Evidence of meeting #66 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was surrey.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
We'll call our meeting to order. We are still studying the redistribution commission's report for beautiful British Columbia.
Monsieur Sandhu, I don't know what we have done, but you had a panel of four starting the day yesterday, and today it's just you.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
I think they are all afraid of me. That's why they haven't shown up here this morning.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
We're going to give you five minutes for a presentation to us, and then we'll ask you questions. So I guess you get to go first.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
This actually feels a little different. I've sat at those tables, and being a witness is a little nerve-racking actually.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Many members have said the same thing. It's the first time they have had to sit at the end of the table. I think they will all be much more polite to witnesses in the future having done it.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Wonderful.
Let me give you a little bit of a background on Surrey. I've lived in Surrey for 33 years, and I pretty much know every corner 7-Eleven. I've hung out in those places in Surrey.
Surrey has five of town centres of sorts. You have the South Surrey White Rock area; the Newton area; the Whalley area, which is the North Surrey part of it; and you have the Fleetwood—Port Kells area with the Guildford part of it. The other area, the town centre or historic town centre, is Cloverdale towards Langley.
The initial map that was proposed by the commission had split some of the historic communities in Surrey. For example, part of my riding went with Newton—North Delta, which basically had no relevance to Surrey North in the initial boundaries commission map.
The commissioners came out to Surrey, and a number of constituents came out to enlighten the commission about the historic settlement of Surrey with regard to different community centres.
The commission listened very carefully and in fact recognized that they had made a mistake in recognizing historic patterns of settlements in Surrey. They listened to the constituents, and they made changes that reflected the views of the constituents from Surrey who had come out. Not only that, but those also reflected the historic settlement in different parts of Surrey.
I have talked to a number of constituents about the proposed new map. They have told me that this is actually a much better geographical representation and that it brings together communities of interest.
There was an article published on the Surrey Leader opinion page that came out on February 7 after the revised maps were presented. It's one of the newspapers of Frank Bucholtz, who wrote:
The revised proposal for Surrey's new federal ridings makes far more sense than did the initial proposal from the federal Electoral Boundaries Commission....
The five Surrey ridings will be much more representative of Surrey's communities than would have been the case under the commission’s first proposal.
I do want to say that the revised boundaries are much more reflective of the boundaries that are present in Surrey.
Having said that, I've seen the representations made by surrounding members, and I do want this committee to know that there are people who came out to the hearings. Their views were heard by the commission. Any changes to surrounding boundaries will have a ripple effect on people who were represented from my community. I want this committee to know that if it is thinking about making any changes based on another MP's input and that of their constituents, please do keep in mind the constituents from my community of Surrey, so that we do not have a ripple effect across different communities.
That is it.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Joe Preston
Super.
Mr. Lukiwski, would you like to lead us off today, for five minutes?
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Thank you, Mr. Sandhu, for being here.
You mentioned that the second map addressed a lot of the concerns you had identified after the first map had been presented, but that there are still, in your opinion at least, some other minor adjustments that could be made or should be made.
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
The community made it very clear. There are five different centres in Surrey, and the new map reflects those communities. I don't think we need to make any more changes.
From the opinion piece that appeared in the Surrey Leader, and from the constituents I've talked to, they're a lot happier with the new map than they would be if some changes were made. I think right now they feel that their views were heard. If changes are made at this level, I think we would be betraying the very constituents who came out and reflected their views.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
I just want to make sure I'm clear on this: you're happy with the map and you're not recommending any other changes to your riding particularly?
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
You're suggesting that if the committee hears, or at least has heard, recommendations from other ridings that would affect Surrey, then we should be cognizant of your testimony here today.
Is that right?
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Absolutely you should. If a neighbouring riding is changed, that will have a ripple effect on the ridings in Surrey.
I'm asking this committee to keep in mind the views of my constituents, the people who came out to these meetings and who represented themselves to the commission. The commission recognized the different town centres in the community, and I wish to add that this should be reflected.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
Tom Lukiwski Conservative Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre, SK
Just so that you're aware of what this committee has been doing, in our final reports from province to province we've basically just been identifying the testimony we've heard from the members of Parliament. We tend not to editorialize. We basically just try to reflect the accurate testimony that we've heard.
I'm sure, in the final report on British Columbia, your comments will also be quite accurately reflected, inasmuch as you like the new boundaries, but you are expressing some caution that if other recommendations get made, they would have an impact on the riding you have currently and that this would not be well received by your constituents.
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Right. I believe the commission took in the concerns of my constituents, and that is reflected in the revised map they especially presented for Surrey. To make changes to those I think would be going against the wishes of the constituents who came out to the hearings.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
I'm not sure I'll need five minutes.
Just checking back, what you're expressing here, Jasbir, is your concern about a domino effect.
As committee members will remember—and I'm not sure how we're going to handle this, Tom, as you say—when we had Mr. Warawa in front of us on Langley, one of the proposals from him was to move west to grab some more of Cloverdale out of Fleetwood—Port Kells. As committee members will also remember, there was a proposal from Mark to move some of that riding from Fleetwood—Port Kells over to....
It was a significant number, Chair, as I recall. It was somewhere in the range of 15,000 to 20,000.
The question was where, if we borrowed that, and Fleetwood—Port Kells then needed to make up some numbers, that would likely come from? So we get into the Surrey question, because that's the domino. It would be unusual to suggest that you would cross the river and then get into....
So in terms of moving around groups of 15,000 to 20,000 in this part of the world, Mr. Sandhu, is there a natural 15,000 or 20,000 out of your riding that would line up with what you heard in the testimony, or what the commission heard in the testimony?
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
I've lived in Surrey for 33 years. In most of the area that's part of the Cloverdale—Langley riding, the new one, the people who live in Cloverdale and Clayton Hill actually shop in Langley, because there's a huge shopping mall. They do not come out to Guildford or Port Kells to do their shopping. So that area is more attached to Langley than it is to the Surrey shopping malls.
Having said that, I don't want my constituents to think that their views are lesser than the views of constituents from Langley. It's pretty clear, from the changes the commission made, that the views of my constituents are reflected in the new map.
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
That's the question.
Tom is right: what this committee tries to do is to reflect the testimony we hear. On the suggestion made by Mark Warawa earlier with respect to Langley, one of our questions was, “Where do you make up the numbers for it?” He had some logic with communities of interest extending to this Cloverdale section but then into Fleetwood—Port Kells, and I'm not sure if we're hearing from the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells.
Are we?
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Regardless, if it then dominos into Surrey, your suggestion is that the map as described right now is a good reflection and that, having seen the new maps, people are happy; there were some alterations made but nothing significant. You said that you don't want people to feel that they somehow matter less.
11:10 a.m.
NDP
Jasbir Sandhu NDP Surrey North, BC
Yes, absolutely. Over 25 individuals testified at the commission's hearing. It would be unfair to them. They don't want their views counting less because somebody else now is coming out with some proposals that weren't presented in the initial hearings.
People are very happy. I've talked to many, many constituents in my riding and they are very happy that the community interests were kept together, especially the town centres in the way they are reflected in the new map. That's how Surrey has grown over the last number of years. There are communities of interest: Whalley, which is basically North Surrey; Newton, which is South Surrey; and Fleetwood—Port Kells, with Guildford, and the Cloverdale-Langley area. This is very reflective of how the community has grown over the last 33 years that I've lived there.