Thank you for inviting me to address this committee.
My name is Chantal Vallerand and I am acting national director of the New Democratic Party of Canada.
When it comes to representation in the House of Commons, the New Democratic Party of Canada believes in the principle of representation by population in a way that respects our country's diversity and founding principles.
Furthermore, we believe that the debate on Bill offers all Canadians an opportunity to have nation-building discussions based on fairness and respect for communities of interest. We believe that our electoral boundary laws should be fair and accessible, and should respect our country's history, culture, and geography.
In a majority ruling regarding provincial electoral boundaries in Saskatchewan, the Supreme Court of Canada found that the right to vote, guaranteed in section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is not equality of voting power per se, but the right to effective representation. It said: “Factors like geography, community history, community interests and minority representation may need to be taken into account to ensure that our legislative assemblies effectively represent the diversity of our social mosaic.” The court added that this was not an exhaustive list of factors, and that this should be kept in mind when defining what equality means in the context of adhering to the principle of representation by population.
Whether communities are linked by language, culture or geographic situation, ensuring that those communities of interest are united after the proposed changes are implemented should be a central aspect of this bill. Today I want to focus on two aspects of the bill that have raised questions.
The first aspect concerns the use of Statistics Canada's demographic projections rather than the use of census data. Is this an accurate or not so accurate measurement? Is this an attempt to make the census itself less necessary? Why distance the act from the figures duly recorded by Statistics Canada and instead use estimates calculated through various formulas?
Another issue concerns the consultations. It appears that this bill shortens all the timelines and timeframes contained in the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act. Whether it be the time allowed to establish a commission or the necessary lead time for the notice to organize consultations, this bill shortens the timeframes allotted to conduct these important stages.
Some of the planned changes are substantial. The necessary notice period for holding a consultation with interested parties and persons is reduced by 30 days. It is being lowered from 60 to 30 days. Any person wishing to attend consultations must submit a written request to the secretary of the commission within 23 days of the final notice, instead of 53 days. Every provincial commission has only 10 months to prepare its report to the chief electoral officer, instead of 12 months.
If this government seriously wishes to implement an open, transparent and engaged process, it must know that these new directives do nothing but limit public participation in that process. This is not desirable for our democracy, particularly at a time when voter turnout and engagement are declining. We should find new ways of encouraging citizens to get involved, not ways to reduce them to silence.
Lastly, the members of the NDP team are concerned by the fact that this government has not conducted consultations with the provincial governments. We believe the government must consult the provinces, as well as Canadians, and ask them to determine which bill, ours or the Conservatives', can better achieve the principle of effective representation while building a stronger and more united Canada.
Thank you.