Procedure and House Affairs Committee on March 23rd, 2023

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

The new riding of Calgary Skyview, which is proposed with the name, I think is better reflected by “Calgary Country Hills” or “Calgary Stoney”. They would be more appropriate names, because it's a new riding and it spans north centre and northeast Calgary. Those are major roadways that identify better with those communities.

The current Calgary McKnight would be better identified using the name Calgary Skyview, because it has the airport, and the communities that remain in that riding have mostly been Calgary Skyview historically. I think it's important.

One other point I'd like to acknowledge is that there is no other MP in the new riding, because it's a new riding. I haven't had the ability to talk to the MP of that riding, because I don't know who that's going to be, but I hope to work closely with him or her in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

That's excellent.

With that, I would like to thank our colleagues, both in person and virtually, for joining us today. We wish you the best.

We will switch over to the next panel.

I'm going to try to maximize our time, colleagues. There are two budgets that need to be approved. One is for the redistribution for Alberta, which we're doing—lunch was provided—and the other one will be for the meetings that we have for the Quebec redistribution.

Are there any concerns with our approving this budget? I see none.

(Motion agreed to)

Clerk, I thank you for your work.

We'll welcome the Quebec panel and pause for a quick 30 seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Resuming the meeting.

During the second hour of the meeting, we will begin our study of the report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec 2022.

The second group of witnesses is composed of Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bernard Généreux, the Honourable Diane Lebouthillier, and Kristina Michaud.

Welcome, everyone.

Each witness will have four minutes to make their opening statements.

Mr. Blanchette-Joncas, the floor is yours.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Dear colleagues, I thank the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs for having me here today.

I will take advantage of the forum I have been offered to explain my strong opposition to the redistribution proposal presented by the committee to which this important task was assigned. This is quite serious and, given the speaking time I am allotted, I will get straight to the point.

The proposal to decrease the political weight of the regions by eliminating the riding of Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia has to be reversed, since that would reduce the number of federal ridings between Montmagny and the Magdalen Islands to three from four. This is a frontal attack on the representativeness of our regions. To be perfectly honest, I have to say that I take strong issue with this. Even with the attempt to justify the proposal by saying that the population quotas have to be balanced, it doesn't pass the field test.

The realities of life in our region go well beyond columns of figures. The mayors and wardens who have long memories remember this. Until the 1960s, we had seven ridings between Montmagny and the Magdalen Islands. Since then, the redistributions have unfortunately caused an even greater lack of representativeness in eastern Quebec.

As if that is not enough, it is being proposed today that the number of ridings be reduced to three from four—and yet, let me remind you, the area covered has not shrunk. The federal government can keep making big speeches about the services offered in rural areas and the importance of revitalizing our part of the country, but they mean nothing if nothing is done to stop this. Nothing could be simpler: the political weight of whole regions is being wiped out, bit by bit. People who don't live where we do and may have never set foot there will be deciding the policies that affect us. They will be able to decide issues as crucial as how natural resources are to be exploited, and about agriculture, tourism development, fresh air, and heritage. We cannot agree to this. Worse still, eliminating an entire riding would mean reducing the service centres and riding offices people have access to. These are crucial things for people living outside urban centres. These services make it possible to help people who suffer the failures of the federal government and give a voice to the many people the federal machine has left by the wayside. Reducing these services would have a disastrous effect for the most vulnerable among us.

The Commission is using the declining population observed in recent years to justify its proposal. But it is forgetting something: the positive net migration levels observed in the the Gaspé and Lower St. Lawrence regions in the past few years. The advent of teleworking, pressure on the property market in the big cities, and the desire to be closer to nature have prompted numerous households, including a number of young families, to settle in the regions, outside urban centres. That is a golden opportunity to promote our regions; we have to seize that opportunity, not lessen, diminish or erase those regions.

There is a simple, legal solution. Under subsection 15(2) of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, the ridings of Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia and Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine must be granted exceptional status, in order to preserve the status quo. I say this in all honesty: any other solution will be fatal for the interests of the people of the Lower St. Lawrence, the Gaspé and the Magdalen Islands. This will hurt the development of our territories.

Madam Chair, I will close by saying this. When political voices outside urban centres are stifled, rural Quebec as a whole is weakened. It is our heritage, our roots, our identity and our lower St. Lawrence values that will be wiped out.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Mr....

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Our part of the country deserves better, and it breaks my heart to have to point that out here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Mr....

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

On behalf of these regions, I ask that you preserve the status quo.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Right.

If we want to have time to make comments and ask questions, the speaker has to yield the floor to me when I signal that their speaking time is up. I ask that everyone take this into account.

Mr. Généreux, the floor is now yours. Welcome.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank the members of the committee for listening to me.

I would like to state my objections to the report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec as it relates to my riding, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, which the commissioners would turn into the future riding of Montmagny—Témiscouata—Kataskomiq, and the reasons for those objections.

If the proposed redistribution is upheld, I believe that the name Montmagny—Témiscouata—Kataskomiq is inappropriate. This is why.

Let's start with the positive. The reasons for adding Kataskomiq are appropriate, as an historic gesture of reconciliation with the First Nations, so we are in complete agreement with having that name in the name of the riding.

For several years, Montmagny, a regional county municipality, or RCM, has been part of what is called "Côte-du-Sud" at the provincial level, which includes the two other neighbouring RCMs: L'Islet and Kamouraska. In recent decades, these three RCMs have developed common public relations under this regional title, working through various organizations. "Montmagny" could therefore be replaced, with greater representativeness, by "Côte-du-Sud," a title that includes the RCMs of L'Islet and Kamouraska.

Témiscouata, which will join the riding with nearly 20,000 electors in 19 municipalities, must not be left out. We believe it is essential that its name be included in the name of the riding, if only out of respect for the electors there and for its unique identity.

The problem lies in the fact that "Rivière-du-Loup" is left out of the name of the future riding. It is wholly inappropriate to minimize the fact that the name of the most populous RCM and city in the riding is missing. Rivière-du-Loup is and will always be an important hub in the Bas-St-Laurent region. The RCM and city are host to a large number of services, industries, businesses, manufacturing plants, educational institutions and healthcare institutions, as well as the largest number of regional media in the entire Lower St. Lawrence region.

Rivière-du-Loup is much more than that, even. As I said, it is a crossroads. It is a road hub between the Maritimes, the Lower St. Lawrence region and the western part of the riding, a marine link with the North Shore, and an air link thanks to the Rivière-du-Loup Airport. It is a major lower St. Lawrence tourism hub, with the internationally recognized islands lying across from the city. As a tourism, cultural, economic and industrial hub, Rivière-du-Loup should be included in the final name of the riding.

I therefore very humbly ask that the committee, the Commission and its commissioners take note of my recommendations, which come out of a consultation with the wardens and mayors of the towns in my riding, both old and new, with the Chamber of Commerce of the RCM of Rivière-du-Loup and with Tourisme Rivière-du-Loup, so that the name of my riding becomes Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata.

It is a long name, but we like it that way. The order of the names follows the geography of my area. Going from west to east, we pass through Côte-du-Sud, the RCM and city of Rivière-du-Loup, and Kataskomiq territory, and finish in the RCM of Témiscouata. It is important that these four entities be in this order, so that it is clear for visitors and electors.

Before concluding, I would like to express my disappointment that under the present act, we are losing a riding in eastern Quebec. I believe that parliamentarians should revisit the question of what life is like for members of Parliament in rural regions in the future.

Thank you for your work, and I am counting on you so that this important recommendation about the name change for my riding is referred to the commissioners.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Bravo. Very good. Thank you.

Ms. Lebouthillier, the floor is yours for four minutes.

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Gaspésie—Les-Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would first like to thank you for taking the time to hear us today and to discuss such an important subject.

I don't think I am mistaken when I say that there is a common denominator that unites us this noon hour, my colleagues and myself, and that is the future of federal democracy in eastern Quebec, purely and simply.

I am here to voice my deepest concerns and those of my fellow citizens regarding the new electoral redistribution proposed in the Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec 2022. Certain factors make this proposal quite simply unacceptable and incoherent for the residents of my riding.

First, in 2016, the government of Quebec has granted special status to the Magdalen Islands because of their island nature. That status recognizes the unique challenges faced by the islands, particularly in terms of transportation and access to public services. The Magdalen Islands are located about 200 kilometres from the coast of Quebec. They are accessible only by plane, or by boat, if you have the time and patience to travel through two provinces, 700 kilometres on the road and five hours by ferry.

No—and yes, I mean no—other federal riding faces constraints like these. As well, no other federal riding endures the huge range of weather conditions that can regularly make travel difficult, if not impossible, and can have significant consequences not just for the residents and businesses on the islands, but also for the member of Parliament who represents them.

I have represented this beautiful riding for more than eight years, and believe me, snowstorms, fog, freezing rain, winds of more than 120 kilometres an hour, planes that can't take off, and cancelled tours—I have seen them all. The Islanders deserve a representative who is available and accessible to represent their needs and interests to the federal government. Adding two RCMs to the riding seriously jeopardizes that objective.

Second, the addition of the RCM of La Matanie to the existing riding of Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine would be patently incoherent in terms of geographic representativeness. That RCM is attached to the Lower St. Lawrence administrative region, also called region 1, while the rest of the riding comprises region 11. This means that La Matanie does not share its centres for services to the public, such as hospitals and other government services, or engage in economic and cultural exchanges, with the rest of the riding.

For all these reasons, while the status quo regarding the number of seats would be the preferable option, it would be more natural and consistent to add that RCM to the neighbouring riding, rather than to the new riding of Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj. The same is true for the RCM of Matapédia, which has already been part of the neighbouring riding since the last version of the Report. That would allow for fair representation of the interests and issues of the residents of those two RCMs.

In closing, I can confirm that in light of the results of a broad consultation with local actors in my riding, this approach is supported by all elected municipal representatives. In this regard, I have therefore filed letters of support with the clerk of the Committee, earlier this morning. One of them is from the mayor and president of the Communauté maritime des Îles-de-la-Madeleine, and the other is from the five wardens who make up the Regroupement des MRC de la Gaspésie.

Once again, I want to thank you for your invitation. I am prepared to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you for that fine presentation, Minister.

Ms. Michaud, you have the floor.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to thank you, members of the committee, for having me here today and giving me the opportunity to advocate for my part of the country.

As I briefly explained in my notice of objection, I am firmly opposed to the electoral map proposal made by the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec. More specifically, I am opposed to the proposal to eliminate the riding of Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, one of the four ridings in the large Eastern Quebec region. The reason is simple: erasing this riding from the map weakens the political weight of an entire region.

In defence of this proposal, which would have major repercussions for where we live, the Commission relies primarily on the idea of electoral quotient. However, and very respectfully, I am afraid that the Commission is overlooking crucial factors in its analysis. Those factors, such as respect for communities of interest, the historic pattern of the electoral district, and the goal of maintaining a manageable geographic size for districts in sparsely populated, rural or northern regions of the province.

The Lower St. Lawrence and Gaspé regions are sparsely populated and rural. The territory of these vast administrative regions is almost entirely occupied. From Montmagny to Îles-de-la-Madeleine, 184 municipalities and four Indigenous communities are grouped in 15 regional county municipalities, or RCMs, in addition to the Îles-de-la-Madeleine archipelago located in the centre of the Gulf of St. Lawrence.

The Commission proposes to redistribute half of the district to the neighbouring district of Rimouski—Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques and the other half to the district of Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine, thereby creating two territories of over 15,000 square kilometres each.

It will be apparent that because the territories of these ridings are almost entirely occupied, as compared to other ridings where the population is concentrated in only one part of the territory and the rest is virtually uninhabited, the concept of representation makes the times when the elected representative has to go out and meet their constituents particularly difficult and dangerous.

The importance of preserving the communities of interest and the historical pattern of the electoral district is also essential. Our region has a unique system of local governance that enables the various stakeholders to work well together and not pointlessly do twice the work. Chopping the map of the east in two will inevitably disrupt the balance and might result in a decline in services to the public, when the present size of the riding I represent already has its share of challenges.

The arguments I am making to you today were made to the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec in September, by me, of course, and also by a large number of regional elected officials—mayors, wardens, members of Parliament and senators—who all, without exception, called for the status quo. For the people in my region, the solution is clear: we have to preserve the map as it stands. They are with me in their thoughts today, but they have also taken the time to make their opinions known in writing.

I have provided the clerk of your committee with a document containing 55 resolutions of municipalities, RCMs and civil society groups that unequivocally support what I am saying today. They agree with me that our region's political weight must be not only preserved, but protected.

The 125 members of the National Assembly of Quebec also support us in this effort. On March 7, they unanimously voted for a motion condemning the proposal to eliminate Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia and they are calling for this recommendation to be revised. Our Quebec colleagues rightly point out that any loss of political weight suffered by our Quebec regions jeopardizes the democratic health of our nation. Last, eliminating the riding I represent seems to be a concern for a number of my colleagues in the House of Commons.

You will probably have noticed that I have obtained the signatures of my three colleagues in eastern Quebec, who are present today, but also of members of each of the parties represented in the House of Commons. This unanimous feeling against the proposal to eliminate the riding of Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia shows that this issue goes beyond political and partisan divides and that it is everyone's duty to preserve the political weight of the regions of Quebec and Canada.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Ms. Michaud.

The next rounds will be six minutes each. I ask that every one speak at a speed that enables the interpreters to do their job properly. They can raise their hand when necessary, and I will ask the person speaking to slow down. I hope I don't have to do it, but we will do what is needed to ensure that the meeting proceeds smoothly.

The next speaker is Mr. Berthold, who will be followed by Mr. Fergus, Mr. Therrien and Ms. Blaney.

Mr. Berthold has the floor for six minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

By announcing that I was going to speak, you have reminded the interpreters that I have a reputation for saying a lot of words in a little time. I will be very careful today, in everyone's interest, and because we have a large number of witnesses today.

As a member for a region outside the urban centres, I have had several occasions to say how important and difficult our work is. There are 50 municipalities in my riding, and I am going to talk about the importance of representation in regions like this.

I would like to talk about one factor with Mr. Généreux.

Often, little attention is paid to the importance of a riding's name. Mr. Généreux, you made the change in your riding's name the focus of your presentation today. In the documents provided to the committee, I read a lot of testimony from people in Rivière-du-Loup who are afraid that the name of their city will disappear from the name of their riding, which virtually all members already find it hard to name correctly.

So you are asking that a name that is just as long be retained, once again. Can you explain to the committee what your reasons are for going in that direction?

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

In fact, in various regions of Quebec, ridings have taken the name of well-known persons, such as the riding of Alfred-Pellan, for example, or of a very clearly defined geographic area.

The problem with our riding is that it overlaps two of Quebec's administrative regions: Chaudière-Appalaches and Côte-du-Sud, and, now, the Lower St. Lawrence and Chaudière-Appalaches regions.

As a result, as Ms. Michaud mentioned earlier, the territory is very large, with an area of almost 12,000 square kilometres. It is hard to give such large regions a single name.

The commissioners probably wanted to simplify my riding's name to three names instead of four by proposing Montmagny—Témiscouata—Kataskomiq as compared to Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, its present name. I am now proposing a name that has three letters more than what we had before that was considered too long: Côte-du-Sud—Rivière-du-Loup—Kataskomiq—Témiscouata. I am doing this out of respect for all of the people who live in this area.

Because the name of a riding may not contain the name of five regional municipalities and because we have to keep to a maximum of four, I am proposing Côte-du-Sud, which includes not only Montmagny but also the three regional county municipalities. The other two that are left out, Kamouraska, where I was born, and L'Islet, where I live now, are grouped with Montmagny in the Côte-du-Sud region.

Rivière-du-Loup is the most populous city in my riding and will continue to be in future. It represents 30 per cent of the total population of the region. You can't miss it. In fact, I did not understand why the commissioners removed Rivière-du-Loup from the name of the riding. They must have expected an objection, because the proposal makes no sense.

During the consultations, I raised this point and explained that Rivière-du-Loup absolutely had to be part of the riding's name. I am trying once again to persuade the commissioners. I hope that at the request of the population as a whole, the commissioners may revise their proposal. It must be admitted that people were not been out in the streets over this proposal. People were slow to react to the change of name proposal. I initiated discussions anyway, and as a result, the entire community of Rivière-du-Loup, including the chamber of commerce, industry and tourism and others, are asking that the name of Rivière-du-Loup continue to be part of the riding's name.

As I said before, some islands across from Rivière-du-Loup are internationally known. Société Duvetnor Ltée, which has been operating there for several years, is known for its great respect for the environment, the islands and the land. We think of this as all connected with Rivière-du-Loup, including, for example, the Rivière-du-Loup to Saint-Siméon ferry. Rivière-du-Loup absolutely has to be part of the riding's name.

I would also like to talk about Kataskomiq. Is my answer too long, Mr. Berthold?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

No.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I didn't want to take up all your speaking time.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Honestly, I think the feeling of belonging to a riding because of its name is an important aspect in the discussion we are having today. That is why I wanted to hear your point of view and I wanted to let you speak after your official statement, to see what you were feeling.

At the end of your remarks, you said that the commissioners should have paid more attention at the outset to rural representativeness. That is what I understood.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Yes, exactly. I firmly oppose the commissioners' choice to eliminate my colleague's riding in eastern Quebec.

The problem is that it was up to us, all of us around the table, to consider this possibility before agreeing to the new Elections Act that was enacted a year and a half ago. That was when we should have been thinking about how to make these changes.

The Supreme Court has made decisions in the past concerning certain riding redistributions, and I think they contain comments about effective representation that need to be examined in greater depth in the future when more changes to electoral boundaries are proposed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you.

Mr. Fergus, the floor is yours.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to congratulate all four of you for being here to show that you are in unanimous agreement on this subject.

Ms. Lebouthillier, I am going to ask you my first question. As you know, in its report, the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Quebec opposed the status quo because the difference between the population of your riding and what is called the electoral quotient was greater than 25 per cent.

If the RCM of Avignon were added to your present riding, as you are proposing, would that take the difference below the 25 per cent threshold, so that the provision for departing from the rule in exceptional circumstances could be argued?

[Diane Lebouthillier, Liberal, Gaspésie—Les-Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Thank you for that question.

Before answering, I want to say that I agree with what Mr. Généreux just said. We really have to look at the representation of rural regions in the next stage, in ten years.

Mr. Fergus, to answer your question, the proposal I have made suggests that the RCM of La Matanie be transferred into the neighbouring riding. La Matanie has fewer than 14,000 inhabitants.

Given the present population, the electoral quotient of my riding, which has 75,927 inhabitants, is 35.5 per cent. I am aware that this falls below the 25 per cent threshold allowed in order to argue the provision in subsection 15(2) of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act for departing from the rule. If we add the RCM of Avignon, which has 12,740 inhabitants, the difference falls to 20.6 per cent. That would then allow us to argue for the provision allowing for departure from the rule to be applied.

In other words, as the Commission said, no riding should have fewer than 81,749 persons; under what I am proposing, our riding would have 88,667 inhabitants. I will be happy to provide the calculations.

After consulting the people in my riding, I think this proposal is eminently reasonable.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

If you could send them to the clerk, we would be very grateful.

In your presentation, you said that adding two RCMs to your riding would compromise the island character of the Magdalen Islands.

What impact would that have, everywhere in your riding, on the public's access to its elected representative, and, conversely, on that representative's ability to represent their constituents?