Bill S-207

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”.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Williamson.

As many MPs do, it seems as though you know your riding very well, and of course you want to be inclusive and represent that riding. Your arguments are very familiar to me, because these arguments were also raised with Bill S-207, brought forward by MP Shanahan regarding Châteauguay—Lacolle. Very similar arguments were made because Lacolle didn't happen to be a part of her riding. There was debate in the House, and there was a vote after that debate. You voted against her being able to change the name of her riding.

Why would that be? I think it's so important to be able to identify your riding appropriately, but in that instance, you felt it wasn't appropriate for the member to change the name for very similar reasons.

Fall Economic Statement Implementation Act, 2022

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

Madam Speaker, I was saying that I am here to represent my constituents, who were frustrated when Bill S-207 was rejected but are happy about Bill C-32, which we are discussing today.

They are happy because this government bill contains precisely the measures my constituents need across every sector. For example, we are delivering on our commitment to make home ownership more affordable for young people and new Canadians with a new tax-free first home savings account that will make it so much easier to save for a down payment. That is very important for young Canadians.

We are delivering on this commitment by doubling the first-time homebuyers' tax credit to help cover the closing costs that come with buying that first home of one's own. We are delivering a multigenerational home renovation tax credit. That is something I am very much looking forward to myself. This will help families across Canada afford to have a grandparent or a family member with a disability move back in if they want to.

We are working to make sure families do not have to choose between taking their child to the dentist and putting food on the table. We are establishing a new quarterly Canada workers benefit, a little-known but important measure for low-income workers. This measure will deliver advance payments and put more money, sooner, into the pockets of our lowest-paid and often most essential workers.

We are providing hundreds of dollars in new targeted support to low-income renters and doubling the GST credit for the next six months.

We are working to deliver lower credit card fees. This is very important for our SMEs, which are often family businesses. That way, they will not have to choose between cutting into their already narrow margins and passing fees on to their customers.

We are taxing share buybacks to make sure that large corporations pay their fair share and to encourage them to reinvest their profits in workers and in Canada.

We are tackling housing speculation and making sure that homes are for Canadians to live in, not a frequently flipped investment asset. That is proof of our respect for the citizens of Canada and Quebec.

That is what we are dealing with, and that is why we must work together here in the House of Commons. That is what Canadians expect of us and why they elected us. They do not want to see frivolous quarrels and they do not want pointless drama. No, Canadians expect us to work together to take concrete action to improve their quality of life.

Bill C-32 includes measures that Canadians are eagerly awaiting, in my riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle and across the country.

I was in Lacolle last weekend, and the mayor asked me a question about Bill S-207. That said, I do not want to stray from the topic at hand.

In my riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle and across the country, people are counting on the government to help them through these tougher economic times. Everyone is feeling the crunch. We are fortunate to have numerous organizations we can count on, such as the Châteauguay Community Centre, La Rencontre châteauguoise, Entraide Mercier, Sourire sans fin and the many volunteer-run centres and services in the region. These organizations help the most disadvantaged on a daily basis. There is also the Société locative d'investissement et de développement social and the Fédération régionale des OSBL d'habitation de la Montérégie et de l'Estrie, which work to offer affordable housing. Some wonderful projects have been implemented in my riding recently thanks to the tireless efforts of these people who work in the field of social housing. That being said, even these organizations are swamped with a growing number of requests from citizens in need.

We need to be there to help our fellow citizens. Canadians expect us to help them by investing in quality of life and by supporting SMEs so that they can continue to operate in a stable environment.

In my riding of Châteauguay—Lacolle, we are very proud of our spirit of entrepreneurship. These SMEs are our partners. They support millions of Canadians by providing jobs that allow them to support their families. Canadians would not want to see us squander our nest egg on cryptocurrency.

What is it with bitcoin? It makes me mad. That is what some members have proposed here in the House and elsewhere.

Our government is aware of the challenges Canadians are facing. Right now, Canadians across the country are feeling the effects of inflation thanks to increased food and rent prices, but they are also worried about the future. It is our role as members of Parliament to reassure them by implementing measures like those in Bill C-32.

We want to continue making life more affordable for people and building an economy that works for all Canadians. It is not complicated. We invest in Canadians in need and ask the wealthiest, especially companies, to pay their fair share. That will help everyone.

The 2022 fall economic statement is focused on building an economy that works for everyone and ensuring that no one is left behind. The investments we are making today will make Canada more sustainable and more prosperous for generations to come.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will be sharing my time with the member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.

I am pleased to rise today in support of Bill C‑32. The economic statement presented by my colleague, the member for University—Rosedale, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, earlier this month once again demonstrates how committed our government is to helping those most in need, to helping Canadians deal with the rising cost of living and the housing crisis, just as we are helping Canadian businesses. This is exactly the kind of bill my constituents want from our government.

It is actually a bit like a bill I introduced in the House, namely Bill S‑207, which sought to change the name of my riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville. Some members in the House told me that they understood my constituents' frustration and they supported my efforts to change the name. Then they voted against the motion, for reasons that I will never understand. They voted against the very will of the people of my region. Others claimed that I was not using my time wisely by wanting to correct a mistake that was affecting my constituents, and that I should have introduced different legislation.

It is not just the fact that I was elected here to represent—

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

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at second reading stage of Bill S-207 under Private Members' Business.

The House resumed from October 28 consideration of the motion that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the speeches I have heard today.

I acknowledge my colleague from Manicouagan, who has such a nice riding name. I wish my colleague from Brampton North good luck with the boundary redistribution. I would also like to acknowledge my colleague from Northumberland—Peterborough South. I am an anglophone too and some names are difficult to pronounce even in English. However, the fact remains that that name represents my hon. colleague's riding, and that is what I want to talk about in my speech today.

I am very pleased to rise again in the House to support Bill S‑207, which seeks to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle. It is a necessary change to correct a misunderstanding. Although this misunderstanding was not ill-intentioned, it still caused problems for my constituents seven years ago. I still remember well what happened during my 2015 election campaign. It takes a lot of time and effort to make the necessary corrections, but it is worth doing because it is important for my constituents.

There are other ways to make the necessary corrections. I will talk about them in a moment. Despite that, I am pleased to sponsor Bill S‑207, which originated in the Senate. Thanks to the work we have done since 2015, I am confident that the name of my riding will finally be changed to Châteauguay—Les Jardins‑de‑Napierville.

I will say it again even though it has been mentioned several times before: The name Châteauguay—Lacolle is inaccurate because the municipality of Lacolle is actually in the riding of my hon. colleague from Saint‑Jean. It is just as important to make this correction for the people of Lacolle, who live in the riding of Saint‑Jean. It is Saint‑Bernard‑de‑Lacolle that is in the boundaries of my riding.

During the 2015 election, several people expressed concern over this name, saying that it caused confusion and interfered with their sense of belonging and the pride that residents of Saint‑Bernard‑de‑Lacolle had for their community.

The late mayor of Napierville, Jacques Délisle, was behind this new name. He is the one who suggested the name at the time. It is true that it is the name of an RCM, but it is also an expression that designates our region in general. The words “Les jardins” or “the gardens” evoke a beautiful agricultural region. Municipalities such as Saint‑Cyprien‑de‑Napierville are found in the regional county municipality of Jardins‑de‑Napierville. It is true that the name “Napierville” adds something extra.

It is important to remember that this proposal does keep the name “Châteauguay”, evoking not only the most populous municipality in my riding, but also the greater Châteauguay Valley area, which includes several municipalities. It truly is an inclusive name.

Again, I want to thank my colleagues who have spoken out in favour of this bill today. I look forward to announcing to my constituents in Châteauguay—Lacolle that they are now part of the Châteauguay—Les‑Jardins-de-Napierville riding.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Ruby Sahota, Liberal, Brampton North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise on Bill S-207 today. For my colleague from Châteauguay—Lacolle, it is a name that has defined her in the House for some time now. However, the concern of this bill is that the name does not correctly identify the riding and the people whom she represents. This is an injustice for any member of Parliament or any representative for there not to be a clear correlation as to who her people are and whom she represents.

I know it was mentioned by the previous speaker in the House that this bill is unnecessary, but that is in the eye of the beholder. It is up to the constituents of Châteauguay—Lacolle and to the member who is sponsoring this bill as to whether something is necessary. The Senate has looked at the bill and found that there is legitimacy to having this name change, and there absolutely is.

There is not much to say on this bill. People can merely look at the map and they will see clearly that Lacolle is not situated in this riding. However, Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle is situated in the riding. How insulting is it to constituents when they hear themselves being represented by a particular name? It further emphasizes that “Ottawa knows best” approach.

The commissioner up here decided in the last redistribution that this was going to be the name. At that time, the NDP member who was the representative of that riding did not contest the name, and I do not know why. There could have been many reasons for that, and maybe we will not really know why that member did not take a keen interest in making sure that their voters were identified properly and knew who their member of Parliament was.

That brings us to this point, and we have been at this point several times. This bill has unfortunately had to go through this process several times and has not made it to the end. We have heard debate in the House as to why this change is necessary and important, and we have heard debate regarding this name change in the other place as well.

The previous speaker said that it is futile and unnecessary at this point because, once again, we are at that 10-year mark when redistribution is happening again and there are further name changes happening. I argue that, if it were not for the member who is the sponsor of this bill, that would have never happened. It is because of the work that has been done through this private member's bill that the commission has become alerted to the fact that this is very important and we should take names very seriously.

I can point to some examples in the redistribution process that are happening today as well for Ontario. The name of my riding of Brampton North is completely being switched and changed to another name, just when the constituents were getting used to the fact that these are our boundaries and this is the name we go by. I would say that the previous redistribution commission did a good job at simplifying the names and making it clearly understandable as to where the voters lived and who represented them.

However, in this redistribution the names are being completely switched. It is unfair to constantly be confusing voters as to whom they need to be going to in a time of need, and that is what we are there for. Often times, when we are not in the House, we are in our constituencies attending to people's worries and concerns, which are often emergency situations.

For my riding, there is often lots of confusion. After the last redistribution, there was immense confusion as to where things stood and whom they needed to go to. They recalled whom they voted for last time and felt that they should be coming to me because my predecessor was the one I had defeated, so it just made natural sense. Therefore, having a name that helps constituents imagine what their boundaries may be if they are not in possession of an actual map is important.

Currently, like I said, my riding is Brampton North. In this redistribution process, Brampton East is being renamed Brampton North. Brampton East no longer exists and Brampton North is now Brampton East. Brampton North is going to be different, Brampton—Chinguacousy, apparently. This is quite confusing. I know I, my other Brampton colleagues and other presenters at the commission have made the argument that, if a new district is being added, a new constituency, there is no need to change around all of the previously existing names. A new name should just be created for the new riding.

I can really relate to my colleague on the need for the name change. I understand why it is so important for her and her constituents to be granted this change. I think it is their right to be identified properly and for it to be acknowledged that they are important within Canada. It is important that we know who they are and what their concerns are, and that they know who to go to when they need change. This would help clear up a lot of confusion.

I would ask that the members in the House support the bill, regardless of what their personal feelings may be, and regardless of whether they feel there could be a matter that is more important to them that could have been raised. I know I have heard comments like that made. However, this is really important to the voters of Châteauguay—Lacolle. The new name for the riding is Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville. I believe this is what the constituents want. This is what the voters want. This is what the House should agree to grant them.

The residents of Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle, among others, communicated these concerns. They communicated them before the commission last time. They communicated them again this time. It just happens to be that with private member's bills this process can be tedious and can take some time. Members do not get to choose the timing. I know a lot of constituents who may be watching at home do not recognize what system we have in Parliament in order for a member to bring forward a private member's bill, but I think it is important for them to know.

Oftentimes I have constituents who come up and ask why I do not bring something forward or say that it would be great if I had a bill passed under my name that helped the community in some way or another, or they ask why a member got to do something or why they seemed to be working harder than I was on a matter. It is important for constituents to know that it is really hard to get a private member's bill. We have a lottery system that comes up every Parliament. After every election, there is a new lottery system. There is no preference given to any members as whether it is something they have been trying to do for many Parliaments and have not been able to accomplish or whether it is a new idea. We have had new members who have spent a few weeks in Parliament who have had to get up and figure out what private member's bill to bring forward.

I would say this colleague of mine has spent a long time, over two Parliaments, trying to get this to the finish line. We respect that. She was able to use her name drawn in the first lottery system for private member's bills. She was also able to use the work she was able to do with the Senate to get the Senate to recognize the bill and bring it to the House. I think we should recognize all the hard work that she has done to almost get this to the finish line.

All of us in this House should support this piece of the legislation and let the voters have what they would like. Let them be represented by who they feel they are. That is really important. I do not think any of us would like to be called something we are not. I would definitely not want to be the member for Mississauga if I was representing Brampton. We should all understand that feeling.

The House resumed from June 21 consideration of the motion that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Judges Act

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill S‑207.

Of course, the Bloc Québécois will vote in favour of this bill. It is not against this bill. I will not be using all of my speaking time, but I would like—

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.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

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

Mr. Speaker, it was actually a question that I faced back in 2018. It is because it is important to my constituents. It does have to do with this error in the fact that there is a municipality that finds itself in my name that is not in the riding. Yes, there is a separate process going on, but that is something that is separate from this House. As Senator Dalphond graciously had Bill S-207 adopted in the Senate, I am seizing on this opportunity to make this happen and I count on the member's support.

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

moved that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say what an honour it is for me to sponsor Senator Dalphond's Bill S‑207 in the House. The bill would change the name of my riding from Châteauguay—Lacolle to Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville.

I would like to remind the House why this bill was introduced. The name Châteauguay—Lacolle is a historical error dating back to the previous electoral redistribution. The name of the municipality of Lacolle is in the riding name, but the city of Lacolle is not in the riding. A correction is therefore in order, and the best name is Châteauguay—Les Jardins-de-Napierville because the vast majority of municipalities in the RCM of Jardins-de-Napierville are in my riding and the other municipalities in the area I represent makeup the greater Châteauguay region.

The simple fact that the municipality of Lacolle is not in my riding and that this bill would result in a complete representation of my riding should suffice to convince my hon. colleagues here in the House that this name change is necessary.

However, some of my colleagues might be surprised that I am once again introducing this bill. Some may have thought that the issue was resolved because the House unanimously agreed to pass the bill in 2017. I will explain why the House needs to pass the bill again, after it already had the support of all members of Parliament.

This bill was first introduced in the 42nd Parliament as Bill C‑377. It was unanimously supported by the House of Commons, made it through committee without amendment, was passed at third reading and then sent directly to the Senate.

The bill was sailing from one legislative step to the next. However, the Senate committee was just preparing to study Bill C‑377 as the 42nd Parliament was drawing to a close, so there was a race against time to get the bill passed. Unfortunately, the Senate committee did not have time to study the bill before Parliament was dissolved. This meant that the bill, which my constituents had been waiting for, died on the order paper right before the finish line.

Today, I am continuing what the House started four years ago by introducing Bill S‑207. The bill has already been approved by the Senate, and once approved by the House, it will pass at last.

I would like to remind my colleagues in the House why this bill is crucial to the residents of my riding. I will tell the story behind it, which speaks to its fundamental necessity.

This name change has been close to my heart since the beginning of my political career. I committed to getting the name changed the first time I spoke in the House of Commons in 2015.

Since being elected, I have always encouraged achievements that benefit the people of Châteauguay—Lacolle. Whether it is through investments in local infrastructure that have a direct impact on my constituents or through financial assistance to help many farms in my region go green, I have long been at the service of the people I represent on a daily basis. Today, by introducing this bill, I am again at their service.

I could go into much more detail about the circumstances that led to my constituency being misnamed. However, as my time is limited, I am counting on the goodwill of my colleagues here in the House to support Bill S‑207, a crucial bill for my constituents.

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

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

moved that Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle, be read the first time.

Mr. Speaker, this morning, I am very pleased to introduce to the House the hon. Senator Dalphond's Bill S-207. I thank him for all the great work he does for our region.

Essentially, this bill seeks to correct a serious error that is unfair to my constituents. Three years ago, I got my bill passed to change the riding name of Châteauguay—Lacolle to “Châteauguay—Les Jardins‑de‑Napierville”.

I do not have time to repeat all of the reasons why this change is so important for the people of my riding, but I think that the fact that the beautiful municipality of Lacolle is not even located within the riding should be enough to convince my hon. colleagues of the legitimacy of our request to change the riding name.

The ball is now back in the House's court, and I humbly ask all of my colleagues to vote in favour of Bill S-207, to vote in favour of “Châteauguay—Les Jardins‑de‑Napierville”.

(Motion deemed adopted and bill read the first time)

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle.