Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 21st, 2013

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

I think we have it figured out now, anyway.

With my first question, I'll start with John, and then, Mark, I want to go over to you.

John, you had mentioned that you agree with some of the presentations made before by Mr. Duncan and Mr. Lunney, who said that Powell River should be back in the Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country riding.

Mark, you mentioned—

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

In case the recorder doesn't pick up my nod, that was a oui.

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

Okay, thank you for that confirmation.

Mark, you had talked primarily about the new riding, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, and what you thought is needed there in terms of, I guess, two things: population quotient and community of interest. You talked about Pemberton and Whistler being together as a community of interest and perhaps being placed in one riding. You're suggesting Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon. I'd like to just get a few more expanded comments from you on that if I could.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Surprisingly, for a riding where it would take me most of the day, if not the whole day, to get to Vancouver Island North, this issue actually starts there. In order to get Powell River back to the Mainland, which is where it wants to be and where it has been, in West Vancouver, there's a need to bring it back to that riding.

Obviously, there are communities of interest all the way along, but if you're bringing Powell River back, which I think everyone who has presented so far has agreed should happen, you have to look at a population shift elsewhere. The most logical population shift when you bring in Powell River is to bring Whistler, Pemberton, and SLRD area C out into what is currently Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon but would be the new Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon riding, because it maintains those communities of interest.

As the representative there now, I'd say that the problem has been that there is not an adequate population in the area to justify the expense of having an office per se in that area. Bringing into a group those communities of interest up there allows for that. I think, as John said, it's not perfect, but it's the only way to get Powell River back to the Mainland, which I think is the linchpin to this whole thing.

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

On the population quotient with Pemberton and Whistler, you've identified them as one community of interest, but if they were moved into the new riding of Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon riding, what would that do on in terms of population variance with all of the ridings around it? Would it get a little closer together? Is that also a—

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It would. Right now, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon is well under the target, within a variance that I believe is 7% or so below, and this brings it up closer to the average. I can get you those specific numbers in just a moment.

As well, bringing Powell River into West Vancouver would put it, I think, well over the legislated maximum. So if you brought those out, Mission—Matsqui would have the room to absorb that population, because it was well under, and it would also allow West Vancouver to be within that variance that's been acceptable to the commission.

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

Last, I'll just make a comment. I normally do this for all those who appear before us. What we have been doing in practice as a committee is just making sure in the final reports that we have an accurate reflection of the comments and the suggestions by the MPs. We tend not to editorialize, but ultimately the final decision is that of the boundaries commission.

I say that only because I think you made some passing reference in your opening comments, Mark, about what this committee could or could not do. We will write a report. Some might have recommendations based on what we have heard from the MPs, but it will ultimately be up to the commissioners to determine whether they accept any of the comments or suggestions made by MPs or reject them outright.

With that, I'm done, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Thank you. Yes, your five minutes are up.

We have Mr. Scott for five minutes, please.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to both of you for coming.

My failure yesterday to get your first name correct, Mark, was actually a compliment.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Part of what the committee has to do is to see whether or not there are clear alternatives proposed that could be put in the report in a way that the boundaries commission could take seriously. At the moment, things are becoming clearer, but we're still not dealing with hard numbers and new lines. I've heard more today from both of you that clears up some confusion from the last time about how to handle this Powell River thing.

John, if Powell River comes into your riding, do you have a number in mind of how many that would actually mean coming into West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, peace and love...?

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

The number is usually about 25,000 in the regional district.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

And then, Mark, in your suggestions about the Pemberton-Whistler thing, are you able to tell us roughly, if those went into Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon...?

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I could give you those. John can probably speak to what Whistler is. The Pemberton area including the SLRD area C has about 5,000. Whistler has about 10,000. So you're looking at about 15,000 going the other way.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Okay.

Then I just wanted to double-check, John. I fully recognize that being an existing representative of an area—and Whistler's in your riding now, right—

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

That's correct.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

—the idea of losing something is not something you'd want to advocate for, but you're willing to see it go? That's the point?

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I don't think it's up to me to say I'm willing to see it go. I would ask whether it is in the best interests of the people we as MPs represent. We have to make some difficult decisions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joe Preston]

Very well put.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Does anybody want to represent Whistler? Of course. There's a personal interest as well as a political interest in doing so. At the same time, we have a very strong need to make sure that the people in Powell River are properly represented. My preference is to represent both, but we have to make a difficult decision.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I'm just looking at your own submission, and I just want to make sure.... It's not just going to be a numbers thing. If they're going to accommodate Powell River, whatever effect that has on Vancouver Island...for example, we know that MP Crowder hasn't been consulted at her end, but you mentioned that the Pemberton region wants to join West Vancouver as it feels it would receive better access to representation.

You're also talking about the linkage to Whistler through West Vancouver. I'm just wondering, from a community of interest perspective, if Pemberton and Whistler easily can go to Mission—Matsqui? Forget about the population thing. Is there really a community of interest going that way?

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

There's a strong community of interest between Pemberton and Whistler. That's a starting point. Both mayors heartily support that principle. I think Mark put it really well. He has represented Pemberton. He has seen that and has even talked about it. So I think that's the driving force, and then you can always pick other communities of interest, which will be strong positives or negatives. But I think you have to start by putting those two together, and what happens after that is a challenge either way.

[Craig Scott, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I guess the only thing I would want to say is that in your letter you did make a pretty good case—and I understand and I also know how active you are, and you probably could represent the entire riding with Powell River and it would be well represented—for why there are linkages between West Vancouver and Whistler and you indicated that Pemberton itself feels an orientation in that direction. So that's part of what we have to wrestle with.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

The letter you're referring to is my letter to the boundary commission from October. That's clearly the case, and I mentioned earlier in my remarks that I sit here in front of you as a representative, as somebody who has an orientation between the north shore and Whistler. Our family has houses in both places.

So it's a question of dealing with what we've seen. We've seen a very strong surge of interest from the people of Powell River and the Sunshine Coast to be together as they have been, as well as one from surrounding ridings. In other words, communities of interest that spill beyond the area I represent have expressed the same thing, that it would be good for Powell River to be there.

My preference would be for them to be together in one riding if we had the ability to do that, but that may not be possible given the population issues.