Debates of April 12th, 1994

Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Suspension Act, 1994

[Dianne Brushett, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I have a comment for the hon. member for Matapédia-Matane. I grew up in rural New Brunswick-

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

Order, please. I do not mean to interrupt the member, but I just want to be sure we all understand that there is no comment or question period as such. However the member can certainly use up to 10 minutes to make an intervention on this particular piece of legislation.

[Dianne Brushett, Liberal, Cumberland—Colchester, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the intervention is to share the sentiments of the hon. member for Matapédia-Matane and his values for the rural communities of Gaspé. Rural New Brunswick and rural Nova Scotia have the same values, needs and long distances between small communities. We too know that representation must come from each geographic region and not necessarily from statistics.

It is important to bring forward ideas. Somehow the hon. member is presenting ideals that we all share and want, yet at the same time he feels they will not be here for the next election. That is entirely contradictory in spirit and thought.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to express my support for Bill C-18 which suspends the process of redrawing federal electoral boundaries.

My riding of Bourassa takes in the entire city of Montreal North. Currently, I represent the 85,516 residents of this municipality. Under the proposed readjustment, the riding's population would increase to 94,214, whereas the average population of federal ridings is 91,500.

If the proposed reforms are carried out, my riding will extend beyond the limits of Montreal North. This municipality is steeped in history. It has its own well-established traditions and a very strong identity. For over 75 years, it has been home to a vibrant community, organized with people, not just administration, in mind.

In our opinion, the new administrative distribution is totally arbitrary. Montreal North has its own community, economic, social and cultural agencies. There are many community agencies in Montreal North that are doing an amazing job. Montreal North has over 3,000 volunteers. My riding, like the rest of the province, was hard hit by the economic crisis from which we are just now emerging. Fortunately, we can count on community agencies that are doing incredible work.

One local community social service centre in Montreal North recently celebrated its 20th anniversary. A few days ago, a benefit dinner and gala were organized by the CLSC foundation of Montréal-Nord. All local officials were in attendance, including yours truly in his capacity of federal MP. I want to take this opportunity to praise the remarkable work of the director general of the centre who has been there since day one. I also want to assure the centre that it can count on my complete co-operation.

The residents of Montreal North also have close ties to the mayor of their city who has held this post for over thirty years. He recently celebrated three decades in office and I was on hand for the festivities. He enjoys the public's support. Unlike me, he is not a sovereigntist or a member of the Bloc Quebecois. However, I would add that-

[An hon. member]

Just give him time.

[Osvaldo Nunez, Bloc, Bourassa, QC]

That will come. I wish to point out his contribution to the economic, social and cultural life of Montreal North. Montreal North also has a recently formed economic and community development corporation that is doing a great job for the people of Montreal North, especially with boards on economic issues that bring together representatives of the people.

The citizens of Montreal North want a federal riding that they can really identify with. In fact, I have consulted the residents of Montreal North about changing the name of my riding.

My riding is named Bourassa, after an outstanding man, a former director of Le Devoir , a great intellectual. But we have a problem because there is a provincial riding with the same name, Bourassa, and there is always confusion. My constituents want the riding to be called Montreal North, so it is more closely identified with our city, just as ridings in other Canadian cities are called Calgary West, Calgary East, Edmonton North, Edmonton South and Québec-Est; they take their name from the city where the riding is located. That is not the case in Montreal North and I am often asked where Bourassa is. Sometimes it is also confused with the former Premier of Quebec, Robert Bourassa.

We want to keep our riding as it is now. For all these reasons, I oppose the amendments moved by the Reform Party and I support the bill. Rather than proceed with arbitrary administrative revisions, I think that we should instead look at the basic criteria for forming federal constituencies. Once again, Mr. Speaker, I would vote for this bill.

[Jean Landry, Bloc, Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is with pleasure that I rise today to speak on Bill C-18, concerning the revision of the electoral map. I must tell you that, when I heard that the Liberal Party had decided to introduce this bill, there was no doubt in my mind that they could count on my support.

The first thing I wondered about was those people who had decided to draw lines any old way, in their offices, without knowing what they were doing. When they got to my riding of Lotbinière, a beautiful riding along the St. Lawrence River up to the Pierre Laporte Bridge, in Quebec City, or just about, let me tell you that what they had in mind, what they wanted to do to my riding was complete nonsense. It made no sense in practical, professional, political, social or cultural terms.

I can tell you this: many of my constituents called to ask me: "Mr. Landry, what is going to happen to Lotbinière? Will you, as a Bloc Quebecois member from Quebec, come to our defence or settle for come what may?" At that time, to reassure my constituents, I told them in a conference and the newspapers: "Look, I am a Quebecer. I am in Ottawa and I intend to stand up for the riding of Lotbinière at the federal level, as well as the interests of Quebec and Canada. That is my duty, and as long as I will be sitting in the federal Parliament, this will remain my vision of the riding of Lotbinière at the federal level."

But there is more to it. From then on, I looked at the basic criteria used by the commission. I was told: "Look, we have to standardize all this as much as possible to make ridings match the RCMs." I was told that the population pool also had to be taken into consideration. I must say that, in my riding of Lotbinière, we met all the requirements. We had the required population and regional county municipalities. What the revisal office was planning to do was basically to tear apart this most beautiful riding of mine because there is only one major town in my riding, namely Victoriaville-Arthabaska.

Let me tell you what was going to happen to Victoriaville-Arthabaska. In their office here in Ottawa, officials decided to draw a line right across here and chop off Victoriaville-Arthabaska, the biggest town of the riding, and tack it onto the riding of Richmond-Wolfe. Which meant I would find myself with no large town in the riding of Lotbinière. That is nonsense. I must also tell you this because it is very important. Not only were they taking away a town, but there were ties involved, the ties between the people of that town and the rest of the population of the riding. Victoriaville-Arthabaska is the queen city of the area which includes Princeville, Daveluyville and Warwick, and it was shunted off towards Sherbrooke, to be attached to Richmond-Wolfe.

Such a drawing of electoral boundaries leaves me speechless. To me, and to the whole riding of Lotbinière, it did not make sense.

If such electoral boundaries had been implemented, the riding of Lotbinière would have been wiped off the federal electoral map in a few years.

If that was the intent, it was a mistake. I am glad to see that our colleagues from the other side adopted the same position as we did because it is sad to see so much money being wasted. Some would say that money is not the only thing, but we are going through difficult times and we need money.

Instead of going ahead with the new boundaries suggested, I would rather see the money used to create jobs and train workers. Then, I would find that we put the money to good use. We must not forget that we are talking about not a few hundred thousand dollars, but millions. And you know that millions can go a long way.

Of course I do not accept the Reform Party's amendment at all. I am glad that we took a position that will soon be adopted, confirming the present boundaries of the riding of Lotbinière. In four years from now, if the Bloc Quebecois is not here any more, I will at least be able to say with pride that as the member for the federal riding of Lotbinière, I took a stand when I had to. That is what is the most important for me and my constituents. In four years from now, we will see whether we have to change our position.

In my riding, social and cultural life is centred on Victoriaville and Arthabaska. It is all there.

I am glad that there has been a change in direction because I felt we were heading the wrong way. My constituents are quite pleased also because I told them last week that we would probably not have to appear before the commission. I certainly hope this bill will be passed soon and that all consultations will be called off.

Mr. Speaker, when my colleagues across the way or my colleagues on this side come up with good ideas on electoral boundaries readjustment, I can look at them with an open mind. I like to be able to stand back to get a better understanding before I make a decision with this team.

I like this House and, for the time being, I am here to defend the interests of both Quebec and Canada. At this very moment, I do not talk as a separatist as such. I am here to look out for the interests of Quebec and Canada, and my position on the electoral boundaries readjustment is quite clear.

[Nic Leblanc, Bloc, Longueuil, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Verdun-Saint-Paul for his applause at the start of my remarks, but it might be wiser to wait and see what I have to say.

I think what my colleague meant is that, for the time being, he takes to heart the interests of both Canada and Quebec. That is my interpretation.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to take part in this debate on Bill C-18 and more particularly on the amendment moved by the Reform Party. I have to say I do not agree with the amendment, because it does not give us enough time to examine fully the impact of those boundary readjustments.

I remember that in 1985-86 we went through the same exercise. We had to redefine a riding on Montreal's south shore, a process which took quite a bit of time because it was suggested then to cut out from Longueuil the area which was expanding. Indeed, a proposal had been made to remove from my riding the whole industrial zone where lots were available for development purposes. I was going to find myself trying to promote the economy of my region with almost no opportunities left to do so. Primarily for that reason, I asked the mayor of Longueuil for his opinion on this issue, and I also consulted with representatives of the Liberal Party, who were opponents but also colleagues, and we agreed that it would not be a good idea to divide Longueuil in that fashion.

Consequently, we had to redefine five or six ridings. The decision not to reduce the number of constituents in the eastern part of the riding but rather to the south meant that we had to redraw the ridings of Saint-Hubert, La Prairie, Saint-Jean, Chambly and Verchères. You can imagine how long this exercise took. This is why I support the bill proposed by the Chief Electoral Officer in the document on new electoral boundaries.

There is another reason why I believe more time is needed, particularly in the case of Longueuil and the vast region on Montreal's south shore. The Montérégie is the region which has been experiencing the strongest growth in Quebec over the last fifteen years. It is in that region that the largest number of jobs were created. I believe it is also where the population has increased the most. In fact, it is for these reasons that a new riding is proposed on Montreal's south shore, as well as on the north shore, in Laval.

I should point out too that many studies are currently underway, including the Pichette report, commissioned by the Quebec government, which also proposes the creation of new regions on the south shore. The south shore would no longer be managed by the Société montérégienne de développement or SMD, but would be divided into two sub-regions which would be managed by the greater Montreal area. We would have Montreal, two regions on the south shore, Laval, the West Island, as well as the east end of Montreal which could form a large community for the purposes of economic development. Obviously, this will result in major changes on Montreal's south shore.

As I just mentioned, the south shore is currently managed by the Montérégie. I personally sit on the Partners for Employment committee-along with members of Quebec's national assembly, mayors, reeves, representatives from regional county municipalities, as well as senior federal civil servants-and I realize that the Montérégie region is not necessarily easy to manage. There are many interests which are not common.

The people in Granby, Bromont and Saint-Jean do not have a lot in common with the residents of Longueuil, Boucherville and Saint-Lambert. That is why we have undertaken an in-depth review of how to better manage the Greater South Shore of Montreal in order to be more efficient at all levels, whether it be economic development, social affairs, cultural affairs, or tourism. So, we are currently conducting this in-depth review to make sure our region can prosper in the areas I just mentioned.

So, the fact that we have two years and commissions to help us examine in detail how we can divide the ridings on the South Shore is very useful, and I think we really need all of these things.

Of course, for the last fifteen years, I have been very involved on the South Shore of Montreal. I do not need to be reminded, but I feel I must point out that, in 1983-84, during my term as chairman of the Chamber of Commerce of the Greater South Shore of Montreal, we addressed this issue. As you can see, it is a lengthy process.

In those days, we talked a lot about decentralization and accountability. If we want to get to know each other better, we need to feel a sense of belonging to be able to take charge of our lives and meet our responsibilities.

I for one have always believed that decentralization and accountability will help us pull through and take charge.

Unfortunately, the Liberal government tends to centralize everything and to manage from the top, which I think hinders progress, and I cannot agree with them on this. We absolutely need to ensure that the people at the grass root level, those who know their needs, who know what they have, who know their resources and their market, can take charge.

How can we go about it? By giving this responsibility to smaller areas. And it is in this spirit that I have been working with the Partners for Employment committee on the South Shore for a long time now.

Here is another suggestion. If we want to make people aware of their responsibilities, we will also have to ensure that municipalities have the resources they need to prosper and to help businesses to prosper.

Again, who is closer to small and medium-sized businesses and thus better able to help them create jobs? People who know well the needs of these small and medium-sized businesses must be the ones to give them the support they need to prosper and create jobs.

That does not seem to be important to the Reform Party. On the contrary, it appears to me that a sense of belonging to a region must absolutely be achieved if we want to create more jobs and work together to improve everybody's lot. It is in that spirit that we, in Quebec, have been working for a long time to delimit regions that are so homogeneous that people living in them can recognize and understand each other, grow and prosper together.

Thus, Mr. Speaker, I will vote against this amendment by the Reform Party and I hope that it will be defeated-and I think it will, since the government is against it-so that we can all prosper, create jobs and do better.

[Réginald Bélair, Liberal, Cochrane—Superior, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to participate in this debate for several reasons. I will start by pointing out how recommendations were made regarding the readjustment of electoral boundaries. The act is rather obsolete as it goes back to 1964. It is obvious that conditions have changed in 30 years. But what irritated me the most in all this is how the Ontario electoral commission proceeded to propose new boundaries.

This commission proposed that each riding should have at least 80,000 residents without taking into account regional affinities or distances to be covered so that every member can serve his constituents properly. I could give you a few examples of regional affinities.

First of all, my immediate region, that is the eastern part of the riding, was divided in two. A region that, since its foundation, has always shared the same economy, the same culture, the same social programs. It is more than a habit, it has become a tradition for this region to stay together. But it has been divided in two. The western part of the region was twinned with Algoma, which extends as far south as Lake Ontario. The name James Bay was added to Algoma, as the riding would now be shaped like a snake going around the region of Timmins to go east and then north to the western shore of James Bay. It makes absolutely no sense.

The second part was twinned with the city of Timmins, which would become Timmins-Cochrane. After consulting with people and with business, municipal and other leaders, it became obvious that it would be totally inappropriate to twin a small, rural part of a riding with a large city for the simple reason that the constituents, the voters of the large city would prevail over those of the small, rural region because of their numbers. And God knows that numbers in this country speak loud and clear. So much for the eastern part of my riding.

In the western part of my riding, the situation is somewhat similar. The western part of my riding was twinned with the existing riding of Thunder Bay-Nipigon. Again, municipal leaders and chamber of commerce directors told me they wanted to stay rural so that their identity would not be diluted, would not be lost within the big city of Thunder Bay that boasts some 100,000 residents.

What I am telling you, Mr. Speaker, is that the electoral commission's proposal was, in my opinion, outright provocation. A provocation that ignored regional affinities and distances to be covered in the vast region of northern Ontario. It is an immense region! There is a limit to taxing the energy of a member. I know what I am talking about because my riding is the fifth largest in Canada and, naturally, the largest in Ontario.

This bill was born as a result of the representations made by all parties in this House.

The proposed legislation will be used to correct the glaring errors and outdated provisions and will give birth, if you want, to a new act which will define the terms of reference of electoral commissions throughout Canada.

I personally look forward to this new legislation, not really because my riding was going to disappear, but because two ridings in northern Ontario were supposed to disappear. Of course, once again, southern Ontario stands to inherit, or shall I say gain these ridings. With the four ridings already proposed by

the commission, that would have meant six more ridings for southern Ontario.

Again, Mr. Speaker, I am telling you that we would have fought like crazy to at least keep the 12 ridings we currently have in northern Ontario, and I would like to make a digression, if I may. Native people are slowly but surely heading towards self-government. And 13,000 Native people live in my riding and 30,000 more live in the neighbouring riding of Kenora-Rainy River, represented here by my colleague, Robert Nault. I have always believed, and my colleague will agree, that it is about time we create a new riding which would be 98 per cent native and where the main goal would be to elect an Indian or a native member to represent these constituents in the House of Commons.

If you link all of this to the fact that we were about to lose two ridings, you will understand that it was out of the question. If we were to think positive, we would in fact consider adding a thirteenth riding.

One final word, Mr. Speaker. It is obvious that our party will vote overwhelmingly in favour of Bill C-18 and we hope, as I mentioned earlier, that the next bill which will define the terms of reference of the commissions will be a little more reasonable and sensible than the current legislation.

[Paul Mercier, Bloc, Blainville—Deux-Montagnes, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the bill before the House gives me an opportunity to introduce my constituency to the House at last.

Most people know where my constituency, that is Blainville-Deux-Montagnes, is located. It extends from the Mille-Îles River, in the south, up to but excluding Mirabel, in the north, and many of us have gone through it to reach Mirabel Airport or to spend a relaxing weekend in the Laurentians.

People who travel through the riding would be well advised to stop once in a while to enjoy its special attractions.

As for electoral redistribution, the problem in my constituency does not come from big distances as it does in the constituency of my colleague who spoke before me and who told us about its huge territory. On the contrary, mine is mainly a very densely populated urban constituency, and I can easily get around the riding by bike, as I often do. Small distances have their advantages.

Our problem does not stem from big distances but from the rapid population increase, so much so that an electoral redistribution based on the current population would probably be outdated at the time of the next election.

This rapid population growth in my constituency is due to several factors which I will now enumerate.

First of all, there is residential development which is growing extremely fast. Many people from Montreal and Laval choose to come and live with us because of the advantages of this semi-rural and urban riding, where we are both close to leisure activities and occupations in Montreal and leisure activities in the Laurentians. Because of these advantages, the population is growing very rapidly. Cities such as Lorraine and Rosemère have mostly very high-standard houses. Other cities in the riding have a wide variety of dwellings that attract people. Thus, a city such as the one that I know best since I was its mayor for a long period of time needs a new primary school every year to deal with this population growth. So, we do not know what the distribution figures for the new population will be in three or four years. The fact is that a division that would be decided today would be outdated by that time.

Apart from that very rapid residential development advantage, there is also the fact that our riding is the location of several industries, from a giant company such as GM, in Boisbriand, to many small and medium-sized businesses created by the strong dynamism of the people, and medium-sized industries such as Stablex, Novabus or Hyprescon.

Nevertheless, we must not forget that part of the riding is covered by provincial Bill 90 which protects agricultural land and that agriculture in the riding is on a very high level, especially market gardening, since we are close to Montreal, which means that the riding's economy is expanding despite the recession and will continue to expand, which in turn makes it attractive to investors.

In the riding, we have autoroute 13 and autoroute 15 running north-south and autoroute 640 running east-west. The riding is very conveniently located in terms of its distance from Dorval Airport and Mirabel Airport. It is also 20 kilometres from the Port of Montreal, which means it has an ideal infrastructure. It has a number of very modern, well-situated industrial parks set up very recently, especially Boisbriand and Blainville which are along one of the major highways, and we are very proud of our labour force whose skills are very attractive to investors.

We have a number of educational institutions of very high calibre, including the Institut d'ordinique which is well-positioned to help develop high-tech industries, and also Lionel Groulx CEGEP and other institutions, so that we are able to provide a quality labour force.

Another aspect which may be interesting for people who go to the Laurentians for recreational purposes is that we have a number of recreational resources but are much closer to Montreal. Of course, we still have a lot of green space. There is still a lot of countryside in the riding. For instance, we have the "Domaine vert", a protected area where no construction is

allowed, a huge expanse that has equestrian trails, bicycle paths, hiking trails, and so forth.

We also have a large number of golf courses. Then, there is the Blainville Equestrian Park where every year two international events are held, as well as a very impressive fireworks display.

We also have an historic event which has become a tourist attraction. There is a church in Saint-Eustache that still bears the marks of shots fired at Quebec's patriots by the British. Fortunately, those shots hit the stones of the church and we have carefully preserved those stones to remember this extremely important event.

This being said, I will now conclude by saying that, since our riding offers some advantages that stimulate its demographic growth and since the makeup of its population changes constantly, any decision made today regarding the distribution of electoral districts would likely become obsolete tomorrow. In a nutshell, this distribution would divide our riding into two ridings that would include three cities that are not part of the existing riding. On one side, we would have Sainte-Thérèse, Boisbriand, Saint-Eustache, Deux-Montagnes and Sainte-Marthe, for a total of 130,000 people, and on the other side we would have Blainville, Rosemère and Lorraine, which already belong to our riding, plus Bois-des-Filion, Sainte-Anne-des-Plaines and Terrebonne, which would be added to our riding to the detriment of neighbouring ridings.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I support this bill to postpone the decision regarding the distribution of electoral districts.

[Pierre De Savoye, Bloc, Portneuf, QC]

Mr. Speaker, an electoral map is much more than a matter of paper and lines. An electoral map is not a sheet of paper where we find what we call ridings at the federal level, or, more colloquially in Quebec, counties. An electoral map is above all people that have some common cultural traits, economic resources and infrastructure links.

When technocrats, in an office tower, pore over the map and try to redistribute the population in fairly equal numbers among the electoral districts, lines start to move. We are sometimes left with the impression that the movement of these lines is based exclusively on a mathematical formula aimed at roughly balancing out the 295 electoral districts in Canada.

If this were really the way of doing it, a computer could no doubt do it better and faster. Let us take, for example, the existing electoral map for my riding of Portneuf. There we find, in the eastern most part of the riding of Portneuf, a small portion of Quebec City. Yes, Mr. Speaker, in the riding of Portneuf there are about 600 constituents who live in Quebec City. They live on the other side of CFB Valcartier, which puts about two kilometres between them and the rest of the riding. They are to be found on both sides of Valcartier Boulevard, along a stretch of about a kilometre and a half.

No matter how hard I try, Mr. Speaker, you will understand that I have great difficulty, as a member of Parliament, identifying with these constituents, since their problems are not really related to those experienced by the rest of the riding of Portneuf. So, no matter how hard I try, I must face the fact that those people would be better served if they belonged to the neighbouring riding, strictly on the basis of geography, of belonging to one municipality rather than to another, of commuting to one's work place, etc.

Because of the proposal before us regarding the electoral map, in the next election, if any, these people will now be part of the neighbouring riding further east. But that is not the only sacrilege, if I may use that term, that we can see in the electoral map of the riding of Portneuf. At the other end, on the west side, I have two municipalities that belong to the RCM of Mékinac. These are people who deal particularly with municipalities in the neighbouring riding of Champlain.

Here again, we see the problems with relations and services. For instance, if these people have to deal with the Canada Employment Centre, they will not go to the office in Portneuf, but to the one from the neighbouring riding. And, of course, it is still possible to communicate with that employment centre, but that increases the paperwork. In fact, yours truly has to interact with four employment centres. That is a lot a employment centres, a lot of people to get to know, a lot of contacts to make and to maintain. Ultimately, that creates a waste of time, a waste of effectiveness, and citizens are not being served as well as they could be otherwise.

In fact, just recently, at the beginning of the break preceding Easter, I had the opportunity, with my colleague from the riding of Champlain, to meet the council of the municipality of Lac-aux-Sables. One night, two members of Parliament and a municipal council met at Lac-aux-Sables to consider the possibility of letting my colleague assume my responsibilities at the employment centre and in other organizations in his riding since, for reasons of distance, it would be easier for him than it would be for me to assume those responsibilities for residents of Lac-aux-Sables. My intention was not to give up on those responsibilities but simply to rely on a colleague that I fully trusted and who would be in a better position than I to carry out those responsibilities from day to day.

We discussed the issue. I must stress that the meeting was held at the request of the municipal council. After a long and useful discussion, we came to the conclusion that it would actually be much simpler for the constituents of my riding to be served by the member of the neighbouring county because their belonging,

their spirit, their culture, their ways, their communications were closer to the neighbouring riding.

However, the new proposal regarding the electoral map that we are discussing does not mention anything about that municipality and perhaps the neighbouring municipality becoming part of the neighbouring riding. I want to say, and I might conclude on that, that when a review of the electoral map takes place, it might not be a bad idea for those who are working in office buildings to come and visit the various ridings, to go into the field and see where the real borders are between people.

Again, an electoral map is not a piece of paper with straight borders running across. A riding is made up of people. Those people have needs and I am sure that it would be very easy to communicate with the member from each riding and the members from neighbouring ridings to see how people could be better served.

The decision on where to draw the line has nothing to do with the number of constituents. The basis representation is not only a matter of numbers, but also, and more importantly, of culture and cohesion among people. I think I have spent the 10 minutes I had. I would like to thank the House for listening and I hope that it will listen as carefully to the following speakers.

[Jean-Paul Marchand, Bloc, Québec-Est, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was anxious to rise and speak on Bill C-18, a bill that proposes a review of electoral boundaries. I must say that the current proposals for readjustment are very favourable to my riding of Québec-Est, since it would add to it the beautiful town of Loretteville. Québec-Est is a rather large riding with about 80,000 voters, which also includes the two small municipalities of Vanier and Ancienne-Lorette. They are within the territory of Quebec City, the capital of the future country of Quebec. It is entirely logical to add Loretteville to the riding of Québec-Est.

One of my problems is with the name Québec-Est, because the riding is not on the east side of Quebec City, but rather to the northwest. The name has been kept for the sake of tradition, because the riding has a long history. Several Prime Ministers were born in that riding and at least one has represented it. This is a riding I love, a riding I am proud to represent.

I have no objection to taking Loretteville, that would be an asset for the riding. Québec-Est does not have the ski runs of the Laurentians, we do not have the Rockies, we do not have any geographical feature which would set us apart, but we have a quality of people second to none in Quebec or Canada. It is important to talk of the quality of the people, because a riding links groups together, and in this case it links three municipalities which work well together, and have a special drive because of the quality of the people.

In the town of Ancienne-Lorette-a town I like, and where I live-there is a group called Solidarité Emplois . It was set up by two retired persons, Mr. Dubé and Mr. Déry who said: ``We are fed up with unemployment. We are not going to wait for the Liberal Party to do something, because when the time comes to create employment you don't wait for the government. We are going to act now''.

These people have put in place a program called "Solidarité-Emploi". They have brought together a number of volunteers and have made representations to find unemployed people in the city of L'Ancienne-Lorette. With the assistance of volunteers, they have found some employers and served as contacts between the employers and the unemployed. This is what a number of people in L'Ancienne-Lorette, in my riding of Québec-Est, have achieved.

This is an example of the quality of the people who live in Québec-Est. Surely we could add the city of Loretteville because I have no objection to this revision of the electoral map.

The other example comes from the town of Vanier. The town of Vanier is completely surrounded by Quebec City. This is a small municipality which is pretty dynamic. Vanier also has its own problems of unemployment, among others. Perhaps it is one of the municipalities which has to struggle the most against unemployment and yet, it surprisingly shows lots of dynamism.

There is a particular organization called "l'ADEC-V". We still have volunteers, some good citizens of Vanier, who campaign every year to raise funds to help people on welfare and give Christmas gifts and food baskets to the needy.

In this group called l'ADEC-V run by a certain Mr. Lemoyne, there are 65 volunteers who carry on a whole series of activities all year round.

[Don Boudria, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize for interrupting a Franco-Ontarian colleague in such a flight of oratory. However, I invoke the rule of relevance, citation 459 in Beauchesne, which says that members persistent repetition or raise issues which clearly have nothing to do with the bill being considered.

It is very interesting to hear him talk about volunteers from his riding, but we must admit that it is just a little too much. This is stretching things out.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

I am sure that other members were wondering if this was relevant. I am also sure that the member from Québec-Est is soon going to show the connection and come back to the issue under consideration.

[Jean-Paul Marchand, Bloc, Québec-Est, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You are quite right and I applaud your great wisdom! I was coming to that. I was going to make the connection between these eminent individuals who live in the riding of Québec-Est and stress with great emphasis how important it is not to change the electoral map

without thinking about it for a while. As we well know, it could have disastrous effects.

In the past, it had disastrous effects and because of changes in the electoral map, people had to get used to a new riding. As we know, it takes years to build a riding such as Québec-Est.

I do not disagree with the planned electoral boundaries readjustment since in my case, Loretteville would be added to my riding, and I welcome this change.

It is obvious that reviewing electoral boundaries takes much longer than 12 months; it takes at least two years. And it requires a lot of serious thinking. We know that the only reason why the Reform Party is putting forward this motion to conduct this review in 12 months is because it wants to take advantage of these changes as soon as possible. Twelve months. In the next election, they could even-As we know, they hope to win more seats.

At any rate, I submit that it takes a minimum of two years to review any changes in the electoral boundaries and that it would give the Reform Party a bit more time to refine its parliamentary strategies so that in two years, when those changes are made, it might actually win more seats. As it stands today, should an election be called, it could lose some of its most important members.

In conclusion, I would say that this bill is very important and that we need at least 24 months to make sure that the readjustment process is fair and equitable. I thank you for your attention.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral, Bloc, Laval Centre, QC]

Mr. Speaker, electoral boundaries readjustment, be it in Canada or in Quebec, even though always the result of logical decisions that could be based on questions of demographic or geographic balance, is nonetheless never sheltered from what can be called the "political touch". Indeed, only the magic touch would explain some of these readjustments, but I am not one to get shocked at such things.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, I have represented Laval-Centre here since October 25, 1993. Laval, the second biggest city in Quebec, now encompasses three federal ridings, named very logically. In the east, there is Laval-East; in the centre, Laval-Centre, and in the west-yes, you guessed it, Mr. Speaker-Laval-West. This electoral boundaries distribution within Laval redressed a previous rather absurd situation in which the Laval-des-Rapides constituency was partly in Laval and partly in Montreal. This great riding was separated-what an ugly word-by the Back River, or Rivière-des Prairies, that no one could swim across. The river was not an example of pollution clean-up in those days nor is it today.

To see our member of Parliament, we had two options: cross the bridge or watch TV. Mind you, the then member for Laval-des-Rapides, who also sat in your chair all those years, did a remarkable job. Like you, Mr. Speaker, she was a TV star. However, when I look at the distribution within Laval proposed by the reform which Bill C-18 would suspend, I am surprised that some strange particularities are maintained. I will come back to that at the end of my speech.

This debate is not about the need to review the distribution of electoral boundaries but about the need to rush into some minor and some major adjustments.

According to Mr. Bernard, distinguished professor of political science at the Université du Québec in Montreal, it is impossible to create several identical ridings; some will have more affluent constituents, some will be more rural. An unbalanced distribution of constituents among the ridings will be advantageous for some parties at the expense of others.

Laval is a region with a total area of little more than 250 square kilometres, but 315,000 people live on that small territory. A third of the labour force works off the island.

Are the three ridings in Laval similar? No, Mr. Speaker. Of the three, Laval Centre is undoubtedly the most urbanized, but the poorest.

The majority of households in Laval Centre rent their housing; over there, they celebrate Canada Day by moving. Just think, between 1988 and 1991, 50 per cent of the population in Laval Centre changed address. I am sure that in the neighbouring riding of Laval West, represented by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, they must celebrate Canada Day differently.

Social and economic conditions in Laval Centre are the worst in the region. The education level is slightly lower and, with the large number of single individuals and one-parent families, 20 per cent of the population of Laval Centre lived below the poverty line in 1990.

To believe one can form equal ridings in Laval is wishful thinking.

I have no problem in saying, as Professor Bernard did, that the desire to reduce inequalities among ridings while preserving the benefits their party could derive from it has created and is still creating important problems for lawmakers.

For political reasons the riding of Laval-des-Rapides has straddled a river for a long time. The same political considerations probably explain why the border between Laval East and Laval Centre, a border everybody knows in Laval, is the Boulevard des Laurentides, but this border stops abruptly, right between two Hydro-Québec power lines.

Would you believe that this enclave is located west of the Boulevard des Laurentides. It is part of Laval East. Does this make sense? I bet you could not find one voter in that area who could make sense of it.

Democracy requires that citizens fully participate in the making of decisions which affect their community. Whether it is through their representatives in Parliament, such as all of us, or through public consultations, Canadians and Quebeckers have the right to be heard and I have no doubt that this Parliament will be listening to them.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Kilger)]

It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Mégantic-Compton-Stanstead, Federal Deficit; the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi, Old Age Security; the hon. member for Richelieu, Rights of Francophones; the hon. member for Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup, Unemployment; the hon. member for Hochelaga-Maisonneuve, Human Rights.

[Gaston Péloquin, Bloc, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, today's debate on electoral boundaries readjustments brings out two basic elements of the mini-reform the governments wants us to swallow. There are two things that really bother me in all of this. Although I really wonder about the very relevance of today's debate, I must say that I am more than puzzled by the provisions and directions stipulated in Bill C-18. I have a feeling that not only is the Liberal government not doing much, but it has the bad habit of going backwards.

First, let us talk about the relevance for us, members of Parliament, to go over the readjustment of Canadian electoral boundaries. I really wonder if this issue is very high on the list of priorities of most Canadians. The government brags about listening to the people. The Liberals hold public briefings and national consultations in order to establish their priorities and we end up today, in this House, discussing the number of ridings we should have in Canada. What a crucial debate that is for the political, economic and social future of our country.

Has the minister taken part in these public consultations? If not, there must be some way to provide him with a report on these hearings. If so, then it is very disturbing. Either the consultations took place on another planet or the minister does not give a damn about what Canadians think. If the minister asked the people of Brome-Missisquoi what the federal government's priorities should be, I do not think that many would say the readjustment of electoral boundaries. I want to tell the minister that the people want the government to take action, and what the real priorities they would like to see on the agenda of the House are.

I will conclude by appealing to the reason of a government which seems to have no more compassion. The issues that should be discussed in this House are job creation, control of expenditures and preservation of social programs. The slow economic recovery, the astronomical unemployment rate and the disastrous state of public finances should convince the government of the need to act quickly. And if, despite everything, the government sticks to its idea of electoral boundaries readjustment, let us at least hope that it will do it intelligently and reduce, not increase, the number of members of Parliament. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[Gilbert Fillion, Bloc, Chicoutimi, QC]

Mr. Speaker, like many of my colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois, I also consulted the people I represent in the riding of Chicoutimi on the proposal made by the electoral boundaries commission for Quebec. So that you know exactly what I am talking about, Mr. Speaker, and I will be brief because I know that time is nearly up, the riding of Chicoutimi is made up of seven municipalities.

They are, of course, the cities of Chicoutimi and La Baie, and the five rural municipalities of Ferland-Boileau, Saint-Félix-d'Otis, Rivière-Éternité, Anse-Saint-Jean and Petit-Saguenay.

Under the commission's proposal, these five rural municipalities that make up the area called Lower Saguenay would be taken away from the riding of Chicoutimi and added to the riding of Jonquière.

Each one of these municipalities refuses categorically to become part of another riding. There are many reasons for that. The riding of Chicoutimi has two major economic centres, namely the cities of Chicoutimi and La Baie. The municipalities of Lower Saguenay have always been economically associated with the city of La Baie. Several services located in La Baie are provided to residents of Lower Saguenay. I will list only a few examples: the Canada Employment Centre, the Small Business Development Centre, La Baie Hospital.

Moreover, the Lower Saguenay municipalities had set up services in which they had invested time and money, like the Chamber of Commerce, the Société touristique du Fjord and the Société de développement de La Baie. Excluding these municipalities from these organizations because they do not belong any

more to the riding of Chicoutimi would jeopardize their entire economic and tourist development.

People in the riding of Chicoutimi have been working for years to reduce the very high unemployment we have in our area. So, for them, electoral boundaries readjustment is not a problem. They want those millions of dollars to be used to find ways of reducing unemployment.

These five municipalities have been working together for a long time on these matters which are essential to their development. unemployment now stands at 16 per cent, and that is what the people of Chicoutimi want us to talk about. They want solutions. That is the reality, Mr. Speaker.

For decades, they trusted the Liberals and the Conservatives. Today, they have had enough. They want to work. They are tired. They are fed up with being overtaxed. So, it is time to stop the futile debates in this House and to tackle these problems first of all.

My constituents in the riding of Chicoutimi are fed up with seeing their purchasing power diminish, which causes more unemployment. They have enough of all the obstacles those two political parties and the former governments invented in the last 30 years to put a damper on job creation in small and medium-sized businesses.

In the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region, those governments have caused an exodus of young people by stripping them of all hope of survival in their region, because we do not get our fair share of R and D. Both governments have neglected regions like mine. Those are the problems, Mr. Speaker, which my constituents and taxpayers in Chicoutimi want us to talk about.

[The Deputy Speaker]

Is the House ready for the question?

[Some hon. members]

Question.

[The Deputy Speaker]

The question is on motion No. 1. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.