The Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs has the honour to present its

 

 

FORTY-FIRST REPORT

 

 

1. Pursuant to the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3, as amended, the Committee has considered the matter of the objections to the Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for British Columbia, 2003.

 

2. After each decennial census an electoral boundaries commission is established for each province.  The Chief Electoral Officer calculates the number of Members of the House of Commons assigned to each province according to the provisions of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.  Following advertisements and representations from interested persons, each commission prepares a report on the division of the province into electoral districts based on population and corresponding as closely as reasonably possible to the quotient of Members per population for that province.

 

3. In its considerations, each commission is to take into consideration the community of interest or community of identity or the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province, as well as what constitutes a manageable geographic size in cases of sparsely populated, rural or northern regions.  The Commission may depart by a variance of up to plus or minus 25% of the quotient in order to accommodate such circumstances.

 

4. Each commission’s report is forwarded to the Chief Electoral Officer, who in turn sends it to the Speaker of the House of Commons, who tables the report in the House.  The report is referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

 

5. In accordance with the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, after each commission report has been tabled in the House of Commons, Members of the House of Commons have 30 calendar days in which to file objections to the proposals contained in each report.  The Act requires that objections must be in the form of a motion, in writing, specify the provisions of the report objected to and the reasons for the objection, and must be signed by not less than 10 Members of the House.

 

6. If objections are filed, the Committee has 30 sitting days, or such longer period of time as may be approved by the House of Commons, to consider the objections.  Following this, the commission report, the objections, and the minutes of proceedings and evidence are returned to the Speaker, who transmits them to the Chief Electoral Officer.  The Chief Electoral Officer returns the material to the relevant electoral boundaries commission, which has 30 days in which to dispose of the objections.  The commission then finalizes its report.

 

7. Once all the commission reports have been finalized, the Chief Electoral Officer prepares a draft representation order setting out the boundaries and names of the new electoral districts.  This is sent to the Governor in Council, who must proclaim it within five days.  No changes can be made by the Chief Electoral Officer or the Government.  The representation order comes into effect one year after it is proclaimed, and is in force for any federal general election called after that date.

 

8. The Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for British Columbia, 2003 was tabled in the House of Commons on March 17, 2003. By the end of the 30-day period, the Clerk of the Committee had received 10 objections.  The Subcommittee on Electoral Boundaries Readjustment of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs was appointed to consider these objections.  This report contains the comments and recommendations of the Subcommittee, as adopted by the Committee, on the proposed changes for the Province of British Columbia contained in the Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for British Columbia, 2003.

 

 

Kootenay-Boundary-Similkameen

 

9.   Mr. Jim Gouk, Member of Parliament for Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan, filed an objection to the proposed name for the constituency of Kootenay-Boundary-Similkameen.  According to Mr. Gouk’s objection, not including Okanagan in the name would ignore an important region within the riding.  He has consulted with representatives of the communities and suggests that, although cumbersome, Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan-Similkameen is the name that best reflects the riding and its residents.

 

10. It appears that the Commission wished to reflect the addition of Similkameen to the riding through a name change.  However, in doing so, it passed over the Okanagan part of the riding.  From testimony in the Subcommittee, the Committee understands that there are many local communities within this riding that are concerned they not be confused with neighbouring regions.  The long name of Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan-Similkameen reflects these local sensitivities.  It also seems that these communities would be satisfied with a more generic name that recognizes them as the British Columbia southern interior, as long as British Columbia was reflected in the name.  Mr. Gouk proposed in Subcommittee the alternate name of B.C. Southern Interior.

 

11. The Committee finds Mr. Gouk’s alternate proposal of B.C. Southern Interior broadly and inclusively describes the riding.  The Committee feels that the “southern interior of B.C.” is colloquially and instantaneously recognizable to Canadians across the country.  However, the guidelines for naming electoral districts suggest avoiding province names within riding names.  The Committee is also aware that four-barrelled names such as Kootenay-Boundary-Okanagan-Similkameen are difficult, and the guidelines recommend avoiding them.  Therefore, the Committee recommends the name Southern Interior as the riding name.

 

 

West Vancouver Sunshine Coast

 

12. Mr. John Reynolds, Member of Parliament for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast, filed an objection to the proposed boundary changes for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast.  According to Mr. Reynolds' objection, the new boundaries will sever a long-established community of interest in Pemberton/Lillooet.  The changes will also severely diminish the capacity for the residents of Pemberton/Lillooet for timely and reasonable access to the offices and services of their new Member of Parliament, as well as to the services of other governmental institutions.  Travel to the southern part of the riding is lengthy and circuitous.

 

13. Mr. Reynolds presented the Subcommittee three options, which he thought would better serve the riding and its residents:

 

a)      Pemberton/Lillooet and its surrounding communities be returned to West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast.  This would bring the riding to approximately 133,000, a variance of about +23%.

 

b)      Pemberton/Lillooet be returned to the riding, as above, and West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast return the section added from North Vancouver.  This would bring West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast to approximately 126,000 – about +16% above the quotient, but would also add approximately 10,000 people to North Vancouver, taking it to 128,000 and +18%.

 

c)      Add Pemberton/Lillooet, as well as Whistler to the new riding of Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon.  This would bring Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon to 112,600 and +4% above the quotient; West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast would be 115,700, about +7% variance.

 

14. In testimony to the Subcommittee, Mr. Reynolds stated that he thought the third option was the best.  Although reluctant to lose Pemberton/Lillooet, he believed that the area forms a natural community of interest, along with Whistler, that should not be divided.  People who work in Whistler, including the mayor of Whistler, live in Pemberton.  The area is a world-famous resort, focused on servicing many times its own population of tourists and temporary residents.  It has a unique local culture based on tourism and on a local ethos.

 

15. The Committee notes that West-Vancouver-Sunshine Coast is already close to the maximum variance allowed by statute and that it encompasses a substantial area for such a populous riding.  It also notes that to place Whistler in the riding of Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon would create excessive transportation difficulties for them in reaching their representative.  To return the section as provided in option b) above creates a riding in North Vancouver that would also be extremely close to the maximum allowed by statute.  We do not support this objective.

 

16. In a final point on this electoral district, the Committee notes that in testimony before the Subcommittee, Mr. Reynolds also noted that a small section of the riding of North Vancouver lies between the Capsilano River and the boundary of West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast, south of Capsilano Lake.  Mr. Reynolds suggested that the natural boundary would be the river itself and should be added.  According to Mr. Reynolds it holds perhaps 100 people.

 

17. Exact data is not available from Elections Canada as to how many people reside in this area, but if it is a matter of approximately 100 to 200 people, and the river does indeed form the natural boundary to the riding, then Mr. Reynold’s suggestion appears to be sensible.

 

 

North Okanagan-Shuswap

 

18. Mr. Darrel Stinson, Member of Parliament for Okanagan-Shuswap, filed an objection to the removal of Sicamous and vicinity (Columbia-Shuswap Division E) to Kootenay-Columbia.

 

19. Mr. Stinson’s objection is based on a community of interest created by geography.  The objection is also based on a matter of public safety.  The change would require the residents affected to drive 458 kilometres through the mountains to Cranbrook in order to reach the riding office.  The drive in winter is difficult, over sometimes-dangerous mountain passes.  According to Mr. Stinson, because of the mountainous drive, people in Sicamous travel south, down the valley, to Vernon, rather than over the passes to Revelstoke.

 

20. Mr. Stinson also added that Sicamous and Mara form an economic community of interest with North Okanagan-Shuswap.  They are linked with the Thompson and Fraser River drainages and the fishing, houseboat and tourism communities of Shuswap Lake, not with the Columbia River communities.

 

21. In his appearance before the Subcommittee, Mr. Stinson indicated that the geography of the Kootenays makes it very difficult to equate populations between ridings.  Other communities – Valemont for example – that look as if they are candidates to move between adjacent ridings, are often separated by very difficult geography and are in fact parts of different valley or river systems.  What looks simple ‘as the crow flies’ is often difficult terrain on the ground.

 

22. The Committee finds Mr. Stinson’s objections sensible and straightforward.  It is somewhat alarmed at the prospect of elderly residents in Sicamous having to drive across the mountains in winter to seek assistance or services from their M.P.  As Mr. Stinson noted in his comments to the Subcommittee:

 

Yes, the major problem with this proposal is it's not even the worst of the best.  It's probably the worst of the worst because there's absolutely no way they could be looked after, particularly in the wintertime.  Not only that, the town of Sicamous itself is one of the main towns on the Shuswap Lake, which is known around the world for the Shuswap Lake. Everything that pertains to Sicamous is generated pretty well off that lake ….

 

23. The Committee agrees and strongly recommends that the residents of Sicamous and vicinity remain in the electoral district of North Okanagan-Shuswap.

 

 

Kamloops-Thompson

 

24. Ms. Betty Hinton, Member of Parliament for the riding of Kamloops-Thompson and Highland Valley, filed an objection to the removal of Logan Lake from the riding of Kamloops-Thompson.

 

25. Ms. Hinton’s objection is based on a community of interest; there are close ties and many levels of relationships between the City of Kamloops and the town of Logan Lake.  According to Ms. Hinton, the people in Logan Lake are currently 45 minutes away from the City of Kamloops; it's where they send their children for any kind of sports activity; it’s where services from baby clinics to local businesses reside – all of the things that a normal community would be a part of. Logan Lake itself exists solely for the mine; Kamploops is where the historical connection for Logan Lake is.  Ms. Hinton stated that under this proposal, Logan Lake will now be three hours away from the constituency office in Penticton, and it will be geographically completely isolated from the rest of the constituency of Okanagan-Coquihalla.

 

26. In Subcommittee, Ms. Hinton noted that one reason she wanted Logan Lake to remain within the riding is that the mine is closing down, and that considerable work has been done by her office to work for adjustment plans for the region.  Ms. Hinton expressed a strong commitment to continuing her work for Logan Lake; practically, too, there are arguments for continuity in order to most effectively pursue adjustment strategies.

 

27. According to numbers provided by Elections Canada, Logan Lake comprises approximately 2,000 people.  Adding Logan Lake to Kamloops-Thompson would put the riding at about 114,000, or about 5% above the provincial quotient. 

 

28. Ms. Hinton recognizes this difficulty and proposes placing Valemont, which was added to Kamloops-Thomson, back with Prince George.  Valemont is currently in Prince George-Bulkley Valley; its natural links are to the new riding of Prince George-Peace River.  Given that Kamloops-Thompson is a large and geographically challenging riding, there are difficulties in placing Valemont in the riding of Kamloops-Thompson.

 

29. The net result of these changes would be that Okanagan-Coquihalla would drop somewhat in population, Prince George-Peace River would go up somewhat in population, and it would be basically a break even for Kamloops-Thompson.  All ridings are in a 3-6% variance above or below the quotient, so it would not have a large impact.

 

30. The Committee supports Ms. Hinton’s objection and recommends the Commission add the town of Logan Lake to Kamloops-Thompson and Valemont and its immediate vicinity to Prince George-Peace River.

 

 

Greater Vancouver Area

 

 

Fleetwood-Port Kells

 

31. Mr. Gurmant Grewal, Member of Parliament for the constituency of Surrey Central, filed an objection to the boundaries and to the proposed name of Fleetwood-Port Kells.  The objection to the boundaries is based on community of interest.  The objection to the name is based on the identification of the constituency.

 

32. In his presentation to the Subcommittee, Mr. Grewal re-iterated that Surrey, White Rock and North Delta should have four ridings as proposed by the Commission, but that they should be differently constituted.  It appears that Fleetwood-Port Kells has been constituted from the population left over, with insufficient attention given to communities of interest in the region.

 

33. Mr. Grewal argues that Cloverdale and East Surrey belong together in the same riding, as they are currently in Surrey Central.  East Surrey is rural and Cloverdale is closely connected to the rural areas.  For the last 50 years, Cloverdale has featured the second largest rodeo in Canada, and its annual fair dates back to 1888.  Cloverdale is a rural community that caters to greenhouse projects, agricultural operations, horse riding, horse stables and building acreages.

 

34. Port Kells has Surrey's largest industrial park.  The Fleetwood area provides additional commercial activities for the Cloverdale community.  The natural flow of business and community activities such as schools, shopping, business, of this natural rural valley should remain intact.  This valley has an active tourist industry, and this region should remain united to capitalize and further promote tourism in this area.  Cloverdale is very much part of Surrey.

 

35. To that end, Mr. Grewal also proposes that the constituency name be changed to reflect his proposed inclusion of Cloverdale to the riding.  He proposes the name Surrey-Cloverdale.

 

36. It appears south Newton, the area around Highway 10 and King George Highway, cannot be included in the Newton-North Delta riding, where it more properly belongs, due to population constraints.  Meanwhile, Panorama Ridge shares a community of interest with South Surrey because of topography, natural boundaries and demographics.  Panorama Ridge should be in White Rock-South Surrey, where its natural community of interest and transportation connections lie, rather than in Fleetwood-Port Kells.

 

37. Mr. Grewal provided substitute wording for the riding descriptions as laid out in the Commission report and reference should be made to the text of his objection, supporting materials and presentation, but the gist of the proposals is as follows:

 

a) Panorama Ridge be moved to White Rock-South Surrey.  The boundary line between White Rock-South Surrey would be drawn from Mud Bay up 129^th Street to 64^th Avenue, along 64^th Avenue to King George Highway, and Newton-North Delta would encompass the area bounded by 72^nd Avenue, 144^th Street and 80^th Avenue before resuming the boundaries as proposed.

 

b) The boundary of Fleetwood-Port Kells could run from the Langley constituency boundary, along the B.C. Hydro Railway to the Serpentine River, then on to 152^nd Street.  From there it could go north along 152^nd Street to 72^nd Avenue, then west to 144^th Street, then north to 80^th Avenue, then west to the King George Highway. At this point it would continue along the Commissions’ proposed boundaries.  This boundary change would retain in Fleetwood-Port Kells all of Cloverdale.

 

38. Mr. Grewal noted that he had been contacted by a large number of the residents with overwhelming support for keeping Cloverdale in Fleetwood–Port Kells, and not with the proposed riding of White Rock–South Surrey.  He presented the Committee four strong supporting letters for his proposal from prominent and influential individuals and organizations: Ms. Patsy Bourassa, chief executive officer of the Surrey Chamber of Commerce; Mr. Jerry Spielmager, president of the Cloverdale Rodeo and Exhibition; Mr. Bill Reid, electoral reform chairman and chairman of the Cloverdale Chamber of Commerce; and Mr. Dave Hayer, MLA for Surrey–Tynehead.  Mr. Grewal also stated he had consulted widely with neighbouring Members of Parliament and had their support.

 

39. According to data available from Elections Canada, these adjustments would give the constituencies the following populations:

 

ä        White Rock-South Surrey: 102,600 and a variance of -5.4%;

ä        Fleetwood-Port Kells: 95,281 and a variance of –12.2%;

ä        Newton-North Delta: 113,750 and a variance of +4.8%;

ä        Surrey North: 106,100 and a variance of –1.6%.

 

If Mr. Cummins’ proposals are accepted – see Delta-Richmond East below – the population of Newton-North Delta would drop to 100,750 and a variance of ‑7.4%

 

40. The Committee finds Mr. Grewal’s proposal well researched, detailed, publicly supported and persuasive.  It recommends that it could form the basis of riding adjustments for the South Surrey region.  All of Cloverdale would be transferred to Fleetwood-Port Kells.  This is a dense, urban area.  Some minor modifications to Mr. Grewal’s proposal might be possible to further even out the variances.

 

41. The Committee further recommends that should the boundaries be adjusted as proposed, Fleetwood-Port Kells be named Surrey-Cloverdale to reflect the historic and continuous names associated with the communities in the riding and with which they themselves identify.

 

 

Delta-Richmond East

 

42. Mr. John Cummins, Member of Parliament for the constituency of Delta-South Richmond, filed an objection to the proposed boundaries of the riding of Delta-Richmond East.  Mr. Cummins’ objection is based on a community of interest, requesting that the community of Delta remain united in one riding and not be split in two as is set out by the current proposals.

 

43. After presenting his objection, Mr. Cummins came back to the Subcommittee at a later date with three proposals to help the Committee, and consequently the Commission, consider a means to achieve the goal of his objection:

 

a) Change the eastern boundary of Delta-Richmond East from Highway 91 to include that portion of North Delta north of Nordel Way, west of Scott Road and south of 96^th Avenue.  This would increase Delta-Richmond East by approximately 13,000.  The area would take in Annieville and Sunbury, which share a community of interest with Ladner and Steveston, and which are two of the oldest fishing communities in Delta.  Importantly, this would also provide a vital link between north and South Delta.

 

b) Change the Richmond boundary along Steveston Highway from Highway 99 to #3 Road and then along to William Street to the dike. This could be moved to run along Steveston Highway to the #4 Road, north on #4 to Francis and then west on Francis to the dike. Mr. Cummins states that this boundary is a natural extension of the existing boundaries.  According to Mr. Cummins, his proposal would also include a section of Delta-East Richmond that has no community of interest with Delta, comprising as it does the North Arm of the (Fraser) Harbour Commission and a distinct farming community.

 

c) A name change: keep the existing name of Delta-South Richmond as it would best describe the riding should the substance of Mr. Cummins’ objection be followed.

 

44. According to Mr. Cummins, the changes he proposes would take Delta-Richmond East to 109,500 and +1%.  Richmond would go to 113,500 and +4.5%, not unreasonable in his opinion, as Richmond is an integral, homogenous community.  Newton-North Delta would go to 99,900 and -8%.  If Mr. Grewal’s proposal (see above) is accepted as the basis for boundary adjustments in the region, then Mr. Cummin’s proposal would take the population of Newton-North Delta down to about 92,000.  This would be low, but tolerable.

 

45. If Mr. Cummin’s objection is adopted, then the Committee also recommends that the name be changed to Delta-South Richmond.

 

White Rock-South Surry

 

46. Ms. Val Meredith, Member of Parliament for the constituency of South Surrey-White Rock-Langley, filed an objection to change the proposed name to South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale.

 

47. Ms. Meredith notes in her objection that Cloverdale is one of the six distinct communities of the City of Surrey, as is South Surrey, and should be included in the constituency name.  Furthermore the order of names should be changed to give precedence to the most populous part of the constituency, which is South Surrey.  The Committee’s discussion of the Cloverdale issue is contained in the above section on Fleetwood-Port Kells.

 

48. The Committee supports Ms. Meredith’s reasoning, but given the Committee’s recommendation that the Commission place Cloverdale within the riding of Fleetwood-Port Kells (Surrey-Cloverdale, see above), it feels it cannot fully support Ms. Meredith’s suggestion.  The Committee, however, does concur that the order of the riding name be changed to South Surrey-White Rock.

 

 

City of Vancouver

 

 

Burrard

 

49. The Hon. Hedy Fry, P.C., Member of Parliament for Vancouver Centre, filed an objection to the proposed boundaries of the constituency of Burrard.  She also filed an objection to the name, arguing that the current name of Vancouver Centre be retained.

 

50. Ms. Fry’s objection is based on community of interest, in order to prevent the division of the community of Kitsilano.  The proposal takes Kitsilano High School, Kitsilano Community Centre, and a large section of Kitsilano Beach out of the riding of Burrard, and places them in the riding of Quadra.  According to Ms. Fry, Kitsilano is a small area in Vancouver Centre that is distinct unto itself and very self-aware. 

 

51. Ms. Fry suggests, rather, that the western boundary of Burrard be moved from Arbutus Street to Trafalgar Street.  Ms. Fry indicated to the Subcommittee that this objection is on behalf of her voters who have written to her, and that her proposal has the support of the other three political parties of Vancouver Centre – the NDP, the Progressive Conservatives and the Canadian Alliance.

 

52. According to numbers provided by Elections Canada, Ms. Fry’s suggestion may comprise a larger population than she estimates.  Her proposal would increase Burrard’s population by 14,000 people, taking it to 130,000 people and 11% above the provincial quotient.  In a dense urban riding this is not necessarily problematic.

 

53. The adjustment would, however, take Quadra down to 99,000 – 9% below the provincial quotient – which would be a more substantial problem for a dense urban riding. Nor is it clear that the current Member for Quadra would support this move because of the effect it would have on Quadra.  When asked by the Subcommittee, Mr. Owen expressed concern that he had already lost a southeastern section of his riding; he wished to retain the northeastern section transferred to Quadra from Burrard in order to retain the population base of his constituency.

 

54. Ms. Fry also proposed that the name Vancouver Centre be retained.  Vancouver Centre has geographical and historical meaning to the rest of the country. It is unclear that the proposed name “Burrard” carries the same import; there has been a Vancouver Centre in roughly the same place since 1917.  It also makes sense to have a Vancouver Centre when the other ridings are East Vancouver, Vancouver South, North Vancouver and West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast.

 

55. The Committee agrees with Ms. Fry’s arguments on the proposed name for the constituency and notes that people in the other City of Vancouver ridings have also petitioned to have Vancouver in the constituency name.  It recommends that the riding retain the name Vancouver Centre.

 

 

Quadra

 

56. The Honourable Stephen Owen, P.C., Member of Parliament for Vancouver Quadra, filed an objection to the constituency’s proposed name of Quadra.  “Quadra” alone is not a unique identifier as it could confuse the riding name with Quadra Island, which is one of the Gulf Coast Islands.  Quadra is a part of the City of Vancouver and should be identified to the rest of the country as such.  The Committee agrees with Mr. Owen, and recommends that the riding retain the name Vancouver Quadra.

 

 

Kingsway

 

57. Ms. Sophie Leung, Member of Parliament for the constituency of Vancouver-Kingsway, filed an objection to the proposed name for the constituency of Kingsway. According to Ms. Leung, the proposed name of Kingsway is unclear.  It does not reflect the true nature of the riding and does not identify its geographic location in any way.  The riding lies completely within the city boundaries of Vancouver and the riding name should reflect this.  Ms. Leung proposes that the riding retain its name Vancouver-Kingsway.

 

58. The Committee agrees with Ms. Leung, and recommends the name Vancouver-Kingsway for the riding.

 

 

Other Vancouver Electoral District Names

 

59. The Committee also notes the overall pattern of names is somewhat inconsistent in the Vancouver region.  From the information and understandings we have gathered, we believe the name of the electoral district of Burnaby North shares some of the voter confusion issues of the proposed riding of Burrard (see above), as well as Kingsway and Quadra.  We believe the proposed riding of Burnaby North to be geographically inaccurate and inexactly matched to a provincial riding of the same name.  A better name, analogous to the name Burnaby-New Westminster, would be Burnaby-Douglas, centred on the important thoroughfare of Douglas Street, which appears to identify the riding locally.

 

60. The Committee recommends the Commission change the name of the electoral district of Burnaby North to Burnaby-Douglas.

 

61. The Committee finds the name “Tri-Cities” to be generic – applicable to almost any district in North America.  We strongly recommend the name be changed and have reason to believe the name Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam would be well received.

 

Conclusion

 

62.  In accordance with the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, the report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for British Columbia, the objections, and the minutes of proceedings and evidence of the Subcommittee will be returned to the Speaker and the Chief Electoral Officer.  We urge the Commission to consider carefully the objections, and the comments and recommendations contained in this report.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,



Peter Adams
Chair