Comment 22 – comments and feedback

James A. McAllister, PhD

Please find attached my submission to the Commission.

Brief to the Federal election districts redistribution 2022 Commission for Ontario: Toronto, Durham and Northern Ontario

The Commission for Ontario is to be commended for assuming this most onerous task of redistributing the boundaries of the province with the largest population and the most MPs in Canada. This task is even more onerous given the knowledge that the federal district boundaries set for southern Ontario are likely to be used for provincial elections and the boundaries set for the City of Toronto are likely to be used for municipal local elections.

This submission will make comments and suggestions for several areas of the province because the ramifications of the Commission’s task are so widespread. It is the assumption of this submission that the redistribution of boundaries should take into account the service role of Members of Parliament. Political scientists have long studied the activities of MPs in terms of how they spend their time or how they operationalize their priorities.ⁱ Specifically, in the words of an undergraduate textbook in Canadian government and politics that I have used in several courses

“all MPs perform the daily function of ombudsmen or social workers for their individual constituents, intervening with ministers or public servants to hasten administrative decisions, to correct bureaucratic errors, and to repair governmental injustices. There will always be constituents with passport, immigration, employment insurance, pension, and many other kinds of problems, and some MPs specialize in trying to resolve them.”ⁱⁱ

The caseload of MPs, performing this service role, has been estimated to take up 42 per cent of an MPs time.ⁱⁱⁱ

With between a third and a half of MP’s time taken up by this service role, it is important to recognize the geographic barriers with which they must contend. Electoral districts should not be so large, remote or difficult to access that it is difficult or impossible for MPs to perform this role. Conversely, it should also be recognized that MPs who represent urban areas, especially in large metropolitan cities, have an easier time in meeting their constituents. Many people in these metropolitan areas may not even know the name of their MP or how to contact them or even think of doing so.

In response to these concerns, this submission will recommend that the City of Toronto should have one less MP than the Commission is recommending – two fewer that at present - and that Northern Ontario should have one more MP than the Commission is recommending, the same as at present.

This submission will deal with the redistribution of the City of Toronto, the neighbouring Region of Durham to the east of Toronto, and the electoral districts of northern Ontario.

Toronto and the Eastern GTA

City of Toronto

It is noted that the Commission proposes to reduce the number of districts in the City of Toronto from 25 to 24 districts and this appears to be a reasonable approach given population trends. However, this may not be a sufficient adjustment as among the current districts only seven have populations above the current quota. The remaining 18 districts have populations below the provincial average.

Even among the 24 districts proposed by the Commission, 12 have populations below the provincial average.

This submission recommends that the number of districts in the City of Toronto be further reduced to 23 so that fewer districts are below the provincial average.

For example, having proposed districts of “Don Valley” East, North, and West seems excessive, particularly when they are close to or adjacent to Bayview-Finch, York Centre, Eglinton-Lawrence, Beaches-East York and Toronto-Danforth – all of which have populations below the provincial average.

It is also recommended that the proposed district of Scarborough Northwest should continue to be called Scarborough Agincourt, the present and historic name for that area. Compared to the Commission’s proposals, it would be moved west to take in the Scarborough part of the proposed Don Valley North. Its western boundary, Victoria Park Avenue – would remain the same as at present, as would its southern and northern boundaries while its eastern boundary would be moved further east. Scarborough Rouge River’s western boundary also would be moved further west and Scarborough North eliminated as the Commission proposes.

Similarly, Scarborough Centre should continue to have Victoria Park Avenue as its western boundary, as at present, but its eastern boundary should be moved further east, as proposed by the Commission.

Durham Region

In contrast to the City of Toronto, where half the proposed electoral districts would have populations below the Ontario average, all of the existing districts in the Durham region are above the provincial average. The Commission is proposing to do little to change this situation and is proposing that all of the districts in the region of Durham continue to have populations above the provincial quotient.

The Commission is proposing that the Ajax and Oshawa districts each have populations more than eight per cent above the quotient. This may be acceptable in the case of Ajax, where the district boundaries are the same as those of the Town of Ajax. Alternately, it may be preferable to alter the northern boundary of Ajax, to make it Taunton Road, which would bring the electoral district closer to the quotient. The area north of Taunton would then become part of Pickering-Uxbridge. However, community of interest dictates that this area remain part of the district of Ajax.

In Oshawa, the Commission is proposing to alter the district boundaries considerably. This is unnecessary and not helpful. It would be preferable to use the existing boundaries except to make Rossland Road the northern boundary of the district to the extent possible. Harmony Road could then be followed south to Adelaide Avenue East and thence to the eastern border of the City of Oshawa. The area north of Rossland Road would become part of the new riding of Bowmanville-Oshawa North or whatever the district is called north of the 407.

Similarly, the Commission’s proposals for Whitby are not helpful. Given that the district is currently 18.8 per cent above the quota and, given population growth, it makes sense to alter the northern boundary of Whitby to follow Winchester Road, east and west, rather than the Town boundaries. The area north of Winchester Road would then become part of Lake Simcoe or whatever the district is called north of the 407.

In the case of Pickering-Uxbridge, the Commission is making the same error as was initially proposed in 2012, of incorporating the village of Brooklin in the same district as Pickering. The two communities have nothing in common. Brooklin is the most northerly part of Whitby and should remain with Whitby or become part of a district further north and/or east like Lake Simcoe.

This submission recommends that the boundaries of Ajax and Pickering-Uxbridge remain the same as established by the previous Commission. It is also recommended that the districts of Oshawa and Whitby be reduced in size from the existing boundaries by moving their northern boundaries further south.

Northern Ontario

This submission contends that the federal electoral boundaries Commission for Ontario has made a major error in its proposals for northern Ontario. The Commission plans to reduce the number of ridings in Northern Ontario by one, from ten to nine, and this will increase the northern ridings’ populations. However, the sheer size and the remoteness of some communities currently makes effective representation in Ottawa problematic and the Commission proposes to make these problems worse.

This submission argues that the right to vote, as guaranteed in Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, would be weakened by the acceptance of the Commission’s proposals as they apply to northern Ontario. In the Carter case before the Supreme Court of Canada, “the Court found that the right to vote in s.3 guaranteed not absolute equality of votes, but rather ‘effective representation’. Indeed, McLachlin J. went as far as suggesting that strict equality may actually detract from effective representation because it prevents communities of interest from sharing a single representative.”^iv

These problems of representation are accentuated by the large Indigenous population in the north and the extra effort on the part of the federal government that should be extended to meet the needs of Indigenous peoples. The Commission should recognize that any redistribution must involve protecting the constitutional rights of the Indigenous communities (sections 25 and 35 of the Charter).

It is noted that in every province no electoral district is permitted to have a population less than 75 per cent of the quotient or more than 125 per cent of the quotient, except that in extraordinary circumstances a Commission may exceed these limits. The Act permits, in Section 15 (2) (b), the Commission to take into account “circumstances viewed by the Commission as being extraordinary” as just cause to increase the variance from one district to another by more than 25 per cent above or below the provincial quotient.

The Commission points out that Section 15 (1) (b) (ii) of the federal Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act permits a variance from the provincial average to maintain “a manageable geographic size for ridings in sparsely populated, rural or northern regions of the province.” This section of the Act should be used to redistribute districts in northern Ontario.

The previous federal Commission in 2012 concluded that, instead of giving northern Ontario eight ridings, as the region’s population would dictate, “given the vast region, the Commission believes that a minimum of 10 electoral districts is required in order for citizens of Northern Ontario to have effective representation.” (page 10 of the Ontario Proposal in 2012). The previous federal Commission concluded that there were reasonable grounds to apply the extraordinary circumstances provision of the Act.

More specifically, in the northern Ontario riding of Kenora, it was “the Commission’s decision that, given the geographic size and relatively sparse population of the electoral district of Kenora, there are reasonable grounds to apply the extraordinary circumstances provision of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act to that electoral district.” (page 11 of the 2012 Proposal). The Ontario Commission proposed that the riding of Kenora have a population below the provincial average and it has a current population of 64,261, according to the 2021 census.

Other Provinces and Territories

In the province of Saskatchewan, a northern riding – Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River – has a population of 71,488. The provinces’s current Commission has indicated “that a substantial variation from the electoral quota is potentially justified” and has proposed their northern district be reduced to 45,524 people.

The Commission for the province of Newfoundland and Labrador has proposed that the boundaries of the district of Labrador, which is separated from the rest of the province by the Strait of Belle Isle, should continue as in the past, which will give it a population of 26,655, far below the provincial quotient.

And finally, it should be noted that each of the northern Canadian territories has a population that is a fraction of the total population of any of the existing districts in northern Ontario. The population of the Yukon is 40,232, the Northwest territories, 41,070, and Nunavut, 36,858.

Summary

The Commission is urged to recognize the extraordinary circumstances of the North and reduce the proposed geographic size and population of Ontario’s northern ridings.

“Following the Carter decision, it can be said with some confidence that the +/- 25% variance permitted by the federal and most provincial legislation is within the bounds of s. 3. Furthermore variance greater than +/- 25% is still permissible where the Commission can show that a group would not otherwise be effectively represented. This exception is most notable in northern districts, where a strict equality requirement would make northern representation negligible or non-existence.”^v

This submission suggests that the boundaries of most of the districts in northern Ontario remain substantially the same and that northern Ontario continue to elect 10 Members of Parliament. Kenora and Timmins-James Bay would be subject to the “circumstances viewed by the Commission as being extraordinary” clause.

Consideration could also be given to include Thunder Bay-Rainy River, Thunder Bay-Superior North, and Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing under the extraordinary circumstances clause.

In line with the Commission’s proposals, Parry Sound – Muskoka, Sault Ste. Marie and Sudbury could be expanded to take in more people and land. The other seven districts would continue, some with minor adjustments, but a majority would have populations almost 25 per cent below the provincial quotient.

Conclusion

I trust that these recommendations will prove useful to the Commission. I would be willing and able to participate in one or more of the public hearings, as well as submitting a written brief. I realize that these recommendations deal with three different regions of the province, Toronto, Durham and the North. However, they reflect my lived experiences as a resident of Ontario for several decades.

James A. McAllister, PhD
September 15, 2022

Notes