Bonjour. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to speak. During the electoral boundary process, I attended both meetings, one in North Bay on the original proposal and the second in Sault Ste. Marie, which was added after the commission put forward an alternative proposal.
I am certain it was a difficult task for the commission to create riding boundaries for northern Ontario that make mathematical and geographic sense. The need to draw up a second proposal reflects how challenging that was.
The physical geography and population density have to be balanced by what can reasonably be expected of any single member of Parliament, and what level of representation can be seen as the most balanced and fair for constituents. That means that in northern Ontario the boundary commission was not able to look only at numbers, as is possible in truly urban areas.
I brought to the commission a schedule of the outreach clinics my office runs so that people who prefer to approach their MP for help in person can do so, and showed how the placement of my constituency offices help maximize my ability to service the constituency. I have one here that I will be able to submit afterwards.
I believe the commission listened to the concerns and opinions presented to them, and the recommendations put forward show that they have done a good job of balancing the criteria. Additionally, they managed to maintain a semblance of continuity that will help minimize confusion among constituents across the region.
I understand there are people on both sides of this proposal, but I feel that if the overarching desire is to increase the number of voters in AMK, the final recommendation is the proposal that will likely do the least harm.
The changes made by the commission mean that the north shore boundaries of the riding of Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing more closely match the boundaries of the provincial Algoma-Manitoulin constituency along the north shore area.
I would also like to mention that from the beginning of the process, before I met with the commission, I was in touch with constituents and municipal officials to determine the wishes of the people who would be affected. Throughout my presentations to the commission, I encouraged them to maintain the status quo and grant a population exemption to AMK.
Given its current size and distance, the end results have to ensure that ridings be designed with serviceability in mind and fairness for constituents. I do believe it is important for the decision to reflect that Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing is made up of numerous similar-sized communities and beholden to none of northern Ontario's biggest cities.
This was the reason cited when the riding was created during the last round of redistribution, and it still makes sense today. It works to the advantage of the many small towns that receive equal representation under the current boundaries, which could be jeopardized if the riding were to skirt Sudbury as was originally proposed. This would also have put three members of Parliament in the city of Greater Sudbury, which would disadvantage the small communities, as I mentioned.
In conclusion I believe it is important to adopt a different mindset when considering the distribution of ridings in northern Ontario. We have to acknowledge that there is more to consider than mere population, and reflect how physical geography sets out certain challenges that define the ability of an MP to service a constituency.
It should also be noted that I did discuss the possibilities of boundary changes with the member from Sault Ste. Marie prior to the North Bay hearing, and did speak with him again after the Sault Ste. Marie one, given that he was not in attendance at either of them. I also suggested that he might want to make a submission. I'm not sure if he did that.
Finally it is important for this committee to consider the fact that any changes to Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing will cascade in two directions and cause considerable reorganization of constituency boundaries from the north shore of Lake Superior through to the Quebec boundary.
I urge you to weigh all these elements as you come up with your final recommendation.
Is there any more time?