Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 12th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We'll call our meeting to order. We're in public today to discuss the redistribution of the province of Alberta. We have a couple of witnesses with us today, Mr. Payne and Mr. Hillyer, who have sent us letters ahead of time but are willing to give us some more information on the changes to the ridings they represent.

We also have technology, as requested. We've got maps. It's as if you could walk right into Alberta right now. It's fantastic. Benoit Montpetit and Johanne Boisvert are here working the maps for us. They're going to wow us with what we can see about changes to redistribution today.

Thank you all for being here. We'll start off with five minutes each from Mr. Payne and Mr. Hillyer on the topics they've sent us, and then we'll ask them questions.

Mr. Payne, do you want to go first?

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Sure, that's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Committee members, I want to start by thanking you for the opportunity to be here to express the various concerns with the proposed boundary changes to the Medicine Hat constituency.

I'll get right to the point. I had the opportunity to meet with hundreds of constituents and local officials, and they're unanimous in opposing the boundaries as proposed by the commission. The mayors are especially in agreement that the proposed changes are the wrong way to go.

The proposed boundary will cause several problems. I mailed and faxed most of the details to the committee clerk in December 2012 and January 2013. I realize my time is limited so I'll do my best to keep things concise.

One of the major concerns from some of my constituents is that they are being put into a new riding in which their representation would change dramatically. I speak specifically of the communities of Brooks, Duchess, Bassano, and the County of Newell. I've heard from most of the mayors and councillors from these communities, and they're unanimous in opposing the changes. They greatly resent being lumped into the proposed Bow River riding as these communities do not meet the definition of “like communities” and “communities of interest”. This means they'll have limited access to an MP who may live as far as three hours away.

This isn't the only reason for this frustration. They believe they have a number of common or shared issues and concerns with other communities in the current Medicine Hat riding. These common issues include an emphasis on agricultural protection. These communities rely on each other for economic growth and they feel they'll be losing the connection by being broken away from the current riding. These communities have traditional economic ties with the city of Medicine Hat as well as being part of the Palliser Health Region of southeast Alberta.

Other communities such as the County of Forty Mile are part of what's called the Palliser Economic Partnership. The communities currently in the riding have common economic drivers. These communities are also part of the southeast zone covered by Alberta Health Services or the Palliser Health Region.

You can clearly see why these folks are concerned about what will happen if they move to the Bow River constituency. One of the major concerns some of my constituents had was that the newest proposal makes way for religious considerations. This is alarming to say the least. It's not the redistribution commission's responsibility to take into account religious considerations. I urge members of this committee to scrutinize this particular item very carefully when you're writing your report.

What I had proposed to the commission is an alternative set of boundaries that I do not find extreme or unrealistic. Renaming the riding Badlands-Medicine Hat-Brooks is the first suggestion. Second, I propose that the riding consist of the County of Forty Mile, County of Newell, and Cypress County, including all the cities, towns, villages, and rural areas within the counties, special areas south of the Red Deer River and north of the two counties of Newell and Cypress, including Empress and Buffalo. The boundaries I propose are natural boundaries like the area south of the Red Deer River and the provincial boundaries to the east and south to the Montana border.

I'll quote from my original submission:

The communities of Brooks, Medicine Hat and the County of Newell, Cypress County and County of Forty Mile have an affinity to Medicine Hat from several points of view: economically as business and industry connections, culturally, health authority responsibilities and jurisdiction, hospitals, central medical and clinical destinations, school divisions and education.

The Medicine Hat College main campus is in Medicine Hat and they have a campus in Brooks, as you can see from the documents I have submitted to the committee.

Again I'll quote from my original submission:

There is no connection or affinity between Medicine Hat and the areas of Cardston, Warner, Waterton Park, Blood Reserve or other communities west and south of Taber and Lethbridge, either economically, professionally, medically or scholastically.

I also pointed out the fact that my original submission and the proposals I have made would ensure the population of the riding would total approximately 103,000, well within the population constraints of the electoral boundaries readjustment.

As I stated, my wish is to maintain the unity of the manufacturing, economic, cultural, education, health, and social relationships that is a vital entity to the Medicine Hat federal riding. We have the support of the majority of people. We have the support of most mayors or reeves. Finally, I've had discussions with members of Parliament whose ridings border the Medicine Hat riding. They agree with what I have proposed, and I will be supporting my colleague Jim Hillyer's proposal as well.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Mr. Hillyer, you have five minutes.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Thank you very much.

I'l start with giving you a history of how we arrived at this current map. In the first proposal, the current Lethbridge riding was changed to cut out all of the communities south of Lethbridge and south of the County of Lethbridge line. The people in that area recognize that when you add six ridings to a province, things need to change, so while they're disappointed to be left out of the Lethbridge riding, they realize that something like this had to happen.

But what really concerned the mayors and the general population was the division of that region into two separate ridings. There were almost 1,200 signatures requesting that this region stay together, because it is a community of interest.

There have been concerns expressed that this community of interest is just an attempt to create a riding based on religion. This region is sometimes referred to as the Mormon Trail. That's an historic designation. One of the towns in that area is a national historic site because it was founded by the Mormons in the early 1900s, but more Mormons would be staying in the Lethbridge riding than there would be in this new riding. That's an historical fact more than anything else.

Anyway, they were very happy to have been put into the same riding because it united that community of interest, but they were discouraged to be put into the Medicine Hat riding, not because anyone has anything against Medicine Hat, but because they just don't have much to do with Medicine Hat. They feel that as a region with a very small population, at the very tail end of a large geographical riding dominated by a large city that will have almost 60% of the population, they will be an afterthought.

The proposal is to accept Mr. Payne's proposal to put Brooks and the County of Newell back into the Medicine Hat riding and put the County of Warner and the County of Cardston into the Bow River riding. Now, even though this will still be a large geographical riding, it will not be dominated by a large city.

To quote the report from the public consultations, the reason they put Taber into the Bow River riding was for a similar concern. At the public hearings, the Municipal District of Taber indicated that they had some concerns and said that “their...wish was to remain in an electoral district with an agricultural and energy focus”. The report stated, “The Commission is of the view that the M[unicipal] D[istrict] of Taber is a similarly good fit with Bow River, particularly as communities with similar interests and rural connections exist throughout that electoral district.” Then it listed some of the communities in that area, saying “all of which are rural and agricultural in character”.

That would be the same for those communities and areas within the County of Cardston and the County of Warner. They feel that even they would still be in a large.... They know they can't avoid being in a large geographical area, but they feel that they'll be better represented and less of an afterthought by being in a large geographical area where they are not dominated by a large city and where they share these common interests and economic concerns.

I have submitted to the committee letters from all of the mayors supporting this, with the exception of Milk River and Coutts, which are on the south end. They don't mind being in the Medicine Hat riding because those communities do have more of a connection to Medicine Hat. The numbers would work out. They have no objection to splitting the county if they put the County of Warner into the Bow River riding.

Finally, I would just like to say that if we are able to make this change, I'd request a change to the name of the riding, since “Bow River” would no longer aptly describe the area. I'm not too concerned with what it is, as long as it reflects the area better—something like “Prairie lands” or “rural southern Alberta”, or something like that.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you both for the submissions. You were both very detailed in the letters and submissions you sent to us.

Mr. Lukiwski, for five minutes.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks, Jim and LaVar, for being here.

And thanks to the Elections Canada officials. This is much better than what we had before. We're actually able to pick up some of the suggestions you're making; the maps we had before were pretty tough.

Could I ask, just in general terms, both LaVar and Jim, in regard to the suggestions you're making to us here today, have you made those suggestions to the electoral boundaries commission in Alberta?

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Partly. The suggestion that I'm making today is that whatever changes happen, the communities south of Lethbridge that are no longer going to be in the Lethbridge riding want to stay in the same riding. So they told me to go and fight for whatever I could, but whatever I do, don't unfix what was fixed. That part was presented.

What wasn't presented was the proposal to be in the Bow River riding, because it never existed in that first map. This is a response to the map that was created. What we had suggested was to include those south communities into the Foothills riding. They didn't do that, so now, based on the second map, the riding that makes the most sense to be in is the Bow River riding.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

In terms of the original submissions for the Medicine Hat constituency, everything is as was put in, other than the fact that there was also a portion of the MD of Taber, to include some other smaller communities—Vauxhaul, Scandia, Rainier, a number of those—partly to get to that 107,000 as the ideal number. We recognize that because of the size of the Medicine Hat riding, 121,000, you'd obviously lose some communities. Obviously, it would have been nicer to be able to keep all those, but I recognize that we'll need to have some adjustments.

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

Yes, one of the challenges is that you're in a province where we're adding seats because of the population increase. Trying to be as close as possible to the population's quotient, the variant, was probably one of the main priorities of the electoral boundaries commission when determining how to add the new seats—keep it within the population quotient, and also observe all of the other things, communities of interest and travel patterns and the like.

I'm wondering if much of what you are presenting to us today was presented to the commission originally, but they didn't listen to you. What arguments did they present to you for why they couldn't accommodate the suggestions you're making to us today?

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Quite honestly, I can't think of a good argument. My colleague Jim, as well as Ted Menzies and Kevin Sorenson, are all on board with what I proposed. I don't know why they wouldn't be able to make that accommodation. It makes perfect sense to me in terms of the counties. When we looked at the whole issue, we tried to get the boundaries so that you would get some natural boundaries like the Saskatchewan border, the Montana border, the Red Deer River. We also included the actual various counties to ensure that the municipalities would be there and stay the same.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I don't get the sense that the commission didn't listen to our concerns. I feel they have a pretty big job, and as they've solved some concerns, unknowingly they've created others. I don't think it was the case of their ignoring concerns and saying, “Oh, sorry, it just doesn't work out”. They did mention in the report.... As I said, we recommended they go into Foothills, but because of other shifts they had made, that wouldn't have worked. I could only talk to them about the map they had before us, and I couldn't really imagine what other changes they were going to make.

I agree with Mr. Payne that based on the second map that they've shown, it has created some other concerns that didn't exist under the first map. I can't imagine the commission having any problems with what we're proposing. It falls within their mandate and falls within the philosophy that they seem to be holding to, according to both reports that came with the first two maps.

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

Lastly, you refer to consulting with a couple of other MPs whose ridings will be affected by your proposed changes. Would it be fair to say—I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think this is very important—that not only the members of Parliament are in agreement with your proposals, but also the communities affected across the board would be supportive of the changes that you're recommending? Is everybody on the same page here?

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Yes, I believe that's correct. I've got letters from the mayors from the various communities around the proposed riding, and as well there have been letters from the chambers of commerce. I have just one other comment. I never appeared before the commission. There were people in the riding who made presentations on behalf of the Medicine Hat constituency.

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

Jim, everyone that you know of?

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

Yes, everyone is on board except, as I mentioned, the County of Warner. I think the commission used county lines because that made sense to them. They didn't understand the nature of the communities in that area. The communities Cardston, Magrath, Raymond, and Stirling are much more a community of interest even though they're in different counties. In fact, they're within the same school board and many other administrative organizations, they're united in that way. Like I said, in Milk River and Coutts they have said, you know what they're not.... That's just the mayors. When I'm talking to the citizens I think that they're more interested in remaining in a purely rural riding because they're not close to the city they would be in. The mayors themselves have said, “You know what, we don't have any trouble being in the Medicine Hat riding”. It's not a strong objection to a proposal, and quite frankly if we use the school board line as a dividing point we could easily include the towns of Warner, Milk River, and Coutts into the Medicine Hat riding and keep within the population balance. It would balance things out fine.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

Mr. Cullen, seven minutes.

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

I'm not sure if my colleagues have some questions as well, but I have a couple of things.

LaVar, you mentioned the religious considerations. You just mentioned it and then went on to your next point. Can you expand on that a little bit for us?

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Certainly. I've had a number of people concerned that when the commission came out with their report it appeared that there were religious considerations in terms of this whole riding. For the committee's information I have relatives in Cardston, Lethbridge, and Magrath who are Mormon. So from my point of view there is no issue around that. I look at it more in terms of what the appropriate boundaries are. In terms of the County of Cardston it's quite appropriate, there are no issues with that, or the County of Warner. To me that was how it was. There was also a letter from the MLA from Cardston—Taber—Warner. I'm not sure if I got a copy to the committee here, but he did express certain concerns around religion as well.

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

I just want to be sensitive, but I don't know the communities well enough to be able to understand the implications of what you're saying. Is it your view that the commission tried to put communities of faith into certain boundaries, it was an attempt that was made?

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I think what happened is certainly the Mormon Trail.... And from what I read in there, and from people I talked to around the whole issue, I think there was a concern that some decision was made on religion versus other aspects.

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

Just to be clear, communities of interest can include the aspect of communities of faith. It's a strange moment because usually in politics we keep those two conversations as separate as we can. This is one of those moments where there is a lens put upon a community to say, “Is there some connection due to faith-based background?” I was just curious more than anything else. I don't critique either your opinion or the one that maybe Elections Canada did.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

That's why I said putting the County of Cardston in there includes most of these communities; to me that makes perfect sense.

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

I see.

It's something, Jim, you talked about. Maybe you want to add to that.

[Jim Hillyer, Conservative, Lethbridge, AB]

I understand why some people would think it was made purely on reasons of faith. I agree with your statement that this is one of those situations where faith can be included. This area called the Mormon Trail is so called because in the early 1900s the Mormon Church was hired by the Canadian government to come and settle this area and build the irrigation canals and so on.

To this day, the population of this town is probably 65% Mormon. But as I said, there are more Mormons who are staying in the Lethbridge riding than would be in this riding. In both ridings they'd be fewer than 10% of the population.

The Mormon Church itself did not become involved in this question. It was the case that they said their religion or faith happens to be part of what unites them as a community of interest, but it doesn't exclude those who aren't members of that church. They still feel part of that community of interest as well.

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

Okay. That's helpful in terms of understanding the history.

To stay with Jim for a second, you talked about the implications of the new maps and the rural culture. One of the things you said was that there were concerns that people in those rural communities would be dominated by a city that made up 60% of the riding. Could you expand on that for me?