Commentaire 55 – commentaires et rétroaction

Peter Maloney

Forwarded herewith is an email I sent to the Ontario Federal Redistribution Commission back in 2012 when redistribution was being done following the results of the 2011 Census.

At that time the Commission's initial proposal was to form a new riding out of "Kitchener South" and "North Dumfries"

It was as ill-advised then as it is now.

There is no relationship or community of interest between the south of Kitchener and North Dumfries.

Though I have since moved to Ottawa, when I heard of your proposal to change the boundaries to the 2012 original proposal I felt I must write to object.

I would suggest that you follow the second rule of your redistribution mandate and do as little change as possible to the boundaries of existing ridings.

The history and community considerations should be as important as the need to come within an equitable distribution of population.

Community should trump math every time.

In the result, splitting the community of Hespeler between two ridings would be a major contravention of your mandate.

That community should be kept intact in one riding and should remain as part of Kitchener South - Hespeler.

Any population shifting should be done at either or both the north or east part of the Kitchener section of the riding.

Thank you for your consideration.

Peter

Nov 18, 2012:

I live and work in the "Kitchener South" area of the current electoral district of Kitchener-Conestoga; I am a homeowner in the area and an instructor at Conestoga College's main campus, which is located in Kitchener South.

I received and read your original proposal to place Kitchener South in a new riding together with North Dumfries and Brant. I thought it was a bad proposal. I am pleased that you have responded to the input you received, particularly from the people in Brant.

However, your response takes the situation from bad to worse.

The Region of Waterloo (Cambridge, Kitchener, Waterloo and the Townships) is the 4th largest population centre in Ontario and the 10th largest in Canada. It is now inhabited by over half a million people and continues to grow at an average rate of just under 6%. Some parts are growing even faster, including Kitchener South. At that size, applying the representation by population mandate of the Commission, the Region of Waterloo should be entitled to 4 electoral districts.

What is the argument for treating the Region of Waterloo as a single political unit for these purposes? Your mandate calls upon you to consider communities of interest. What is the reason for having that included in your mandate? I would suggest it is for the purpose of focusing political accountability and enhancing political efficiency and effectiveness. In using those terms I mean that representation at all 4 levels of government (local, regional, provincial and federal) can be made more effective when the interests of the community served are more easily and sharply delineated, and when the voters can hold each of their representatives accountable for the achievement of those goals which the community seeks in common.

Your mandate also calls upon you to consider community identity. Kitchener South's identity is as part of Kitchener and of Waterloo Region. Our residential, occupational, commercial and recreational lives are oriented northward and eastward, not southward. We have absolutely no identification with North Dumfries or Brant. We share few, if any, goals in common. We would have more in common with the city of Guelph.

Your current, revised proposal would result in even greater diffusion of political accountability. It would create a situation in which Kitchener South, as a community not distinctly identified or represented at any level of government would have to compete with quite dissimilar communities, and their more organized local representation, for the care and attention of the Member of Parliament for the proposed electoral district, whoever that might be from time to time.

Community should trump math every time.

The Region of Waterloo's economy is a hub for light manufacturing, for hi-tech industries, for innovation and for education. In that regard, Kitchener South, has economic and political interests much more in common with Waterloo and Kitchener generally than with North Dumfries and Brant.

In short, for Kitchener South, it would be preferable to have boundaries set so that we would be represented by someone who felt bound to focus on the political and economic interests of the Region of Waterloo, and who would work as part of a political team with representatives at all levels of government to achieve the goals we seek as residents to this city and region and province.

I, for one, hope that you will go back to the drawing board and rethink your proposal to spin off chunks of the Region of Waterloo. The current proposal fails to respect our identity and our interests, which appear to have been sacrificed on the altar of mathematical expediency.

With best wishes for accomplishing a difficult assignment,

Peter Maloney