Federal electoral districts redistribution 2022

Part ll: Overview of the Changes Proposed for Each Electoral District and Additional Reasons for these Changes

Acadie—Bathurst

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie (which includes the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville) that is situated in the current electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst has a population of 79,581 and is 2.60% above the provincial electoral quota.

At the beginning of this redistribution process, the Commission did not believe that this electoral district required any restructuring. However, during our pre-proposal consultation, we received a written submission from Mr. Keith Chiasson, the MLA for Tracadie-Sheila, bringing to our attention the fact that a small section of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie, more specifically the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville (consisting of approximately 1,990 people), is included in the electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake, while the much larger section of the regional municipality is located in the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst.

Mr. Chiasson submitted that the populations of these communities are predominantly Francophone and Acadian and that their linguistic profile and sense of belonging align with the Acadian Peninsula and the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst, where they go for services and daily needs, such as schools, health services, shops, businesses, financial and legal services, and provincial and federal government offices. We note that the entirety of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie is included in the Acadian Peninsula Regional Service Commission. We were also copied on a letter sent to the Minister of Local Government and Local Governance Reform by a citizen of Rivière-du-Portage, asking that these communities become part of Acadie—Bathurst, so that its citizens would be represented by the member of Parliament for Acadie—Bathurst.

The Commission believes that these communities can be more effectively represented as part of the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst, with which they share a community of interest as well as a community of identity based on language and culture. Although the proposed Miramichi—Grand Lake riding has the highest negative variance from the provincial electoral quota, we view this as a case where the need for effective representation clearly trumps the lack of voter parity.

Beauséjour

The Commission is proposing a minor change to the electoral district of Beauséjour, assigning that very small part of the City of Moncton that is currently in the riding of Beauséjour to the proposed riding of Moncton—Dieppe. The proposed electoral district of Beauséjour has a population of 88,490 and is 14.09% above the provincial electoral quota.

We received a submission from the Kent Regional Service Commission suggesting far-reaching changes to several of the current districts, which would require a major restructuring of New Brunswick's electoral map, including the disappearance of Miramichi—Grand Lake, Fundy Royal, Tobique—Mactaquac, and New Brunswick Southwest; and the creation of Central NB, Albert—Tantramar, Western Valley—Charlotte and Kings—York.

The submission suggested that all communities that are part of the Kent Regional Service Commission be assigned to the proposed electoral district of Beauséjour. Several of these communities (mostly in Kent County but also some in Northumberland County) are in the current and proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake, a district that is underpopulated. It further suggested that the southern part of the riding, including the communities of Sackville, Dorchester, Port Elgin, and surrounding areas, be removed from Beauséjour and assigned to the riding that is now called Fundy Royal. Similar suggestions for Beauséjour were made by a citizen of Miramichi—Grand Lake, calling for the transfer from Miramichi—Grand Lake to Beauséjour of communities that are situated in Kent County and the transfer of the southern part of the riding to Fundy Royal.

The removal of the suggested communities from Miramichi—Grand Lake would require further additions to that electoral district, if it is to stay within 25% of the electoral quota. Transferring the suggested communities from Beauséjour to Fundy Royal would mean that some inhabitants and the member of Parliament for Fundy Royal would have to travel through the ridings of Beauséjour and Moncton—Dieppe to reach each other. The Regional Commission also noted that the suggested changes would mean that Beauséjour, along with the two districts of the north, would represent mainly French-speaking communities. As previously noted, our redistribution plan maintains the status quo.

The Commission does not believe that the electoral map of the province or the electoral district of Beauséjour requires fundamental restructuring as suggested. Although the population of Beauséjour has increased, the Commission is of the view that the increase does not warrant a change of its boundaries. Its relatively high population compared to the other rural electoral districts is justified, given that it is geographically the smallest rural electoral district (approximately 4,080 km2). This district has a strong community of interest and, in our view, it is appropriate in both size and character. Although Beauséjour would have a population count closer to the electoral quota if these suggestions were adopted, the Commission did not deem that this would contribute to more effective representation.

Fredericton (suggested name: Fredericton—Oromocto)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Fredericton be renamed Fredericton—Oromocto. It would comprise the current existing district plus those parts situated in the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac that are included within the new proposed limit of the City of Fredericton, as of April 8, 2022; less the Parish of Burton assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix; and less the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current riding of Fredericton, assigned to Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Fredericton—Oromocto has a population of 85,540 and is 10.29% above the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission received a submission from the City of Fredericton, as well as from two members of the public who live within the city limits but are part of the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac, asking that the entirety of the City of Fredericton be included in one district instead of two as it now stands.

The City of Fredericton is the urban centre of New Brunswick's Capital Region. The City is of the view that the community of interest shared by the urban electorate is best advanced by combining in one electoral district: the entirety of the City of Fredericton (per the new proposed city limits), the Town of Oromocto, the Village of New Maryland, the St. Mary's First Nation, and the Oromocto First Nation. There is no doubt that a strong community of interest and historical ties exist among these communities.

The adoption of the City's suggestions would also permit the transfer of the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current riding of Fredericton to the proposed riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake, which is chronically underpopulated. This factor also militates in favour of accepting the suggestions we received concerning the readjustment of the boundaries of this riding.

The Commission concludes that the arguments made in favour of the suggested changes are reasonable and we are proposing to go along with them. However, we are of the opinion that the proposed electoral district should be renamed Fredericton—Oromocto, to give a better description of the new geography of the district.

Fundy Royal (suggested name: Fundy Royal—Riverview)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Fundy Royal be renamed Fundy Royal—Riverview. It would comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the Town of Riverview that is in the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe; less the Parish of Waterborough assigned to the proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake; and less the Town of Quispamsis, which would be assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis. The proposed electoral district of Fundy Royal—Riverview has a population of 74,261 and is 4.25% below the provincial electoral quota.

There exists a community of interest as well as historical ties between the Town of Riverview and the riding of Fundy Royal, because approximately 50% of the population of Riverview is already part of the riding of Fundy Royal. In fact, the Commission received comments from a resident of the Town of Riverview expressing her frustration with the fact that the Town of Riverview was divided between two ridings and commenting that many did not seem to know where the dividing line between the districts was situated. The community of identity is obvious, as the riding of Fundy Royal and the Town of Riverview are both heavily populated with majority-Anglophone communities.

The transfer of the remainder of the Town of Riverview to Fundy Royal is also driven by the fact that the current district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, with a variance of 30.53% over the electoral quota, is beyond the allowable variance; therefore, a part of this riding must be transferred to another district. Obviously, similar arguments to those made above could also be used, at least in part, to justify transferring the remainder of Dieppe to the district of Beauséjour. Therefore, in the section dealing with the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe, we explain further why the Commission is proposing to transfer the remainder of the Town of Riverview to Fundy Royal, instead of transferring the remainder of the City of Dieppe to Beauséjour.

The community of Waterborough adjoins the community of Chipman. We assigned Waterborough to Miramichi—Grand Lake, because of its geographic proximity to the communities of Canning, Minto and Chipman, which are all part of the proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. Its addition to Miramichi—Grand Lake will help increase the population count of that riding. The Commission is also of the view that Waterborough has a community of interest and identity with the communities in the proposed riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake.

Bearing in mind relative voter parity, the Commission has assigned the Town of Quispamsis to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis. We have more to say about this proposed move in discussing the proposed district of Saint John—Kennebecasis.

The proposed district of Fundy Royal—Riverview, while mostly rural, has a landmass that is less than half the size of the two geographically largest electoral districts, Miramichi—Grand Lake and Tobique—Mactaquac. Therefore, a higher population is justified.

As the entirety of the Town of Riverview will be included in this proposed riding, the Commission proposes that the name of the electoral district be changed to Fundy Royal—Riverview. The new boundary changes dictate a change of name to better reflect the new geographic boundary.

Madawaska—Restigouche

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche, whose population is 22.40% below the provincial quota, comprise the current electoral district plus the Parish of Grand Falls, the Town of Grand Falls, the Parish of Drummond, the Village of Drummond, and the Rural Community of Saint-André, which are in the current electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. We are also proposing a small adjustment concerning the boundaries around the Mount Carleton Provincial Park and the Nepisiguit Protected Natural Area, so that the entirety of the Park and Protected Area will be in the proposed district of Madawaska—Restigouche, rather than leaving a very small part of it (which has a population count of zero) in the proposed district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche has a population of 71,099 and is 8.33% below the provincial electoral quota.

Travelling from the west to the east of this riding, and vice versa, is challenging, due to the distance and a poor transportation system. More than 300 kilometres separate Connors in Madawaska from Colborne in Restigouche, and it takes more than three and a half hours to travel this distance by car. We believe that the geographical challenges justify it having a population that is 8.33% below the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission received three different submissions making suggestions that would affect the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. None of these submissions seemed to be from residents of the communities being transferred, and the Commission did not retain any of these submissions in their totality. However, all three suggested that the regions of Saint-André, Grand Falls, and Drummond should be in the same riding as Madawaska County. Although this region will add landmass to the riding, it will not increase the distance from the west to the east.

These communities have historical ties, as well as a community of interest, with communities in both Madawaska—Restigouche and Tobique—Mactaquac. From 1966 to 1996, they were in the same riding as the communities of Madawaska County; the riding was then known as Madawaska—Victoria. In fact, the line that separates the two counties runs through the Town of Grand Falls. It is also noted that these communities are included in the Northwest Regional Service Commission, along with the rest of the communities of Madawaska County.

They have a stronger community of identity with the riding of Madawaska—Restigouche than with Tobique—Mactaquac, due to language and culture. The population of this region is predominantly Francophone. More than 78% of the people of the current district of Madawaska—Restigouche are Francophones, while less than 17% of the people of the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac are Francophones.

Furthermore, this readjustment contributes to an increase in the population of the current electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche, which has a variance that is very close to the allowable limit, at 22.40% below the provincial quota. Extending the boundary of Madawaska—Restigouche to include the Francophone communities that are situated in the northern part of the adjoining riding of Tobique—Mactaquac brings the population of Madawaska—Restigouche closer to the electoral quota, with a variance of -8.33%. We realize that this move will bring the population count of the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac further from the electoral quota, from -10.59% to -16.63%, notwithstanding the additions that we are proposing for that district. One district has moved closer to the electoral quota by gaining 14.07%, while the other has lost 6.04%. Therefore, this readjustment promotes relative voter parity in the overall electoral map of the province.

The Commission concludes that, when the factors of relative voter parity, community of interest, community of identity and historical pattern are taken as a whole, the communities being transferred can be more effectively represented as part of the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche.

Miramichi—Grand Lake

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake comprise the current electoral district plus that part added by extending the district southward to include the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current electoral district of Fredericton; plus the Parish of Waterborough that is in the current electoral district of Fundy Royal; less that part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie currently located in this riding (which includes the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville) assigned to the proposed electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst; and less a very small area within the Mount Carleton Provincial Park and Nepisiguit Protected Natural Area (which has a population count of zero), assigned to the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. The proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake has a population of 59,725 and is 23.00% below the provincial electoral quota.

It covers a land area of approximately 18,500 square kilometres, or 25% of the province's landmass, making it the largest riding in New Brunswick. Tobique—Mactaquac comes in second, at approximately 15,500 square kilometres.

The population of the current electoral district now stands at 57,520, which is 25.84% below the provincial electoral quota. With the transfer to Acadie—Bathurst of that small part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie that was in Miramichi—Grand Lake (approximately 1,990 residents), this variance increases to approximately 28% under the provincial electoral quota. A variance of more than 25% of the electoral quota is not allowed by the Act, as the Commission concluded that there were no extraordinary circumstances that would justify allowing any electoral district in New Brunswick to deviate by more or less than 25% of the electoral quota. Therefore, additions must be made to this riding to keep it within the allowable variance.

Water is an impediment to expansion on its eastern boundary. Adding to the challenges of the reconfiguration of an appropriate electoral district is the fact that this district is surrounded by the three predominantly Francophone ridings and has large, very sparsely populated areas. Its neighbour to the west, the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac, is also substantially underpopulated, with a variance of 16.63% below the provincial quota.

In addition to comments received from the public relevant to this riding (alluded to in the discussion of the riding of Beauséjour), the Commission also received a written submission from Mr. Jake Stewart, the member of Parliament for Miramichi—Grand Lake. He encouraged the Commission to maintain the current riding as is. As explained above, this is not allowed. As an alternative, he suggested that we consider extending the district westerly and assign to it the communities of Juniper, Stanley and other smaller rural communities nearby. As noted, the riding to the west is Tobique—Mactaquac, which is also substantially underpopulated.

It is in part these reasons that prompted the Commission to propose an extension toward the south, where the communities of interest and identity better align and there is more population.

Considering that the parishes of Maugerville and Canning are already partly in the current riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake, the Commission is of the view that the remaining part of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning and the parishes of Sheffield and Waterborough are well suited additions to this riding, because of their character as rural communities, their economic community of interest and their linguistic profile.

Notwithstanding our efforts to increase the population of this district, the deviation from the electoral quota (-23.00%) is still very high. It is the highest in the province, nearing the lower tolerance level. Bearing in mind the main objective of effective representation, the Commission concludes that it is more important to conserve this electoral district with a small population than to create a riding with a population closer to the electoral quota, whose residents feel that they do not belong, by reason of the community of interest or identity binding them to an adjacent riding.

This decision is consistent with the provisions of the Act, which permit the Commission to look beyond the principle of representation by population to consider manageable geographic size for sparsely populated, rural, or northern regions of a province. It is generally recognized that it is more difficult to represent large rural districts than small urban districts. The problems of representing a vast, sparsely populated territory warrants a lower population count in this district.

Notwithstanding its large geographic size, the shared interests of its population makes this electoral district viable. Technological advancement continues to ease communication challenges formerly experienced in large geographic areas. Thus, despite its size, the Commission is of the view this electoral district can be effectively represented.

Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe (suggested name: Moncton—Dieppe)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe be renamed Moncton—Dieppe and comprise the current electoral district plus that very small part of the City of Moncton that is in the current electoral district of Beauséjour; less that part of the Town of Riverview that is in the current district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Fundy Royal—Riverview. The proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe has a population of 91,333 and is 17.76% above the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission recognizes the ties that bind the three communities that form the current riding. These militated strongly thus far in favour of keeping all of them together within one electoral district. However, we are of the view that keeping them together while continuing to chip away parts of Dieppe and Riverview is no longer the most appropriate configuration for this riding when considering the available alternatives for creating an electoral map for New Brunswick.

The population of the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe grew from 89,484 in 2011 to 101,237 in 2021. Thus, its population is 30.53% over the provincial electoral quota and adjustments are therefore required.

The Commission received a submission from the City of Moncton recognizing that changes to the boundaries of this riding were inevitable, to comply with the Act. It noted that the population count of the City of Moncton is now at 79,470, which is 2.46% above the electoral quota. It stated: Previous Commissions have drawn our federal electoral district boundaries with a goal of respecting the community of interest and identity that is present [...] in the greater Moncton area. Although the merit of this approach is undeniable, our desire to continue to collaborate and share with our regional partners to deliver the best possible services to our combined citizens will continue regardless of the boundaries chosen. In conclusion, it stated that the City of Moncton's preferred option is a Moncton riding that coincides with [the] City's current municipal boundaries. We seriously considered this option but, for reasons explained below, the Commission concluded that the part of the City of Dieppe that is currently in this riding and the City of Moncton should be kept together in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe.

Transferring both the remainder of the City of Dieppe and the Town of Riverview to other ridings, as suggested, would require major changes to several other ridings. Transferring the remainder of Dieppe (a population of 11,863) to Beauséjour would increase the population of Beauséjour to 100,353, thus bringing it beyond the allowable limit of 25%, at 29.39% above the electoral quota. As previously explained, we are basically proposing that the electoral district of Beauséjour remain as is, because we found it appropriate in both size and character.

As noted earlier, we also received a submission from the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick expressing its wish that the riding currently known as Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe remain bilingual after the redistribution process. The Commission is of the view that it is desirable that the riding encompassing the City of Moncton remain bilingual, provided that this can be done within the confines of the law and jurisprudence that govern us.

Statistics Canada will release the data concerning the linguistic diversity and use of English and French in Canada on August 17, 2022. In the meantime, we are using the 2016 data. For that part of Dieppe that remains in the proposed district, this data shows that 60.6% of its population indicate French as the language spoken most often at home, while 66.6% indicate that their mother tongue is French. For the City of Moncton, this data shows that 23% of its population indicate French as the language spoken most often at home, while 30.7% indicate that their mother tongue is French. By keeping part of the City of Dieppe within the same electoral district as the City of Moncton, these percentages increase to 27.8% and 35.4% respectively. At the end of the last redistribution, these percentages for the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe were 28.95% and approximately 34.5% respectively.

Notwithstanding the bilingual status of the City of Moncton, the Commission is of the opinion that the dilution of the Francophone critical mass and the loss of a Francophone municipality (Dieppe) would endanger the effective representation of the Francophone minority in the suggested new riding, in that it would weaken that minority's political influence and diminish its ability to voice its concerns effectively.

Furthermore, the Acadians and Francophones of Dieppe and Moncton (in the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe) represent a community of interest, in that their interests are intrinsically tied in with the substantial Francophone institutional network found in the Moncton area. Keeping Moncton and Dieppe together in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe makes it possible to preserve the integrity of the community of interest formed by the Francophone population of Dieppe and Moncton toward the Francophone institutional network located therein, and to preserve a Francophone critical mass in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe.

Because the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe is at most one twenty-fifth the geographic area of the Beauséjour riding, a larger population is to be expected. The variance from the electoral quota for Moncton—Dieppe is high (+17.76%) but, considering the density of the population in a very small area, it should not jeopardize the member of Parliament's ability to represent the people of the riding effectively. We note that, at the end of the previous redistribution process in 2013, this riding was 19.3% above the provincial quota. Urban electoral districts, by virtue of their smaller geographic size and representative accessibility, are justified in having higher positive variances from the electoral quota.

The 2021 Census revealed that Moncton and Dieppe are the province's fastest-growing cities; therefore, it is important to leave some room for both to grow. The proposed changes leave both the electoral districts of Moncton-Dieppe (+17.76%) and Beauséjour (+14.09%) well within the 25% range of deviation permitted by the Act.

In our analysis, we concluded that the factors found in section 15 of the Act, especially the community of interest factor, as well as fair representation for New Brunswick's linguistic minority, militate in favour of keeping part of the City of Dieppe in the same riding as the City of Moncton.

The Commission believes that those factors are, in this case, more important than voter parity is to ensuring effective representation. As stated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Carter, to insist on voter parity might deprive citizens with distinct interests of an effective voice in the legislative process as well as of effective assistance from their representatives in their 'ombudsman' role (p. 188).

With the removal of Riverview from the Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe riding, it is incumbent on the Commission to rename the riding Moncton—Dieppe to reflect the changes in the boundary of the riding.

New Brunswick Southwest (suggested name: Saint John—St. Croix)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest be renamed Saint John—St. Croix. It would comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the current electoral district of Saint John—Rothesay lying west of the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour; plus the Parish of Burton, which is in the current electoral district of Fredericton; less the villages of Harvey and McAdam, the parishes of Dumfries, Kingsclear, McAdam, Manners Sutton and Prince William, the Rural Community of Hanwell, and the Kingsclear Indian Reserve No. 6, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. The proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix has a population of 78,963 and is 1.81% above the provincial electoral quota.

The current riding covers approximately 11,800 square kilometres and includes constituents living on three islands, a situation that presents unique travel and representation challenges. With the proposed new boundaries, the size of the riding will decrease to approximately 8,600 square kilometres, making it more manageable.

Concerning the Parish of Burton, as previously explained, the Commission accepted the suggestions from the City of Fredericton, and therefore Burton had to be transferred to its only other adjoining riding, the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix. We believe that it is better suited to this riding than to the proposed district of Fredericton—Oromocto.

The Commission has given additional reasons for transferring the above-listed communities to the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac in the section dealing with that riding. With the transfer of these communities to Tobique—Mactaquac, the addition of part of the City of Saint John to this riding effects a desirable population adjustment between this riding and the current riding of Saint John—Rothesay, to which we have assigned the Town of Quispamsis, increasing its population. However, this means that the City of Saint John will be divided between two ridings.

At the request of the City of Fredericton and the City of Moncton, the Commission proposes that these cities be reunited so that the entirety of the city be in one riding, as was the situation with all other cities in the province, except for Dieppe. In stark contrast to this, we are now proposing that the City of Saint John be divided, by using the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour as a natural topographical division, and transferring the part lying west of this dividing line to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix.

The Commission recognizes that, in addition to dividing one city into two electoral districts, this proposal also attaches a small part of the City of Saint John to a largely rural electoral district.

Hybrid electoral districts are sometimes necessary, or desirable, to bring population numbers more in line with the provincial quota or to deal with natural topographical divisions. In the past, Saint John was, in fact, a mixed urban-rural electoral district known as Saint John—Albert. Boundaries can be drawn in many ways, but each case must be determined with regard to its particular facts, the statutory criteria, the population count and the available alternatives for creating an electoral map for the province and a workable electoral district that can be effectively represented.

We are aware that an option similar to what we are proposing for the City of Saint John was suggested in the past and considered by at least one previous commission, in 2003. However, the option was not part of the commission's original redistribution proposal submitted for public input. Therefore, awareness of the proposal was not widespread and there was little opportunity for public intervention and feedback. That commission was of the view that further public consultation was advisable. By suggesting these changes at the proposal stage this time, we hope to allow for proper public input and debate during the public consultation phase, including the public hearings.

There is an obvious and shared community of interest between the population of the proposed electoral districts of Saint John—St. Croix and Saint John—Kennebecasis. Some would say that they are one and the same community of interest, with common challenges and concerns and historical ties. The community of identity of the proposed ridings of Saint John—St. Croix and Saint John—Kennebecasis is significant, with over 90% of the population of these ridings having English as their first language. Both districts border the Bay of Fundy.

The City of Saint John will remain the major business, economic and service centre for most of the population of this proposed riding, especially the residents from the counties of Charlotte and Saint John.

Finally, the Commission recommends that the name for the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest be changed to Saint John—St. Croix because of the addition of part of west Saint John to the current district of New Brunswick Southwest. The redistribution proposal of the 2002 Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New Brunswick contains an extensive review of the names proposed for the electoral districts. In relation to the significance of the Island of St. Croix, which is referred to as the birthplace of Acadie and of Canada (page 8), the last paragraph reads: The name St. Croix is eminently suitable for a federal electoral district that can legitimately claim to be the birthplace of the nation. It should also be borne in mind that the St. Croix River forms a portion of Canada's international boundary with the United States of America. The Commission is of the opinion that the renaming better reflects the new electoral district's culture, history, and geography.

Saint John—Rothesay (suggested name: Saint John—Kennebecasis)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Saint John—Rothesay be renamed Saint John—Kennebecasis. It would comprise the current electoral district plus the Town of Quispamsis, which is in the current electoral district of Fundy Royal; less that part which lies west of the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix. The proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis has a population of 81,954 and is 5.66% above the provincial electoral quota.

In the previous section, we gave our reasons for proposing to transfer part of the City of Saint John to the proposed district of Saint John—St. Croix. The present section deals with the addition of the Town of Quispamsis to the proposed district of Saint John—Kennebecasis.

The Commission is of the view that the Town of Quispamsis has a close community of interest with the more urban area of the City of Saint John and the Town of Rothesay. These three communities have a community of identity based on language and historical ties. At one time, Rothesay and Quispamsis were part of the riding of Fundy Royal. After 2003, Rothesay and part of Quispamsis were in the same riding as the City of Saint John. Then, in 2012, Quispamsis was reunited in Fundy Royal, while Rothesay remained with the City of Saint John. In the past, some have asked that the Town of Rothesay and the Town of Quispamsis, commonly referred to as the Kennebecasis Valley, remain in the same electoral district, given the obvious shared economic community of interests and geographic proximity.

The Commission is satisfied that the proximity of communities and commonality of interests in this area provide an excellent basis for an electoral district.

With the addition of the bedroom community of Quispamsis to this riding, the Commission has proposed changing the name to Saint John—Kennebecasis, to reflect the new geography of the boundary readjustment. The lower Kennebecasis River valley includes the municipalities of Quispamsis, Rothesay and surrounding communities, all part of the Saint John region.

Tobique—Mactaquac

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac comprise the current electoral district plus that part added by extending the southwesterly boundary of the district to include the villages of Harvey and McAdam, the parishes of Dumfries, Kingsclear, McAdam, Manners Sutton and Prince William, the Rural Community of Hanwell, and the Kingsclear Indian Reserve No. 6, which are in the current district of New Brunswick Southwest; less those parts that are within the new proposed limit of the City of Fredericton, as of April 8, 2022, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Fredericton—Oromocto; and less the communities of the Parish of Grand Falls, the Town of Grand Falls, the Parish of Drummond, the Village of Drummond, and the Rural Community of Saint-André, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. The proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac has a population of 64,664 and is 16.63% below the provincial quota.

A few factors militate in favour of adding the above-named communities to the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac. They have many things in common with the other communities in Tobique—Mactaquac, such as their linguistic profile.

The Commission also recognizes a historical pattern shared between these communities and several communities of the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac, as they were at one point in the same riding, Carleton—Charlotte, which also included communities from York County.

The communities situated in the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac form a potential communal representation of rural New Brunswick interests. The addition is a southwestern extension of the riding, and the elected representative from Tobique—Mactaquac would enjoy practical access to these newly added communities.

However, the most important reason for adding communities to this district is to increase the population of Tobique—Mactaquac, considering the Commission's mandate to ensure relative voter parity and effective representation. Nevertheless, the geographic size of a district must also be considered in the balance. The Commission believes that it is justified in departing from relative voter parity to ensure more effective representation of the second-largest district of the province.