Procedure and House Affairs Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2023

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I would agree that there's population growth in Provencher and that they had to do something, so that's a part of the proposal.

Did you speak with any of the neighbouring members, such as the member for Kildonan—St. Paul, or even the member for Provencher, where you were saying that the population would have to decrease?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I haven't, no, but I am aware that Mr. Falk made a submission to the boundaries commission proposing what the commission has done, so I suspect that he's not disappointed with the proposal.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Did you have any other members of Parliament from Manitoba or the NDP sign your objection?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Not from Manitoba, no.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

I noted that you didn't.

You're proposing that all the neighbourhoods that in the commission's report are being moved from Elmwood—Transcona into Kildonan—St. Paul remain in Elmwood—Transcona, and that the part of the RM of Springfield being put into Elmwood—Transcona be put instead into Kildonan—St. Paul. Is that what you're proposing?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

That is what I'm proposing, and that the northern border of Elmwood—Transcona would be adjusted accordingly, so that it's a population-neutral move. What that would do is that it would retain Elmwood—Transcona as an urban-only riding, and it would maintain Kildonan—St. Paul as an urban-rural split riding, instead of....

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

How many people would be moved, then, from the north part of Elmwood—Transcona into Kildonan—St. Paul?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Well, it's not that folks in the north part of Transcona would go into Kildonan—St. Paul.

Here's what I'm proposing. Currently, Elmwood—Transcona doesn't extend past the perimeter, and what the commission is proposing is that a chunk of territory outside the perimeter would be added to Elmwood—Transcona.

What I'm suggesting is that it would make more sense to take that area, which has to come out of Provencher for population reasons, add it to Kildonan—St. Paul, and then adjust the northern boundary of Elmwood—Transcona or, alternatively, the southern boundary of Kildonan—St. Paul, in order to make up that difference in population, so that it's not strictly adding to Kildonan—St. Paul. It's just shifting between Elmwood—Transcona and Kildonan—St. Paul in order to keep one urban riding and one urban-rural split riding.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Are you suggesting that the population counts would be the same in each riding in regard to the change, or have you calculated what the new population counts would be in each riding?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I think there's a way to do it in a population-neutral way. My suggestion to the commission is just to extend the northern boundary of Elmwood—Transcona as much as would be necessary in order to have the same number of people in that area as are represented currently in the proposal to add population outside the city limits.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

It's something between the two proposals that have been on the table so far.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

That's right. All I'm suggesting is that the proposal to include territory outside of the city of Winnipeg stop, and that the territory instead be included in Kildonan—St. Paul, because I recognize something has to come out of Provencher. Then just simply move up by however many streets are required to equal the amount of population in the area outside of the city that they're currently suggesting would be added to Elmwood—Transcona.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

Have you had any written presentations or had people speak to you from the RM of Springfield who told you they don't want to be part of Elmwood—Transcona?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

No, I haven't had people say they don't. If you think about the nature of representing the riding currently for what is a relatively small number of folks who would be added to Elmwood—Transcona, you're talking about establishing a relationship with a whole new council for Springfield. You're talking about another regional health authority. You're talking about having relationships with rural MLAs who currently aren't part of the riding. It is a significant change in the kind of work that the MP for Elmwood—Transcona would do, who they would liaise with and the issues that might come up.

[Larry Maguire, Conservative, Brandon—Souris, MB]

It is a natural sitting [Inaudible—Editor] area, so a) between Springfield and Transcona because they—

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

It's an issue about which reasonable people can disagree. I think that on balance it's better to maintain one urban riding and one urban-rural split riding, and that there's a way to do that without offending any of the other principles the commission is rightly concerned about.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

That's excellent.

That was a very good exchange. I enjoyed it—the bit of overlap in between perhaps less so, but otherwise I feel like I know your communities better.

We have a special appearance today. I would like to welcome Mr. Kevin Lamoureux to committee.

You have six minutes.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

As has been suggested, maybe I could stand for my presentation.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, I have a few questions. Maybe I will just continue along the line of the questions my colleague, Mr. Maguire, was asking of Mr. Blaikie.

That was, have you had any discussions at all with the member from Kildonan and gotten her thoughts on what you're suggesting?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

I haven't, no. As I said, Mr. Falk made a submission to the boundary commission, suggesting the very thing that it has undertaken in its proposal. My feeling was that it was likely Ms. Dancho would agree with Mr. Falk on that. I haven't had a conversation with her about it.

As I say, I'm here mostly to speak to the principle of maintaining an urban riding and an urban-rural riding. As I say, this is something about which reasonable people can disagree, but I think it makes sense to try to have cohesive urban ridings and cohesive rural ridings where that's possible. This is a case where it certainly is possible. There's no kind of major redrawing of lines that has to occur in order for what I'm proposing to be population-neutral. I just think on balance it's an argument about the principle of whether—

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I'm just concerned about the amount of time I have, which is only six minutes. In regard to Mr. Falk, has he indicated any support for your suggestion, and have you or your party made representation in regard to the boundaries and the concerns you have?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

The initial proposal for Elmwood—Transcona that the boundary commission came out with—which is not the one we're discussing today—was also one of significant change. It was going to include some of the Island Lakes area in Elmwood—Transcona. There were a number of community representations about that. The commission chose not to include that area. That had been certainly my focus and the focus of a number of community members in that round of public consultation.

This now is something that the commission came up with in order to try to offer a different suggestion. There were representations made at the time to simply say that the best way to expand Elmwood—Transcona would be to move the northern boundary up along the river. To the extent that's what I'm proposing as a solution to this iteration of the boundary commission's proposal, we have seen representations in favour of that idea. That makes sense when we're talking about East Kildonan.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

I guess the concern I have is...it turns out Mr. Falk and the member from Kildonan—St. Paul are not onside with you regarding your proposal.

I'm not a hundred per cent clear. Did you have an opportunity where you or someone representing you, your office or your party presented the types of concerns you're presenting today with PROC?

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Are you asking whether we presented to the boundary commission?