Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 28th, 2013

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

Yes, thanks.

Those maps are a little bit confusing at this end, too.

The main thrust we have is that in the current riding they want to take the eastern part and split off Nelson and Kaslo, and bring Penticton into the riding and cut off the westerly communities. The people, including the former MPs, argued against this very idea. For example, Mr. Abbott said that Trail, Castlegar, and Nelson are inextricably linked together with all the communities. Stockwell Day said that there had not been a single person he had spoken to who considered it to be a good idea to move the boundaries of Okanagan—Kootenay to include Penticton.

The commission, at that time, 10 years ago, said, “Representation at the hearings convinced us that these proposals created significant difficulties of their own and that there were better alternatives.” The alternatives that they found were the current boundaries. So we have a historical precedent here.

My time is limited, so I'm going to talk about communities of interest. The main message I'm hearing from constituents and elected officials is that we need to keep Trail, Nelson, Castlegar and surrounding areas together. We have the regional hospital. We have the regional district, which links Nelson with Castlegar. The smaller communities are connected to Nelson, which is the government centre, and Castlegar, which is the airport. They call themselves the tri-cities. Trail has the regional hospital. Castlegar has the regional college. They work together. They hosted the BC Summer Games and the world juniors.

The people in Slocan Valley feed into our communities. I know that my colleague, Dan Albas, had an op-ed, and one of the things he put in, which I agree with, is that if you were living in Slocan Valley under the current proposal and you have to travel to Penticton to see your MP, that's a long drive in the winter over a couple of mountain passes, whereas now the folks go right into the area of Castlegar and Nelson.

The other thing I think is really important, and which all of us as MPs value is this whole idea of serviceability or accessibility. These are huge ridings, and our task is to make the MP as accessible as possible.

For example, David, I think you have a strong case to keep your current boundaries just based on geography. We have a precedent in our province. Right now, if we go with their proposal, and say the MP is elected from our area, and that is the West Kootenays, there would undoubtedly be an office there.

Currently I have a satellite office in Oliver, which is a smaller community in the west, that works part-time and services those small communities. If Penticton were to be added, that part-time office couldn't service Penticton. There would have to be some adjustment, and given our limited resources of hiring staff, if more of the staff were moved to Penticton, then our area would suffer. I think David has an analogous situation with Nelson and Cranbrook. If the MP were in Penticton, it would still be the same juggling act that he or she would have to follow.

It's not a good mix. It's not a good mix to put Penticton, which is for our purposes an urban centre, along with communities that are basically rural.

Another message I heard in these hearings was that the West Kootenay communities historically had been together, and they want to stay that way. Summerland and Penticton do not want to be separated because they have a similarity, an affinity, and the current proposal would separate them. It would put Penticton into this riding and Summerland into another riding.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Could you wrap it up now.

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

I'll wrap up by saying that I've done some juggling of figures and I'll table them with the committee after. If we can meet our objectives so both David and I could have roughly 96,000 people in our ridings, which would satisfy the objectives—actually, David, it would take Meadow Creek and Nakusp out of your riding and bring in Sicamous, for example—then we would each have 96,000.

I'll table some of the details later. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Super.

Mr. Wilks, do you want to try to do the same thing?

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We could make this simple if you guys would just let me go into Alberta a little bit. It would resolve everything.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I provided three maps, which you have, as well as, I believe, an explanation in both official languages.

If you go to map number one, which I'm going to refer to, you can see that right now, with the existing boundaries, I have Nakusp in my riding and I have Revelstoke in my riding. That's quite significant. Then I have Creston in the bottom end.

To get from Nakusp to Creston, I have to drive directly through New Denver. I have no choice. Highway 6 goes through New Denver. I have no choice but to go through there. If I decide to turn on Highway 31A at New Denver and go over to Kaslo, I am diverted from going through Silverton. Otherwise, I have to drive down and go through either Nelson, or more likely, Castlegar. From the perspective of saving time for the member for Kootenay—Columbia, it does nothing, because we have to drive through the other riding regardless.

If you go to page 2, which is the new riding, what I'm suggesting is relatively simple. Because I retain Revelstoke but they've taken Nakusp out, and they've given me Kaslo, Nelson, and Salmo, I'm suggesting—and I believe you have it highlighted in both red and yellow—where the boundary would go. That red line is eliminating that portion of the boundary. The reason for that is that from Revelstoke I would travel south on Highway 23, go directly through Nakusp and directly through New Denver to get to Kaslo. There's no way of getting around it. There is what I'll call a forestry road that goes from Trout Lake over to Meadow Creek, which ironically is still in the area. It's interesting.

Further on, if you go to the last large map—and I've highlighted it in pink—you can see Revelstoke. That's Highway 23. You travel down to Shelter Bay. You cross on the ferry to go to Galena. Follow it down to number 5, which is Nakusp. That's the riding right now. It will be taken away. I'll just have Revelstoke. What I'm suggesting is since, as you can see from the highways, I have no choice but to drive through these two communities to get to Kaslo, they might as well come into the riding. It's for continuity of the riding, and it's just better travelling for the MP. Otherwise I believe that the MP would be wasting their time by driving through two communities which they could service instead of just driving through them.

I showed the pink line going down to Fauquier, or the Needles ferry, because it's in the riding now and there are only about 400 or 500 people. It just makes sense.

Then the pink line that goes over to Kaslo is Highway 31A. It intersects at New Denver. Then from New Denver you have to travel north to Nakusp or south down through the Slocan Valley.

That's my presentation, Mr. Chair. I accept the findings of the commission. If they're going to give Salmo, Nelson, and Kaslo to Kootenay—Columbia, then let's make it easy for me to travel around. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

That makes sense.

Mr. Lukiwski, are you up first?

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

I guess I am.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We can always try five minutes. We may not get to everybody.

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

Sure. Let me see if I have this straight, and please correct me if I'm wrong, because I probably am.

Do I understand from both you gentlemen that you both disagree with or are making suggestions other than what the boundaries commission has suggested, and you're both suggesting different boundaries for your two ridings that butt up against one another? In other words, you both agree on one thing, that you don't like the commission's recommendations, but you can't agree on where the boundary lines should be drawn. Am I correct in saying that?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

I would say that is correct.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

I am not opposed to Salmo, Nelson and Kaslo. I get it. If you're going to do that, for continuity let me bring back Nakusp—they took out what I have right now—and add New Denver, which I don't have right now, but I have to drive through.

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

It would make it easier for David or any other MP, if we take those areas he mentioned, Kaslo and New Denver and Nakusp, and retain them, put them in the current riding of British Columbia Southern Interior and, I'm not sure, take Sicamous, which is on Highway 1, which is currently in a riding of 121,000 according to the proposal, and add that to your riding.

I'm not sure what your thoughts would be on having another community on Highway 1, David, rather than doing all the mountain passes and trying to navigate through Nelson and Slocan Valley. That would be my suggestion as far as how we could get around that, and then just base Kootenay—Columbia on geography, adding one small community. That would take a lot of pressure coming in and going through.... The mountain pass that David would have to travel to get to Nelson is the highest one in Canada. In the winter, it's often closed. I have a couple of them in my current riding, but I don't think it's as bad as that one. There are two passes to get into Nelson from Cranbrook.

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

I appreciate the comments from both of you. One of the reasons I asked the question is this is the first time we've encountered a situation whereby we have two MPs who have disagreed on where the boundary should be, so it makes our job perhaps a little more challenging, other than just reporting accurately what their suggestions are. In most of the other presentations we've been dealing with, we've had MPs make suggested changes to boundaries, but the boundaries or the other ridings they're affecting by their recommendations have been accepted by the other MPs.

I appreciate your comments, but beyond that I think I'll pass my time to the NDP.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Okay.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

I will start.

I have been to Trail, Nelson and Castlegar. I fully appreciate how difficult it is, especially for Mr. Atamanenko, to travel from one place to the other, given the mountains and all.

Where did the people who appeared before the commission stand? To what extent did they support one proposal over another?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

Ms. Turmel, most people support what I am proposing. In other words, they are against what the commission is proposing. The main reason is that they want to have what are known as communities of interest. They don't want Nelson, Castlegar and Trail separated. And, as I pointed out in my presentation, they don't want to separate Penticton from Summerland to put Penticton in the other riding.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Very well.

Mr. Wilks, what about you?

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

It was different for us because we had hearings in Cranbrook, which is in my riding, but Nelson and Castlegar are not right now. I have spoken to the mayors of the area. Nakusp is in my riding right now, and the mayor would prefer that Nakusp stay there. I can't speak for Kaslo or Nelson, because they do genuinely want to stay with what is now referred to as B.C. Southern Interior. But it is what it is; they want to get to 105, and I don't know how else you do it.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

My other question is about services.

If you include Penticton in this plan, how can you serve all the communities in question?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

It would be hard, given that the demands of an urban population are different from those of small rural communities.

It also depends on our staff. Frankly, if I were the member for a riding like that, I don't know how I could serve the people of Penticton and all the other regions in the riding. I don't know how I could be there to address their needs. Stockwell Day mentioned that in his presentation, ten years ago. It's the same thing.

[Nycole Turmel, NDP, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

When the people of Nelson and Trail need something, do they automatically go to Penticton, or do they just go to Vancouver if they're making a trip anyways?

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

Actually, we try to encourage buying local. We have what we call the Tri-Cities. Unfortunately, sometimes people cross the boundary to buy cars in our region. If they want something from a big city, they usually go to Kelowna. They can get there without going through Penticton, since they're heading north. Of course, there is also Vancouver.

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

For both of you, this is one of the more complicated parts of British Columbia, or maybe the country, to drive around just because of the mountain passes and the communities, so I appreciate the attempts to try to keep some sense to things.

Alex, how close is the Summerland-Penticton connection that you talked about in your presentation? I want to get a sense because they're being divided under the current model that Elections Canada is proposing.