Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The first thing I would like to say is that we are very pleased that the commission has listened to Quebeckers. Its first proposal caused a lot of problems. Its second is very well received.
The requests being made are generally for minor adjustments or name changes. On the Island of Montreal, there have been no challenges from any members whatever, and everyone is satisfied, with the honourable exception of our colleague from Ahuntsic. As you will see, the changes requested are only name changes. I share in that satisfaction. It was a genuine feat to bring together all the members from the Island of Montreal, except one, and the commission did it.
In the brief I submitted to you, I cite examples showing why the commission's proposal improves the situation on the Island of Montreal relative to the status quo. In many cases, it reunites communities that were divided. In other cases, it creates divisions that make more sense, that are more logical. So it is really an improvement. We should definitely not return to the status quo.
As for my riding, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, I would have liked to keep Saint-Laurent and Cartierville together. I am honoured to be the member for those two very distinct communities. That will not impress my colleagues who come from more rural areas and must deal with some 40 communities, but I have two. Having had to fight for a sports centre in Saint-Laurent, we could not tell the people of Cartierville that they should just go to the one in Saint-Laurent; they would not have accepted that. We had to fight to get one in Cartierville. So these are two very different communities.
However, what happened is that Saint-Laurent has experienced outstanding demographic growth. Every place experiences demographic growth, but no place on the Island of Montreal has had growth comparable to that of Saint-Laurent. In 10 years, the number of inhabitants increased 17% from 77,381 to 93,842. Today that makes my riding, which now has 117,950 residents, the most highly populated on the Island of Montreal. It exceeds the provincial quota of some 101,300 by 16%.
So I did not appear before the commission to request the status quo; the effort would have been wasted. The commission was very clear: it did not want to exceed a variance of plus or minus 10%. When it made exceptions, it could not be in urban areas. They were very clear about urban areas: they wanted to keep the variance within 10%. My colleagues will understand that that is entirely reasonable since it is what the commissions of the other provinces have done. In fact, the target for those of Manitoba and Alberta was to keep variances within 5%, not 10%, for all of Manitoba and Alberta, an objective that they essentially achieved.
Consequently, it was unrealistic to request a positive variance of 16% for the Island of Montreal. No one should suggest that Cartierville should stay in Saint-Laurent; the commission will say no. With a heavy heart, I must give up Cartierville, which represents 24,000 residents. The logic that the commission has followed is to include them in Ahuntsic, since those people are already together from a municipal standpoint. Cartierville, Bordeaux and Ahuntsic together form a borough. So that is what will be done.
As regards the demographic variances, Saint-Laurent has roughly 94,000 inhabitants, which corresponds to a variance of -7% from the established quota, but it is experiencing strong growth. I repeat: growth is ongoing, and 2,000 inhabitants are being added every year. The cranes are there. This is not a project that is being challenged because of excessive densification or anything, as we see elsewhere, including in Ahuntsic. The cranes are there; building is under way. All of Bois-Franc is under construction, as the mayor has confirmed. And if the commission concludes that the growth in Saint-Laurent is exceptional, then believe me it has done its job.
I believe my five minutes are up. I would also simply like to say that the proposal to cut Papineau makes a great deal of sense. This is a major division of that place. No serious opposition is mobilizing against that idea; I would challenge that statement.