Evidence of meeting #30 for Electoral Reform in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was yukon.
2:25 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Sorry, Mr. Chair, I don't usually do this, but I want to clarify that last position of the witness.
Are you suggesting additional MPs across the entire north, or do you mean just the Yukon?
2:25 p.m.
Green Party of Canada-Yukon
It would be some form of proportional representation across the north. That would be Nunavut and—
2:25 p.m.
NDP
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
Good afternoon, gentlemen.
I'd like to say hello to everyone who came out to see us today. It's a pleasure to meet you.
I'd like to extend a special hello to Mr. Bagnell and Mr. Kelly, who are joining us today.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Pardon me, Mr. Ste-Marie.
I'd like to let the people in the audience know that there are earpieces for picking up simultaneous interpretation.
2:25 p.m.
As an Individual
While we're waiting, perhaps I could quickly respond to one of Mr. Cullen's comments about whether there's the desire for some form of aboriginal representation in the House of Commons.
I want to refer you back to the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. I think they spent a considerable amount of time talking to aboriginal citizens across the country on the very topic of a first people's legislative body of some kind connected to the House of Commons. There seemed to be at that point in time a fair amount of interest in it. Maybe that has changed, but I'd just like to point you in that direction.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
2:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Francis Scarpaleggia
Thank you.
You'll have an extra minute, Mr. Ste-Marie. Go ahead.
2:25 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
I'd like to acknowledge everyone who is here today: audience members, witnesses, colleagues, and staff.
I'm pleased to be in Whitehorse, Yukon. It's my first time here, and what a wonderful place it is.
Yukon has just one member of Parliament, Mr. Bagnell. If we were to adopt some form of proportional representation, it would be problematic for your territory, since you have just one MP. Achieving some sense of proportionality would be hard under such a system.
I don't think the government wants to open up the Constitution and seek the provinces' consent to amend it in order to change the voting system. What it wants is electoral reform within the existing confines of the Constitution. Even if an element of proportional representation were added, it would have to stay at the provincial level. At the territorial level, it could be a bit different. Mr. Cameron said he didn't want to see Yukon connected to British Columbia or the Northwest Territories.
Do you have any solutions you can suggest for Yukon? Would it involve adding a seat or grouping it with the Northwest Territories or British Columbia?
That's my first question. You can each answer in turn, beginning with Mr. Haase.
2:30 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
How can we achieve some form of proportional representation in Yukon, which has just one seat? What solutions would you suggest?
2:30 p.m.
Green Party of Canada-Yukon
That's exactly what I said. We could elect one representative in each territory. Next, we could give another seat to one or two members from the proportional representation lists.
2:30 p.m.
Bloc
Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette, QC
From a constitutional perspective, the lists have to be province-based. Does that mean Yukon's votes would be transferred to British Columbia, or would the Northwest Territories and Yukon have another MP?
2:30 p.m.
Green Party of Canada-Yukon
I would suggest that the other votes not represent southern British Columbia, only Canada's north.
2:30 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you for that question.
I'll be quite frank with you, I don't see the need to reform to connect somehow proportionality to something called the region called north. I just don't believe that's necessary. We have 38,000 people in the Yukon territory. I don't even know if that's a small riding in southern Ontario or B.C. or many of the other more populous areas of the country. Frankly, we have one seat. I don't personally look at proportionality as connecting fairness in a particular region as I do seeing it on a national scale.
So to my way of thinking, 38,000 people were well represented with one member of Parliament. The entire proportionality will bring the numbers far more in line across the entire country, if indeed a proportional model is accepted that will get whatever that percentage is close to the percentage of seats in the House of Commons, and that's fine by me. I do not want, in any way, to erode the character of Yukon, of Northwest Territories, of Nunavut, or for that matter of any province of the country, by somehow suggesting that we should be considered in some kind of homogenous way.
That's my two cents’ worth.
2:30 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you very much, Mr. Ste-Marie.
I think one has to face reality. If there's going to be a proportional system, or even preferential ballots, and the characteristic of distinct regions is retained, there will have to be some deeper change. Either ridings will be reshaped somehow or the number of MPs will have to increase. I think the functional international examples on those technicalities are pretty clear. From the models I have been reading through, we shouldn't be afraid of that, because ours is not a European text-based constitution. Our constitution provides political stability because it changes. We are not Euro-American constitution-based. We have a very different system. We might have to have courage for a few things that cut a little deeper, but in the spirit of building consensus, we shouldn't be afraid of that.
2:30 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses. It's good to see all of you again. I happen to have met you all before, so I'm very happy to be back in Whitehorse again and back in Yukon.
I'm always drawn to Robert Service. As you were testifying, Kirk, I was thinking, boy, there were strange things done in the midnight sun by the men who moiled for gold—like trying to steal your democracy over and over again. That didn't ever get celebrated by Robert Service, but it's a timely reminder.
I want to put a question to all three of you. One of our witnesses was our former chief electoral officer, Jean-Pierre Kingsley. I don't know if you've seen his evidence, but I'll summarize. He proposed that for practical purposes, a way to provide proportionality in our Parliament and eliminate unfair voting without increasing the number of seats in Parliament and without creating a politically driven list system would be to cluster those ridings that you can in urban areas in southern Canada through single transferable vote, and leave the territories alone. This of course raises the question of how people in the territories would feel about knowing that all Canadians were going to get fairer voting except the territories.
Does that speak to the importance of the point that you made, Kirk, that we don't want to do anything that is disrespectful to the identity of northerners, who have a very distinct and different political past?
I think I'll just go down the row and start with Gerald, then go to Kirk, and then Peter if that's okay. With any luck, I might still have time for another question.
2:35 p.m.
Green Party of Canada-Yukon
Well, it's damned if you do and damned if you don't, eh? I think that's what the committee is tasked with. The committee is never going to please everyone in this country.
Personally, yes, it is a bit of a sacrifice for northerners, I think, to view that as not having the proportionality that the rest of Canada enjoys. However, the flip side of the coin is the representation. You know that person is from Yukon or from the NWT or from Nunavut, and most people have pretty good access to their MPs in the north despite the large distances.
I guess that's all I can say on that.
2:35 p.m.
As an Individual
Thank you for your question and your comment.
I'm with Jean-Pierre Kingsley. I think that's completely workable. I would like to suggest that when we talk about proportionality, when we talk about fairness within our electoral system, we think nationally. That's where the proportionality question becomes useful. It isn't so much then connecting specifically with a particular region in the country. It's about saying that we have this amazing country; we want to ensure that when we look at the members who are representing us in Parliament, it roughly connects to the number of votes that a particular party got within the country, not particularly a region but the country in its entirety.
I go back to my earlier point. We're a very small riding when it comes to population. I think we should take comfort in knowing that we are well reflected and represented in the national office. But I would not want to see a member of Parliament from, say, Yellowknife residing in Yellowknife and looking after the business of Yukon. You have no idea how difficult it is to get across. Up until recently, when Air North, Yukon's airline, put on a flight, it was a tough time moving down to Vancouver, over to Calgary or Edmonton, and back up to Yellowknife. It was about a day's travel to get to Yellowknife, which is just across the way in the Northwest Territories.
To think of us as somehow being an easy fit, with 40% of the land mass of Canada and a sizeable percentage of the coastline.... The north is pan-national as much as any parts of the south. I think we need to leave it to that, and leave it to its three distinct regions. That is my perspective.
2:35 p.m.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
I have about 20 seconds left, Peter, if you want to weigh in on the idea of leaving the territories alone and providing proportionality for the rest of Canada.
2:35 p.m.
As an Individual
I think we should not do that. I would build on Mr. Cameron's comment of pan-nationality. The relation of the majority and minorities in Canada is truly distinct. In the western world it's a completely different constitutional history. We don't have a majority that assumes power and brings out the artillery against minorities. This is the fundamental question. We don't want to bring structures in here that will again hurt minorities like first nations.
The relevance of the north is twofold. We have our own value, but we are also an important piece of the Canadian identity. The former premier of the Yukon, Tony Penikett, pointed out that the Yukon, in his view, was the last Canadian jurisdiction to go out of the egalitarian political business. So if the Yukon loses, and Nunavut loses, all of Canada loses.
It is a deep question, and a profound question, and we should not escape the truth of this electoral reform when it comes to the practical details. That would be un-Canadian, certainly in the legacy of our country.