Introduction

On 23 March 2023, pursuant to its mandate under Standing Order 108(3)(a)(vi) and section 22 of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act (EBRA),[1] the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (the Committee) began its consideration of the objections filed by Members of the House of Commons in respect of the Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta (the Report and the Commission).

After each decennial census, the number of Members of the House of Commons and the representation of each province is adjusted according to the rules found in section 51 and 51A of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The chief electoral officer (CEO) is responsible for calculating the number of Members of the House allotted to each province. This calculation is mathematical and the CEO exercises no discretion in the matter.

The work of readjusting electoral boundaries is carried out in each province by an independent and neutral three-member electoral boundaries commission. The mandate of these commissions is to consider and report on the division of their province into electoral districts,[2] the description of the boundaries and the name of each electoral district.

The EBRA provides the rules governing the division of a province into electoral districts. The population of each electoral district must be as close as possible to the electoral quota for the province, that is, the population of the province divided by the number of Members of the House of Commons allocated to the province under section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

In setting the boundaries of an electoral district, each commission is legally obliged to consider the community of interest, community of identity or the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province. Further, electoral districts must have a manageable geographic size, in cases of sparsely populated, rural or northern regions.

A commission may depart from the provincial electoral quota by plus or minus 25% in order to respect the community of interest, community of identity, or the historical pattern of an electoral district, or to maintain the manageable geographic size of sparsely populated districts. In circumstances that are viewed as extraordinary by a commission, the variance from the electoral quota may be greater than 25%.

After coming up with an initial Proposal for the electoral districts in their province, a commission is required to hold at least one public meeting to hear representations by interested persons. After the completion of the public hearings, each commission prepares a report on the boundaries and names of the electoral districts of the province. These reports are tabled in the House of Commons, and referred to the Committee. Members of the House then have 30 calendar days to file objections with the clerk of the Committee to the proposals contained in a report.

An objection must be in writing and in the form of a motion. It must specify the provisions of the report objected to, and the reasons for those objections. An objection must be signed by not less than 10 Members of the House of Commons.

The Committee then has 30 sittings days to consider Members’ objections, unless an extension is granted by the House. The Committee’s reports on Members’ objections are referred back to the relevant commissions, along with the objections, the minutes of the proceedings and the evidence heard by the Committee. The commission then has 30 calendar days to consider the merits of all objections, and prepare its final report.

Once all the commission reports have been finalized, the CEO 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, within five days, must proclaim the new representation order to be in force and effective for any general election that is called seven months after the proclamation is issued.

Objections

The Report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta was tabled in the House of Commons, and referred to the Committee on 2 February 2023. By the end of the 30-day period, the clerk of the Committee had received five objections.

A.   Electoral Boundary Changes

1.    The Honourable Randy Boissonnault, P. C., the Member for Edmonton Centre

The Honourable Randy Boissonnault, P. C., the Member for Edmonton Centre, objected to the placement of the eastern portion of the northern boundary for the proposed riding of Edmonton Centre in the Commission’s Report. Currently, and in the initial Proposal, Edmonton Centre’s northern border follows the transportation corridor formed by the Yellowhead Highway and the Canadian National Railway. However, in its Report, the Commission has placed in Edmonton Centre three communities (i.e., Athlone, Calder and Kensington) that are to the north of this transportation corridor, and cut off by it from the rest of Edmonton Centre.

Mr. Boissonnault proposed that Athlone, Calder and Kensington instead be placed in the proposed riding of Edmonton Griesbach. In order to balance out the difference in population for Edmonton Centre, he proposed to add the communities of Parkview and Laurier Heights[3] into Edmonton Centre from Edmonton Griesbach. He indicated that these two communities were well connected with the communities to their southwest, in that all border the North Saskatchewan River, share Community Leagues,[4] schools, hockey rinks, and have been together in the same federal riding in since 2004.

Mr. Boissonnault indicated that the Yellowhead Highway has long served as a definitive human-made physical and psychological barrier in the City of Edmonton, and ought to be utilized as the northern boundary for Edmonton Centre. According to Mr. Boissonnault, drawing a northern boundary for Edmonton Centre above the Yellowhead Highway does not adequately consider the historical pattern of this electoral district, nor does it take into account the community of identity of the riding, as set out in section 15 of the EBRA.

Mr. Boissonnault indicated that the Yellowhead Highway:

• for almost four decades, has often served as a boundary between north and central Edmonton during federal electoral boundary readjustments;
• is utilized, for the most part, as the north-south provincial and municipal border for electoral districts;
• is the north-south boundary for postal codes;
• is the border between the north and central divisions for the Edmonton Public School districts;
• business organizations, such as the Kingsway Business Improvement Area, consider it a natural border, and
• is the border for all 18 neighbourhood Community Leagues in Edmonton that run along the highway.

Further, Mr. Boissonnault noted that the neighbourhoods north and south of the Yellowhead Highway have separate histories within the city, as they were developed at different times.

2.    George Chahal, the Member for Calgary Skyview

George Chahal, the Member for Calgary Skyview objected to the configuration of the northeast portion of the proposed riding of Calgary McKnight. In the Commission’s Report, for that riding, 96 Avenue Northeast (also called Airport Trail) is utilized as the northern boundary in the riding’s northeast, as well as 80 Avenue Northeast (which is located to the south of 96 Ave. N.E.). The boundary that the Commission has proposed south from 96 Ave. N.E. to 80 Ave. N.E. is a walking and cycling pathway that lies between backyards of residential housing. As a result, certain neighbourhoods below and above 96 Ave. N.E. are split between the proposed ridings of Calgary McKnight and Calgary Skyview by a walking and cycling pathway.

Mr. Chahal objected to this configuration, proposing instead that the neighbourhoods south of 96 Ave. N.E. be placed in Calgary McKnight.

He stated that the Commission’s configuration for the northeast portion of Calgary McKnight does not give full consideration to the community of interest and sense of belonging of the residents of Saddle Ridge/Savanna. According to Mr. Chahal, Saddle Ridge is one community that shares the same community association, recreation centre, schools, and places of worship. He noted that two provincial electoral ridings were divided by 96 Ave. N.E.

Further, he indicated that he believed this configuration would result in lower voter participation and engagement in Saddle Ridge/Savanna, and that voter turnout there was traditionally lower than in other major urban areas. He also noted that all entry points into the southeastern part of Saddle Ridge must be through Calgary McKnight.

He indicated that the unique character of the communities east of the Deerfoot Trail was acknowledged during the public hearings by local municipal representatives.

Mr. Chahal noted that his proposal would increase the population of Calgary McKnight by 8,530 and result in a riding of 131,678 people, making it the largest riding in Alberta, as its variance would be 14.3% above the province’s electoral quota. However, he stated that, in this case, it was necessary and desirable to deviate from population parity. Further, in his view, the proposed riding of Calgary Skyview would, over the next decade, experience population growth that would make it the most populous riding in Alberta.

The Committee supports Mr. Chahal’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.

3.    Gerald Soroka, the Member for Yellowhead

Gerald Soroka, the Member for Yellowhead, objected to the drawing of an eastern portion of the proposed riding of Jasper—Banff—Canmore.

In the initial Proposal, the Commission proposed to retain the riding name Yellowhead and it had placed all of Yellowhead County in this proposed riding. Mr. Soroka supported this proposed name and boundary configuration, and indicated that these proposals also had the support of the mayor and residents of Yellowhead County. However, in the Report, the Commission substantially changed the configuration of the proposed ridings in this area. They created a riding to the west of the City of Edmonton called Parkland, and placed the eastern part of Yellowhead County in Parkland, while placing the western part of Yellowhead County in Jasper—Banff—Canmore.

Mr. Soroka did not believe that the Commission had taken into account communities of interest in proposing the configuration for Jasper—Banff—Canmore. He noted that placed within this single riding were the disparate interests of Calgary residents, coal mining, forestry, and oil and gas industries, and national parks that focus on tourism.[5]

In order to keep the whole of Yellowhead County in the single riding of Jasper—Banff—Canmore, Mr. Soroka proposed several changes to the nearby ridings to balance out the population deviations.[6] These were:

• In the Report’s proposed riding of Parkland: remove Yellowhead County from Parkland and place it in Jasper—Banff—Canmore. Add to Parkland a larger portion of Lac Ste. Anne County from the riding of St. Albert—Sturgeon River. Mr. Soroka indicated that the Report contains confusing boundaries and that his proposal provides easier boundaries to follow. This would result in a population for Parkland of 115,124, versus 114,679 in the Report.
• In the Report’s proposed riding of St. Albert—Sturgeon River: remove from St. Albert—Sturgeon River the communities he specifies in Lac Ste. Anne County and add them to Parkland. This would result in a population for St. Albert—Sturgeon River of 114,787, versus 121,306 in the Report.
• In the Report’s proposed riding of Battle River—Crowfoot: add a specified portion of Mountain View County to Battle River—Crowfoot and remove it from the riding Ponoka—Didsbury Riding. This would result in a population for Battle River—Crowfoot of 116,567, versus 110,212 the Report.
• In the Report’s proposed riding of Bow River: add a specified portion of Rocky View County and South of Mountain View County. This would result in a population for Bow River of 112,905, versus 112,763 the Report.

Mr. Soroka also noted that he was providing the Committee with letters written by several mayors from the area, in support of his objection.

The Committee supports Soroka’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.

4.    Arnold Viersen, the Member for Peace River—Westlock

Mr. Viersen objected to the configuration, in the Commission’s Report, of the northwest portion of the proposed riding of Peace River—Westlock. In the Commission’s initial Proposal, the northwest portion of the boundary for Peace River—Westlock extends west to meet the provincial border with British Columbia. However, in the Report, the northwest portion of this boundary extends due north to the border with the Northwest Territories.

It is worth noting that Chris Warkentin, the Member for Grande Prairie—Mackenzie, filed the identical objection with the clerk of the Committee.

Both Mr. Viersen and Mr. Warkentin proposed the same two changes to the proposed western boundary of Peace River—Westlock/eastern boundary of Grande Prairie, for the Commission to consider:

• place Mackenzie County in its entirety in the proposed riding of Peace River—Westlock. This would reunite the county in the same federal riding. Further, a stronger community of interest exists between the Town of High Level and the Town of Peace River, than between High Level and the City of Grandee Prairie. Mr. Viersen noted that this boundary configuration was suggested in the Commission’s initial Proposal.
• for Grande Prairie and its near communities, revert to the boundary configuration that exists currently between the ridings of Peace River—Westlock and Grande Prairie—Mackenzie. Mr. Viersen noted that the Commission is proposing to transfer communities that have a community of interest with Grande Prairie out of the proposed riding of Grande Prairie and into the proposed riding of Peace River—Westlock.

Mr. Viersen stated that residents in Peace River—Westlock were largely content with the Commission’s initial Proposal, and as such, did not voice any objections to it. However, they object to the Commission’s Report, yet have no forum to voice their concerns except to the Committee, through him as their representative.

He stated that residents of northwest Alberta had close community ties with the towns and geographic areas in which they lived. He noted that Grande Prairie, Peace River and High Level all were distinct communities of interest. He also noted that the proposed riding configuration for Peace River—Westlock could create confusion among residents about where they vote in federal elections.

The Committee supports Mr. Viersen’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.

5.    Chris Warkentin, the Member for Grande Prairie—Mackenzie

Mr. Warkentin filed a written objection that is identical to the one filed by Mr. Viersen. As such, he proposed the same two changes as Mr. Viersen to the proposed eastern boundary of Grande Prairie/western boundary of Peace River—Westlock.

Mr. Warkentin indicated that he and Mr. Viersen were in agreement that Mackenzie County should remain intact in a single federal riding.

Mr. Warkentin noted that, in the Commission’s Report, Highway 58, a major east-west thoroughfare, was split into the two different ridings of Grande Prairie and Peace River—Westlock. He stated that Highway 58 is a connective roadway for First Nations communities who live in that region, and that dozens of small First Nations communities live along it. In his view, Highway 58 should be placed in a single federal riding.

In addition, he noted that a Member of Parliament needed to drive north about five hours to participate in the large community meetings held near Highway 58, and that it made more sense for a single Member of Parliament to represent the residents of that area, rather than two Members. He noted that provincially, the region was represented by a single Member of the Legislative Assembly, as was the case with the local municipal government.

Mr. Warkentin also indicated that in the Report, Sturgeon Lake, Crooked Creek and Goodwin were shifted from the proposed riding of Grande Prairie and into Peace River—Westlock. He stated that, under this proposal, those communities would be separated from Grand Prairie where they conducted their business. He stated that those three communities have close ties with Grande Prairie, as it is where they work and go to school.

The Committee supports Mr. Warkentin’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.

B.   Electoral District Name Changes

1.    George Chahal, the Member for Calgary Skyview

Mr. Chahal objected to the proposed riding name of Calgary McKnight. He proposed instead that the name Calgary Skyview be retained, as the Calgary International airport was placed in Calgary McKnight in the Report but not in the Initial Proposal. He also noted that his constituency office was located in the proposed riding of Calgary McKnight, which in his view would result in unnecessary transition costs to the House of Commons and create confusion for residents in the area.

In addition, to the alternative name of Calgary Skyview for the proposed riding name of Calgary McKnight, Mr. Chahal suggested other potential names for the Commission to consider to reflect the diversity of the area: Calgary Metis (after a major local road), Calgary Mandela (after a local high school) or Calgary Stoney.

He also suggested that the proposed riding of Calgary Skyview be named instead Calgary Country Hills (Country Hills is a major thoroughfare in central northeast Calgary) or Calgary Stoney (the Stoney Trail runs through the proposed riding).

The Committee supports Mr. Chahal’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.

2.    Gerald Soroka, the Member for Yellowhead

Mr. Soroka objected to renaming the current riding of Yellowhead with the proposed name of Jasper—Banff—Canmore. His objection is based on the following reasons:

• the riding name Yellowhead was first use in a federal election in 1979 and is very familiar with its constituents;
• the name Yellowhead is a reference of historical and regional significance. It refers to the nickname given to the 19th-century explorer David Thompson, who spent a period stationed in Rocky Mountain House;
• the Rt. Hon. Joe Clarke was the Member for Yellowhead when he became prime minister in 1979; and
• the choice by the Commission of the towns that compose the proposed name of Jasper—Banff—Canmore has led some constituents to wonder why these town names were selected instead of other equally suitable communities encompassed in the proposed riding.

The Committee supports Mr. Soroka’s objection and recommends that the Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of Alberta consider it favourably.