Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 5th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

We'll call the meeting to order. We have some fantastic witnesses today and lots to discuss and cover.

I will start off by doing my map thing again for those members of the committee who were here last time. We have made another change, I think. The map on your right will always be what it is today. The map on your left will be the one from the report of the commission. Members at the end as they make their presentations will tell us what is changing on it. We've been having some real trouble overlaying because of the names, so we're just going to stay with what it is now and what the commission has represented.

For witnesses, that's what you have. So if you're going to refer to the map over here, please tell us. When using the laser pointer, please avoid the analyst and the chair. The clerk's very quick; the rest of us are not.

Mr. Stewart and Mr. Julian, which one of you would like to go first? You'll have five minutes.

Mr. Stewart, you're going first. You have five minutes to thrill the committee with your changes.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

I'll give it my best shot.

I'd like to thank you for having me here today.

I would also like to thank the clerk for the eleventh-hour translation and for sending the documents around. Essentially we'll be splitting our presentation. I'll be going through the community objections to the Burnaby North—Seymour configuration in the report. Then Peter will talk more about how we propose to fix this.

Really I just wanted to stress all the way through my presentation how unpopular the decision essentially to cross the Burrard Inlet is. When we get to the maps, I can show you exactly what I mean. We're asking the committee to recommend to the commission that they not go ahead with this change.

Again, I will stress that I feel that the commission's work was integral; I just feel they made a mistake in this situation.

If we look at the first map, that's the current configuration of the riding of Burnaby—Douglas. Once we pull up the Burnaby North—Seymour map on the other screen you'll see what the commission has proposed. You can see that the new Burnaby North—Seymour riding goes across the Burrard Inlet. The only way that those two communities connect is through the Iron Workers Memorial Bridge. Almost unanimously the many people who have been coming out to the commission meetings and writing letters to the editor have objected to this configuration.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Is the bridge you're speaking of there on the bottom left of the new riding?

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

That's right, and that's the only way those two municipalities connect.

The objection to this merger of north Burnaby and North Vancouver is highlighted in the commission's report. I'll read you a quote:

It was and remains apparent to the Commission that there is a distinct lack of enthusiasm on both sides of Burrard Inlet for some combination of the existing North Vancouver and Burnaby—Douglas electoral districts to address deviations from the electoral quota. There were many submissions that viewed the large arterial corridor of the Ironworkers Memorial (Second Narrows) Bridge as more of a challenge to than an enhancement of access and communication for constituents.

Just to remind the committee, this proposal was also put forward in 2002 by the boundaries commission that reviewed boundaries at that time. There was the same level of objection from the community, and that commission decided not to go ahead. They proposed the same configuration that we're faced with today. The community pushed back very hard on both sides, North Vancouver and Burnaby, and the commission in the end reversed its decision and left us with the riding that we have today.

The commission held two meetings on this new change. In total, 59 people attended. One of the commissioners told me that it was by far the most controversial change in the whole province, and he attended meetings with large audiences that were passionately against this change.

Letters from both sides were sent to the commission. There were letters to the editor, lineups of people of all political stripes outside my office, objections from the board of trade, objections from the business improvement associations. There is a letter from city council that I've included in your package. It goes through the four main objections that are brought up time and time again.

Essentially, there's no significant community of interest between these two communities. North Burnaby and North Vancouver are distinctly different. First, North Vancouver is very wealthy, Burnaby, less so. These are different economic profiles. Second, Burnaby is a land of immigrants. We have 100 different languages in Burnaby. North Vancouver is not nearly as diverse. Third, there are different health authorities on the north shore, and North Vancouver and north Burnaby have different health authorities. Finally, there is the objection to the bridge.

Seniors showed up at these community hearings to say that it was almost impossible for them, because they are transit reliant, to make it from one side to the other, and they never travel between those two ridings.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. Stewart, we're running out of time.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Okay, how much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

None.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Okay, those were my four objections.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you.

Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll briefly reiterate what Mr. Stewart has just said about the reaction from the public in 2002, when a similar new riding was proposed, North Vancouver—North Burnaby, and the public reaction today.

I attended the public hearings in Burnaby and New Westminster. Another parliamentary colleague, Fin Donnelly, attended the commission hearings in Coquitlam. Very clearly there was a virtual consensus among the public from dozens of people who intervened. Even in the community of New Westminster, people were speaking against this proposed new riding because the communities of interest simply were not there.

I've circulated a copy of a proposed new riding, instead of the North Vancouver—North Burnaby riding, that does meet with some real consensus within our community and preserves those communities of interest that exist. I believe every member of this committee has a copy. I'd like to quickly go through that new riding, the existing ridings, and what would change.

First off, for Burnaby—Douglas, you would see a smaller reduced Burnaby—Douglas riding that would include the communities of interest that exist already in North Burnaby. As Mr. Stewart has indicated, there's a demographic similarity in north Burnaby, and that would be preserved.

Second, if you go two maps over to the third map, you'll see the proposed reduced-size Burnaby—New Westminster riding. There's a lot of community of interest between the south Burnaby neighbourhood, which demographically is the most diverse in all of Canada, and the west side of New Westminster, and a number of institutional links as well, including local schools. They cross the 10th Avenue area between the west side of New Westminster and south Burnaby.

If you go to the final map, you'll see the community of interest that exists between the east side of New Westminster, including the Sapperton neighbourhood, Coquitlam, and the Maillardville area, and that community of interest would be preserved.

Then if you go to the third map along in your kit, which is the proposed new Port Moody—Burquitlam riding, demographically this area has a great community of interest. There is a lot of interaction across North Road. The Burquitlam area is actually a combination of Burnaby and Coquitlam, and you'll see many businesses that publicize themselves as Burquitlam businesses. What this does is it preserves that community of interest and is a much better new riding than the proposed new riding of North Vancouver—North Burnaby.

There has been a real consensus in the community about that, and I'd like to say that my colleague, Fin Donnelly, who's not here today, as well as Mr. Stewart and I, believe that would be a much better new riding, a proposed Port Moody—Burquitlam riding, than the North Vancouver—North Burnaby riding. That's the case that was put by many in the public to the commission at the hearings.

Just to close, Mr. Chair, I'd like to read two quick paragraphs from the City of Burnaby's submission to this committee. It was sent to Mr. Scheer and Mr. Nicholson. It says that basically, in terms of the North Vancouver—North Burnaby riding, “...the two communities are not geographically linked. The need to cross Burrard Inlet to visit each community would compromise an MP's ability to devote equitable amounts of time in each community.”Mayor Corrigan from the City of Burnaby said, “In closing, we respectfully request that you convey our strong objection to this proposal to the House of Commons committee.” That is this committee.

Mr. Chair, it's very clear. I think there is a virtual consensus in our communities that this proposed new riding of North Vancouver—North Burnaby is a non-starter, and something along the lines of a Port Moody—Burquitlam riding would be much more in keeping with the communities of interest that exist in our area.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you very much, both of you, for your opening statements today.

We'll go to questions.

Mr. Lukiwski, are you leading off?

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

I think Mr. MacKenzie's going to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Mr. MacKenzie's going to lead off today.

You have five minutes.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I understand exactly what you're saying. These are tearing apart and putting together areas in nonsensical ways, from your view of dealing with constituents. What I didn't see was what the population numbers would end up being with the changes you're proposing. How would that fit with what the officials are trying to do?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you very much for the question. It's a very good one.

In terms of the electoral quotient for British Columbia, the three existing ridings that are reduced in size and the proposed new riding of Port Moody—Burquitlam would be within 2% of the quotient, so within 104,000 to 106,000 voters. The proposal would keep with the mandate that the commission has, certainly.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

The other part that I was having trouble trying to sort out is that you're talking about a new riding, but is that an additional riding over what the electoral boundaries commission have?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

No, because they propose a new riding of North Vancouver—North Burnaby, which is extremely problematic for all the reasons that we've just set out, we're saying North Vancouver—North Burnaby as a new riding is a non-starter. Instead of doing that as the new riding in the area, we're proposing Port Moody—Burquitlam. It doesn't change anything else in terms of the scope of the commission's recommendations for British Columbia.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

I take it you're both singing from the same song sheet with what you perceive.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

It's not a new riding. It's just a new configuration of ridings. We just draw the lines differently, that's all.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

But as two members from the area, you're both in agreement about the change.

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Absolutely.

[Dave MacKenzie, Conservative, Oxford, ON]

What about the adjoining ridings that you would then touch as a result of those changes?

[Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

We have spoken at length with my boundary MPs: Peter, Libby Davies, Fin Donnelly. We've all discussed this and they're broadly in agreement as well, or absolutely in agreement with this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Some of them will be coming here so we can ask them that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I'd like to add, Mr. Chair, if I might, Mr. Donnelly has actually sent a letter to this committee saying that he supports the reconfiguration we're proposing.