Redécoupage des circonscriptions fédérales de 2022

Commentaire 100 commentaires et rétroaction

Retour aux commentaires et rétroaction du public

Les documents ci-dessous sont affichés dans la langue officielle d'origine tels qu'ils ont été reçus.

Cheryl Gallant, MP for Renfrew – Nipissing – Pembroke

By way of introduction, I acknowledge the Federal Riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke is on the traditional territory shared by the Anishnaabeg (Ah-nish-in-a-bek) and Haudenosaunee. I am committed to moving forward in the spirit of partnership, reconciliation and collaboration.

The Federal Electoral Districts Redistribution 2022 Ontario Commission has recommended boundary changes to the Riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, with a name change to Algonquin-Renfrew-Pembroke. These changes include removing the entirety of the Township of Greater Madawaska as well as including a portion of the City of Ottawa in the new boundaries.

As Member of Parliament for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke, I have substantial concerns regarding the proposed boundary changes. I offer the following observations/recommendations to the Ontario Boundary Commission.

Effective representation must ensure that Members of Parliament remain accessible. Canadians should have equal access to federal government services, regardless of where they live. This has traditionally been a challenge for rural Ontario residents, where there is a lack of public transportation; reliable cellular and internet services; and access to government agencies.

For these Canadians, Members of Parliament are their gateway to the federal government.

The County of Renfrew, geographically the largest county in Ontario, has been represented by one Federal member for decades. The boundary proposal, if approved, would lead to political division within the County of Renfrew

Greater Madawaska, population 2,864, is a recently amalgamated rural township consisting of the former historical townships of Matawatchan, est. 1859, Broughham, est. 1851, Blithfield, est.1843, Bagot, est. 1843, and Griffith, est. 1861. They are part of the colourful history of Renfrew County and the Upper Ottawa valley.

Constituents in the Township of Greater Madawaska primarily conduct their business as well as social activities like family gatherings within the Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke electoral district. Since the Boundary Commission published its redistribution proposal, I have heard from countless constituents and community stakeholders who have shared their concerns over the proposed changes. Both the Council of the Township of Greater Madawaska and the County of Renfrew have taken firm stands opposing the division of Renfrew County. I share the concerns expressed about the need to continue to have effective representation in the House of Commons, for now and in the future.

Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke has more in common with its neighbours to the west, Parry-Sound-Muskoka and Nipissing-Timiskaming, as well as other federal ridings in northern Ontario where a significant number of constituents are employed in the natural resource sector. Recognizing rural and geographic considerations, the Boundaries Commission proposes to deviate -12.3% below the provincial average in the case of Parry-Sound Muskoka, and in the case of the proposed Riding of Nipissing, -15%.

While the Commission proposal would put the changed Riding .03% above the 2022 population quota, keeping Renfrew County intact would still result in the changed Riding being within 10% of the provincial quota, as would no changes.

In recognizing the first rule in the Redistribution Act is population equality, the Commission must recognize community of interest. The community of interest of the City of Ottawa is not the same as a primarily rural electoral district. Expecting semi-urban constituents to build a relationship with a rural Member of Parliament hours away is not conducive to the democratic process. The proposal by the Commission to include a small slice of the City of Ottawa should be reconsidered with the goal of keeping Ottawa representation intact with as few divisions beyond its borders as possible. While not including a part of the City of Ottawa in the redistributed Riding would result in us being below the provincial quota, we would still be within the 10% variation the Commission is using.

I draw to the attention of the Commission an error in the delineation of the eastern border of the Riding. The Canada (Ontario Boundary) Act, 1889 places the border between Ontario and Quebec in the middle of the main channel of the Ottawa River. The Ottawa Ship Canal Survey by Walter Shanly, C.E., that was used to delineate that boundary clearly places Allumette and Calumet islands in Ontario. The border location was confirmed as recently as January 21, 2016 by the Minister of Natural Resources in response to an Inquiry of Ministry. The population of those islands, at slightly more than 2,000, must be included in the Commission's proposal as they are in the Province of Ontario.

In recommending that Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke maintain its existing boundaries, this recommendation includes retaining the current name. The Commission has proposed dropping Nipissing from our name. Nipissing identifies a local indigenous group, as well as the District of Nipissing which forms part of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke. Nipissing is being dropped to identify a different indigenous group, the Algonquin, who lend that name to a local Provincial park as well as a rural Nipissing District community currently represented in the Riding of Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke. The term Algonquin was imposed on our indigenous people for more than 400 years by Euro-Canadians. Our local indigenous citizens identify as Anishnaabeg. It is entirely consistent to retain the current Riding name while maintaining the current boundaries. Our name is inclusive, meaningful, and connotes a clear sense of location and geographic reference.

In conclusion, I recommend that Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke maintain its existing boundaries. I strongly urge the Commission to reconsider its proposal. My constituents are not opposed to adjustments where necessary, however we believe boundary changes are unnecessary for Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Gallant,
Member of Parliament
Renfrew-Nipissing-Pembroke

Haut de page