerged as a logical and meaningful choice for a number of reasons.

First, Les Jardins-de-Napierville is the name of a regional county municipality that includes nine of our 15 municipalities. Yes, there are 15 municipalities in my constituency and nine of them are in the RCM of Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

Second, all citizens could identify with the name Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville because the residents of Châteauguay and the five surrounding municipalities in the northwest of the riding can identify with the Greater Châteauguay area. The municipalities of Mercier, Léry and Saint-Isidore are in that Greater Châteauguay area.

Third, the RCM of Les Jardins-de-Napierville is the most important region in Quebec for vegetable production. Vegetables—such as lettuce, carrots, and onions of all kinds—grow very well there. That makes it relatively well-known.

Lastly, the name “Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville” is a good representation of the semi-urban, semi-rural nature of our riding.

I must remind you that I am sponsoring this bill for my constituents. A petition calling on the House of Commons to make Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville the new name of our riding is also circulating in the region. People are happy that I am already working on the project.

The petition already has several hundred signatures, including those of the mayors of Napierville, Saint-Cyprien-de-Napierville, and the neighbouring towns.

As elected officials, those mayors are happy to support my initiative on behalf of their citizens, as are my colleagues from the neighbouring ridings: Jean Rioux, MP for Saint-Jean, who is also happy that Lacolle is in his constituency, Anne Minh-Thu Quach, MP for Salaberry—Suroît, and my colleague Jean-Claude Poissant, MP for La Prairie.

As indicated in my bill, Châteaguay—Lacolle was created in 2013, following the redistribution that came into effect with the dissolution of the 41st Parliament in 2015. The current riding was formed from the former ridings of Châteauguay—Saint-Constant and Beauharnois—Salaberry.

Those who were here during the last Parliament may well know and understand the system much better than I do. That said, it seems that the Quebec electoral boundaries commission made an error in naming the new federal riding in the province of Quebec. The fact that Lacolle was already in the constituency of Saint-Jean at the time of the last redistribution probably went unnoticed.

I'm now going to get to the more technical part. The committee has heard my reasons for changing the name of my riding. Let me outline a bit how name changes for federal ridings come about in the first place, and the criteria that any name change must meet.

First of all, given the practice of reviewing electoral district boundaries every 10 years following a new national census, Elections Canada provides the 10 provincial electoral boundaries commissions with guidelines on riding name conventions and best practices.

While Elections Canada will enact any name changes legislated by Parliament, there are practical and technical issues, such as the limited capacity of databases, that must be considered. Thus, riding names must be limited to 50 characters. That may come as a surprise to my colleagues, because we certainly have some with quite interesting and long names. As long as it's 50 characters or less—including hyphens, dashes, and spaces—it meets the criterion. That's so they can fit it onto databases and maps and so on.

“Chateauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville”, I'm happy to report, has 38 characters, including hyphens, dashes, and spaces.

As well, the names selected for ridings should reflect the character of Canada and be clear and unambiguous, and I believe that these criteria are met in the bill, as the names refer to a municipality and an MRC region.

A distinction must also be made, in the spelling of names, between hyphens and dashes. Hyphens are used to link parts of geographical names, whereas dashes are used to unite two or more distinct geographical names. This convention has been respected: a dash is used to separate “Châteauguay” and “Les Jardins-de-Napierville”, with the hyphens in “Les Jardins-de-Napierville”.

On the map, we see that Châteauguay and Les Jardins-de-Napierville are two geographical names that correspond almost entirely to the territory and also conform to the reading of the map from left to right. That's for simplicity and clarity and to respect the geographical locations.

Moreover, the name of an electoral district must be unique, meaning the components of the name are to be used only once, which is indeed the case for the elements of the two names in question.

The guidelines also contain negative characteristics to be avoided, and this is also the case with the name that we have chosen. For example, the name of a riding should be clear in both English and French and, as much as possible, be acceptable without translation into the other official language, so that you don't have multiple versions of multiple translations of the name.

The other characteristic to be avoided is the use of cardinal points, such as east or west. You may think, “It seems to me that we do have some names using those cardinal points”, but again let me remind you that Parliament is the ultimate authority in passing these name changes. The guidelines say it is to be avoided because of clumsy translation.

Lastly, the use of actual names of provinces, personal names, and names that are imprecise or contrived from non-geographical sources is also to be avoided.

I think I've raised all the relevant arguments for requiring the name change as proposed by my private member's bill, Bill C-377, as well as demonstrated how the new name respects the guidelines as laid out by Elections Canada.

I'm honoured to have the trust of my constituents in ensuring that a wrong will be righted. I'm confident that the bill will find the support of all my colleagues for our new name, Chateauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

I'm now delighted to take your questions. Thank you.