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

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yes.

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

Yes.

I'm saying that there were community members who suggested the best way to alter Elmwood—Transcona would be to move up the northern boundary along the river. That is an argument....

I'm not here to make new arguments. Some of those arguments prevailed in respect of Island Lakes. We heard from community members at Island Lakes who didn't think it made sense for them to be lumped in with Elmwood—Transcona, but to remain part of Saint Boniface—Saint Vital.

Punching the riding out past the city limit is a product of this second round, but the solution is the same. Community members advised the commission that they thought it would make the most sense to focus on the northern boundary by the river.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

With the population growth that's taking place in the capital region, it's quite significant. We have to balance that in terms of the rural component. It sounds as if the commission took that into consideration.

The issue for me, as it is for you, is the idea of urban-rural ridings. We've had debate inside the Manitoba legislature, too, in terms of 31 versus 26. It seems to me that this discussion has also taken place. I'm a bit reluctant to suggest that we make changes if so many people appear to be relatively comfortable with what's being proposed.

I want to go to Niki Ashton.

When we talk about reconciliation, I'm very sensitive to that point. Were there any discussions with the Manitoba assembly of first nations? Are they aware of the presentation and what you and Mr. Bezan would like to do?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Our office has been in touch with both first nations. We deal directly with the—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I'm sorry. Can you just lift your mike up, please?

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Yes. I'm sorry.

Our communication has been at that level. AMC obviously is one of the main advocacy organizations, but in terms of the boundaries, we're always in touch with the first nations directly.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

You have two indigenous communities specifically. It's important that you would have not only touched base with them, but that they're comfortable with what you're suggesting.

Second, given the role that the Manitoba assembly of first nations plays, I think it's also imperative that they be consulted in some fashion because, as you have pointed out in your presentation, we want to make sure there is that whole sense of reconciliation and they're comfortable with the suggestion. At one time, at least two of those reserves, I understand, were part of the Interlake riding.

James.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

To respond, Madam Chair, we're really starting to feel that if you keep bouncing communities back and forth between ridings, they will become disenfranchised. They'll become very, I guess, not trusting in how this is unfolding and how their electoral considerations are being taken under advisement.

They were not consulted. Originally, they were going to stay within the Churchill—Keewatinook Aski riding. Then, for whatever reason, no presentations were made and they didn't consult with either Little Saskatchewan First Nation or Lake St. Martin First Nation about changing the boundaries.

There was a presentation that came from the Municipality of Grahamdale, based upon the first draft. I circulated our detailed proposal, along with the new drawings of the map showing the properties in the Municipality of Grahamdale, along with the maps of the boundary commission itself, which I circulated this morning.

If you look at the proposal—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

I'm sorry to do this, but I was generous. I just can't be more—

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

You keep cutting me off.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

We can talk about that after.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My colleagues will have the opportunity to answer my questions.

We've just received a number of new details and it's true that things are much clearer to us.

I'm going to ask some more general questions again.

We just realized that one issue continues to evolve. We need to take two things into account: we're hearing about demographic shifts and we're also seeing an expansion of geographical territory. I'd like to hear your thoughts on those two things.

MPs often wonder how they could be more available to people in their constituency if they have too many constituents. That's the first thing.

Secondly, how can MPs be available to their constituents when their riding covers a large area? I'm thinking of certain constituencies in Manitoba, for example. In Quebec, I'm thinking of ridings like Manicouagan and Abitibi—Baie‑James—Nunavik—Eeyou. MPs aren't more available just because they have fewer constituents in their riding.

Where does that leave us? Things are not done changing. We have to ask ourselves an important question, because many provinces are directly affected.

Do you believe that, in the end, we will have to reassess the formula? Yes, we have to take territorial expansion into account, which sometimes leads us to split ridings. Furthermore, some cities become very populated due to demographic shifts.

I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.

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

For me, when you look at the riding of Elmwood—Transcona and at the riding of Kildonan—St. Paul, which is really what I'm here to talk about today, you see they're not those really large ridings. I'm sure Mr. Bezan and Ms. Ashton will have more to say in response to your question there.

For me, I don't think that's the challenge in respect to the ridings that I'm here to talk about. I think you can add a bit more of the rural area to Kildonan—St. Paul. Northeast Winnipeg is certainly large, and it's growing, so I think the question is whether we want to have a trajectory for northeast Winnipeg as it continues to grow that will see two ridings potentially stretch out, or whether we want to have a trajectory whereby there will be a northeast Winnipeg riding within the Winnipeg city limits, which continues to grow as the population grows. Then we would have another riding that captures more of that section of northeast Winnipeg and indeed sometimes a bit on the other side of the river, and have the rural area that it has now, perhaps less, perhaps more, depending on the rate of population growth.

To me, I'm really here on the principle and the trajectory of representation in northeast Winnipeg, and I think Mr. Bezan and Ms. Ashton are better placed to answer.

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I'll address it from a rural Manitoba MP standpoint. I can actually say that we had rural Manitoba MPs of all political stripes work together after the first report came out, because the boundary commission in Manitoba was very tied to the principle that there needs to be recognition that populations stay within a 10% variance. That way, every riding is equal in the vote in the House.

We made the presentation that they should go beyond that variance, knowing that the act allows up to 25%, recognizing the fact that Ms. Ashton has a riding that is already 70%, geographically, of the province of Manitoba—or in excess of that, 72.5%.

We were prepared to balance that off and work with Ms. Ashton to ensure that didn't happen. The boundary commission took that under advisement.

However, what was surprising after we saw it—and this was the reason we made our submission—was the splitting of one first nation and the removal of the other first nation that was, for the last number of years, in Ms. Ashton's riding and should be returned. The big issue here is reconciliation and disenfranchisement, and to make sure that those individuals feel some continuity every time we do the boundary readjustment.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Since you brought it up I like to come back to it because I didn't get all the answers to the questions I asked. Maybe it's because of the interpretation.

You talked about Indigenous communities and consultations. I want to be sure I understand you correctly. You say they were not consulted. Is that because there were no consultations on their lands or because they were unable to provide any information to the commission? Is there any difference?

[James Bezan, Conservative, Selkirk—Interlake—Eastman, MB]

I believe that, because of the first draft that came out from the boundaries commission, they were still in the Churchill riding, and the boundaries commission had actually proposed something similar to what I drew out. The RM of Grahamdale took exception to it, because it split the village of Gypsumville in half, so they made a suggestion to redraw that line. Unfortunately, when they redrew that boundary, they decided to put Little Saskatchewan back in and split Lake St. Martin in half. That was unfortunate. There was no consultation. The first nations then felt like they needed to make a presentation to the RM of Grahamdale; they thought they had to because of the split of the town of Gypsumville.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I understand.

My final question is about territory and it's for Ms. Ashton.

If they end up expanding the territory in 10 years, will the proportion of individuals represented go down? What do people have to say about all that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Your time is up. Would you like to use your two minutes from the next round right now?

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Yes. I'll skip my turn next time.

I will repeat my question.

Due to demographic shifts, the ridings will have to be expanded if we consider the number of constituents. Some MPs will have to fly or spend a lot of time on the road to do their work, while other MPs who will have a lot of work to do will be able to get around on a bicycle.

How do you see this situation playing out? I'd like to hear your thoughts.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

I think we would need a lot more than two minutes to discuss this issue.

I'm grateful that you mentioned the northern regions of Quebec, like Abitibi and James Bay. Many parallels can be made with the northern regions of Canada.

It's crucial that Parliament and the federal electoral boundaries commissions consider the challenges facing MPs who must represent regions like ours that are so huge and diverse.

It must also be recognized that Statistics Canada data doesn't reflect the actual population in some regions. This poses major problems, especially for Indigenous communities.

As you said, MPs who represent remote areas spent a lot of time in the air. In fact, that's why I was late this morning. Living conditions in those regions are very different. I'm thinking of the extreme cold, for example. When we do our work as MPs, certain factors are much harder for us, whereas they are taken for granted in other regions. For example, our offices are far away and we and our staff often need to travel. That's why it's so important that we can work virtually. It makes it possible for us to always stay in touch with our communities.

Lastly, it boils down to saying that we don't want two types of MPs: those whose offices are located close to the people they represent and those who, along with their staff, run themselves ragged to provide services to which all constituents are entitled.

So it's a matter of fairness, and I thank you for bringing this up, Ms. Gaudreau.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Blaney, you have the floor.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank everyone for their presentations today. I'm going to go to Ms. Ashton and then follow up with you, Mr. Bezan, on this very concerning process. I'm really glad to hear you're here doing the important work that you need to do, especially around indigenous communities.

My first question for Ms. Ashton is around the work she's done to consult with the indigenous communities that are currently within her riding. It sounds very clear to me that there was one process put forward. The nations felt comfortable with that, and then suddenly there was a new map provided by the commission. It really confused everyone and has brought up issues that could not have been foretold.

One of the things that really concern me through this process is that we should be a country that is working actively to encourage indigenous communities to participate in the federal election process. The best way you can do that is by making sure their voices are heard.

I would like to hear from you, Ms. Ashton, on what work you've done with those communities to amplify their voices.

The second part of this question is about what the commission could potentially do better in the future to include indigenous voices and make sure they are heard.

As a B.C. MP, I think if the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs said anything about a nation without consulting with it first or amplifying its voice, that would be a huge concern in my riding. I think it's really important that we recognize that this is a nation-to-nation process and that we have to honour indigenous communities and not undermine their voices in any way.

I leave that to you.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Yes. Thank you for that recognition. That is at the crux of the work we do. I also want to acknowledge the work James Bezan has done for many years representing first nations. I think both of us, if James will allow me to share, feel that this particular change is unfair and disrespectful to these two first nations—deeply disrespectful—and, as noted, will contribute to disenfranchisement, which, as you pointed out, Ms. Blaney, is a huge issue that we've all said we need to contend with.

One way of contending with that is acting on this objection and reinstating these two first nations into Churchill—Keewatinook Aski. We've spent seven years building relationships. I don't mean this in a political sense; I mean it in terms of service and communities. In fact, one of our three offices is in Peguis First Nation, which is the biggest hub in the Interlake region. Essentially, we'd be cutting off two first nations that are relatively close to Peguis from being able to access constituency services, which I think we can all agree is not acceptable.

As was pointed out, again, these were two first nations that this proposal was never on the table to remove from the constituency. They didn't have the opportunity to voice anything. We hope the commission will take into account that it's not the way to do things. I think there were real efforts made in terms of the big picture and respecting first nations, but this is a particular indication that there is work to be done on that front, and a way of fixing that or correcting that wrong is by reinstating the entirety of Little Saskatchewan First Nation and the other half of Lake St. Martin back into Churchill—Keewatinook Aski.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Yes, I was going to come right to you, Mr. Bezan. I really appreciate it, and, before you start, I want to acknowledge how great it is to see non-partisan effort to have people come together and say that this is the right thing to do.

Please go ahead.