SELE Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION
Subcommittee on Electoral Boundaries Readjustment of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs
EVIDENCE
CONTENTS
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
| Â | 1215 |
 |
The Chair (Ms. Paddy Torsney (Burlington, Lib.)) |
|
Mr. Bill Casey (Cumberland—Colchester, PC) |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC) |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
| Â | 1220 |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ) |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Michel Guimond |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Carleton, Canadian Alliance) |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Bill Casey |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore, PC) |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
| Â | 1225 |
| Â | 1230 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull—Aylmer, Lib.) |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
| Â | 1235 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
Mr. Marcel Proulx |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Marcel Proulx |
|
Mr. André Cyr (Project Manager, Electoral Geography Division, Register and Geography Directorate, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer) |
|
M. Marcel Proulx |
|
The Chair |
| Â | 1240 |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
Mr. Scott Reid |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
| Â | 1245 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Scott Reid |
|
Mr. André Cyr |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. André Cyr |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Scott Reid |
|
Mr. André Cyr |
|
Mr. Scott Reid |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP) |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
| Â | 1250 |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
Mr. Rick Borotsik |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
|
Mr. Gerald Keddy |
|
The Chair |
CANADA
Subcommittee on Electoral Boundaries Readjustment of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs |
|
l |
|
l |
|
EVIDENCE
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
 
(1215)
[English]
The Chair (Ms. Paddy Torsney (Burlington, Lib.)): I call this meeting to order.
We're very pleased to have with us this afternoon, on the subject of electoral boundary readjustments in Nova Scotia, Mr. Bill Casey from Cumberland--Colchester.
Mr. Casey.
Mr. Bill Casey (Cumberland—Colchester, PC): Thank you very much.
I just want to say I'm outraged and incensed by these changes to my riding, but I'm withdrawing the objection.
I do want to say that when the process was originally implemented, I called the office and asked if there were any proposals to change my riding. They said there weren't, so I forgot about the whole thing and just let it drop, until the book came with the proposed changes. But my staff and I were told there were no changes proposed or being considered for Cumberland—Colchester. It just left us a little short when the book came out and said there were proposed changes.
Anyway, that's it. I withdraw my objection.
The Chair: Do you have any other questions?
Mr. Borotsik.
Mr. Rick Borotsik (Brandon—Souris, PC): I walked over here with Mr. Casey and this is a shock to me. I didn't realize he was withdrawing his objection. I did know, however, that the process was in question.
I take it that having withdrawn the objection, you're comfortable with the number of people you now represent. There's been an increase, I assume.
Mr. Bill Casey: There are 87,507. Would you like to know their names?
Mr. Rick Borotsik: No, I wouldn't, but are you comfortable with that number?
Mr. Bill Casey: Yes. The reason I objected in the first place was because my riding was already a typical size and this expanded it significantly, while ridings adjacent to me were below standard and went lower. I didn't understand that. But anyway, I'm withdrawing my objection.
 (1220)
Mr. Rick Borotsik: I have just one other question, Madam Chair, since we're here.
One of the criterion set out by the commission, regardless of province, is community of interest. Do you see the additional population you've now assumed in the riding of Cumberland--Colchester as being a community of interest? You haven't had them to represent in the past, but do they in fact utilize the existing riding as their community of interest, or do they go other places?
Mr. Bill Casey: Some people I've talked to feel they're more part of the City of Halifax, and some feel they're more part of a rural riding like my own. I'd say it's split.
The Chair: Thank you.
Mr. Guimond is next, and then Mr. Reid.
[Translation]
Mr. Michel Guimond (Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île-d'Orléans, BQ): I would like to ask Mr. Casey a question. When did you decide to withdraw your objection? Did you just make that decision?
[English]
Mr. Bill Casey: I was going to have a public meeting in the area to find out what the people thought, but yesterday I got word that the meeting was today, so I didn't have time to go back to the riding and hold the meeting. Perhaps I should have done it before, but I thought there would be more time before this meeting was called.
With 24 hours' notice I didn't have the opportunity to do that, so I called as many people as I knew in that area to try to get a feeling for what they wanted, because I think this should also be a part of what they want. Do they feel, as Mr. Borotsik said, they are part of my riding, or part of the riding they're in now, which is attached to Dartmouth and is part of the greater Halifax area?
The response I got was that most people felt very comfortable being part of the rural riding. Some said they would feel more comfortable being part of the city riding, but certainly the majority of them said they were comfortable joining my riding. I made the final decision about an hour ago. I made calls last night and this morning to try to get a feeling for what the people thought, and basically they endorsed it. There was one editorial in a newspaper that opposed it, but that was the only public comment that was made about it.
[Translation]
The Chair: Mr. Guimond.
Mr. Michel Guimond: That's allright, Madam Chair, since there was not enough time to advise us. My caucus meeting was to last till 12:30 p.m., but I left at twelve. We wouldn't have come here for nothing, all the more so since Mr. Keddy is not here, unless he thinks that the meeting is at 12:30 p.m.
[English]
Mr. Bill Casey: No. I talked to him a little while ago. Mr. Keddy knew it was at 12.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: Madam Chair, I also talked to Mr. Keddy. Unfortunately, because of the notice, he again found out yesterday--
The Chair: I have to interrupt.
Mr. Keddy was in the room when we made the decision to have the meeting today. We checked with him whether or not this time suited him and specifically agreed to 12:30, to suit him and all of us.
The reason we're meeting at 12, Mr. Guimond, is because Mr. Keddy asked us to meet at 12.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: I'm not making any apologies on behalf of Mr. Keddy. I know one of his constituents--whether it came up quickly or not--is receiving an award and he will be participating in that. So I make no apologies. However, I'm sure we can deal with his objection.
The Chair: We can read his objection and deal with it.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: Absolutely.
The Chair: Mr. Reid.
Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Carleton, Canadian Alliance): Now that you've withdrawn your objection, I just have a question of principle to ask you about.
As I understand it, one of the things the boundaries commission has done in Nova Scotia is try to adjust federal boundaries to as closely as possible approximate groupings of provincial ridings, and not have part of one provincial riding overflow into a separate federal riding. This is something that, as Ontarians, doesn't relate to us because our federal and provincial ridings are identical.
So I'm just wondering if that seems to you like a good principle to follow, or whether it's actually not as important, in terms of community of interest, as other considerations.
Mr. Bill Casey: I'd say it's one element that should be considered. I think it's positive to align them, but I don't think it's the only thing. The provincial riding involved here was split. It was half in my riding and half in Peter Stoffer's riding, and it worked well. But I think that's the only justification for doing what's being proposed here, because it makes my riding significantly bigger than the adjacent ones, with a bigger population. I think those factors should also be part of the decision. It shouldn't just be determined by provincial ridings, although I see the argument for that and welcome that change. That's just one part, and I don't think it should be the only part.
Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you.
Are there any further questions for Mr. Casey? Then we can deal with Mr. Keddy's request.
Mr. Keddy's here. Mr. Keddy is starting to drive me crazy, but I'll get over it.
Thank you very much, Mr. Casey. Should we decide to change your riding anyway, we'll let you know.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh.
Mr. Bill Casey: I'll close it.
The Chair: I'm teasing.
Mr. Keddy, as soon as you are prepared to make your testimony, we are prepared to hear you.
Mr. Gerald Keddy (South Shore, PC): I am not prepared, however I am here and I will make my submission.
The Chair: Thank you.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: You're welcome.
I don't have a map with me of the boundary changes.
The Chair: We'll get one for you.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: That would be great.
Originally, when the boundary changes were first discussed, there were no boundary changes to be made to South Shore so I didn't look at the demographics. I didn't look at any proposed changes because there were none to look at.
Since then, the Electoral Boundaries Commission followed the lead of the Electoral Boundaries Commission for Nova Scotia, which added one extra district to the riding of Chester--St. Margaret's. The riding used to be Chester--something and they changed it Chester--St. Margaret's. If you look at your map, the old geographical boundary of the South Shore riding was where the Lunenburg County line met the West Hants and Halifax County lines. So it included all of Lunenburg County, all of Queens County, and all of Shelburne County. It was the largest riding in the province of Nova Scotia.
On the change, if you look at where it says “Chester” the line that goes down through the middle of Lunenburg County was the boundary of the riding of Chester, to which they added St. Margaret's--St. Margaret's Bay was the geographical end of the old provincial boundary--to include Route 3 or Route 333 going out the eastern shore of St. Margaret's Bay to Peggy's Cove, which most of you will be familiar with. I think that added about 8,000 people to the South Shore riding. We weren't below the margin of error prior to that. It's already the largest riding in the province. I realize the difference that some of the Cape Breton ridings will face because they will actually have to cross the Strait of Canso and come down into Guysborough County.
My argument yesterday on some of the changes on another matter with this committee was the difference between rural and urban ridings. Rural ridings have much greater demands and numerous communities of interest. Instead of the community of interest simply being Halifax, or a couple of small areas within the urban area, the community of interest is probably 60 or 70 small towns that each have a summer fair and their own history from a period of relative isolation.
The area of Nova Scotia in which I live has been settled for over 200 years. Most of the province has been settled for a minimum of 250 years. The French areas in the province, which include some of the areas in the South Shore, were settled in the early 1600s. So those areas very much have their own personalities, their own mayors, and their own communities of interest.
The St. Margaret's Bay area of the riding very much belongs to the community of interest of Halifax. This area includes all the bedroom communities for Halifax. People have moved out and bought up the ocean frontage. They've moved into Seabright, Indian Harbour, Indian Point, and Black Point in the Hubbards area.
 (1225)
Now don't get me wrong; there are certainly people who live in Chester, the Blandford area, and even in New Ross, the little community I live in and was born in. There are people who live in Halifax. But if you want to look at the community of interest for the St. Margaret's area, that community of interest is very much Halifax, not the South Shore. They don't participate in the same fairs; they don't participate in the same events; their normal orientation is into urban Halifax.
My worry, as a member of Parliament who will hopefully have to represent this area--we'll all wait until the next election before we decide who we're representing--is that I have the biggest riding in the province now. Geographically it's 14,000 square kilometres. That's certainly not big compared to many ridings in the province, but it takes three hours to drive across it. It's a long, narrow, coastal riding. I live inland in the extreme north-central point of the riding, but I drive 45 minutes to my office in Bridgewater, and I drive two hours and ten minutes to my office in Barrington. I have two offices now. I can't represent the St. Margaret's Bay area without another office in Hubbards, Black Point, or somewhere within that region.
Quite frankly, I don't have the budget to do that. I have a full-time office and a part-time office in the riding now. We have a lot of responsibilities as members of Parliament. Yvon and Rick will both recognize that being a member of a smaller party has even more responsibilities than being a member of a larger party. We have critic portfolios and need legislative assistants. There's no way we can get around without them. That budget would be needed to adequately represent the people in the St. Margaret's Bay area.
Quite frankly, if push comes to shove and I have to represent St. Margaret's Bay, I'll be more than happy to do it. The polls there are very good for me. I have no problem working. I was a Christmas tree grower and a farmer before politics. I sold Christmas trees in St. Margaret's Bay area and had a tree lot down there. I sold firewood down there. I have a lot of friends who live in the area. Politically, that's not the point.
The point is we're taking the biggest riding in the province with 72,000 constituents and making it bigger; and we're taking a relatively small urban riding and making it smaller. I fail to see the fairness in that process.
 (1230)
The Chair: Mr. Proulx is next and then Mr. Reid.
Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull—Aylmer, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a suspicion that Mr. Keddy's notes were prepared from the July report, because in his first point he referred to an extension to Halifax County, but according to the 2003 report, South Shore doesn't even touch Halifax County; it touches Halifax West.
The second point is he's requesting that his South Shore riding be named South Shore--St. Margaret's, and that's exactly what the new report--
The Chair: Mr. Proulx, I was going to ask Mr. Keddy if he wanted to clarify. I think he's actually objecting to these two things he wrote rather than requesting them.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I never wrote them.
The Chair: The objection you filed with us asks us to:
| consider the matter of the following objections: |
| That the eastern boundary of the South Shore electoral district be extended into Halifax County... |
| That the name of this electoral district be changed to South Shore--St. Margaret's... |
So I think you've written it in the reverse.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I would say so.
The Chair: Yes. You are objecting to both of these facts you want changed.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I apologize for any discrepancy there on my part. How's that?
The Chair: So basically you're asking that the first consultation document be accepted; that they not do what they did in the final consultation document. Is that correct?
Do you have a copy of this document?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Yes, I'm sure I do. I didn't read it over this morning.
The Chair: That's okay. Turn to the first map, which is toward the back. It doesn't have a page number, but it's the second-last page in the book.
This proposal shows South Shore, and then it has 6, 5, and 4 to the east. Do you like that one?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: My contention is that the boundaries should stay the way they are. On a point of clarification, Halifax County includes the ridings in Halifax and Halifax West. So with the original boundaries of South Shore, Lunenburg County runs all the way up to Halifax County.
 (1235)
The Chair: So they used the country line in the first one and they're not using the county line in the second one.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Exactly. They're using the Chester--St. Margaret's provincial riding boundaries in the second map, and that's the change that's been made. They've followed exactly the recommendations for the provincial boundaries.
Mr. Marcel Proulx: On a clarification, Madam Chair, does he want South Shore, or South Shore--St. Margaret's?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: My belief is the boundaries should stay the same. The riding should stay as South Shore.
I realize you guys are busy, but I wasn't prepared to come here today to talk about these boundaries. I'm here, but that's the reason for the mix-up.
The Chair: Okay. Mr. Keddy, perhaps we can deal with that later. But when I'm in a meeting room with a bunch of people and I ask if everyone is good for Wednesday and people say, “Yes, how about 12:30?”, I figure everyone agrees. You clearly had some other perception of what I was requesting, but I was trying to confirm with you that 12:30 today was good.
You've now identified that there was a problem. That was not clear on Monday. We actually based the meeting on your confirmation that today's date and time--
Mr. Gerald Keddy: But I did call yesterday to the committee to say it was almost impossible.
Anyway, that's beyond the point. Let's not waste time on that. The issue here is quite simple. I realize there are ridings in New Brunswick that are larger than South Shore, but they're not any longer and they don't have more sea coast. In South Shore you can't drive 100 miles of sea coast without coming to a fishing village. You can drive five miles and come to another fishing village. There are literally hundreds of them; they're everywhere. It's the largest fishery riding in Canada. It's fishery and forestry, with some agriculture base. To take that and add the bedroom communities of Halifax is a big responsibility for the member of Parliament.
I'm very responsible with my budget and I think most members of Parliament are, but I know I don't have enough budget to run another full-time office. I can't service the urban dwellers without having a full-time office. They're used to having full-time representation and they will expect to continue to have full-time representation.
My riding office in Bridgewater, if you look at the map, is not in the centre of the riding. It's within a reasonable commute for me and it's the largest town in South Shore. If I need to have another full-time office, I don't know where I'm going to get the budget to do that.
The Chair: Mr. Proulx and Mr. Reed.
Mr. Marcel Proulx: I have a question for the clerk or our expert. Do we know what the population would be if we removed, as requested, from South Shore what's called St. Margaret's now? I want to know how many are in that particular area so I can figure it out. We have one at 83,694 and one at 79,933. Of course, if we removed that area it would be logical to not call it South Shore--St. Margaret's, as St. Margaret's wouldn't be in that riding.
Mr. André Cyr (Project Manager, Electoral Geography Division, Register and Geography Directorate, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer): The area that was added of St. Margaret's Bay consists of 8,400 persons, so the rest of the riding would be at 75,545.
M. Marcel Proulx: Okay. So Halifax West would become 87,000 or 88,000. It's 79,933 now.
The Chair: Pages 22 and 23 of your document show the current and proposed distributions. Schedule D is what was proposed in this document, and schedule E is what they're proposing now.
 (1240)
Mr. Gerald Keddy: South Shore--St. Margaret's would have 83,945 people. Halifax West, if it were still called that, would end up with 71,000 people. So you'd take an urban riding and make it smaller, according to the numbers you've just given out.
The Chair: According to schedule D, Halifax West would be 87,683, so it would be plus 6.22%. Your current riding of South Shore would be 75,545, so it would be minus 8.48%. They're proposing to make Halifax West minus 3.17%, and your riding plus 1.39%.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: Did Halifax West have 106,000 under the old boundaries? Am I reading that properly? That was in the old census of 1996.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: So although my numbers are wrong, my contention is correct. You're taking the urban riding and making the population smaller; and you're taking the rural riding and making the population larger. In the final context, South Shore--St. Margaret's would have more population than Halifax West.
The Chair: Perfect. Yes.
They are significantly out of whack to your point, Mr. Borotsik, but their proposals would put them closer.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I realize is everyone is busy, but my understanding, when I read this documentation over, was they were following the provincial boundaries. The provincial boundaries are set up so that within some limitations, each of the 11 federal ridings in Nova Scotia has roughly five provincial ridings.
South Shore now has five provincial ridings. Because of the provincial boundary change to Chester, from Chester to Chester--St. Margaret's, half of the Halifax West riding was added to the provincial boundary change. The federal boundary commission looked at that and said, “We should continue to represent the five provincial boundaries”.
I fail to see the logic in that, based on the fact that you're going to give the rural riding a larger population base than Halifax West, which is the urban riding from which they're taking that population base. You end up with 79,000 versus 83,000. That difference of 4,000 people isn't a lot, but as a member of Parliament for the largest rural riding in the province now, an extra 8,000 people is a big responsibility.
Mr. Scott Reid: Just looking at this from a numbers point of view, there's obviously a problem with both of the ridings moving away from the provincial average, if the suggestion you've made is taken. So if in this particular case the boundaries commission were to accept that we might not follow provincial riding boundaries, would it make sense to draw a line somewhere in the St. Margaret's part that's being added to your constituency?
Do you see what I am getting at? Given that this is all part of the City of Halifax, no municipal boundaries would be violated. Are there any suggestions you would have in that regard?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: It's entirely possible. I'll show you on the map.
St. Margaret's Bay is this big bay here. So if you look at where the Lunenburg County line comes out, that area is Black Point. The Lunenburg County line goes through the community of Hubbards, so part of it is in Lunenburg County and part of it is in Halifax County. But it's the very edge of Hubbards, so it's a long way from the centre of it.
If we moved the line down to Black Point, a community of maybe 300 to 400 homes, that might take some of the pressure off Halifax West and not enlarge the South Shore boundary so it's out of proportion. That's possible. But if what the boundary commission has recommended is still based on the full five provincial ridings, I don't think they'll go for that. I think it would be simpler to stay within the county lines, versus the provincial ridings.
 (1245)
The Chair: Mr. Reid, are you finished?
Mr. Scott Reid: Is it possible to find out what Mr. Keddy has just suggested would do to the populations of the two ridings?
Mr. André Cyr: If I move that area to Halifax West--is that what you were mentioning?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Yes. You took it a bit farther than I was mentioning. If you look at the first cove that goes in there, I would like the limit drawn more to the west.
It's just a suggestion to try to reach some kind of a compromise solution. From what I understand, I don't know if there's a compromise available to us.
The Chair: We'll just check the numbers.
Mr. André Cyr: Halifax West would be at plus 3.4%, and South Shore would be at minus 5%.
The Chair: Mr. Reid, does that answer your question?
Mr. Scott Reid: Could you give me the raw numbers? I didn't do percentages for the other numbers I've been jotting down here.
Mr. André Cyr: Okay. Halifax West would be 85,384, and South Shore would be 78,547.
Mr. Scott Reid: That does answer my question. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you,
Mr. Godin is next, and then myself and Mr. Borotsik.
[Translation]
Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP): You say you were satisfied with the first map, but not with the second. Did the commission hold hearings in the area in the meantime? Did members of the public ask the commission to make the last changes we received, or did the commission make those changes on its own initiative?
[English]
Mr. Gerald Keddy: To my understanding, there were no public submissions made on the first changes. I'm not aware that there have been any on the second changes, to this point.
The Chair: There isn't a process for the second changes.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Exactly. There were no submissions made on the first changes that I'm aware of--
 (1250)
The Chair: --requesting what was done.
I think Mr. Cyr is just double-checking that too.
I have just one thing you might want to notice. On pages 5 and 6 of the document it specifically says, according to the objectives of the commissioners, they believe that urban electoral districts could handle larger populations than rural because of the ease of serving them. Interestingly enough, their recommendation is exactly the opposite.
I thought you'd like to hear that, Mr. Keddy, before Mr. Borotsik asked his question.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: I have just two very quick questions. Do all the other ridings follow provincial boundaries? Are there any other ridings that don't follow provincial boundaries?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Again, I have recently reviewed the entire province. I don't know the answer to that. I think the same thing happened with Bill's riding. They followed the provincial boundaries.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: If it stays the way it is right now, although there may be recommendations otherwise, would you object to the name change then to South Shore--St. Margaret's?
Mr. Gerald Keddy: The name change shouldn't go without the boundary change.
Mr. Rick Borotsik: I mean, if the boundaries changed.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: If the boundaries changed, I wouldn't object to the name change.
The Chair: So if it's as originally proposed, it should stay as South Shore; if it's as now proposed, it should be South Shore--St. Margaret's.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I would think so, because you have to represent that other geographical area.
The Chair: All right, and if it stays this way, even though the line is in the middle of St. Margaret's Bay, it should not be called South Shore--St. Margaret's; it should be called South Shore.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Absolutely.
The only other point is--and I'm sure you folks are going to have to deal with a number of these situations across the country--we've recognized, as the Parliament of Canada, that the larger ridings get a geographical supplement. The riding of South Shore is large enough to get that geographical supplement now.
It's not quite the same as adding a large area to a fairly remote riding when that area doesn't have any people living in it. If you're adding a larger area to a large riding now with a number of people living in it who need to be serviced by a separate office, a rural riding with a large population base and a big geographical area should have a substantially larger budget to accommodate the full expense of a second office. That means renting the office and hiring at least one full-time person to work in it.
I realize that may be out of your hands, but I'm just putting that out there. I think it is incumbent upon this committee to make that recommendation because it's certainly a problem. It's a big difficulty for me.
The Chair: Can I just clarify whether you are currently getting the geographic supplement in your riding.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: I'm getting a geographical supplement of $8,000.00.
The Chair: My staff would just like you to know that even in an urban office where they get a lot of walk-in traffic, they wouldn't mind a supplement for an extra person either. A busy urban office is typical.
Mr. Gerald Keddy: Exactly. It wouldn't cover one full-time staffer.
The Chair: Thank you very much, gentlemen, for appearing.
If I can just keep my colleagues around the table for a couple of minutes, we can go in camera.
[Proceedings continue in camera]