Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to all committee members for the opportunity to appear before you.
At the outset, I would just like to express that I'm both supportive of and pleased by the addition of one additional seat for British Columbia, as well as the decision of the electoral boundaries commission to allot that new seat in the southern interior. While reasonable alternatives exist in the placement of that seat, I believe that the rationale of the commission is strong and sound in this regard.
I appear to express my concerns, specifically about the proposed boundary changes as they pertain to my electoral district of Vancouver Kingsway. Specifically, I believe that it's both inappropriate and unnecessary to place the expansion of Vancouver Kingsway into the area at the southwestern corner of the riding as proposed by the British Columbia Electoral Boundaries Commission in its revised proposal.
The first proposal would have extended Vancouver Kingsway across municipal boundaries into Burnaby. When I appeared before the commission and raised our concerns about that, it erased that proposal and instead popped Vancouver Kingsway into a significant portion of Vancouver South.
I handed out a map that I hope all of you have. I will be referring to that in a few moments. I have extra copies if you need them.
During the consultation process, I submitted and personally presented a proposal to the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission that provided two different options for Vancouver Kingsway specifically, and for all six Vancouver federal ridings in general. Both outlined rational and minimally disruptive boundaries. Both resulted in very close alignment with the provincial population quotient and very close equality of residents between the ridings. Both respected historical, cultural, electoral and social factors. We were dismayed to see the electoral boundaries commission's subsequent map largely ignore our proposal.
I will, of course, accept whatever the final outcome of this process is and enthusiastically represent, to the best of my ability, all residents who may be added to Vancouver Kingsway. However, I must add my voice to those who are concerned that the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission so fundamentally ignored the bulk of the public feedback it received and proposed a second map that contained radically different boundaries from its initial map. By doing so, in my view, it effectively rendered public input meaningless.
For the purposes of this submission, I will focus on my original first-choice plan for Vancouver Kingsway, which addresses the problems with the current proposal and more effectively respects the legislative direction and common law principles of relative equality of voters and communities of interest and identities.
Please refer yourselves to the map. Rather than expanding Vancouver Kingsway south to 49th Avenue between Knight Street and Main Street, I propose that it makes much more sense to keep the present southern boundary of my riding at 41st Avenue, and instead expand Vancouver Kingsway westward to Ontario Street from the current western boundary of Main Street. That's about three blocks west.
Ontario Street is the formal dividing line between the east and west sides of Vancouver. It starts at 000, and municipal addresses extend numerically upward in each direction, designated as west or east. Municipal lot sizes differ on either side of this line, with lots to the west generally being 40 feet or more wide and those to the east being 33 feet, resulting in different property tax interests and community densities.
Historically and culturally, the east and west sides mark a socio-economic division. Many residents identify as “east side” or “west side”. I note that this area has also historically been a part of Vancouver Kingsway, whereas the proposed addition never has. Vancouver Kingsway represented this area historically from 2004 to 2015. 41st Avenue is a major natural historical boundary, and I think confusion would ensue if we crossed it.
I've attached maps that illustrate it.
I hear the timer. I'll conclude by saying that I believe other impacted MPs adjacent to my riding concur with this proposal. I ask for your favourable recommendation.
Thank you.