Geoff Regan

[Government Response to Petitions, December 5th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 18 petitions.

[Motions for Papers, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Notices of Motions for the Production of Papers be allowed to stand.

[Questions on the Order Paper, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.

[Questions Passed as Orders for Returns, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, if Starred Question No. 29 could be made an order fo return, the return would be tabled immediately.

[Committees of the House, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, following discussions among the parties, if you were to seek it I think you would find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That members of the Special Committee on Non-medical Use of Drugs be authorized to travel to Vancouver, Montreal and Halifax from Sunday, December 8, 2002, to Monday, December 9, 2002, in relation to its mandate and to publicize the release of its interim report across the country, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.

(Motion agreed to)

[Government Response to Petitions, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the government's response to 15 petitions.

[Privilege, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might ask you for the opportunity to make a further submission at a later time.

[Privilege, December 4th, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, I have the responsibility to ensure that answers to written questions are tabled in the House. I want to assure hon. members that I will endeavour to look into this particular matter and check into what has happened in this case. I am sure there was no intention to mislead the House on the part of the government.

I want to make it clear that in my role I try to get answers as quickly as possible for hon. members in the House. I think it is very important that those answers be given quickly. It is my expectation of all departments that those answers be accurate and complete.

[Nuclear Safety and Control Act, December 3rd, 2002]

Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment on this motion.

The motion addresses issues that are very important in our system of representative government, that is, fair and reasonable boundaries for the federal ridings; the distribution of ridings in each region, province and territory in such a way that all Canadians can be sure that their opinions will be carefully considered in the House of Commons.

We must recognize, first, that the current system is working well. There may be disagreements from time to time about the exact size of some ridings, but Canadians generally agree that the system is fair and does an excellent job, given the size and diversity of our country.

The distribution of ridings in Canada is governed by the Constitution and laws established by Parliament. For example, section 51 of the Constitution Act of 1867 is used to calculate the number of House of Commons seats to be allocated to each province. Another example is the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, which establishes the process and principles to be followed by electoral commissions in defining the boundaries of federal electoral districts in each province.

From the very beginning, this system has sought to provide equitable representation while guaranteeing that each region has a say in the government of this country. Of course this has not always been easy, for while successive parliaments have recognized the importance of representation by population, they also have recognized the need to reflect the geographic, cultural and demographic diversity of our country and give voice to both urban and rural Canadians.

To address this we have a compromise that provides representation by population while avoiding the tyranny of the majority, but as we know, democratic government is a work in progress and so this compromise has changed from time to time to keep pace with economic, social and demographic changes in our very dynamic country. The most recent example of this involved the adoption in 1985 of the Representation Act, which simplified the formula contained in section 51 of the Constitution and provided clear and simple procedures for calculating the seats for each province and territory.

Under this act, each territory gets one seat. The total population of the provinces is then divided by the remaining number of seats to obtain an electoral quotient used in determining the theoretical number of seats for each province. This number is then adjusted using the senatorial clause, under which provinces cannot have fewer seats in the House of Commons than they do in the Senate of Canada, and a grandfather clause which guarantees that the provinces will not have fewer seats than they did in 1986.

This provides the number of seats for each province, but this is just the start of it, for each province must also create a commission every 10 years to determine the size, shape and composition of each riding to reflect changes and movements in the population. Each commission is chaired by a judge appointed by the chief justice of that province or by a resident of the province appointed by the Chief Justice of Canada, with two other members being appointed by the Speaker of the House of Commons.

Using input from public hearings and members of Parliament, these commissions prepare and forward reports to the Speaker of the House of Commons that form the basis of an order specifying the number and character of ridings in each province. The most recent review began March 12 and is well under way, as members of the House will know.

This, then, is our current system, one which has served us well and continues to do so.

Given that it is working well, we need to think carefully before undertaking ad hoc changes such as that contained in today's motion, for making such an exceptional change might well create a precedent that would make it difficult to resist future calls for ad hoc changes. Should this happen, the result might eventually be a large number of special situations, which would lead to an electoral map that more closely resembles a crazy quilt than a carefully thought out master plan.

Supporters of the motion will no doubt point to the large land mass of the region, not unlike that of the existing three territories, which are assigned one seat each. In response, I want to remind members that Nunavik differs from the territories in one very important respect. It is not a separate jurisdiction but is rather an integral part of the Province of Quebec, and as such must abide by the rules that govern every other region of that province. Then, too, establishing an exception to the way we assign seats would conflict with the principle of proportional representation of the provinces in the House of Commons and could require a total rethinking of our system.

Finally, such a change would not be a trivial matter, for it would require a modification of article 51 of the Constitution Act, an exercise few of us, I would say, would relish.

In conclusion, the motion involves important constitutional questions that would have to be resolved before we could consider such a change. Approving it could create a precedent for other ad hoc changes to our electoral system that could damage or distort our system of representative government.

I do want to commend the member for his commitment to strengthening democratic government in his province, a commitment the government shares.

[Nuclear Safety and Control Act, December 3rd, 2002]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Following consultations among the parties, I think you would find unanimous consent for the following: That members of the Special Committee on Non-medical Use of Drugs be authorized to travel to Vancouver, Montreal and Halifax from Sunday, December 8 to Monday, December 9 in relation to its mandate and to publicize the release of its interim report across the country, and that the necessary staff accompany the committee.