Changes to electoral boundaries in Alberta and Saskatchewan have raised objections from Conservative MPs in the provinces, but Tory MP Tom Lukiwski says it’s “not a partisan issue whatsoever.”Opposition MPs, meanwhile, have cried foul after the Conservative Party was forced to confirm last week that it was behind a push poll opposing changes to Saskatchewan’s redistribution plans to voters in the province, and Deputy Liberal Leader Ralph Goodale (Wascana, Sask.) said Conservatives are trying to “politicize” the process.
“The Conservatives were lobbying strenuously against the [proposed Saskatchewan] map right from the very beginning,” said Mr. Goodale, who is the lone opposition MP in the 14-seat province, which is otherwise entirely held by Conservatives.
“This is supposed to be a non-political, arm’s length, independent process and the Conservatives have tried to twist it and politicize it. … I’ve heard, quite frankly, nothing but support for the new map,” Mr. Goodale said.
Mr. Lukiwski (Regina-Lumsden-Lake Centre, Sask.), who described the Conservative Party’s calls as “deceptive,” also said that despite the issue being framed as partisan one, it’s not. For instance, in the proposed riding of Moose Jaw-Lake Centre-Lanigan, Sask., where he would run, it would be advantageous for him, but he doesn’t want the change. Mr. Lukiwski said he’s against the proposed changes because it would mean both Regina and Saskatoon would “be losing one Member of Parliament each,” because he said going to urban only “greatly expands the geographic area in a lot of the rural areas,” including his riding, and because he said there are different communities of interest within these cities.
“If I represented this new riding, this rural riding, I would be up to about 65 per cent plus [of the vote]. So you know, if one is to argue I’m looking at this from a self-serving standpoint is really laughable because it would be better for me from a vote-count standpoint,” said Mr. Lukiwski, who said with the proposed changes both Regina and Saskatoon would lose a seat.
The Conservatives are against the proposed five new entirely redrawn urban seats in Saskatoon and Regina and want to maintain the urban-rural blended ridings. The ridings are expected to help the opposition parties in the 2015 federal election.
The Procedure and House Affairs Committee has been studying reports outlining the finalized provincial boundary commission proposals as part of the 10-year federal riding redistribution review since Jan. 29. The House will add 30 seats, jumping from 308 to 338 in 2015. Of these seats, 15 will be added to Ontario, six to British Columbia, six in Alberta, and three in Quebec.
The commission reports for Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador and Alberta were tabled in the House and sent to the committee to study before the winter break. On Jan. 28, when the House returned from a six-week break, the commission reports for New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and B.C. were also tabled. The Ontario and Quebec provincial commissions have both requested two-month extensions for their proposal reports, and those are now due by Feb. 21.
Conservative MPs representing 10 of Alberta’s 28 ridings have filed objections with the committee, and Saskatchewan’s Conservative MPs are already outspoken in their opposition to changes.
“It really varies from province to province. In Alberta’s case, I think it’s natural to expect a number of objections since they’re adding seats,” said Mr. Lukiwski. “There are many, many, many reasons why Saskatchewan MPs will be objecting, and I will be one of them.”
The Procedure and House Affairs Committee has also agreed to ask Elections Canada to attend meetings to provide technical support to MPs, after a meeting on Feb. 7 which saw many committee members scrambling to match up MP testimony on the changes to what they were seeing in the maps. Committee chair Conservative MP Joe Preston (Elgin-Middlesex-London, Ont.) said the committee will receive “ongoing” support from Elections Canada.
“It’s our job to listen. In this case it’s the MP’s job to come forward if they have concerns or praise or something else with the commission. It’s our job to listen to that and then pass that on in a report to the commissions. Our job isn’t to filter to any great degree,” explained Mr. Preston. “We want to hear from every MP who wants to speak to us.”
The committee presented reports on the Prince Edward Island, Manitoba, and Nova Scotia proposals to the House on Feb. 4, and its report on Newfoundland on Feb. 7. Of these, the committee only heard objections from three MPs for the proposed changes in Newfoundland.
NDP MP Ryan Cleary (St. John’s South-Mount Pearl, Nfld.) and NDP MP Jack Harris (St. John’s East, Nfld.) filed objections over the proposed changes to the boundary dividing their ridings based on “community of interest” concerns. Mr. Clearly and Mr. Harris’ proposal only affected their ridings.
Meanwhile, Liberal MP Scott Simms (Bonavista-Gander-Grand Falls-Windsor, Nfld.) also filed an objection to his riding’s proposed name change to Bay d’Espoir-Central-Notre Dame, Nfld.
In Manitoba and Nova Scotia, changes were proposed both to boundaries and ridings names, and in Newfoundland and Labrador significant changes have been proposed for five of the province’s six ridings, with Labrador, Nfld., being the untouched exception. Only the P.E.I. provincial commission recommended no boundary or name changes—the province has four seats in the House.
As set out in the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, commissions have to take into account population quotas, communities of identity or of interest, geographic size, and historic patterns of an electoral district.
On Feb. 7, Conservative MP Brian Jean (Fort McMurray-Athabasca, Alta.), Conservative MP Chris Warkentin (Peace River, Alta.) and Conservative MP Blaine Calkins (Wetaskiwin, Alta.) appeared before the committee to explain their objections to the proposed changes.
Mr. Jean, whose riding would see changes to its border, said the changes don’t take into account the population growth that is expected in Fort McMurray as a result of the oilsands.
Mr. Jean said the census population statistics, which are used by the commissions, are not accurate—“there’s a lot more people there,” said Mr. Jean, who said he thinks reliance on the municipal census “is best.”
Mr. Jean said instead the regional municipality of Wood Buffalo, which includes Fort McMurray, would be better suited as its own riding, as that would take into account the population growth. If not properly accounted for, he said there could be more than 300,000 people in one riding.
In addition, Mr. Jean said all major roads in Alberta run north-south until around Edmonton when they begin going east-west. Many of the proposed boundary changes in the province’s north have moved the lines either east or west, and Mr. Warkentin said the commission has “compromised” both community interest and travel for MPs. Mr. Warkentin said as a rural MP he needs to be physically available, and said social media is not necessarily accessible to everyone.
“Nobody deserves to have less attention from their elected representative whether you be urban or rural and my constituents certainly expect to see me and that is my number one complaint from my constituents that they don’t see me enough notwithstanding that I travel home frequently,” said Mr. Jean.
Meanwhile, Mr. Culkins said his riding of Wetaskiwin has existed as is since Confederation—and pointed out his riding would meet the population quotient still if left untouched—and on behalf on his constituents he said he proposed some minor changes, including keeping Edmonton out of the traditionally rural riding.
Mr. Culkins said his constituents are concerned their voice will be lost in the shuffle if they became an urban-rural riding. He also suggested that the proposed riding of Red Deer-Wolf Creek instead be named Red Deer-Lacombe.
On Feb. 12, Conservative MPs Jim Hillyer (Lethbridge, Alta.), LaVar Payne (Medicine Hat, Alta.), Joan Crockatt (Calgary Centre, Alta.), Devinder Shory (Calgary Northeast, Alta.) and Minister of State for Finance Ted Menzies (Macleod, Alta.) will testify on their objections to the Alberta riding changes.
MPs have until Feb. 27 to file objections for the Saskatchewan report. Committee clerk Marie-France Renaud said she couldn’t yet say if, or how many, objections have been filed so far.
“I know in Saskatchewan there’s going to be many objections,” said Mr. Lukiwski.
Currently the province is a compilation of urban-rural blended ridings, with the province’s two main cities, Regina and Saskatoon, being divided pie-like into larger ridings. The proposed changes would see Regina and Saskatoon have their own urban ridings.
For what is believed to be the first time in Canadian history, one of Saskatchewan’s three boundary commission members, Dave Marit, wrote a dissenting, or minority, report speaking out “strongly” against the changes proposed by the majority of the commission. Mr. Marit said the province should maintain its urban-rural blended ridings, and he said close to 75 per cent of communications received by the commission were opposed to the proposed changes.
Then, two weeks ago Saskatchewan residents reported receiving pre-recorded calls from a number identified as from “Chase Research,” a seemingly non-existent company, which reportedly asked opinion-poll type questions that shed an unflattering light on the proposed boundary changes.
Conservative Party spokesperson Fred DeLorey initially said the party wasn’t polling, but on Feb. 5, he issued a statement confirming the party was behind the calls in Saskatchewan saying “we are doing a host of things to communicate with voters.”
“There was an internal miscommunication on the matter, and the calls should have been identified as coming from the Conservative Party,” said Mr. DeLorey in his emailed statement.
Deputy Liberal leader Mr. Goodale has filed a complaint with the CRTC over the calls made to Saskatchewan because of the Conservative Party’s failure to identify themselves, and he said the party is trying to “twist” and “politicize” the process.
“The municipalities argue strongly, and SARM [Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities] argues especially strongly, that you need distinctive municipal organizations because the issues are different. … It is the exact same argument for distinctive urban and rural representation on the electoral map,” said Mr. Goodale, who said he hopes to express his view to the committee. “I just don’t see the logic in Mr. Marit’s opinion.”
Original Article
Source: hilltimes.com
Author: LAURA RYCKEWAERT
No comments:
Post a Comment