Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Jan. 31st, 2013

[Jack Harris, NDP, St. John's East, NL]

I was at the hearings. Most of the issues before the hearings were about the riding of Avalon and changes to Avalon.

So I think this change to St. John's East and St. John's South—Mount Pearl was kind of consequential, a bit of a domino effect. It came as a surprise to me too because there was nothing about changing the boundary. In other words, there were no counter-arguments presented to what we're saying here today. This came upon us as a result of the second thing. So for continuity and community of interest we're making this argument.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Armstrong.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

First of all, thank you to all three of you for coming.

Mr. Cleary, sometimes I think when you speak about your riding, you're better than the Newfoundland and Labrador ads we see on Air Canada when we fly back and forth every week. They're tremendous ads.

You've done a wonderful job. I've been to your riding several times and I agree with you it's one of the most beautiful spots in Canada. Terrace, B.C. is in there as well, and of course Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley in Nova Scotia is pretty nice as well.

We can see how this happened. When the commission put the first submission out this was not included. They made some changes, probably domino effect changes, and then you didn't have a chance to present because you didn't see the changes in the first place. But the other group that didn't get a chance to present, of course, was the group you're involved in, the Narrows group. I'm assuming if these changes had been made in the first submission they would have gone and probably presented. Would I be accurate in saying that?

So really your presence here today is also representing them because they didn't have the opportunity. They didn't get a chance before these changes were made. Is that accurate?

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

That's absolutely accurate and the Narrows group also wrote a letter to this commission objecting to the change. I had a written presentation but I scrapped it. By the way, our provincial tourism minister just announced last week that our tourism industry is nearing a billion dollars. Our tourism industry is getting stronger all the time.

A paragraph from the Narrows group in support of my objection reads:

The Narrows Group was established to address concerns in the district and to develop guidelines for future development. Fort Amherst and Outer Battery are under similar development pressures, are similar with respect to tourism, share common aspects of history (military, fisheries), and have a long established history of settlement but with a small population base. Being able to work together with a credible group of stakeholders on the Narrows Group provides us with a larger, more effective voice to address issues.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Right, and they didn't have an opportunity to present because.... They had no chance and no opportunity because this was not presented before the public consultations. I think we should support these changes, quite frankly. My only worry is that when I actually go back to Newfoundland and go down on George Street and Water Street some night, I'm not going to know who to call if something bad happens to me.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

We had better be sure we're very clear on where this boundary is drawn.

[A voice]

[Inaudible—Editor]

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

It'll be Mr. Cleary.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

If you make the change—

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

I've been a lawyer. Having the opportunity to call a lawyer...it might be to my advantage. I don't know.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

If you make the change, I'll give you my cell number.

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Okay.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Scott Armstrong, Conservative, Cumberland—Colchester—Musquodoboit Valley, NS]

Thank you very much.

But I do think the drawback in this process is that if changes are made after the public consultations, they may have repercussions for other groups that didn't have the chance to respond.

I appreciate you coming here today and making these recommendations.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Lukiwski, you wanted to follow up on something?

[Tom Lukiwski, Conservative, Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK]

Yes, very quickly, just so there's no confusion.

I'm sure all you gentlemen are aware of this as well. Even though Scott said that we would probably recommend accepting the changes you're recommending.... I agree with that. I don't think we have any difficulty on this side. Unfortunately, the procedure and House affairs committee report is not the be-all and end-all. It still will be the commission that determines if they want to take your recommendations to heart and make further changes, or if they want it to remain with the boundaries they have suggested in this report.

Just so there are no expectations, I guess, I want to make sure you're aware that this committee will determine exactly how we wish to write the report. We have the ability, as was determined at the last meeting, to make some editorial comment. In other words, if collectively we feel that your arguments make sense and we support your arguments, that's what the report will say when it's sent back to your boundaries commission. But that is no guarantee that you will get what you're asking for, because it's their authority and theirs alone.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Cleary, in regard to the letter you read from the Narrows community group, could our group have a copy of it? I recognize that it may not be translated, but if you'd like to get it to the chair, we'll get that...so that we have a copy of it too.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

Yes, absolutely.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

That's super. Thank you.

For the NDP, we have Mr. Cullen.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I have two quick questions.

Thanks to all of you, gentlemen.

Ryan, you mentioned that on the far shore of the Narrows not that many people are impacted. The electoral boundaries commission talked about 3,600 or 3,656 people. That seems like a lot. If my recollection of the number of houses and community members over there.... Is that accurate? Is that how many people we're talking about, give or take?

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

For the Outer Battery and Fort Amherst, you're probably looking at about 1,500 people. As for those numbers, I don't know, maybe they include Witless Bay and Bay Bulls....

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Right, that was my one question.

As Jack mentioned, there has probably been a domino effect on this, with some changes to Avalon or other places. If the recommendation from the committee—and it makes perfect sense to talk about communities of interest—is to seek to reverse that decision, I'm trying to get a sense of how big the domino effect is coming back.

If we're talking about 1,200 or 1,500 people, it's within the parameters of what the electoral boundaries commission is always seeking. If it's this number or higher with some of these smaller ridings, maybe the impact is greater, but again, I've only spent a little bit of time on that side of the water, and I just can't imagine that there are nearly 4,000 people living over there, or even close.

[Ryan Cleary, NDP, St. John's South—Mount Pearl, NL]

I would say that between Fort Amherst and the Battery, both sides of the Narrows, in terms of just the number of homes, it's probably fewer than 100.