A New Federal Electoral Map is Taking Shape for New Brunswick

 

The Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for New Brunswick Invites the Public to Participate in Its Work

 

Meet your commission – New Brunswick

 

Part l: Introduction and Overview– New Brunswick

After each decennial census, an independent electoral boundaries commission is established for each province. Its task is to revise or, more properly stated, to readjust the boundaries of the federal electoral districts (sometimes called ridings) to reflect changes and movements in the province's population. The Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3 ("the Act") sets out the procedure for the review.

The Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for New Brunswick ("the Commission") was established on November 1, 2021. The Chair of the Commission, appointed by the Chief Justice of New Brunswick, is Madam Justice Lucie A. LaVigne, of the Court of Appeal of New Brunswick. The other members of the Commission, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Commons, are Dr. Conde Grondin, a retired professor of political science from the University of New Brunswick, and the Honourable Thomas Riordon, a retired justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of New Brunswick and Deputy Chair of the Commission. Mr. Riordon served as a member of the previous Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New Brunswick in 2012–2013, while Dr. Grondin was a member of the 2012 Provincial Electoral Boundaries and Representation Commission for New Brunswick.

The Commission must propose a new electoral map for the Province of New Brunswick; consult with New Brunswickers through public hearings and review written submissions; submit a report on its considerations and propose an electoral map to the House of Commons; consider objections from members of the House of Commons; and prepare a final report outlining the electoral boundaries for the province.

The Commission will consider the input received from the public and from members of the House of Commons when determining the boundaries. However, as an independent body, the Commission makes all final decisions as to where these boundaries will lie.

The Starting Point ─ The 2021 Census

The 2021 Census established the total population for the province at 775,610. New Brunswick's representation in the House of Commons is 10 members and the province is accordingly divided into 10 electoral districts. The population of the province divided by 10 gives a provincial electoral quota of 77,561 residents per electoral district. From 2011 to 2021, the population of the province increased from 751,171 to 775,610, which is an increase of 24,439 or 3.25%. Some areas of the province grew faster than others, with Moncton and Dieppe being the province's fastest-growing cities, showing increases of 10.5% and 10.8% respectively.

Table 1 below shows the current electoral districts with their population counts from the 2021 Census and displays their current variances from the provincial electoral quota of 77,561 if no adjustments were to be made to their electoral boundaries.

Table 1 – Populations and Variances for Current Electoral Districts Electoral Quota of 77,561

Federal Electoral District	Population 2021	Variance(%)
Acadie—Bathurst	77,594	0.04
Beauséjour	88,797	14.49
Fredericton	87,436	12.73
Fundy Royal	83,721	7.94
Madawaska—Restigouche	60,184	-22.40
Miramichi—Grand Lake	57,520	-25.84
Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe	101,237	30.53
New Brunswick Southwest	67,781	-12.61
Saint John—Rothesay	81,996	5.72
Tobique—Mactaquac	69,344	-10.59

Voter Parity and Effective Representation

Section 15 of the Act directs that the population of each electoral district shall correspond as closely as reasonably possible to the electoral quota. The Act, however, also requires the Commission to consider several other factors and permits the Commission to depart from the quota in any case where it considers it necessary or desirable:

1. in order to respect the community of interest or community of identity in or the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province, or
2. in order to maintain a manageable geographic size for districts in sparsely populated, rural or northern regions of the province.

When considering these factors, the Commission must make every effort to ensure that, except in circumstances it views as extraordinary, the population of each electoral district in the province remain within ±25% of the electoral quota.

In conjunction with the provisions of the Act, the Commission's decisions must be guided by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees Canadian citizens the right to vote in federal and provincial elections. In Reference re Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) [1991] 2 S.C.R. 158 ("Carter"), the Supreme Court of Canada held that the purpose of the right to vote, as guaranteed by section 3 of the Charter, "is not equality of voting power but the right to 'effective representation'" (p. 182). At issue was a Saskatchewan provincial electoral map that displayed large deviations from representation by population to the benefit of rural voters and at the expense of urban ones. Effective representation was understood by the Court to entail voter parity as the primary concern, but to permit deviations for reasons such as "geography, community history, community interests and minority representation," in order to "effectively represent the diversity of our social mosaic" (p. 184).

Each of these factors can, like the size of the population in the riding, have an impact on the ability of a member of Parliament to effectively represent the people he or she was elected to represent. Departures from voter parity are permitted where they can be justified as contributing to better government of the populace as a whole. The concept of effective representation is a key consideration for the proper operation of Canadian democracy.

The Commission, being a federal institution, has certain duties pertaining to the Government of Canada's commitment to promote the development and vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada. Therefore, the Commission must take into account the impact of its decisions on the official-language minority community; in New Brunswick, this refers to the French-language community. There is a strong Francophone and Acadian presence in the Province of New Brunswick; effective representation for this linguistic minority is an important goal, especially in New Brunswick, Canada's only officially bilingual province.

The Commission has endeavoured to achieve the effective representation of New Brunswickers in Parliament. The sparsely populated northern regions of the province, the topography of certain ridings and New Brunswick's linguistic profile presented a few challenges in the configuration of appropriate electoral districts.

Public Participation

The Commission invited the public to participate in the creation of its initial redistribution proposal by providing their written suggestions or comments. We received several submissions and refer to some of them in the following two paragraphs and in Part II of this document. The Commission wishes to thank everyone who provided comments for our review and consideration during this advance public consultation process. These comments identified many issues that we discussed and considered. Some were in direct contradiction to each other. The Commission could not accommodate the wishes of all. However, many of the suggestions were incorporated in this redistribution proposal, some in their entirety, others in part.

We received a brief from the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick. It summarized its view of the applicable principles as well as the Commission's obligations and duties according to the Act, the Charter and the jurisprudence. It noted that New Brunswick presently has three predominantly French-speaking electoral districts (Acadie—Bathurst, Beauséjour and Madawaska—Restigouche), one bilingual district (Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe) and six mainly English-speaking districts (Fredericton, Fundy Royal, Miramichi—Grand Lake, New Brunswick Southwest, Saint John—Rothesay and Tobique—Mactaquac), and expressed the hope that this will also be the case at the end of this redistribution process. The Commission is of the view that its redistribution proposal maintains the status quo concerning the linguistic profile of the electoral districts.

Local governance reform is now underway in New Brunswick. However, the new local government boundaries are not expected to come into effect before January 1, 2023. Therefore, as indicated in the Appendix, when describing the electoral districts, "wherever a word or expression is used to denote a territorial division, such word or expression shall indicate the territorial division as it existed or was bounded on the first day of January 2021, unless otherwise stated." We have made only one departure from the general rule. At the request of the City of Fredericton, when drawing the proposed electoral district of Fredericton—Oromocto, we have included in that riding all of the territory that is expected to be included within the limits of the City of Fredericton after the completion of the local governance reform process. The Commission reserves the right to readjust territorial divisions to take into account some or all of the local governance reform, should we conclude that there is a need to do so before submitting our final report.

The Initial Redistribution Proposal

As shown in Table 1, the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe exceeds the electoral quota by 30.53%, while Miramichi—Grand Lake falls short of it by 25.84%. The Commission is of the view that there are no extraordinary circumstances that would justify allowing any electoral district in New Brunswick to deviate by more than 25% or less than 25% of the electoral quota. In view of the above, it is obvious that changes to the electoral map of the province are required.

The Commission agrees that change should not be made just for change's sake. Therefore, we set out to make the adjustments with a minimum of disturbance to the current boundaries, while at the same time considering the principles set out in section 15 of the Act, the Charter and the jurisprudence. However, when one adjusts the boundary or boundaries of one electoral district, it necessitates the adjustment of adjoining ridings, which can have a domino effect on other ridings. In the proposal, all electoral districts in New Brunswick have been altered—some more substantially than others—to better promote relative voter parity while maintaining effective representation.

As part of its mandate, the Commission reviewed the names of all 10 electoral districts. Because of the proposed changes to the boundaries, the Commission considers it appropriate to make changes to the names of five of the proposed districts, to better describe their geographic locations. The names of electoral districts in New Brunswick have usually reflected geographic features and historically significant place names. Names such as Madawaska—Restigouche and Tobique—Mactaquac have tremendous historical and cultural significance to the people of those ridings, and therefore we are not suggesting any name change notwithstanding the proposed changes to the boundaries of these districts.

After careful review, the Commission proposes maps and boundaries that reflect the names and population numbers found in Table 2 below.

Table 2 – Populations and Variances for Proposed Electoral Districts Electoral Quota of 77,561

Federal Electoral District	Population 2021	Variance(%)
Acadie—Bathurst	79,581	2.60
Beauséjour	88,490	14.09
Fredericton—Oromocto	85,540	10.29
Fundy Royal—Riverview	74,261	-4.25
Madawaska—Restigouche	71,099	-8.33
Miramichi—Grand Lake	59,725	-23.00
Moncton—Dieppe	91,333	17.76
Saint John—Kennebecasis	81,954	5.66
Saint John—St. Croix	78,963	1.81
Tobique—Mactaquac	64,664	-16.63

Two of the current electoral districts were beyond the allowable variance of ±25% and another was very close. With its proposal, the Commission effects a redistribution that brings most of the electoral districts closer to the provincial electoral quota and improves relative voter parity, in the sense that no riding is now outside the 25% limit and most of the ridings have a 10.29% variance or less. The Commission is satisfied that effective representation can occur within the proposed boundaries.

Although Part I of this document gives the general reasons for our proposed redistribution plan, Part II provides narrative descriptions of all proposed electoral districts, an overview of the changes proposed for each electoral district and additional reasons for these specific changes.

The Act calls for public hearings so that the Commission can hear representations from interested persons concerning its proposed redistribution plan before submitting its final report to the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada. The times and places of these public hearings are set out in Part III of this document. The Commission has adopted rules for the conduct of the public hearings and the making of representations. These rules are set out in Parts IV and V. The Appendix contains legal descriptions and maps of the proposed electoral districts.

We look forward to hearing from interested parties, either in person during our public hearings or in writing. The Commission recognizes that matters such as community of interest or identity, historical patterns and manageable geographic size are open to differing interpretations as they apply generally or to particular electoral districts. We welcome submissions on these matters.

Simultaneous translation will be available in both official languages at all public hearings.

 

Part ll: Overview of the Changes Proposed for Each Electoral District and Additional Reasons for these Changes– New Brunswick

Acadie—Bathurst

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie (which includes the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville) that is situated in the current electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst has a population of 79,581 and is 2.60% above the provincial electoral quota.

At the beginning of this redistribution process, the Commission did not believe that this electoral district required any restructuring. However, during our pre-proposal consultation, we received a written submission from Mr. Keith Chiasson, the MLA for Tracadie-Sheila, bringing to our attention the fact that a small section of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie, more specifically the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville (consisting of approximately 1,990 people), is included in the electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake, while the much larger section of the regional municipality is located in the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst.

Mr. Chiasson submitted that the populations of these communities are predominantly Francophone and Acadian and that their linguistic profile and sense of belonging align with the Acadian Peninsula and the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst, where they go for services and daily needs, such as schools, health services, shops, businesses, financial and legal services, and provincial and federal government offices. We note that the entirety of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie is included in the Acadian Peninsula Regional Service Commission. We were also copied on a letter sent to the Minister of Local Government and Local Governance Reform by a citizen of Rivière-du-Portage, asking that these communities become part of Acadie—Bathurst, so that its citizens would be represented by the member of Parliament for Acadie—Bathurst.

The Commission believes that these communities can be more effectively represented as part of the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst, with which they share a community of interest as well as a community of identity based on language and culture. Although the proposed Miramichi—Grand Lake riding has the highest negative variance from the provincial electoral quota, we view this as a case where the need for effective representation clearly trumps the lack of voter parity.

Beauséjour

The Commission is proposing a minor change to the electoral district of Beauséjour, assigning that very small part of the City of Moncton that is currently in the riding of Beauséjour to the proposed riding of Moncton—Dieppe. The proposed electoral district of Beauséjour has a population of 88,490 and is 14.09% above the provincial electoral quota.

We received a submission from the Kent Regional Service Commission suggesting far-reaching changes to several of the current districts, which would require a major restructuring of New Brunswick's electoral map, including the disappearance of Miramichi—Grand Lake, Fundy Royal, Tobique—Mactaquac, and New Brunswick Southwest; and the creation of Central NB, Albert—Tantramar, Western Valley—Charlotte and Kings—York.

The submission suggested that all communities that are part of the Kent Regional Service Commission be assigned to the proposed electoral district of Beauséjour. Several of these communities (mostly in Kent County but also some in Northumberland County) are in the current and proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake, a district that is underpopulated. It further suggested that the southern part of the riding, including the communities of Sackville, Dorchester, Port Elgin, and surrounding areas, be removed from Beauséjour and assigned to the riding that is now called Fundy Royal. Similar suggestions for Beauséjour were made by a citizen of Miramichi—Grand Lake, calling for the transfer from Miramichi—Grand Lake to Beauséjour of communities that are situated in Kent County and the transfer of the southern part of the riding to Fundy Royal.

The removal of the suggested communities from Miramichi—Grand Lake would require further additions to that electoral district, if it is to stay within 25% of the electoral quota. Transferring the suggested communities from Beauséjour to Fundy Royal would mean that some inhabitants and the member of Parliament for Fundy Royal would have to travel through the ridings of Beauséjour and Moncton—Dieppe to reach each other. The Regional Commission also noted that the suggested changes would mean that Beauséjour, along with the two districts of the north, would represent mainly French-speaking communities. As previously noted, our redistribution plan maintains the status quo.

The Commission does not believe that the electoral map of the province or the electoral district of Beauséjour requires fundamental restructuring as suggested. Although the population of Beauséjour has increased, the Commission is of the view that the increase does not warrant a change of its boundaries. Its relatively high population compared to the other rural electoral districts is justified, given that it is geographically the smallest rural electoral district (approximately 4,080 km²). This district has a strong community of interest and, in our view, it is appropriate in both size and character. Although Beauséjour would have a population count closer to the electoral quota if these suggestions were adopted, the Commission did not deem that this would contribute to more effective representation.

Fredericton (suggested name: Fredericton—Oromocto)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Fredericton be renamed Fredericton—Oromocto. It would comprise the current existing district plus those parts situated in the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac that are included within the new proposed limit of the City of Fredericton, as of April 8, 2022; less the Parish of Burton assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix; and less the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current riding of Fredericton, assigned to Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Fredericton—Oromocto has a population of 85,540 and is 10.29% above the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission received a submission from the City of Fredericton, as well as from two members of the public who live within the city limits but are part of the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac, asking that the entirety of the City of Fredericton be included in one district instead of two as it now stands.

The City of Fredericton is the urban centre of New Brunswick's Capital Region. The City is of the view that the community of interest shared by the urban electorate is best advanced by combining in one electoral district: the entirety of the City of Fredericton (per the new proposed city limits), the Town of Oromocto, the Village of New Maryland, the St. Mary's First Nation, and the Oromocto First Nation. There is no doubt that a strong community of interest and historical ties exist among these communities.

The adoption of the City's suggestions would also permit the transfer of the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current riding of Fredericton to the proposed riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake, which is chronically underpopulated. This factor also militates in favour of accepting the suggestions we received concerning the readjustment of the boundaries of this riding.

The Commission concludes that the arguments made in favour of the suggested changes are reasonable and we are proposing to go along with them. However, we are of the opinion that the proposed electoral district should be renamed Fredericton—Oromocto, to give a better description of the new geography of the district.

Fundy Royal (suggested name: Fundy Royal—Riverview)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Fundy Royal be renamed Fundy Royal—Riverview. It would comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the Town of Riverview that is in the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe; less the Parish of Waterborough assigned to the proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake; and less the Town of Quispamsis, which would be assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis. The proposed electoral district of Fundy Royal—Riverview has a population of 74,261 and is 4.25% below the provincial electoral quota.

There exists a community of interest as well as historical ties between the Town of Riverview and the riding of Fundy Royal, because approximately 50% of the population of Riverview is already part of the riding of Fundy Royal. In fact, the Commission received comments from a resident of the Town of Riverview expressing her frustration with the fact that the Town of Riverview was divided between two ridings and commenting that many did not seem to know where the dividing line between the districts was situated. The community of identity is obvious, as the riding of Fundy Royal and the Town of Riverview are both heavily populated with majority-Anglophone communities.

The transfer of the remainder of the Town of Riverview to Fundy Royal is also driven by the fact that the current district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, with a variance of 30.53% over the electoral quota, is beyond the allowable variance; therefore, a part of this riding must be transferred to another district. Obviously, similar arguments to those made above could also be used, at least in part, to justify transferring the remainder of Dieppe to the district of Beauséjour. Therefore, in the section dealing with the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe, we explain further why the Commission is proposing to transfer the remainder of the Town of Riverview to Fundy Royal, instead of transferring the remainder of the City of Dieppe to Beauséjour.

The community of Waterborough adjoins the community of Chipman. We assigned Waterborough to Miramichi—Grand Lake, because of its geographic proximity to the communities of Canning, Minto and Chipman, which are all part of the proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. Its addition to Miramichi—Grand Lake will help increase the population count of that riding. The Commission is also of the view that Waterborough has a community of interest and identity with the communities in the proposed riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake.

Bearing in mind relative voter parity, the Commission has assigned the Town of Quispamsis to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis. We have more to say about this proposed move in discussing the proposed district of Saint John—Kennebecasis.

The proposed district of Fundy Royal—Riverview, while mostly rural, has a landmass that is less than half the size of the two geographically largest electoral districts, Miramichi—Grand Lake and Tobique—Mactaquac. Therefore, a higher population is justified.

As the entirety of the Town of Riverview will be included in this proposed riding, the Commission proposes that the name of the electoral district be changed to Fundy Royal—Riverview. The new boundary changes dictate a change of name to better reflect the new geographic boundary.

Madawaska—Restigouche

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche, whose population is 22.40% below the provincial quota, comprise the current electoral district plus the Parish of Grand Falls, the Town of Grand Falls, the Parish of Drummond, the Village of Drummond, and the Rural Community of Saint-André, which are in the current electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. We are also proposing a small adjustment concerning the boundaries around the Mount Carleton Provincial Park and the Nepisiguit Protected Natural Area, so that the entirety of the Park and Protected Area will be in the proposed district of Madawaska—Restigouche, rather than leaving a very small part of it (which has a population count of zero) in the proposed district of Miramichi—Grand Lake. The proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche has a population of 71,099 and is 8.33% below the provincial electoral quota.

Travelling from the west to the east of this riding, and vice versa, is challenging, due to the distance and a poor transportation system. More than 300 kilometres separate Connors in Madawaska from Colborne in Restigouche, and it takes more than three and a half hours to travel this distance by car. We believe that the geographical challenges justify it having a population that is 8.33% below the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission received three different submissions making suggestions that would affect the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. None of these submissions seemed to be from residents of the communities being transferred, and the Commission did not retain any of these submissions in their totality. However, all three suggested that the regions of Saint-André, Grand Falls, and Drummond should be in the same riding as Madawaska County. Although this region will add landmass to the riding, it will not increase the distance from the west to the east.

These communities have historical ties, as well as a community of interest, with communities in both Madawaska—Restigouche and Tobique—Mactaquac. From 1966 to 1996, they were in the same riding as the communities of Madawaska County; the riding was then known as Madawaska—Victoria. In fact, the line that separates the two counties runs through the Town of Grand Falls. It is also noted that these communities are included in the Northwest Regional Service Commission, along with the rest of the communities of Madawaska County.

They have a stronger community of identity with the riding of Madawaska—Restigouche than with Tobique—Mactaquac, due to language and culture. The population of this region is predominantly Francophone. More than 78% of the people of the current district of Madawaska—Restigouche are Francophones, while less than 17% of the people of the current district of Tobique—Mactaquac are Francophones.

Furthermore, this readjustment contributes to an increase in the population of the current electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche, which has a variance that is very close to the allowable limit, at 22.40% below the provincial quota. Extending the boundary of Madawaska—Restigouche to include the Francophone communities that are situated in the northern part of the adjoining riding of Tobique—Mactaquac brings the population of Madawaska—Restigouche closer to the electoral quota, with a variance of -8.33%. We realize that this move will bring the population count of the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac further from the electoral quota, from -10.59% to -16.63%, notwithstanding the additions that we are proposing for that district. One district has moved closer to the electoral quota by gaining 14.07%, while the other has lost 6.04%. Therefore, this readjustment promotes relative voter parity in the overall electoral map of the province.

The Commission concludes that, when the factors of relative voter parity, community of interest, community of identity and historical pattern are taken as a whole, the communities being transferred can be more effectively represented as part of the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche.

Miramichi—Grand Lake

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake comprise the current electoral district plus that part added by extending the district southward to include the Parish of Sheffield and those parts of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning that are in the current electoral district of Fredericton; plus the Parish of Waterborough that is in the current electoral district of Fundy Royal; less that part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie currently located in this riding (which includes the communities of Rivière-du-Portage, Haut-Rivière-du-Portage and Brantville) assigned to the proposed electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst; and less a very small area within the Mount Carleton Provincial Park and Nepisiguit Protected Natural Area (which has a population count of zero), assigned to the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. The proposed electoral district of Miramichi—Grand Lake has a population of 59,725 and is 23.00% below the provincial electoral quota.

It covers a land area of approximately 18,500 square kilometres, or 25% of the province's landmass, making it the largest riding in New Brunswick. Tobique—Mactaquac comes in second, at approximately 15,500 square kilometres.

The population of the current electoral district now stands at 57,520, which is 25.84% below the provincial electoral quota. With the transfer to Acadie—Bathurst of that small part of the Regional Municipality of Tracadie that was in Miramichi—Grand Lake (approximately 1,990 residents), this variance increases to approximately 28% under the provincial electoral quota. A variance of more than 25% of the electoral quota is not allowed by the Act, as the Commission concluded that there were no extraordinary circumstances that would justify allowing any electoral district in New Brunswick to deviate by more or less than 25% of the electoral quota. Therefore, additions must be made to this riding to keep it within the allowable variance.

Water is an impediment to expansion on its eastern boundary. Adding to the challenges of the reconfiguration of an appropriate electoral district is the fact that this district is surrounded by the three predominantly Francophone ridings and has large, very sparsely populated areas. Its neighbour to the west, the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac, is also substantially underpopulated, with a variance of 16.63% below the provincial quota.

In addition to comments received from the public relevant to this riding (alluded to in the discussion of the riding of Beauséjour), the Commission also received a written submission from Mr. Jake Stewart, the member of Parliament for Miramichi—Grand Lake. He encouraged the Commission to maintain the current riding as is. As explained above, this is not allowed. As an alternative, he suggested that we consider extending the district westerly and assign to it the communities of Juniper, Stanley and other smaller rural communities nearby. As noted, the riding to the west is Tobique—Mactaquac, which is also substantially underpopulated.

It is in part these reasons that prompted the Commission to propose an extension toward the south, where the communities of interest and identity better align and there is more population.

Considering that the parishes of Maugerville and Canning are already partly in the current riding of Miramichi—Grand Lake, the Commission is of the view that the remaining part of the parishes of Maugerville and Canning and the parishes of Sheffield and Waterborough are well suited additions to this riding, because of their character as rural communities, their economic community of interest and their linguistic profile.

Notwithstanding our efforts to increase the population of this district, the deviation from the electoral quota (-23.00%) is still very high. It is the highest in the province, nearing the lower tolerance level. Bearing in mind the main objective of effective representation, the Commission concludes that it is more important to conserve this electoral district with a small population than to create a riding with a population closer to the electoral quota, whose residents feel that they do not belong, by reason of the community of interest or identity binding them to an adjacent riding.

This decision is consistent with the provisions of the Act, which permit the Commission to look beyond the principle of representation by population to consider manageable geographic size for sparsely populated, rural, or northern regions of a province. It is generally recognized that it is more difficult to represent large rural districts than small urban districts. The problems of representing a vast, sparsely populated territory warrants a lower population count in this district.

Notwithstanding its large geographic size, the shared interests of its population makes this electoral district viable. Technological advancement continues to ease communication challenges formerly experienced in large geographic areas. Thus, despite its size, the Commission is of the view this electoral district can be effectively represented.

Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe (suggested name: Moncton—Dieppe)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe be renamed Moncton—Dieppe and comprise the current electoral district plus that very small part of the City of Moncton that is in the current electoral district of Beauséjour; less that part of the Town of Riverview that is in the current district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Fundy Royal—Riverview. The proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe has a population of 91,333 and is 17.76% above the provincial electoral quota.

The Commission recognizes the ties that bind the three communities that form the current riding. These militated strongly thus far in favour of keeping all of them together within one electoral district. However, we are of the view that keeping them together while continuing to chip away parts of Dieppe and Riverview is no longer the most appropriate configuration for this riding when considering the available alternatives for creating an electoral map for New Brunswick.

The population of the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe grew from 89,484 in 2011 to 101,237 in 2021. Thus, its population is 30.53% over the provincial electoral quota and adjustments are therefore required.

The Commission received a submission from the City of Moncton recognizing that changes to the boundaries of this riding were inevitable, to comply with the Act. It noted that the population count of the City of Moncton is now at 79,470, which is 2.46% above the electoral quota. It stated: Previous Commissions have drawn our federal electoral district boundaries with a goal of respecting the community of interest and identity that is present [...] in the greater Moncton area. Although the merit of this approach is undeniable, our desire to continue to collaborate and share with our regional partners to deliver the best possible services to our combined citizens will continue regardless of the boundaries chosen. In conclusion, it stated that the City of Moncton's preferred option is a Moncton riding that coincides with [the] City's current municipal boundaries. We seriously considered this option but, for reasons explained below, the Commission concluded that the part of the City of Dieppe that is currently in this riding and the City of Moncton should be kept together in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe.

Transferring both the remainder of the City of Dieppe and the Town of Riverview to other ridings, as suggested, would require major changes to several other ridings. Transferring the remainder of Dieppe (a population of 11,863) to Beauséjour would increase the population of Beauséjour to 100,353, thus bringing it beyond the allowable limit of 25%, at 29.39% above the electoral quota. As previously explained, we are basically proposing that the electoral district of Beauséjour remain as is, because we found it appropriate in both size and character.

As noted earlier, we also received a submission from the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick expressing its wish that the riding currently known as Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe remain bilingual after the redistribution process. The Commission is of the view that it is desirable that the riding encompassing the City of Moncton remain bilingual, provided that this can be done within the confines of the law and jurisprudence that govern us.

Statistics Canada will release the data concerning the linguistic diversity and use of English and French in Canada on August 17, 2022. In the meantime, we are using the 2016 data. For that part of Dieppe that remains in the proposed district, this data shows that 60.6% of its population indicate French as the language spoken most often at home, while 66.6% indicate that their mother tongue is French. For the City of Moncton, this data shows that 23% of its population indicate French as the language spoken most often at home, while 30.7% indicate that their mother tongue is French. By keeping part of the City of Dieppe within the same electoral district as the City of Moncton, these percentages increase to 27.8% and 35.4% respectively. At the end of the last redistribution, these percentages for the current electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe were 28.95% and approximately 34.5% respectively.

Notwithstanding the bilingual status of the City of Moncton, the Commission is of the opinion that the dilution of the Francophone critical mass and the loss of a Francophone municipality (Dieppe) would endanger the effective representation of the Francophone minority in the suggested new riding, in that it would weaken that minority's political influence and diminish its ability to voice its concerns effectively.

Furthermore, the Acadians and Francophones of Dieppe and Moncton (in the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe) represent a community of interest, in that their interests are intrinsically tied in with the substantial Francophone institutional network found in the Moncton area. Keeping Moncton and Dieppe together in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe makes it possible to preserve the integrity of the community of interest formed by the Francophone population of Dieppe and Moncton toward the Francophone institutional network located therein, and to preserve a Francophone critical mass in the proposed district of Moncton—Dieppe.

Because the proposed electoral district of Moncton—Dieppe is at most one twenty-fifth the geographic area of the Beauséjour riding, a larger population is to be expected. The variance from the electoral quota for Moncton—Dieppe is high (+17.76%) but, considering the density of the population in a very small area, it should not jeopardize the member of Parliament's ability to represent the people of the riding effectively. We note that, at the end of the previous redistribution process in 2013, this riding was 19.3% above the provincial quota. Urban electoral districts, by virtue of their smaller geographic size and representative accessibility, are justified in having higher positive variances from the electoral quota.

The 2021 Census revealed that Moncton and Dieppe are the province's fastest-growing cities; therefore, it is important to leave some room for both to grow. The proposed changes leave both the electoral districts of Moncton-Dieppe (+17.76%) and Beauséjour (+14.09%) well within the 25% range of deviation permitted by the Act.

In our analysis, we concluded that the factors found in section 15 of the Act, especially the community of interest factor, as well as fair representation for New Brunswick's linguistic minority, militate in favour of keeping part of the City of Dieppe in the same riding as the City of Moncton.

The Commission believes that those factors are, in this case, more important than voter parity is to ensuring effective representation. As stated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Carter, to insist on voter parity might deprive citizens with distinct interests of an effective voice in the legislative process as well as of effective assistance from their representatives in their 'ombudsman' role (p. 188).

With the removal of Riverview from the Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe riding, it is incumbent on the Commission to rename the riding Moncton—Dieppe to reflect the changes in the boundary of the riding.

New Brunswick Southwest (suggested name: Saint John—St. Croix)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest be renamed Saint John—St. Croix. It would comprise the current electoral district plus that part of the current electoral district of Saint John—Rothesay lying west of the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour; plus the Parish of Burton, which is in the current electoral district of Fredericton; less the villages of Harvey and McAdam, the parishes of Dumfries, Kingsclear, McAdam, Manners Sutton and Prince William, the Rural Community of Hanwell, and the Kingsclear Indian Reserve No. 6, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. The proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix has a population of 78,963 and is 1.81% above the provincial electoral quota.

The current riding covers approximately 11,800 square kilometres and includes constituents living on three islands, a situation that presents unique travel and representation challenges. With the proposed new boundaries, the size of the riding will decrease to approximately 8,600 square kilometres, making it more manageable.

Concerning the Parish of Burton, as previously explained, the Commission accepted the suggestions from the City of Fredericton, and therefore Burton had to be transferred to its only other adjoining riding, the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix. We believe that it is better suited to this riding than to the proposed district of Fredericton—Oromocto.

The Commission has given additional reasons for transferring the above-listed communities to the proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac in the section dealing with that riding. With the transfer of these communities to Tobique—Mactaquac, the addition of part of the City of Saint John to this riding effects a desirable population adjustment between this riding and the current riding of Saint John—Rothesay, to which we have assigned the Town of Quispamsis, increasing its population. However, this means that the City of Saint John will be divided between two ridings.

At the request of the City of Fredericton and the City of Moncton, the Commission proposes that these cities be reunited so that the entirety of the city be in one riding, as was the situation with all other cities in the province, except for Dieppe. In stark contrast to this, we are now proposing that the City of Saint John be divided, by using the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour as a natural topographical division, and transferring the part lying west of this dividing line to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix.

The Commission recognizes that, in addition to dividing one city into two electoral districts, this proposal also attaches a small part of the City of Saint John to a largely rural electoral district.

Hybrid electoral districts are sometimes necessary, or desirable, to bring population numbers more in line with the provincial quota or to deal with natural topographical divisions. In the past, Saint John was, in fact, a mixed urban-rural electoral district known as Saint John—Albert. Boundaries can be drawn in many ways, but each case must be determined with regard to its particular facts, the statutory criteria, the population count and the available alternatives for creating an electoral map for the province and a workable electoral district that can be effectively represented.

We are aware that an option similar to what we are proposing for the City of Saint John was suggested in the past and considered by at least one previous commission, in 2003. However, the option was not part of the commission's original redistribution proposal submitted for public input. Therefore, awareness of the proposal was not widespread and there was little opportunity for public intervention and feedback. That commission was of the view that further public consultation was advisable. By suggesting these changes at the proposal stage this time, we hope to allow for proper public input and debate during the public consultation phase, including the public hearings.

There is an obvious and shared community of interest between the population of the proposed electoral districts of Saint John—St. Croix and Saint John—Kennebecasis. Some would say that they are one and the same community of interest, with common challenges and concerns and historical ties. The community of identity of the proposed ridings of Saint John—St. Croix and Saint John—Kennebecasis is significant, with over 90% of the population of these ridings having English as their first language. Both districts border the Bay of Fundy.

The City of Saint John will remain the major business, economic and service centre for most of the population of this proposed riding, especially the residents from the counties of Charlotte and Saint John.

Finally, the Commission recommends that the name for the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest be changed to Saint John—St. Croix because of the addition of part of west Saint John to the current district of New Brunswick Southwest. The redistribution proposal of the 2002 Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New Brunswick contains an extensive review of the names proposed for the electoral districts. In relation to the significance of the Island of St. Croix, which is referred to as the birthplace of Acadie and of Canada (page 8), the last paragraph reads: The name St. Croix is eminently suitable for a federal electoral district that can legitimately claim to be the birthplace of the nation. It should also be borne in mind that the St. Croix River forms a portion of Canada's international boundary with the United States of America. The Commission is of the opinion that the renaming better reflects the new electoral district's culture, history, and geography.

Saint John—Rothesay (suggested name: Saint John—Kennebecasis)

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Saint John—Rothesay be renamed Saint John—Kennebecasis. It would comprise the current electoral district plus the Town of Quispamsis, which is in the current electoral district of Fundy Royal; less that part which lies west of the Saint John River and Saint John Harbour, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Saint John—St. Croix. The proposed electoral district of Saint John—Kennebecasis has a population of 81,954 and is 5.66% above the provincial electoral quota.

In the previous section, we gave our reasons for proposing to transfer part of the City of Saint John to the proposed district of Saint John—St. Croix. The present section deals with the addition of the Town of Quispamsis to the proposed district of Saint John—Kennebecasis.

The Commission is of the view that the Town of Quispamsis has a close community of interest with the more urban area of the City of Saint John and the Town of Rothesay. These three communities have a community of identity based on language and historical ties. At one time, Rothesay and Quispamsis were part of the riding of Fundy Royal. After 2003, Rothesay and part of Quispamsis were in the same riding as the City of Saint John. Then, in 2012, Quispamsis was reunited in Fundy Royal, while Rothesay remained with the City of Saint John. In the past, some have asked that the Town of Rothesay and the Town of Quispamsis, commonly referred to as the Kennebecasis Valley, remain in the same electoral district, given the obvious shared economic community of interests and geographic proximity.

The Commission is satisfied that the proximity of communities and commonality of interests in this area provide an excellent basis for an electoral district.

With the addition of the bedroom community of Quispamsis to this riding, the Commission has proposed changing the name to Saint John—Kennebecasis, to reflect the new geography of the boundary readjustment. The lower Kennebecasis River valley includes the municipalities of Quispamsis, Rothesay and surrounding communities, all part of the Saint John region.

Tobique—Mactaquac

The Commission proposes that the electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac comprise the current electoral district plus that part added by extending the southwesterly boundary of the district to include the villages of Harvey and McAdam, the parishes of Dumfries, Kingsclear, McAdam, Manners Sutton and Prince William, the Rural Community of Hanwell, and the Kingsclear Indian Reserve No. 6, which are in the current district of New Brunswick Southwest; less those parts that are within the new proposed limit of the City of Fredericton, as of April 8, 2022, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Fredericton—Oromocto; and less the communities of the Parish of Grand Falls, the Town of Grand Falls, the Parish of Drummond, the Village of Drummond, and the Rural Community of Saint-André, assigned to the proposed electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche. The proposed electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac has a population of 64,664 and is 16.63% below the provincial quota.

A few factors militate in favour of adding the above-named communities to the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac. They have many things in common with the other communities in Tobique—Mactaquac, such as their linguistic profile.

The Commission also recognizes a historical pattern shared between these communities and several communities of the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac, as they were at one point in the same riding, Carleton—Charlotte, which also included communities from York County.

The communities situated in the proposed district of Tobique—Mactaquac form a potential communal representation of rural New Brunswick interests. The addition is a southwestern extension of the riding, and the elected representative from Tobique—Mactaquac would enjoy practical access to these newly added communities.

However, the most important reason for adding communities to this district is to increase the population of Tobique—Mactaquac, considering the Commission's mandate to ensure relative voter parity and effective representation. Nevertheless, the geographic size of a district must also be considered in the balance. The Commission believes that it is justified in departing from relative voter parity to ensure more effective representation of the second-largest district of the province.

 

Part lll: Notice of Public Hearings– New Brunswick

The Commission will conduct public hearings to hear representations concerning the boundaries and names it has proposed, at the following locations, dates, and times:

Schedule of Public Hearings

Location	Place of hearing	Date of hearing	Time of hearing
Woodstock	Best Western Plus 123 Gallop Court (Exit 185)	Wednesday, September 7, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Saint-Quentin	Palais Centre-Ville Multifunctional Room 198 Canada Street	Thursday, September 8, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Saint-Léolin	Municipal Hall 115 des Prés Street	Tuesday, September 13, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Newcastle	Kinsmen Centre 100 Newcastle Boulevard	Wednesday, September 14, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Shediac	Multipurpose Centre 58 Festival Street	Thursday, September 15, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Moncton	Hyatt Place Moncton (Rooms 1-2) 1000 Main Street	Tuesday, September 20, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Sussex	All Seasons Inn 1015 Main Street	Wednesday, September 21, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Rothesay	Bill McGuire Centre 95 James Renforth Drive	Thursday, September 22, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Saint Andrews	W. C. O'Neill Arena Complex 24 Reed Avenue	Tuesday, September 27, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Fredericton	Fredericton Inn Bi-Centennial Room 1315 Regent Street	Wednesday, September 28, 2022	2:00 p.m.
Virtual Hearing	The link will be provided to participants.

 

Part lV: Requirement for Making Submissions During Public Hearings– New Brunswick

Interested persons proposing to make representations must read and follow the rules set out in Part IV and V of this proposal. There is no entitlement to be heard by the Commission unless you comply with these rules.

The Commission encourages representations from interested persons or representatives of interested groups; however, any person or group desiring to make a representation must give written notice in accordance with subsection 19(5) of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, which states:

19(5) No representation shall be heard by a commission at any sittings held by it for the hearing of representations from interested persons unless notice in writing is given to the secretary of the commission within 23 days after the date of the publication of the last advertisement under subsection (2), stating the name and address of the person who seeks to make the representation and indicating concisely the nature of the representation and of the interest of the person.

All notices must be received no later than Tuesday, August 23, 2022, and must be submitted:

By mail:

Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for New Brunswick
PO Box 161,
Edmundston, New Brunswick E3V 3K8

Or By email:

NB@redecoupage-federal-redistribution.ca

Notices may also be submitted electronically by completing the online form available at redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca (select "New Brunswick" and then click "Public Participation").

 

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/electoral-riding-changes-proposed-1.6492429

 

Proposal to split Saint John into two federal ridings baffles MP

Wayne Long says he'll fight change proposed by federal boundary commission

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

 

 

 

https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/10/former-mps-rob-moore-rodney-weston-and.html 

 

Tuesday, 8 October 2019

Former MPs Rob Moore, Rodney Weston and John Williamson hope to flip 3 southern New Brunswick ridings

---------- Original message ----------
From: "Shuttle, Paul"<Paul.Shuttle@pco-bcp.gc.ca>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 12:26:21 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks it was interesting that CBC shut
down the comment section about Moore, Williamson and Weston just
before our debate last night but Rogers TV recorded it N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Please note that I am no longer at PCO. For immediate assistance,
please contact Ms. Jodie van Dieen at 613-957-5726 or Ms. Guylaine
Létourneau at 613-957-5252.

Veuillez noter que je suis plus au BCP. Pour une assistance immédiate,
veuillez contacter Mme Jodie van Dieen au 613-957-5726 ou Mme Guylaine
Létourneau au 613-957-5252.

Thank you.



---------- Original message ----------
From: "Drouin, Nathalie (BRQ)"<Nathalie.Drouin@justice.gc.ca>


---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 09:26:08 -0300
Subject: Methinks it was interesting that CBC shut down the comment section about
Moore, Williamson and Weston just before our debate lastnight but Rogers TV
recorded it N'esy Pas?
To: robmoorefundy@gmail.com, alaina@alainalockhart.ca,
tim.thompson@greenparty.ca, rudolf_neumayer@yahoo.ca,
James.Tolan@ndp.ca, johnevans.nca@gmail.com, votejohnw@gmail.com,
bruce.fitch@gnb.ca, bruce.northrup@gnb.ca, Ginette.PetitpasTaylor@parl.gc.ca, karen.ludwig.nb@gmail.com, Jacques.Poitras@cbc.ca, Jack.Keir@gnb.ca,
Kevin.Vickers@gnb.ca, Kevin.leahy@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, Dale.Morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, jp.lewis@unb.ca, darrow.macintyre@cbc.ca,
David.Akin@globalnews.ca, steve.murphy@ctv.ca, Newsroom@globeandmail.com, Gerald.Butts@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, Katie.Telford@pmo-cpm.gc.ca, Catherine.Tait@cbc.ca,
sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.ca, Alex.Johnston@cbc.ca, Paul.Shuttle@pco-bcp.gc.ca,  pablo.rodriguez@parl.gc.ca, hon.melanie.joly@canada.ca, hon.ralph.goodale@canada.ca,



https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies





David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @FloryGoncalves and 49 others
Methinks it was interesting that CBC shut down the comment section about Moore, Williamson and Weston just before our debate last night but Rogers TV recorded it N'esy Pas?


https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/10/former-mps-rob-moore-rodney-weston-and.html


#cdnpoli#nbpoli 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-federal-election-former-conservative-mps-1.5312202






David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @FloryGoncalves and 49 others
The 3 stooges will get their seats back in the circus However we should be in fear that Trudeau The Younger wins a majority mandate as ringmaster with Maritime buddies such as McClellan McKenna, Butts and Leblanc as the main puppeteers


#cdnpoli#nbpoli 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-federal-election-former-conservative-mps-1.5312202





David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos @FloryGoncalves and 49 others
These are some of the documents I served on the lawyer Rob Moore before I debated him on in June of 2004 


https://www.scribd.com/doc/265620671/Cross-Border-Txt


#cdnpoli#nbpoli 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/new-brunswick-federal-election-former-conservative-mps-1.5312202

Ousted by Liberal wave in 2015, trio of Conservatives try to retake seats

Former MPs Rob Moore, Rodney Weston and John Williamson hope to flip 3 southern New Brunswick ridings

Jacques Poitras· CBC News· Posted: Oct 08, 2019 5:00 AM AT





From left, Conservative candidates Rodney Weston, Rob Moore and John Williamson are hoping to retake the federal seats they held prior to the Liberal wave in New Brunswick four years ago. (CBC)

Rob Moore remembers how it slowly crept up on him: the realization that the 2015 election was going to be far more challenging than he expected.

Moore went into that campaign as the favourite. He was first elected a Conservative MP in 2004 and won the riding of Fundy, later Fundy Royal, three more times.

But "we could sense that it was going to be tighter and tighter as the campaign went on," Moore recalled.

"It certainly didn't start off close, but by the end of it

, we recognized that it was going to be very close."

It was, but not in Moore's favour. He lost to Liberal Alaina Lockhart by 1,775 votes. A Liberal wave crashed into normally safe Conservative ridings, helping Justin Trudeau win all 10 of New Brunswick's federal seats.

Four years later, Moore and two other former Conservative MPs defeated in 2015 are hoping the Liberal tide is going back out in these three ridings along the Bay of Fundy.


Moore, the Conservative candidate in Fundy Royal, says he's focused more on the party's agenda than on leaders past or present. (CBC)

Moore, Rodney Weston and John Williamson are back on the ballot. All three say Trudeau has not delivered the change voters wanted.

"People feel now they were sold a bill of goods," Moore said. "By most measures, Justin Trudeau and his government and the MPs in the region have been a disappointment."

Liberals say Tories 'not evolving'

For Liberals, the attempted triple comeback is an opportunity to portray Conservatives as backward-looking.

"It speaks volumes to how the Conservative Party of Canada is not changing, is not evolving, is not embracing new thoughts, new people and new ideas," said Saint John-Rothesay Liberal candidate Wayne Long.

"I constantly hear it at the doors: 'Are you telling me that after four years, after each of them losing, that they haven't moved on?'"


Saint John-Rothesay MP Wayne Long, pictured here with fellow Liberal Karen Ludwig, running in New Brunswick Southwest, says the return of the former Conservative MPs shows the party isn't 'evolving.'

The 2015 Liberal wave was driven by a surge of support for Trudeau.

"Definitely I was helped by the national trend," said New Brunswick Southwest candidate Karen Ludwig.
 
There was also fatigue with Stephen Harper, who had been Conservative prime minister for almost a decade.

"I would hear, 'I like you, but,' and you knew what was coming," said Weston, the Saint John-Rothesay Conservative candidate. "It's not uncommon to have that after a government's been in office and a prime minister's been in office after 10 years."

Political scientist J.P. Lewis of the University of New Brunswick in Saint John said the Conservative vote was down in 2015, but the Liberal wins were also driven by increased voter turnout.

This time, the results in the three ridings will hinge on "how much Trudeau has become a drag on the vote," he said.

History and current dynamics would appear to favour a return to Conservative voting traditions.

Comparing records

Williamson, the third member of the Conservative comeback crew, said he's running on "a voting record that reflects the values and priorities of constituents in New Brunswick Southwest."

That includes criticism of Ludwig for voting for the Trudeau government's Bill C-71, which toughened background checks on gun owners. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer has promised to repeal it.
 


Williamson, the Conservative candidate in New Brunswick Southwest, is critical of Ludwig for supporting tougher background checks for gun owners. (CBC)

Ludwig said that she's happy to compare her record to Williamson's and that she listened to voters, particularly women, who were worried about guns. She "erred on the side of public safety" by supporting the bill.

While Saint John-Rothesay is more of a swing riding, the provincial Progressive Conservatives nearly swept the area last fall, in part thanks to the perception that the proposed Energy East pipeline was cancelled due to Liberal policies.

But the three Liberal incumbents in the three ridings say Conservative comebacks are not a sure thing.

"I very rarely talk to someone who says, 'We should go backwards,'" Lockhart said as she knocked on doors in Quispamsis.

She said suburban bedroom communities at both ends of Fundy Royal have plenty of voters with ideas "quite different than some of the Conservative ideology."

"I know what the past has said about this riding, but in 2015 we showed there was a strong progressive voice here and that's what we're hearing at the doors."

'He's not my kind of guy'

Even so, fatigue with Trudeau could be as big a problem for her as Harper fatigue was for Moore.

"I'm not happy with the way the leader operates," one resident told Lockhart on his doorstep. "He's not my kind of guy."

That may explain why Lockhart puts more emphasis on Liberal policies, such as the Canada Child Tax Benefit, and on her own record.

"People really took a chance on me as a representative, and I've really focused in the last four years on being in the communities and being accessible and being a partner," she said.

"I'd rather focus on the work I've done, what I've accomplished in this election."


Weston is challenging Long in Saint John-Rothesay after losing his seat in 2015. (CBC)

Long is even more explicit, saying voters like his accessibility and transparency but tell him they're "disappointed" with his leader.

He said he responds by asking them if they want Conservative Leader Scheer as prime minister — they usually say no, he claimed — and by emphasizing his own record of bucking the Liberal Party line.

In 2017, Long broke ranks and voted with Conservative MPs trying to extend consultations on a controversial proposed small-business tax increase.

He also called for an independent investigation into the SNC Lavalin controversy and opposed ejecting MPs Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from the Liberal caucus.

"I don't apologize for being an independently minded Liberal," Long said. "I think finally this riding can get behind a candidate that has their back here, has their back against industry, has their back against the party if need be. Candidates should be riding first."
Not surprisingly, his Conservative opponent, Weston, is telling voters not to buy it.

"People understand that a vote for him is a vote for Justin Trudeau," Weston said. "People understand that very clearly."

Ludwig also acknowledged hearing concerns about Trudeau on doorsteps, though she said some of it is based on misinformation.

"The name on the ballot is a local candidate," she said.

With both Harper and Trudeau representing potential baggage, the candidates prefer to spar about "deliverables"— what they did for their ridings while in power — and policy.

Moore laments that the Liberals eliminated Conservative-created children`s sports and arts tax credits, which Scheer is promising to bring back.
 

Liberal Alaina Lockhart flipped the riding long held by Moore in 2015. (CBC)

Lockhart said those "boutique" credits only benefit "those who can afford to spend in the first place," while Liberal tax cuts benefited the middle close more broadly.

Both seem anxious to avoid a lengthy discussion of their own leaders.

"What we're talking about is not Trudeau years or Harper years," Moore said. "We're moving forward. We've got a forward-looking agenda."

"I'm more focused in this election on talking about our plan for the future," Lockhart said.

Despite that rhetoric, the three races here may be determined by which past — a decade of Harper or four years of Trudeau — voters are more anxious to discard.



 



66 Comments  
CBC deleted a pile of comments then shut this one down early just before the debate started in Sussex this evening
Commenting is now closed for this story.







David Raymond Amos
Methinks some folks understand why I am laughing as I watch things go "Poof" at the circus N'esy Pas?






















Kyle Woodman

David Raymond Amos
Content disabled 
Reply to @David Raymond Amos: Surprise Surprise Surprise














Anne Bérubé
New Brunswick will not move 'forward' with the liberals, you have tried for 4 years and it has not worked. Change course.


David Raymond Amos 
Reply to @Anne Bérubé: Yea Right and Harper 2.0 is no doubt your pick of the litter Correct?














Al Clark
LOL Moore's resume reads a LOT like his boss'. Graduated from bible U, went to "work" for the Reform party, never left....


David Raymond Amos 












Lewis Taylor
Reply to @pete prosser:
Cooke planting seeds for the future. 




https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/unb-saint-john-debate-election-climate-1.5305858

UNB Saint John to host all-candidates debate about climate change

Debate Thursday at 5 p.m. is part of GreenPAC's 100 Debates on the Environment being held across the country

CBC News· Posted: Oct 03, 2019 2:09 PM AT

 


The University of New Brunswick in Saint John is inviting members of the public to attend a debate being held on campus Thursday evening to hear Saint John-Rothesay candidates talk about their views on the environment. (Joseph Tunney/CBC)

The University of New Brunswick in Saint John will host a public all-candidates debate Thursday night focused on climate change.

It will be one of more than 100 such debates being held across the country in partnership with GreenPAC, a non-partisan, non-profit organization that wants federal candidates who will be "environmental leaders" elected on Oct. 21.

UNB nursing student Ashley Cook, a member of the students' representative council and a board director for the New Brunswick Student Alliance, helped organize the 100 Debates on the Environment event for the Saint John-Rothesay riding.

"I just think it's a really important issue that we should be focusing on for this election," said Cook, pointing to recent events in the province, such as spring flooding and climate change protests.

"We should be working together to better protect our communities and our businesses and the people within our communities."

• Thousands join climate strikes across New Brunswick

• Money alone not enough to address climate change, says conservationist Louise Comeau

The goal of 100 Debates on the Environment is to create a forum where voters can hear directly from local candidates about their visions for the environment, according to GreenPAC's website.

The debates will "demonstrate the strong public support that exists for environmental leadership, and enable the best policy ideas to come forward to compete for that support," it states.

They will also "create accountability for elected leaders and spur meaningful government action towards a sustainable future."

Good turnout expected

Cook expects the UNB debate, being held on campus in the Whitebone Lounge from 5 to 7 p.m., to be "really packed."

"I've had a lot of members of the community say they will be attending, as well as a lot of students," she said.

Wayne Long of the Liberal Party, Ann McAllister of the Green Party, Armand Cormier of the New Democrat Party, Adam Salesse of the People's Party, and independent candidates Stuart Jamieson and Neville Barnett are scheduled to participate.

Conservative Party candidate Rodney Weston said he was unable to attend, said Cook.


J.P. Lewis, a political science professor at the University of New Brunswick Saint John, will be the moderator of the debate on campus. (Graham Thompson/CBC)

The debate will focus on four key questions provided by GreenPAC, dealing with issues such as air pollution, water and housing, she said.

UNB political science Prof. J.P. Lewis will serve as moderator.

Many UNB students are keenly interested in the environment and sustainability, said Cook, noting there is a student-led environmental organization on campus.

The Green Society operates a recycling program, maintains the Tucker Park walking trails, organizes outdoor activities and promotes awareness about environmental problems and solutions.

There is a push to eliminate the use of plastics on campus, and UNB also has a community garden, she said.

Cook hopes a lot of students will get out to vote so their voices are heard. UNB has partnered with the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations on the Get Out The Vote campaign.

"I think it's like a really important campaign because it emphasizes the importance of voting and … for first-time voters, it really helps them to feel a bit more comfortable because we also provide them with information on how to vote," she said.


 

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices







Jason Inness
So, Rodney Weston is unable to attend? I saw on News Chasers that he has said that he won't do debates. Maybe the CBC should ask him why he won't be attending. Maybe it is too far of a drive from his home in St. Martins. Maybe he is scared to debate. Maybe he has nothing to actually add to the debate, and doesn't want to waste everyone's time. Maybe he has front-runner disease (you know, hide out until election day because anything you do could actually reduce votes for you).
As a voter, maybe I don't want to vote for a Harper re-tread just to get rid of Trudeau.


Jason Murphy 


Murray Brown
Sponsored obviously by the Liberal party... The party raising everyone's taxes in a fight against nature... And thinking they can control the weather by driving an electric car? of putting a solar panel on their roofs.


David Raymond Amos