HANSARD
NOVA SCOTIA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ESTABLISHING AN
ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES COMMISSION
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
TRURO, NOVA SCOTIA
3:00 P.M.
Printed and Published by Nova Scotia Hansard Reporting Services
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ESTABLISHING AN
ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES COMMISSION
Hon. Ross Landry (Chairman)
Mr. Gary Ramey
Ms. Michele Raymond
Mr. Leonard Preyra
Mr. Jim Boudreau
Hon. Michel Samson
Mr. Andrew Younger
Hon. Christopher d'Entremont
Mr. Keith Bain
[Ms. Michele Raymond was replaced by Ms. Pam Birdsall.]
WITNESSES
Canadian Taxpayers Federation
Mr. Kevin Lacey
Francophone Community Centre of Truro
Ms. Yvette Saulnier
Ms. Wendy Robichaud
In Attendance:
Ms. Kim Langille
Select Committee Clerk
Ms. Moira MacLeod
Report Writer
TRURO, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 22, 2011
SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ESTABLISHING AN ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES COMMISSION
3:00 P.M.
CHAIRMAN
Hon. Ross Landry
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to these hearings. I have a little dissertation to read here.
My name is Ross Landry and I'm the chairman of this Select Committee on Establishing an Electoral Boundaries Commission. In the interest of public safety, I have been asked to point out the fire exits to the back there and the side, for safety reasons. Sparks sometimes fly in the Legislature, it gets a little heated. If it gets a little heated, I'm fairly confident that if you feel a need to run to the exits, it will not, in all likelihood, be as a result of a fire.
However, in a moment I'll ask my fellow committee members to introduce themselves to you. Before I do that, I would like to provide a little background and briefly comment on the roles of this all-Party committee. Every 10 years, the government is required to examine its electoral boundaries, with a view to making adjustments that, to the greatest degree possible, ensure fair and equitable representation for all of its citizens. Today and over the next week and a half we will be travelling across the province and asking for input on two important questions: who should sit on the Electoral Boundaries Commission and what should be included in the commission's terms of reference?
We are also asking for written and phone-in comments. Essentially, we are step one in a two-step consultative process that is designed to ensure as many Nova Scotians as possible have a direct say in determining what, if any, changes should be made to the province's electoral map. Our goal: to set up an Electoral Boundaries Commission in a way that is open, fair, and non-partisan; to ensure the terms of reference address those issues Nova Scotians deem worthy of consideration - for example, how to address population shifts or to protect communities of interest; and finally, to engage the best people possible to carry out the review.
1
With that said, I'd like to thank you for coming here this afternoon. It is a reflection of your interest in, and support for, our democratic process and a tangible demonstration of good citizenship. I also have a few procedural matters that I need to address before we continue with the introduction and begin hearing presentations. First, I would like to point out that this is a public hearing and that it is being recorded by Legislative TV. Presenters should know that the media may be present and that their comments, along with their phone-in or written comments we receive, are a matter of public record and may be included in the final report.
As well, if there is anyone present who did not previously notify the Committees Office of their intention to make a presentation and who now wishes to do so, please let the clerk know - and I'll point out Kim back here - and she will add your name to the list. Also, to ensure we accurately capture your comments, we ask that you begin by stating your name and that you speak clearly into the microphone.
My fellow committee members will now introduce themselves, starting from my right.
[The committee members introduced themselves.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. If anyone from the audience wants to speak and hasn't already done so, a community member, you can register with Kim there. Who's the first speaker today? Is it Mr. Lacey?
MS. KIM LANGILLE (Select Committee Clerk): Yes, this lady isn't here yet but Mr. Lacey is here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, Mr. Lacey, please come forward to the mike, and you know the procedure to speak into the mike. I don't need to give you any directions; you're very artful at it.
MR. KEVIN LACEY: No, actually I don't know that I know. Please go ahead if you have direction.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The direction is just that we speak clearly and that you would state your name.
MR. LACEY: I'll certainly try to speak clearly, Mr. Chairman, thank you. First of all, thank you very much to each of the committee members for having me here today. My name is Kevin Lacey. I'm the Atlantic Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has existed for 20 years across Canada. We just began in Atlantic Canada a little over one year ago. We are a group dedicated to lower taxes, less waste in government and more accountable government, which is what brings me here today.
I know that the discussion of the terms of reference for a committee, to set up the terms of reference for another committee, is not something that drums up widespread discussion. With that being said, it is our group's opinion that this presents a unique opportunity, an opportunity to create an effective and smaller Legislature, and that the purpose that we are here today is that we believe it's time for the province to ask the question: how many provincial MLAs are needed for the effective running of a province the size of Nova Scotia?
Therefore, our group would like to make two recommendations, with regards to the terms of reference for drawing up new electoral boundaries. First, we would propose that the terms of reference be set for the committee and that they draw up a maximum of 52 members in the Legislature. By adding the term "maximum" to the terms of reference will allow the independent committee to examine the optimal number of MLAs needed for effective representation of Nova Scotia, as well as efficient running of the legislative functions of government.
Recently, two decisions by the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board, an independent body, separate from government, decided on the number of municipal politicians needed to represent both the Cape Breton Regional Municipality and the Halifax Regional Municipality. The boards in both cases found that the number of councillors should be reduced without any impact on service, representation, or the decline in legislative functions. The Halifax Regional Municipality took a decline of about 27 per cent of the total number of councillors, while the Cape Breton Regional Municipality took a 25 per cent cut in the total number of councillors.
The level of reductions by the URB has occurred at the municipal level, and now we think it's time for it to happen at the provincial level. If the boundaries were kept the same way as they are today, after the 2012 municipal election in Halifax, there would be about 19 MLAs to represent about 16 municipal districts, which means for the first time we'd have larger municipal districts than we would provincial.
In fact, Nova Scotia is the only province, in the last 22 years in Atlantic Canada, not to reduce the number of politicians within its Legislature. New Brunswick, in 1995, at one time had 58 MLAs; it now has 55. Prince Edward Island had 32 and now it has 27. Newfoundland and Labrador had 52; it now has 47. So the reductions are possible while maintaining and keeping fair representation within the Legislature.
Because of this, and because of the fact that the new electoral boundaries body will be truly independent, like the URB, we believe it's a fair time to have a discussion about the total number of MLAs we need.
The second recommendation we wanted to make today is with regards to minority representation in the Legislature. Our group supports that each Nova Scotian is equal and should be represented as such within the Legislature. As a result, we'd recommend that the province do away with minority representation within its legislative body. In 2009, for example, in the provincial election, the riding of Preston had approximately 8,000 voters, while just down the road, in Bedford-Birch Cove, it had approximately 20,000 total voters within its representation.
In conclusion, we believe that these reforms would create a more effective and better representation for all Nova Scotians and would save taxpayers money. These are the options we would like to put on the table for further discussion. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Are there any questions?
HON. MICHEL SAMSON: Just as a point of clarification, with the translation services, is it possible to ask the question in French knowing that it will be translated back into English? With our translator, I take it that's not a problem?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, go ahead.
MR. SAMSON: Merci, M. le Président. Merci, M. Lacey pour ta présentation ici aujourd'hui. Au sujet de la représentation des groupes minoritaires, ici en Nouvelle-Écosse, vous faites la recommandation qu'on abolit les sièges qu'il y a, qui existent, pour les communautés minoritaires ici en Nouvelle-Écosse. Je me demande si votre organisation a eu des discussions avec des groupes minoritaires pour voir quelle était leur impression du succès d'avoir des sièges désignés pour les communautés minoritaires ici en Nouvelle-Écosse?
MR. LACEY: No, we haven't. Frankly, I think our recommendation is due to the fact that we want to see all Nova Scotians treated equally. They should be treated that way, both inside and outside the Legislature.
This was created in 1991, I remember that. Certainly, Nova Scotia has changed significantly since then and there are a number of various minority groups now, with large numbers in the province, so we believe that, ultimately, all ridings should be about similar and hence, treat all Nova Scotians equally.
MR. SAMSON: Je ne suis pas sûr si vous le savez ou pas, mais comme qu'il existe maintenant, même si on n'a pas les quatre circonscriptions qui sont protégées pour les groupes minoritaires acadiens et la communauté africaine, ici en Nouvelle-Écosse, les circonscriptions maintenant ont déjà une variance d'environ 20 à 25 p. 100 de la population, alors même si on enlève les quatre circonscriptions protégées, nous avons encore une différence de la population. Par exemple, si on regarde dans la circonscription de Guysborough-Sheet Harbour, qui est presque la grandeur de l'Çle-du-Prince-Édouard, la population n'est pas la même chose qu'on trouve à Bedford-Birch Cove.
Alors, je me demande, comment est-ce que vous voyez que ça va faire un gros changement, à la fin de la journée, quand nous avons déjà une grande différence entre le montant d'électeurs dans les circonscriptions, hors des quatre circonscriptions protégées, ici en Nouvelle-Écosse?
MR. LACEY: The simple answer is because the variance is not as large.
MR. SAMSON: Je me demande, est-ce que vous pourriez nous dire si votre organisation a des représentants de la communauté acadienne ou de la communauté africaine de la Nouvelle-Écosse?
MR. LACEY: I'm not sure what you mean by representatives. We have only one director here in Atlantic Canada, as staff. We have people across Canada; I could tell you we have Métis representation within our directors, if that was your question.
MR. SAMSON: Non, ce n'est pas la question. Je comprends que vous êtes ici comme délégation. Vous dites que vous représentez des membres. Je vous demande, si partie des membres que vous représentez, ici en Nouvelle-Écosse, est-ce que vous avez de la représentation de la communauté acadienne ou de la communauté africaine de la Nouvelle-Écosse ou autre minorité qui existe ici en Nouvelle-Écosse?
MR. LACEY: We do, but I don't have exactly what kind of numbers those would be.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to give someone else an opportunity - and I'll come back to you, Mr. Samson - does anyone else wish to ask a question?
Mr. Bain.
MR. KEITH BAIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's interesting to note, when you talk, Mr. Lacey, about the reduction of provincial seats, throughout Atlantic Canada over the past few years, and just one question that I have is the population of New Brunswick - I know I don't know it, do you?
MR. LACEY: It's 750,000. Yes, it's 750,000.
MR. BAIN: So, you look at New Brunswick, with 750,000 and 55 seats, and Nova Scotia with almost one million people and you're proposing 33 - what's your justification for doing such a thing?
MR. LACEY: Well, that's a really good question and the reason is this: the URB, an arm's length body of this province, said that we could do - certainly with the municipal councillors - to have more representatives than those provincially, and recommended about a 25 per cent cut in the total number of seats, in both Cape Breton and Halifax. So, as a result, if the committee believes that that's right for municipal, what we're asking for, is that the same rules apply and that the provincial study, within the confines of the upcoming committee, how many MLAs should be available, and I think, you know with respect, Mr. Bain, that's quite a small ask.
MR. BAIN: I guess when we talk about HRM and CBRM; I think the new council will consist of 16 members in HRM, 12 in CBRM - that's 28. If you looked at an equal representation in both those municipalities, that leaves five members to serve the rest of rural Nova Scotia.
MR. LACEY: I think though, what we've recommended, in order to - and you mentioned the 33 and I appreciate that, I didn't get that in - what we've recommended is that you have three by federal ridings. So use the federal constituencies as a marker and that would certainly distribute the ridings. Because they're doing so, redistribution coming federally, between federal - between, excuse me, urban and rural seats.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll go to Mr. Ramey, and then we'll certainly have more.
Mr. Ramey.
MR. GARY RAMEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think, Mr. Lacey, in your comments you mentioned, if I have this correct, that Preston, I think you said 8,000 . . .
MR. LACEY: Yes.
MR. RAMEY: . . . and you mentioned Bedford-Birch Cove with 22,000. Have you done any speculation on what you think the average size of a constituency should be?
MR. LACEY: No, I mean, ultimately, that's going to be a decision for the committee, which you'll pick. What we're recommending here is that, you include in your terms of reference, a maximum of 52 members, and allow them to do the work, to decide, whether that number is - I mean our recommendation will be 33, but whether or not that's 50, 48, 47, that's really up to - you know, according to what we're recommending here - that would be up to the independent committee to make a decision on what the optimal size of a constituency would be.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a question. In regards to your analysis of coming to a conclusion of 33, do you have a clear understanding of the workload or what the job description of an MLA is, and the complexity of their job, and to couple that with what the duties and responsibilities are as a minister? If so, how does that fit in with being able to provide the services?
I know this week, this committee alone, or last week, our average day is 10 to 12 hours, and if you take a number of people out of that mix, does that increase the workload, because the work doesn't go away? Is the job requirement similar to a city councillor versus an MP, with a staff and a number of different offices that they have in their budgets? So, have you done an analysis on the costing and whether or not reducing the number significantly saves money or increases . . .
MR. LACEY: I would say two things. The first is that the - you know, we are in a deficit mess, and you know this better than I do, and everything is being looked at, education, health care, so one of the things we are asking for, is that the same rules apply to the Legislature. So to your point on the workings of the Legislature, that's a very good question. I mean, how would 33 act with regards to committees?
What we're asking for, again, for our recommendation, is not that the committee recommend a specific number, what we're asking is that you give the committee the power to make a decision, over what the optimum numbers would be, which is the exact same process that the municipalities followed - they just gave it to the URB: you'd be giving it to this new committee.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So if there's something else that I'm hearing, before I go on to Mr. d'Entremont, is that you're accepting of the 52 in saying, you're not asking for it to increase from this, you are asking to stabilize at the maximum of 52 . . .
MR. LACEY: That's right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: . . . and then take a fluctuation from there. I think that's a fair question, so I thank you for that point.
Mr. d'Entremont.
HON. CHRISTOPHER D'ENTREMONT: Merci beaucoup, M. le Président. Kevin, je te demande la question que, si les circonscriptions désignées ne sont pas là, qui ne sont pas là pour offrir des services ou de la représentation dans la Chambre à Halifax, comment est-ce que la population acadienne, francophone de la Nouvelle-Écosse, va vraiment avoir sa voix entendue à la Législature? Tu dis qu'on va voir quelque chose de plus responsable à travers de la province, mais comment est-ce que le monde de Richmond, le monde de Clare, le monde d'Argyle, francophone, de descendance francophone, comment est-ce qu'ils vont avoir de chance d'avoir leur voix entendue?
MR. LACEY: What I'd say to that is, I guess, a couple of things: first is specifically to the riding of Clare, I mean there is a fair number - the population may actually warrant a French constituency in that area; and the second thing I'd say, is that there are a number of minority communities now around Nova Scotia, and those communities don't have the same types of representative powers as others do. So what we're saying is, let's even the playing field and treat all Nova Scotia equally.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: L'autre chose, c'est avec la Charte des droits et libertés. Les populations minoritaires ont le droit, spécialement les droits francophones, ont le droit de représentation juste et avez-vous pensé, comme fédération, comment est-ce que vous allez appliquer les droits et les libertés dans la Charte? Parce que, ça semble que vous n'avez pas vraiment - quand on demande ça, vous manquez quelque chose, quand ça vient d'être canadien.
MR. LACEY: Member, with respect, I don't think I'm missing anything. I think, the point being is that we need to have these ridings protect certain minorities, and what I'm essentially saying are a couple of things: let's represent everybody equally, and second, Nova Scotia has changed, there are a lot of minority groups, and why this group and not another group is, I guess, ultimately the question.
I think the answer to that is, within the terms of reference, to simply do away with them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
Mr. Preyra.
MR. LEONARD PREYRA: Mr. Chairman, I just have a quick question about affirmative gerrymandering, which is what, I guess you refer to when you're talking about Clare possibly having enough of a population base to have its own constituency. So, you don't disagree in principle with a constituency that tries to get a community of interest represented, as long as it fits the rough numbers, in rough proportion?
MR. LACEY: You raise a great point. Communities of interest, when the committee eventually takes a look at that, may actually end up with ridings that have certain minority populations in them - so you're absolutely right. Clare would be the obvious one, I mean, given its population, size, and geography. I'm not going to pretend to be here to do a redraw of boundaries, but it would seem to make sense that that riding may still exist and there would still be an Acadian representative within the Legislature.
MR. PREYRA: So you don't really object, also, to the idea of a Preston constituency in principle, it's just that the numbers included in it are too small for your liking?
MR. LACEY: And the reasons why, is really, I think, it's the reason for why that riding is so small, that we object to it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. I might add a point in here too. If I'm hearing you correctly then, you're not opposed, for example, in Clare, of having an Acadian representative, for being designated - if I'm hearing you then, you're saying three might be too many for the province. Is that one of the points you're trying to make?
MR LACEY: No. I think, minister, what I'm saying is that one, because of the community of interest, it may survive, but what we're saying is, do away with the term of reference that would simply mandate that these ridings exist.
MR. CHAIRMAN: There was another point ... Does anyone else have a question?
Mr. Samson.
MR. SAMSON: Merci, M. le Président. C'est un point intéressant que vous indiquez que Clare, à cause de sa population, pourrait être grande assez, pour avoir sa propre circonscription. Dans les quatre circonscriptions protégées, Clare est la deuxième, en terme de nombre d'électeurs. C'est le comté de Richmond qui a le plus grand numéro d'électeurs et maintenant, Richmond est beaucoup moins - moins que la moitié de Bedford-Birch Cove, alors je ne comprends pas comment vous suggérez que Clare pourra rester comme circonscription avec presque 8 000 électeurs.
Quand on regarde, si on va premièrement, abandonner les circonscriptions protégées, deuxièmement, réduire les montants de députés jusqu'à 33. Le problème avec la communauté acadienne, historiquement, c'est que les Acadiens se trouvent partout dans la province, dans des petits groupes. Nous avons Clare, Argyle. Il y a la communauté de Greenwood. Il y a la communauté de Pomquet, à Antigonish. La communauté de Chéticamp, à Inverness. Sydney a un groupe d'Acadiens et même ici, à Halifax maintenant, un grand groupe d'Acadiens, en même temps. Alors c'est presque impossible, pour les communautés acadiennes elles-mêmes, sans cette protection, de justifier avoir leur propre circonscription. Alors je ne comprends pas comment vous pouvez suggérer que Clare pourra rester comme circonscription avec les changements que vous proposez à ce Comité.
MR. LACEY: Well, the answer to that is simple. These ridings are based on geography, and we shouldn't be gerrymandering seats just to fit in one group or another. I'm not going to sit here and try and redraw the electoral map. It was my impression, to the member, that this is about setting the terms of reference. What I'm doing is recommending a change, within the terms of reference that have been there since 1991.
Look, I'm not going to challenge your knowledge of Richmond County, but what I will say is, what I know is that, Nova Scotians deserve to be treated equally, and they're not if you are gerrymandering seats to put some in the Legislature and others not. That's not what ridings were built and made to do. I mean, you could argue - I'll let you go ahead, sir.
MR. SAMSON: Juste un autre point - premièrement, il faut comprendre, qu'avec les quatre circonscriptions désignées, il n'y a aucune assurance, ou garantie, que, dans les circonscriptions acadiennes, que ça va être un Acadien qui sera élu, ou dans la communauté de Preston, que ça sera un Africain de la Nouvelle-Écosse qui sera élu. L'idée, quand ça été créé, c'est d'avoir la situation qui donnerait la meilleure chance possible aux communautés minoritaires d'élire un représentant de leur communauté. Quand Richmond a premier été protégé, en 1991, Richie Mann était le député de Richmond. Même s'il n'était pas acadien, il était certainement un grand champion pour la communauté acadienne, mais il n'y a aucune garantie que Richmond va continuer à élire quelqu'un qui est acadien. Faudrait dire, dans mes cinq élections, les candidats de tous les autres partis n'étaient pas des Acadiens. Alors, si je n'avais pas gagné moi-même, on n'aurait pas eu un Acadien pour représenter Richmond.
Mais, sur l'autre question, si vous suggérez que tout le monde doit être traité également et puis qu'on abandonne les quatre circonscriptions protégées, qu'est-ce qu'on fait avec le bureau des Affaires acadiennes, le bureau des Affaires autochtones, le bureau pour les Africains de la Nouvelle-Écosse et le bureau des Affaires gaéliques? Est-ce qu'on abandonne ça aussi? Parce que là, comme vous avez dit déjà, il faut que tout le monde soit égal. Mais si tout le monde est égal, est-ce qu'il faut qu'on abolit ces quatre bureaux-là, en même temps?
MR. LACEY: With respect, I'm here to talk about the Electoral Boundaries Commission, so I mean we'll have to leave that for Finance, when you can ask me lots of questions, because I've got lots of ideas on budget cuts and taxes as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The next two questions are coming from Mr. d'Entremont, and then Mr. Preyra and then Mr. Bain.
MR. D'ENTREMONT: Thank you very much. I am going to do this one in English because I think it warrants it - I'm just trying to figure out how to exactly say this.
I understand the lineup, that you're trying to say that there are other minority groups in this province, but I'm saying with the history that we've had of Acadians in this province - I'm not going to do a history lesson - to see the changes in this Legislature after 250 years of anglophone rule, to see the changes that we have celebrated since 2004, the changes in services to our Acadian populations, to see the possible stop of assimilation and loss of culture and language, I think the experiment of having protected ridings has more than proved itself to actually have worked.
Michel is quite correct in saying that regardless of the fact that they are protected, there is no guarantee that there is going to be a French-speaking Acadian in those seats. So in my mind, these have contributed to a culture, to a province that has been inclusive, but in its absence, I wonder where assimilation, where these services are going to go, and quite much too, to what Michel said, what happens to these other programs that have been brought in, that have acceptance now in the province? Just some ideas there - without that, what's left?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Preyra.
MR. PREYRA: Just following on that question - I know that your presentation here, the principle of the presentation is based largely on the principle of one member, one vote, and effective representation. I'm wondering, whether or not, you would tolerate any variance, because you seem prepared to accommodate communities of interest, and I'm wondering, how far you would go in allowing for variances to reach that goal?
MR. LACEY: I think for us, we'd support what has happened in the previous two commissions with regards to variance. I think there is reason for that, so that the changes are not radical, one way or the other. I think that's kind of where we come down, just to ensure that you don't see a massive change from one group to another.
MR. PREYRA: Is there a number that you would tolerate - would you say 10 per cent or have you thought about that?
MR. LACEY: Oh I think the last two were 25, and that's certainly kind of where we would come down on that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bain.
MR. BAIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess one of the questions I have is whether or not, in your deliberations - you have to have had deliberations to make a recommendation, of course - how much consideration was given to geography when you come up with a number that you have? I recognize Jim is from Guysborough-Sheet Harbour, which is the largest constituency in this province, and mine is not too far behind. As a matter of fact, if I started in one end of my constituency, in Frenchvale, and drove to Bay St. Lawrence, that's pretty much the same as me leaving Sydney and driving to Halifax. So how much weight, or any, was put into that when you make this recommendation?
MR. LACEY: Certainly I've heard from lots of MLAs about the axles in their cars, driving over the roads through these big ridings.
Look, I think that this is a determination that the committee should set to the committee to make a decision on. I mean, Mr. Bain, to your point, what we are recommending here is that you allow an independent body to make a determination of how many MLAs should sit in the Legislature - that's what we're recommending.
When that happens, we'll recommend 33. We can have a debate on whether that's right or not, but I think at this point, what we're asking for is that this committee, at least lay on the table, the number 52, and as arbitrary as you may feel 33 is, it is as arbitrary as the 52 that we sit under now. You can't justify the number that's currently before us, so I think the solution to this is to allow an independent committee to make that decision.
MR. BAIN: Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing about any number that's up there. I'm not saying that 33 is not the right number - I'm just asking whether or not you've taken these into consideration in your recommendations.
MR. LACEY: I hear you. I think you make a really good point, but I think that's a point that deserves to be made at the next phase.
MR. BAIN: Thanks.
MR. JIM BOUDREAU: Yes, just a quick question with regard to your 33 number - I'm curious to see how you arrived at that and how you justified that number.
MR. LACEY: There were a couple of reasons, actually. The first was I had spoken to a number of former politicians, who had served in the Legislature, about what they felt was a fair and representative number in their area; and the second was when you look at a 25 and 27 per cent cut that the URB made a decision - if you take that to the 52, you get somewhere between 35 and 39 members.
One of the advantages, then, from our group's perspective, is to use the federal boundaries as kind of a way to help in the "redistricting" process. Essentially, what you'd end up doing is slicing up the various federal constituencies.
MR. BOUDREAU: So you're looking at sort of applying the federal boundaries?
MR. LACEY: No, I'm saying that you can use those to help guide your principles of setting the provincial ones up.
MR. BOUDREAU: Okay. You did make reference to some reductions in New Brunswick, P.E.I., and Newfoundland and Labrador. When you look at those numbers, in relation to population, I'm at a loss to see where you come across with the 33 if you're looking . . .
MR. LACEY: Because, sir, with respect, I think there are opportunities to be leaders without necessarily deferring to every other jurisdiction in the country. Look, we've laid a number on the table; that's an open discussion. We can have an argument, but I think for the purposes of this committee, it's about - I don't mean to go back to it, but ultimately, for our group, we just want to see this looked at, and no one really has. We could argue about 33, but I could also argue with you about 52.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I accept your point about 33, and I think on that point we should move on from there. You've stated the rationale behind it, and I respect that . . .
MR. LACEY: I hope so.
MR. CHAIRMAN: . . . and your range is between 33 and 52, and you're asking the selection committee to come to a determination based on some factual structure. You've provided some suggestions, one being the electoral boundaries of the federal process and dividing them up proportionately as to how that balances.
Another key point I heard you say today is that, on the issue of minority representation, we're diversifying the province in many other areas in that it no longer has the merit it once did. There's also a question raised about the continuation of the different minority interest groups - the Acadian position, the First Nations, African Nova Scotians - and I want to comment on that.
No matter what structure or formula we move forward, I still see a need as to why we would keep those positions and portfolios in place. At some point, we may want to expand to other minority groups, but I think it's important, whether it's Gaelic Affairs or whatever, that we acknowledge that you made a distinct separation in your discussion today, that that's not where your point is, and that's for a future debate - and I agree with you fully.
I support the positions that are there and I respect the fact that you have made a distinction, not based on that you're against the minority group representation, you believe in equality and from your perspective equality is measured in equal representation, one vote, one person, amongst the broader base - does that basically capture what you're trying to say here today?
MR. LACEY: I think that's fair.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions?
Mr. Boudreau.
MR. BOUDREAU: Yes, I just wanted - you sort of cut me off there - some clarity. The reason I asked the question was for clarity, in trying to fully understand your position, it's really not to debate the issue of the number. My feeling is if we have to set terms of reference, then we have to have some complete understanding of what you're proposing, so that's where I was going with my line of questioning.
MR. LACEY: Look, I think it's fair to ask me lots of questions - I certainly have lots to say.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Now, there is another point that you made earlier - it was on the costing, and correct me on this point, you're implying that the fewer MLAs in the context of what you're proposing means a direct saving, and you're also, if I'm correct in reading between the lines, what you're saying is that government, in all its forms, needs to find ways to reduce its costs.
MR. LACEY: Well, essentially, sir, your government has entered into a rationalization and what we're saying is that the rationalization that you have going on in your own department should be extended to the Legislature.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, I think I understand fully where you're coming from, and if there are no other questions I want to thank you very, very much for coming and sharing your perspective and your organization's perspective. Thank you very much.
MR. LACEY: Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Not seeing anyone else in the room to come to speak, we're going to take a brief interlude and walk around and wait for the next client to come forward.
[3:41 p.m. The committee recessed.]
[4:08 p.m. The committee reconvened.]
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'll now call the committee to order. I want to thank Yvette Saulnier from the Francophone Community Centre of Truro for being here - we're excited to hear from you and thank for coming. We will now start.
MS. YVETTE SAULNIER: I'm Yvette Saulnier, I'm from the Francophone Community Centre here in Truro. I'm just going to . . .
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to interrupt you for a second, because I see I should have just given you a notice that this complete meeting is public; it's being recorded and it's a matter of public record for that purpose. Okay? You may proceed.
MS. SAULNIER: Je m'appelle Yvette Saulnier. Je viens de la Baie Sainte-Marie. On a déménagé ici il y a à peu près un an et demi passé, à cause du travail de mon mari, et je suis maintenant directrice au Centre communautaire de Truro. J'ai commencé à la fin de septembre et j'aime beaucoup ça, c'est vraiment le « fun ».
Ici à Truro, la population est à peu près 5 000. Je pense que ça grandit toujours. L'école acadienne aussi, grandit toujours. Cette année, il y a une augmentation de 30 p. 100 des élèves, qui est excellent. Nous, au Centre, on fait notre possible, à travers du Centre et à travers de l'école acadienne, pour promouvoir le français, de vivre en français, s'amuser en français.
Notre nouveau Centre, qui ouvre dans le proche avenir, présentement on offre des classes conversationnelles en français, des soirées de musique avec les aînés, « Bon appétit! » qui est une classe de cuisine avec les tout-petits. On a justement lancé notre nouveau programme pilote, à travers d'alphabétisation, samedi dernier, c'est appelé « Chaque enfant prépare à sa lecture ». C'est avec les six compétences nécessaires à la lecture. C'est une heure de comptines, chants et activités. Je pense que le programme a six familles qui participent, qui est vraiment bien.
Le programme après l'école qu'on offre maintenant en français, est rappelé. Il n'y a plus de place pour personne. On a une liste d'attente, qui est vraiment bien. On pensait grandir l'année prochaine. Tout ça pour dire que notre culture est unique, le français existe ici à Truro et on est parti de l'avant, je pense, avec toute la population et on a besoin de l'aide pour grandir et on n'aimerait pas prendre un pas d'arrière, on aimerait d'aller par en avant.
Présentement, je pense, il y a trois députés acadiens qui siègent. Il y a M. Wayne Gaudet, Michel Samson et Chris d'Entremont. On n'aimerait pas vraiment de risquer de perdre ces Acadiens francophones sur le Comité, donc on demande au Comité de considérer ces éléments suivants. C'est le Centre communautaire appui ces cinq éléments. Ça sera demandé par la FANE que vous considérez.
Numéro un, c'est que les consultations de la Commission aient lieu dans toutes les régions acadiennes, pour donner la chance aux citoyens concernés de s'impliquer sur les possibilités de changements aux circonscriptions électorales; les régions acadiennes immédiates de Chéticamp, Isle Madame, Clare et Argyle. Une deuxième, c'est que toutes les sessions de consultation se déroulent avec traduction simultanée, permettant à tous les citoyens et citoyennes de s'exprimer en français ou en anglais. Un troisième, que l'un des facteurs primaires à être considérés par les termes de référence, soit que la minorité acadienne est de première importance en Nouvelle-Écosse et respecte le caractère spécifique des circonscriptions acadiennes actuelles, dans le respect de leur diversité, leur histoire et leurs traditions.
Aussi, que le facteur primaire de la proportion des langues officielles soit considéré a être ajouté aux termes de référence et qu'au moins deux personnes de la communauté acadienne et francophone siègent au Comité ou à la Commission qui sera chargée de recommander des révisions, ou non, aux délimitations des circonscriptions électorales actuelles.
Donc, ça c'est les cinq points que la FANE suggère et notre Centre
communautaire les appuie et, merci. Si vous avez des questions?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any questions? Mr. Samson.
MR. SAMSON: Merci beaucoup, Yvette. Tu m'avais dis que tu étais un peu nerveuse, mais je peux dire que vous avez fait une très bonne présentation et félicitations.
Je voulais juste te poser quelques questions, parce que c'est très intéressant et je pense que mes collègues seront peut-être surpris de savoir que la communauté acadienne francophone ici à Truro, vous avez dit, que c'est presque 5 000 personnes?
MS. SAULNIER : Oui, oui, je pense que oui. Notre école a présentement 200, presque 230 élèves de « Grandir en français » jusqu'à la douzième année. Je pense qu'il y a 27 élèves qui sont inscrits dans « Grandir en français » pour l'année prochaine déjà, qui veut dire qu'il y aura, qui s'en viennent - présentement, il y a deux classes de maternelle. Il s'en vient deux classes de première année, l'année prochaine et ainsi, ça commence, c'est toutes des classes doubles, maintenant.
Il y a aussi la communauté francophone qui sera dans les écoles d'immersion. Il y a quatre écoles, je pense, qu'on fait de la publicité avec. Il y a 80 élèves dans les classes d'immersion, juste dans ces écoles-là. Donc, c'est juste un commencement de toute la population qui existe.
MR. SAMSON: Je ne sais pas si vous pouvez répondre à cette question ou pas mais, savez-vous combien d'étudiants qu'il y avait à l'école acadienne de Truro quand c'est premier ouvert? Parce que le chiffre de 230 élèves, c'est remarquable. Parce que si je m'en rappelle bien, l'école, ici à Truro, c'était une petite école avec très peu d'étudiants.
MS. SAULNIER: Wendy, do you know how many students were at the school when it started? There was - was it 92 in the very beginning?
MS. WENDY ROBICHAUD: In the very beginning, 37
MR. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, I'm going to interrupt for a second. If you would like to come up and sit next to her, you're more than welcome. Just for the record, I can't really recall - I did say your name, so I'm sure that they got that on the record, but I'll ask if you could just state your name.
MS. ROBICHAUD: Yes. Good afternoon, my name is Wendy Robichaud. I am a volunteer with the Centre and I work in community development with the Acadian communities. As well, there are communities with Coastal Communities Network.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Go ahead, Yvette, please.
MS. SAULNIER: In the beginning, the school that was begun, basically by concerned parents, who wanted to not only maintain the language, but also the culture. What we were dealing with at that time was mostly Acadian families and those from Québec, and a few from Manitoba. When we started, we had 37 in a small office space, attached to the school board. It has grown substantially, and what we are dealing with now is not only the francophones who are within Canada, but now our immigrant population. Within this, we have Moroccan, we have Arabic, and we have people from Chile, who have an option of learning in French as well.
What we get to is the opportunity of the immigrant communities here - their first language is French, and, when it comes to representation that's how they express themselves and their issues first. We're finding that very evident, particularly with the new professionals coming in, in immigration, as attached to the school now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Samson.
MR. SAMSON: Juste un point final sur ça c'est, peut-être que mes collègues ne sont pas au courant, mais le seul conseil scolaire en Nouvelle-Écosse qui a vu une augmentation dans le numéro d'étudiants cette année, c'est le Conseil scolaire acadien provincial. Alors, ce n'est pas Halifax Regional School Board, ce n'est aucun des conseils scolaires anglophones. Ils ont tous vu une réduction de leur population, sauf le Conseil scolaire acadien provincial et je vous félicite pour le bon travail que vous avez fait ici à Truro, pas juste avec la communauté acadienne, mais, comme vous dites, les immigrants, les nouveaux Canadiens qui sont venus avoir l'option d'avoir leur éducation en français. Je vous félicite pour ça et puis, c'est remarquable, de 37 étudiants à 230. C'est une histoire de succès. Merci.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions? I thank you very much for coming today. It was very kind of you to take your time and be here with us.
MS. SAULNIER: Thank you. I am very proud to be Acadian, and for the three members who represent us in the government, at whatever level they are, I really wish that they'd continue being there and representing us. It's very important to us. We just don't want to lose our culture and our language. It's great. Thanks.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, thank you. We will take a recess now, and I think our time slated for here was from 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Is that correct?
Maybe what we'll do is take this break, and then we'll come back and have our in-camera meeting to discuss a few points that we need to do.
[The select committee adjourned at 4:18 p.m.]
