Commentaire 5 – commentaires et rétroaction

Earl A. Washburn

My name is Earl A. Washburn, and I am a senior analyst with EKOS Research Associates, a local polling firm in Ottawa, where I'm affectionately known as the riding guru. Since I was a child, I have had an interest in geography, which led to an interest in electoral geography. Since then, I've experimented with drawing riding boundaries in my past time, the same way someone else might enjoy a crossword or a sudoku puzzle. Drawing ridings is in itself like a puzzle, as you have to create these shapes of similar population, while balancing other parameters such as community of interest. I will be presenting my proposed riding boundaries at the commission's hearing in Ottawa in October.

One part of the process I enjoy is thinking about what names a riding should have. Riding names should strive to be as inclusive as possible in representing the communities within ridings, but not be too long or cumbersome. Riding names should also strive to retain historical names of ridings located in its territory, and I believe ridings should never be named after people. In the House of Commons, the speaker calls on the Honourable Member from XYZ, and so the riding name should represent the place the riding represents. Based on this criteria, I believe that in several instances the commission has come up with unrepresentative, illogical, or weak names that I believe can be improved. I have decided to offer this as a written submission, as it may be too exhaustive to discuss in a public presentation.

The following is a list of suggested names for the ridings as proposed by the commission. This is with the understanding that the proposed map presented by the commission will not be the final map. At this point, it is impossible to know which of the proposed ridings will exist in the final report, and which ones will not. With that in mind, if the current proposed map stands, here are my suggested names:

* Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke: My suggested name for this riding would be Renfrew—Pembroke—Carleton. While it is commendable that the commission has dropped Nipissing from the current name of this riding, I don't feel the inclusion of Algonquin is appropriate as long as the riding contains part of the City of Ottawa. The Algonquin portion of this riding (Algonquin Park and the Municipality of South Algonquin) has a combined population of just 1,055 compared to the portion of this riding within the City of Ottawa (12,598). Therefore, it makes more sense to include Carleton in the name, in reference to the part of the City of Ottawa the riding would include, that is part of the former municipality of West Carleton (today part of West Carleton-March Ward).

* Bayview—Finch: My suggested named for this riding would be Newtonbrook—Bayview. The commission has regrettably split the Willowdale neighbourhood in half, with the eastern half now in the proposed Bayview—Finch riding. Willowdale has been united under the riding of the same name since 1979, so it is unfortunate to see it split. Having said that, I don't think it's necessarily appropriate to keep the name Willowdale as part of the riding name. I am instead suggesting this riding be named Newtonbrook—Bayview, as the two main neighbourhoods in this riding are Newtonbrook and Bayview Village. I believe using the name Finch in this riding is inappropriate, as Finch is a long road that extends into several other ridings, and is perhaps more synonymous with the Jane and Finch area, located further west.

*Bowmanville—Oshawa North: The proposed name for this riding leaves out the name of a very large community in the riding, and that is Courtice. Courtice has a population of nearly 30,000, and so should not be excluded from the riding name. I suggest two alternative names for this this riding, Clarington—Oshawa North (as both Bowmanville and Courtice are in the Municipality of Clarington), or Bowmanville—Courtice—Oshawa (North).

*Brampton—Chingouacousy: My suggested name for this riding is Bramalea—Springdale. I feel Chingouacousy is not an appropriate name, as there are better historical alternatives, plus it is ambiguous, as Brampton also includes a major road called Chingouacousy Road, which is not located in the riding. The names Bramalea and Springdale were included in riding names in Brampton prior to the last redistribution, and I feel should be brought back. This riding includes most of the Springdale area, and the northern half of Bramalea, so I feel the name Bramalea—Springdale is quite appropriate.

*Brampton North: I believe the commission made a grave error in adopting the literal compass directions for their proposed Brampton riding names. Historically, riding names in Brampton don't follow the literal compass directions, but rather presume the city is on an east-west axis. The proposed Brampton North riding, while is in the literal northern corner of the city, is colloquially in the east of the city. In fact, its proposed borders are very similar to the existing Brampton East riding, and share no common territory with the current Brampton North riding. For this reason, the riding should be named Brampton East instead.

* Brampton Southeast: My suggested name for this riding would be Brampton South—Bramalea. Again, the commission's proposed name for this riding is reliant on the literal compass directions. This riding contains two distinct communities, separated by a large industrial area, and its name should incorporate both parts of the riding. The western half of the riding contains an area that is directly south of Brampton's core, and is part of the current riding of Brampton South, while the eastern half of the riding contains the south part of the Bramalea community. Therefore, I believe Brampton South—Bramalea is a more appropriate name of the riding.

* Brampton Southwest: My suggested name for this riding would be Brampton West. This again is an issue of the commission's desire to use the literal compass directions. This riding extends along the entire western border of the city, and while it is literally in the southwest corner of the city, it is colloquially in the west end of the city, therefore I believe Brampton West is a more appropriate name.

*Burlington Lakeshore: I believe the commission has overused appending the name Lakeshore to ridings, appending it to next door Oakville and to Hamilton—Stoney Creek—Grimsby as well. I feel this is unnecessary, as it has no basis in the riding's history. This riding is very similar to the existing Burlington riding, therefore I believe the riding should maintain the name Burlington.

*Burlington—Milton West: The portion of this riding that is in Milton is much larger (pop. 79,943) than that which is in Burlington (pop. 33,915). Therefore, I think it would be more appropriate to list Milton first in the riding name, and therefore the riding should be named Milton—Burlington North instead.

*Chatham-Kent—Leamington—Kingsville: With four place names in the riding name, this proposed name is unnecessarily long. My suggested name for this riding would instead be Chatham-Kent—Essex. Both Leamington and Kingsville are found within the County of Essex, as is Pelee Island and the eastern third of Lakeshore, which are not represented in the commission's proposed name for the riding. It should also be noted that the proposed borders of this riding do not even contain the entirety of the Municipality of Kingsville, plus the name Kingsville has never been used in a riding name before. However, Chatham-Kent—Essex was the name of this riding prior to the last redistribution.

*Cochrane—Timmins—Timiskaming: For this riding, I am offering only a re-ordering of the names to be Timmins—Cochrane—Timiskaming instead. Timmins has a population of 41,145 which is larger than the rest of Cochrane District, which has a population 32,600 and Timiskaming District which has a population of 31,424. Timmins is also the first name listed in its current riding of Timmins—James Bay. Alternatively, Cochrane—Timiskaming could work for the riding, as Timmins is in Cochrane District, however the City of Timmins has been excluded from previous ridings with the Cochrane name.

*Collingwood—Blue Mountains: Suggested name: Simcoe—Grey. The commission has on numerous occasions replaced historical county names with local geographical places names or municipalities. I feel in this case it is unnecessary. The proposed riding name includes only two municipalities in the riding, that together only make up a minority of the riding's population (34,201 out of 116,511), though admittedly Blue Mountains can refer to a wider geographic area, not just the municipality. The proposed riding is very similar to the current riding of Simcoe—Grey, and with the exception of the Township of Mulmur, contains portions of both Simcoe and Grey counties. Therefore I feel the name Simcoe—Grey should be retained. Mulmur may protest the name, but it has a small population (3,571), and it was once part of Simcoe County, albeit prior to 1881.

*Elgin—Middlesex—Thames: This is a very awkwardly drawn riding that splits several municipalities, and extends into five different counties. I suspect this riding will not last past the proposal stage, and given its awkwardness, is very difficult to name. Almost half the riding (57,695 people) live in Middlesex County, and 43,179 people live in Elgin County, so Middlesex and Elgin are musts for this riding name, but they should be listed in that order. A portion of this riding (10,745) is in Kent County (technically the Municipality of Chatham-Kent), so Kent could be included as well. There are parts of this riding in Lambton (6,873 people) and Oxford County (781 people), but we have to draw the line somewhere. The commission decided on using the name Thames as part of the riding name, which does not have any historical basis. Why was this name added to the riding, considering the Thames River already separates Elgin and Middlesex Counties, which are already included in the proposed riding's name? A portion of the river flows through Chatham-Kent, but that part of the riding could be represented by adding Kent to the riding name instead. For these reasons, I believe Middlesex—Elgin—Kent should be the name of the riding, though Elgin—Middlesex—Kent could work as well, nodding to the order of names in the current name of the riding, Elgin—Middlesex—London. However, with St. Thomas out of the picture, the Elgin portion of the riding is not as populous.

*Etobicoke North: This riding now contains territory outside of Etobicoke, as it has crossed the Humber River into North York. In fact, 26,247 people in this proposed riding do not live in Etobicoke, a substantial number. For this reason, I believe the riding's name should be changed to Etobicoke North—Humber River, adopting the Humber River name from the current riding of Humber River—Black Creek. The proposal has all of the territory of that riding along the Humber River being transferred to the proposed Etobicoke North riding, so it only makes sense to append Humber River to Etobicoke North, since it has been dropped from the commission's proposed Black Creek riding. The only caveat with my proposed name is that the Humber River travels further south through the proposed riding of Humber, which could create confusion, though that riding should be re-named as well. However, the Humber name fits well within the proposed riding, as it contains the neighbourhoods of Humbermede, Humber Summit and Humberlea.

*Gananoque—Brockville—Prescott: The populations of the three municipalities of Gananoque, Brockville and Prescott together make up just 31,577 people, which makes this proposed riding name unrepresentative of the riding as a whole. The bulk of the riding is located within the United Counties of Leeds and Grenville, plus the riding contains 26,423 people in the Frontenac County census division. For this reason, I believe Leeds—Grenville—Frontenac is a better name, as all of the proposed riding can be found in either Leeds and Grenville or Frontenac.

*Georgetown—Milton East: My proposed name for this riding is Milton—Georgetown—Oakville. The riding contains a significant portion of the Town of Oakville, 21,277 people to be exact, which I believe is enough to merit inclusion in the riding name. I also believe Milton should go first in the name order, as the portion of this riding within Milton (49,927) is greater than that in Halton Hills (47,300), which covers the community of Georgetown.

*Hamilton—Stoney Creek—Grimsby Lakeshore: For this riding, I propose dropping the word Lakeshore, and adding back the word East to Hamilton, making the name Hamilton East—Stoney Creek—Grimsby. As discussed earlier, I believe the commission has overused the term Lakeshore in its proposal, and I don't feel it's necessary in this case. It is correct that the riding does not contain all of the municipality of Grimsby, but it does include the main community of Grimsby, which I think is good enough. I also feel that East should be added to the riding to maintain name continuity with the current riding of Hamilton East—Stoney Creek.

*Humber: My proposed name for this riding is York South—Humber. A plurality of this riding (54,502 people) live in the former City of York, which has been traditionally known as York South in riding names, to differentiate it from York Region and other parts of the former County of York. While this part of the riding abuts the Humber River, few place names in York are named Humber, which I believe necessitates the inclusion of York in the riding name. Plus, it offers continuity with the current riding of York South—Weston. Humber is a worthwhile name for the Etobicoke portion of the riding (population 46,506), as the Humber name has been given to provincial electoral districts in this area before, plus it is included in the name of several neighbourhoods in the riding, namely Humber Heights and Humber Valley. I am a bit worried about the confusion with my proposed riding name of Etobicoke North—Humber River, though, so if the commission feels that may be a problem, then York South—Etobicoke may also work as a name.

*Kanata: I propose reverting the name of this riding to its current name of Kanata—Carleton. A total of 19,095 people in this riding do not live in the former city of Kanata; they either live in Nepean (mostly Bells Corners) or west of Kanata; either in Stittsville or the former West Carleton Township. I believe appending Carleton (Ottawa's former county, and a name still widely used in the capital) should cover those bases, and offers continuity with the current riding name.

*Kenora—Thunder Bay—Rainy River: I propose re-ordering the names within this riding to Thunder Bay—Kenora—Rainy River in order to match the populations of each section. A total of 46,781 people in this riding live within Thunder Bay District, while 34,732 live in Kenora District and 19,437 live in Rainy River.

* Lake Simcoe—Uxbridge: This is another example of the commission ditching historical county names for newer, less representative names. I would suggest the commission name this riding York—Durham instead. It may not be the most romantic sounding name, but the riding does contain significant portions of both regional municipalities, and is in line with past naming conventions. I feel the proposed riding name is inappropriate, as it puts extra emphasis on Uxbridge (which only has 21,556 people), which is not even the largest municipality in the riding (which is Georgina). It also unnecessarily highlights the fact that it borders Lake Simcoe, which is shared by multiple proposed ridings. Plus, only one of the municipalities (Georgina) in the riding even borders Lake Simcoe, meaning the riding could just as easily be named Georgina—Uxbridge. However, that would still leave out the 22,487 people who live elsewhere in York Region and the 26,884 people who live elsewhere in Durham Region from being represented in the riding's name.

* Lanark—Frontenac: Suggested name: Lanark—Rideau Lakes—Frontenac. The Frontenac portion of this riding, while geographically large, only makes up for 9,266 people. The portion of the riding within the United Counties of Leeds and Grenville (pop. 17,220) is much larger, and therefore deserves representation in the riding name. My suggestion would be to adopt the name Rideau Lakes to represent this area, as the Municipality of Rideau Lakes is the largest municipality in this portion of the riding, plus it borrows a name from the current Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes riding name, and the entirety of this portion of the riding also borders the Rideau River/Canal system.

* London Northeast: Suggested name: London—Thames Centre. There are 13,722 people in this district that don't live within the City of London, and I feel should still be represented in the riding name. Most of this population lives within the Municipality of Thames Centre, though a few thousand live in Zorra Township. However, this portion of Zorra Township borders the Thames River, and its largest community is called Thamesford. Therefore it could be said the name Thames Centre also represents this portion of the riding too.

* Manitoulin—Nickel Belt: Suggested name: Nickel Belt—Algoma—Manitoulin. Never in the history of the ridings named Nickel Belt have the communities of Elliot Lake or Blind River fallen within its borders. I think it would be inappropriate for this historically uranium rich region to be left out of the riding name, which I would not consider to be part of Sudbury's Nickel Belt. I believe including Algoma in the riding name should be enough to cover this area, though just Elliot Lake might be fine. Appending Algoma to the riding would be an homage to the former riding of Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing which the commission has decided to eliminate. In terms of the name order, Nickel Belt should definitely go first, as two-thirds of the riding lives in either Sudbury District or the City of Greater Sudbury, areas considered to be part of the nickel belt area. Even the Algoma portion of the riding (pop. 18,032) is larger than all of Manitoulin District (pop. 13,935), which is why Manitoulin should go last in the riding's name, not first.

* New Tecumseth—Bradford: There are a number of possible names this riding could adopt. Perhaps the most boring would be to keep the name York—Simcoe from the existing riding, as it encompasses portions of both Simcoe County and York Region. This proposed riding has shifted more westward than the current riding, to encompass New Tecumseth, so I don't mind ditching the historical name to something along the lines of Gwillmbury—New Tecumseth. The proposed riding contains all of the municipality of Bradford West Gwillimbury, and portions of East Gwillimbury as well. If Bradford feels left out, the riding name could also be New Tecumseth—Gwillimbury—Bradford, though I would consider Bradford to be part of the geographic West Gwillimbury Township, and therefore might not necessarily merit inclusion in the riding name.

*Niagara South: My suggested name for this riding would be Welland—Erie. I wouldn't exactly consider Welland to be in the south part of Niagara Region, and I feel the city of 55,750 people merits inclusion in the riding name, considering half the district lives in it. Plus, other parts of the riding border the Welland Canal, which is may be why much of this riding used to be called Welland (or perhaps because the area is historically part of Welland County). I feel Erie should also be part of the riding name, to encompass the communities along Lake Erie, including Fort Erie. Erie was also used as part of a riding name for this area in the past, when the area was part of the riding of Erie—Lincoln.

*Northumberland: Suggested name: Northumberland—Newcastle. This riding contains 17,214 people that live in the Municipality of Clarington, which is not in Northumberland County. Most of these people live in the community of Newcastle, which is why I believe Newcastle should be appended to the riding name. Northumberland—Clarke is also an option, as the territory in Clarington covers the former Township of Clarke, however I don't know how common that name is used in the area anymore. Newcastle is probably a more well known name.

*Oakville Lakeshore; Suggested name: Oakville—Burlington East. Again, I feel the commission has overused the Lakeshore appendage for riding names, which I don't think is necessary. However, keeping the riding name as just Oakville is no longer appropriate, as the proposed riding contains 18,023 people in the City of Burlington, namely in the neighbourhoods of Pinedale and Elizabeth Gardens. I think appending Burlington East to the riding makes the most sense so that these residents are represented in the riding name.

*Oakville North: This proposed riding also contains a similarly sized chunk of Burlington, namely the Orchard and Tansley neighbourhoods (total pop. 18,026). For this reason, I believe the riding can revert to the name of the current riding of Oakville North—Burlington.

*Penetanguishene—Couchiching: Suggested name: Simcoe North. This proposed riding is very close to the current riding of Simcoe North, a name which has existed in every election since Confederation, and therefore I do not think there is any need to adopt a different name. Not only that but, the proposed name I believe is wildly inappropriate, as Penetanguishene is the least populated municipality in the entire riding. The commission may have adopted the Penetanguishene name to refer to peninsula, but I'm not sure how wildly known its name is. But I digress, there is too much history in the riding to have its name change.

*Richmond Hill South: Very little of this riding has changed from its current incarnation known as just Richmond Hill. Sure, it's located in the south part of the city, but it covers the historic main part of the community. I don't feel there is a need for to append South to the riding name, therefore I suggest this riding revert to its current name of just Richmond Hill.

*Sault Ste. Marie: I feel this proposed name does not represent the riding as a whole, because one quarter (25,248 people) of the riding does not live in the City of Sault Ste. Marie. With the commission's decision to eliminate the riding of Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, I feel it is necessary to append Algoma to this riding's name to recognize the population that live in that riding, and also everyone in the current Sault Ste. Marie riding that do not live in the Soo, but rather in the rest of Algoma District. Therefore, I believe this riding should be named Sault Ste. Marie—Algoma (or even just Algoma, as technically Sault Ste. Marie is in Algoma as well).

*Scarborough Northwest: Suggested name: Scarborough—Agincourt. There is absolutely no need to change the name of this proposed riding from the name of the current Scarborough—Agincourt riding, which has used that name since 1988. Sure, the proposed riding's boundaries have shifted quite a bit, but it still contains the community of Agincourt. In fact, the proposed riding contains even more of Agincourt than the current Scarborough—Agincourt riding does, as Agincourt's eastern section (including Agincourt Park) is currently in Scarbrorough North. Not only that, but the actual Northwest corner of Scarborough falls in the proposed riding of Don Valley North, making Northwest an inappropriate name in my view.

*Scarborough—Rouge Park. Less than half of this proposed riding (51,372 people) lives in the current riding of Scarborough—Rouge Park, which means it is a significantly different riding with these boundaries. The rest of this proposed riding (more than half) is currently in the riding of Scarborough North, which I think makes for a more appropriate name for the proposed riding, as its oriented in the northern part of Scarborough (while the current Rouge Park riding is more based in the east of Scarborough). It should be noted that from 1988 to 2015, much of this riding was covered in the riding of Scarborough—Rouge River which could also work as a riding name. Another possibility would be Scarborough—Malvern, as the community of Malvern makes up a substantial part of this riding.

*South Huron Shores: Considering this proposed riding makes up significant portions of four counties, a name change from the existing riding of Huron—Bruce may be necessary. However, I feel South Huron Shores is not a good name for the riding. For one, directional words usually come after the geographic name in ridings, meaning Huron Shores South would work better. Secondly, I'm not sure South is even necessary. Sure, it's probably there to differentiate with the Huron north shore region, but I think when one thinks of Huron Shores, they're more likely to think of the east coast of Lake Huron, which this riding lines all the way from the Bruce Peninsula to the Sarnia area. For this reason, I think Huron Shores is the best name for the riding. However, if there is some ambiguity with this name, then Bluewater could work instead. There are many references to Bluewater in the district from the Bluewater School District in the riding's north, to the Municipality of Bluewater in Huron County, to the Bluewater tourist region in Lambton County in the south.

*St. Clair—Mount Pleasant: Here is another example of the commission unnecessarily ditching an historical name. This proposed riding is very similar to the current Toronto—St. Paul's riding, save for the addition of the Leaside area. The name St. Paul's, while admittedly meaningless in this day and age, has been the name of the riding that has covered this part of Midtown Toronto since 1968, and has existed as a riding name since 1935. It was re-named Toronto—St. Paul's in 2015, which I feel was a mistake, as very few ridings in Toronto have Toronto appended to them (either all ridings in Toronto should have Toronto appended, or none of them). Therefore, I believe the riding should return to its older name of St. Paul's. Additionally, I feel the use of St. Clair is inappropriate the proposed riding's name, as St. Clair Avenue extends into other ridings as well, creating ambiguity.

*Taiaiako'n—High Park: While I have no issue with the commission adding Indigenous names to other ridings, I don't know if it's entirely necessary for this riding. Taiaiako'n references an historical community that no longer exists, and I feel riding names should only reference contemporary communities. The current riding that covers most of this proposed riding is Parkdale—High Park, and the commission decided to replace the name Parkdale with Taiaiako'n, despite the fact that the Taiaiako'n community was located in what is now the High Park area. This has resulted in the proposed riding name now referencing two locations in the same half of the riding, leaving the Parkdale half without any name representation. For these reasons, I believe the commission should revert to the riding's current name of Parkdale—High Park. If necessary, the name Parkdale—High Park—Taiaiako'n could also work.