Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 146, Number 29: SUPPLEMENT
July 21, 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FEDERAL ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES COMMISSION FOR THE PROVINCE OF NEW BRUNSWICK
PROPOSAL
Part Ⅰ — Preamble
Pursuant to subsection 3(1) of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3 (the Act), the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New Brunswick (the Commission) was constituted by proclamation dated February 21, 2012.
The Commission is composed of Mr. Justice Alexandre Deschênes as Chairperson, and Mr. Justice Thomas Riordon and Dr. Patrick Malcolmson as commissioners. The chairperson of the Commission was appointed by the Chief Justice of New Brunswick while the other two commissioners were appointed by the Speaker of the House of Commons.
The Commission is legally required to readjust the boundaries of the 10 electoral districts (the word “riding” is often used in lieu of “electoral district”) in New Brunswick, using the results of the 2011 decennial census.
The last census established New Brunswick’s population at 751,171. Under the rules prescribed by the Act, the provincial electoral quota must be calculated by dividing the provincial population by the number of members of Parliament for New Brunswick, namely 10. The provincial electoral quota therefore stands at 75,117. That number is significant as the Act provides that each electoral district shall have a population “as close as reasonably possible” to the provincial electoral quota (see s. 15(1)(a) of the Act).
However, this important rule is tempered by other rules that allow the Commission to depart from the electoral quota by a variance of up to +/-25%. In addition, the Act allows a variance from the quota beyond +/-25% “in circumstances viewed by the commission as being extraordinary” (see s. 15(2) of the Act). As this proposal is being made, the Commission does not know of any extraordinary circumstances that would allow any electoral district to be drawn with a variance of more than 25% from the electoral quota, with the exception of the electoral district of Miramichi.
The rules clearly provide for a departure from the electoral quota of up to +/-25% in any case where the Commission considers it necessary or desirable “in order to respect the community of interest or community of identity in or the historical pattern of an electoral district”, or “in order to maintain a manageable geographic size” in a sparsely populated or rural region of the province (see s. 15(2) of the Act).
Although the Commission considers voter parity as a factor of considerable importance in drawing an electoral district, the ultimate or primary goal being pursued by the Commission is “effective representation” (see Reference re Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) [1991] 2 S.C.R. 158). In that context, attempts to respect the provincial electoral quota are significant not only because of the important objective to preserve an equal value of each citizen’s vote, but also because voter parity impacts upon the concept of effective representation. All things being equal, no one takes issue with the proposition that an elected representative can more effectively represent 50,000 people in a riding than his or her colleague who must represent 100,000 people in a similar riding.
The population count in an electoral district, however, must not overshadow the importance of other factors such as community of interest or identity, historical pattern or geography. 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.
This proposal makes it quite obvious that the Commission has no hesitation in moving up or down within the 25% variance with emphasis on community of interest or identity and other statutory factors, including relative voter parity, in an effort to ensure that the primary objective of effective representation is best achieved.
The 10 electoral districts in our province have followed a long-established historical pattern of the three major urban centres (Moncton, Fredericton and Saint John) each having their own riding, while the other seven ridings are either mixed urban/rural (e.g. Acadie—Bathurst) or primarily rural (e.g. Tobique—Mactaquac). Over the last few decades, the overall population of New Brunswick has not increased to a significant extent. However, the population continues to shift from the rural areas to urban areas so that the three major urban centres have reached, or soon will reach, the maximum allowable variance from the provincial electoral quota. The Commission is thus obligated to readjust these riding boundaries in order to ensure that the principle of effective representation continues to serve as an equitable basis for an equitable population distribution.
Two approaches could be taken to resolve this problem. One is to add population and area obtained from surrounding ridings to the three major urban districts. This would enable the creation of two urban ridings for each of the three major cities, for a total of six; but this would reduce the number of mixed and primarily rural districts from seven to four. A second approach is to readjust the population size of the major urban ridings by redrawing the boundaries to transfer some of the urban population into the surrounding mixed urban/rural ridings.
The Commission has opted for this second approach for the following reasons. First, this approach recognizes the continued importance of the long-standing historical pattern of representation in the province for its 10 existing electoral districts. To reduce the seven mixed and primarily rural ridings to four would entail a major disruption of this pattern and distort the existing communities of interest that have served as the basis for these districts. In the Commission’s view, to do so would not be accepted by New Brunswickers at this time without a long period of consultation and discussion, which would extend well beyond the time limitations in the current process. Most importantly, the approach we have taken best allows for the most effective representation by ensuring that important communities of interest and identity continue to be recognized while relative voter parity is maintained.
Part Ⅱ of this proposal provides an overview of the Commission’s recommendations in regard to each electoral district of New Brunswick, including any changes to electoral district names. Detailed legal descriptions and population numbers for each district are provided in the Schedule to this proposal.
The Act calls for public hearings so that the Commission can receive representations from interested persons. Such hearings will be held for all the electoral districts of the province between September 10 and 24. The dates and locations of these hearings are set out in Part Ⅲ of this proposal. Advertisements about this proposal and the hearings will appear in the provincial daily newspapers during the summer months.
The Commission has adopted rules for the conduct of these public hearings and the making of representations. These rules are set out in Part ⅠV of this proposal. Simultaneous translation will be available in both official languages. Persons with accommodation needs who intend to attend the proceedings should inform the Commission of those needs.
Part Ⅱ
The Commission recommends changes in the boundaries and names of the electoral districts as set forth in the Schedule. The proposed changes are explained below.
Proposed Boundaries
1. Beauséjour—Dieppe and Moncton—Riverview
(a) Beauséjour—Dieppe
The City of Dieppe, now part of the electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, would be added to the current electoral district of Beauséjour. There are several reasons for that major change.
The population of the electoral district of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe is now 98,539. Thus, its population is 23,422 constituents and 31.18% over the provincial electoral quota, a situation that is not allowed by the Act except in extraordinary circumstances. In the Commission’s view, such circumstances do not exist in the Greater Moncton area. Accordingly, the Commission is compelled by law to adjust the existing boundaries.
A portion of the City of Dieppe (close to 18% of its population) is already part of the electoral district of Beauséjour. The Commission sees a community of interest and identity between the City of Dieppe and the electoral district of Beauséjour.
The Commission is aware that there are concerns about creating an electoral district where constituents from smaller communities might feel overwhelmed by the presence in their midst of an expanding city like Dieppe. On the other hand, the creation of a mixed rural/urban electoral district is inevitable, given the strong movement of the population of this province to the cities and their suburbs. In the Commission’s view, when one considers the rural population of the newly formed district in comparison with the population of the City of Dieppe, there is little apparent reason to fear that the City of Dieppe’s presence would be detrimental to rural communities in terms of effective representation.
The creation of the electoral district of Beauséjour—Dieppe obviously has a considerable impact on what remains of the Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe electoral district, which would be known after the readjustment as Moncton—Riverview.
The Commission acknowledges that the Francophone community of the City of Moncton might look upon the reduction of their numbers in the newly formed electoral district of Moncton—Riverview as diminishing their ability to voice their concerns effectively. Indeed, the percentage of Francophones in the newly formed electoral district of Moncton—Riverview would drop from 31.61% to approximately 20%. (The percentages provided are based on the language spoken at home.) On the other hand, no one can take issue with the fact that the City of Moncton is now officially bilingual and that the Francophone community and its institutions form an integral part of Greater Moncton’s social, cultural and economic life. In addition, their presence in terms of numbers is far from being insignificant.
In that context, it is somewhat difficult to argue forcefully that an elected representative could ignore their needs as a Francophone community.
As a result of the proposed change, the electoral district of Beauséjour—Dieppe would have a variance from the electoral quota of +22.57%. The variance is high but, considering the density of the population in a relatively small geographical area, it should not jeopardize an elected representative’s ability to represent the people of the riding effectively. In addition, the variance is within the permissible range of +/-25% prescribed by the Act. That percentage has withstood the scrutiny of a constitutional challenge at the highest level on the basis that the maximum variance does not erode voter parity to an unacceptable degree (see Reference re Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) [1991] 2 S.C.R. 158).
(b) Moncton—Riverview
As a result of transferring the entire City of Dieppe to the current electoral district of Beauséjour, the Commission would create a newly formed electoral district of Moncton—Riverview, comprising the City of Moncton and that portion of the Town of Riverview presently in the riding of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. As a result of the proposed change, the variance from the provincial electoral quota for Moncton—Riverview would be +7.60%.
2. Fredericton
The electoral district of Fredericton has a population of 93,181 and a variance from the provincial electoral quota of +24.05%, which is close to the allowable limit of 25%. The Commission is of the view that the variance from the quota can be significantly reduced by transferring (a) the parishes of Canning and Chipman, including the Village of Chipman, to the riding of Fundy Royal and (b) the parishes of Maugerville, Northfield and Sheffield and the Village of Minto to the electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. As well, the communities of the parishes of Lincoln and Burton would be transferred to the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest.
The Commission believes that these rural communities have a stronger community of interest with the ridings where they are being transferred than with the electoral district of Fredericton. This factor, along with the desirability of reducing the population of the Fredericton riding, were the two main reasons militating in favour of this proposed change, which would reduce the variance from the electoral quota for the Fredericton riding from +24.05% to +4.32%.
3. Saint John
The electoral district of Saint John has a population of 84,670, which is 12.72% over the provincial electoral quota. The Commission does not believe that the electoral district requires any fundamental restructuring. That said, we believe that two important changes are in order. One affects Quispamsis. A section of Quispamsis, consisting of 2,660 people, is currently part of the electoral district of Saint John, while the much larger section of Quispamsis is located in the electoral district of Fundy Royal. The Commission believes that this is an anomaly and proposes to transfer that part of Quispamsis in the electoral district of Saint John to the electoral district of Fundy Royal. There exists a strong community of interest with the other part of Quispamsis already located in Fundy Royal.
A second change involves the residents of Cape Spencer, in the Parish of Simonds, who are located in the riding of Fundy Royal. For reasons mentioned below, the Parish of Simonds should be transferred from Fundy Royal to the electoral district of Saint John.
As a result of the proposed changes, the variance from the provincial electoral quota for the electoral district of Saint John would be +14.27%.
4. Madawaska—Restigouche
There are no major proposed changes for this riding. The Commission believes, however, that in spite of the problematic low population of the Miramichi riding, the communities of the parishes of Colborne and Durham should be transferred from there to the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche.
The Commission is of the view that there is no community of interest between these communities and those of the electoral district of Miramichi, and that the only apparent reason why they now form part of the latter is to augment its population. In our view, these communities can be more effectively represented as part of the electoral district of Madawaska—Restigouche, with which they share a community of interest.
As a result of the proposed changes, the variance from the electoral quota for this electoral district would be -16.78%.
5. Miramichi
The population of this electoral district now stands at 51,996, which is 30.78% below the provincial electoral quota. It is a variance that is not allowed by the Act unless the Commission is of the view that there exist extraordinary circumstances to justify it. The district extends as far north as the Belledune and Colborne area, and as far south as the Acadieville and Blackville region.
The Commission considered transferring the northern portion of Kent County, consisting of the Village of Saint-Louis de Kent and the parishes of Saint-Louis and Saint-Charles, to the electoral district of Miramichi. Those communities had previously been part of the electoral district of Miramichi until transferred to the riding of Beauséjour by the previous commission. The major argument that militates in favour of a return of these communities to the riding of Miramichi is to augment Miramichi’s population. After much thought, however, the Commission decided not to adopt that option by reason of the much stronger communities of interest and identity that exist between these communities and the other communities of the electoral district of Beauséjour. The Commission believes that those factors are, in this case, more important than voter parity for ensuring effective representation.
The Commission is also of the view that there are no apparent reasons, other than the riding of Miramichi’s low population, to justify the inclusion of the communities of the Village of Belledune in the riding of Miramichi. The Commission believes that the Village of Belledune should be part of the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst. The decision to include the Village of Belledune in the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst rather than Madawaska—Restigouche was not an easy one. The Commission acknowledges that Belledune has a strong community of interest with communities in both the Restigouche and Gloucester counties. In fact, the boundary line which separates the two counties runs through the Village of Belledune, and it appears that Belledune has strong cultural and historical ties to communities in both ridings. In the end, the Commission proposes to include Belledune in Acadie—Bathurst on the basis of a stronger community of interest, particularly from an economic standpoint by reason of Bathurst’s strong ties to Belledune’s large port and industries. Although not a decisive factor, it should be noted that, as recently as March 2012, Belledune’s village council opted to be included in the newly created Regional Service Commission 3, which includes the Greater Bathurst area. If matters develop as planned, Belledune’s municipal planning and waste management will be handled by staff located in the electoral district of Acadie—Bathurst.
The Commission also proposes to transfer the parishes of Harcourt, Huskisson and Welford, and the First Nations community of Richibucto Indian Reserve No. 15, from the riding of Beauséjour to the riding of Miramichi.
Part of the community of Upper Miramichi is located in the electoral district of Tobique—Mactaquac. The remaining part lies in the riding of Miramichi. The Commission believes that all of Upper Miramichi should be part of the riding of Miramichi.
Taking into account these proposed changes, Acadie—Bathurst’s variance would be 5.62% over the electoral quota, while the riding of Miramichi would have a variance of -28.66%. The Act does not allow for a variance exceeding 25% unless the Commission is of the view that such a variance is justified by reason of extraordinary circumstances. In the Commission’s view, the large variance is justified on the basis of extraordinary circumstances for the following reasons:
- (a) This electoral district covers an area of approximately 17,000 square kilometres. It is the largest riding in the province and a considerable challenge for an elected representative in terms of providing effective representation. In that context, the member of Parliament for that riding needs the advantage of a smaller number of constituents to provide more effective representation. The high negative variance (3.66% over the allowable variance) is justifiable in part by the size of the territory.
- (b) What is extraordinary about this riding is that it is surrounded on all sides (except on its eastern boundary, where water is the impediment to expansion) by large areas with no appreciable population, or by communities that have no community of interest or identity with the riding of Miramichi. To put it simply, there is practically no place to turn to increase the population base for the riding of Miramichi without unduly increasing its size or without seriously dividing communities of interest or identity.
- (c) In the Commission’s view, and bearing in mind the main objective of effective representation, it is more important to create or conserve an electoral district with a small population than to create a riding with a population closer to the electoral quota whose residents feel they don’t belong in that riding by reason of the community of interest or identity binding them to an adjacent riding.
6. Acadie—Bathurst
The only change affecting this electoral district has been explained in discussing the changes to the riding of Miramichi. For the reasons covered, the Village of Belledune would be transferred to the riding of Acadie—Bathurst.
As a result of the proposed change, the variance from the electoral quota for this riding would be 5.62%, compared to its present variance of 3.56%.
7. Tobique—Mactaquac
The Commission proposes to transfer a section of Upper Miramichi from Tobique—Mactaquac to the riding of Miramichi, as mentioned earlier.
In addition, the Commission proposes to transfer the following communities from the riding of Fredericton to the riding of Tobique—Mactaquac:
- (a) the Parish of Maugerville
- (b) the Village of Minto
- (c) the Parish of Northfield
- (d) the Parish of Sheffield
In the Commission’s view, there is a strong community of interest between these communities and those of Tobique—Mactaquac.
As a result of the proposed changes, the riding of Tobique—Mactaquac would have a variance from the provincial electoral quota of -1.94%, compared to its present variance of -8.53%.
8. Fundy Royal
As mentioned in discussing the changes to the riding of Saint John, that part of Quispamsis located in the riding of Saint John would be transferred to the riding of Fundy Royal. As well, for reasons to be explained below, the Parish of Studholm and the Village of Norton located in the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest would be transferred to Fundy Royal.
For the reasons mentioned in discussing the changes to the riding of Fredericton, the communities of the parishes of Canning and Chipman, including the Village of Chipman, would also be transferred to the riding of Fundy Royal.
As a result of the proposed changes, the variance from the electoral quota for this electoral district would be 5.68%, compared to its present variance of -2.17%.
9. New Brunswick Southwest
For reasons to be explained below, the Parish of Studholm and the Village of Norton located in the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest would be transferred to the riding of Fundy Royal.
The communities of the Parish of Lincoln situated south of the Trans-Canada Highway in the riding of Fredericton would be transferred to New Brunswick Southwest. The communities of the Parish of Burton situated south of the Trans-Canada Highway and west of Highway No. 7 in the riding of Fredericton would also be transferred to New Brunswick Southwest.
For reasons to be explained below, that part of the Parish of Kingsclear where the residential area of Hanwell Park is located (presently in the riding of New Brunswick Southwest) would be transferred to the riding of Fredericton.
As a result of the proposed changes, the variance from the electoral quota for this electoral district would be -12.68%, compared to its present variance of -15.31%.
10. Proposed changes affecting the ridings of Saint John, Fundy Royal and New Brunswick Southwest
There are four communities in these ridings that would be transferred to another electoral district primarily on the basis of common sense. In each case, the transfer can be substantiated on the basis of community of interest and can be instituted without offending the main objective of effective representation.
- (a) The electors from Cape Spencer, in the Parish of Simonds, are located in the electoral district of Fundy Royal. They ordinarily vote in the electoral district of Saint John because of the absence of a road offering them a reasonable alternative to do so in their own electoral district. As a result, the returning officer for Fundy Royal must ask the Chief Electoral Officer to adapt section 122 of the Canada Elections Act so that polling stations for Cape Spencer electors can be set up nearby in the adjacent electoral district. The Commission therefore believes that it makes sense to transfer the Parish of Simonds from Fundy Royal to the electoral district of Saint John.
- (b) The electors of Apohaqui, in the Parish of Studholm, belong to the electoral district of New Brunswick Southwest. They habitually vote in a community centre located in their village. A new community centre was built nearby to replace the old one, but it is located in the electoral district of Fundy Royal. Again, the returning officer needs to request a legal adaptation by the Chief Electoral Officer so that Apohaqui electors can exercise their right to vote in a location that is obviously much more practical. The Commission believes that it makes sense to transfer the Parish of Studholm from New Brunswick Southwest to Fundy Royal in order to accommodate the electors of Apohaqui.
- (c) The dividing line between the electoral districts of New Brunswick Southwest and Fundy Royal runs through the Village of Norton. The Commission believes that all of the Village of Norton should be transferred to Fundy Royal.
- (d) The dividing line between the electoral districts of New Brunswick Southwest and Fredericton runs through the residential area of Hanwell Park situated in the Parish of Kingsclear. The Commission believes it would make sense, on the basis of community of interest, to transfer this small portion of the Parish of Kingsclear to the electoral district of Fredericton.
Proposed Names of Electoral Districts
The Commission proposes to change the names of some electoral districts, as follows:
- (a) The riding of Beauséjour would become Beauséjour—Dieppe for the obvious reason that all of the City of Dieppe is being added to the current electoral district.
- (b) The riding of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe would become Moncton—Riverview for the obvious reason that the City of Dieppe is being moved to the electoral district of Beauséjour—Dieppe.
- (c) The riding of Tobique—Mactaquac would become Tobique—Saint John River Valley. This alteration would allow for a better description of the geography of the riding, which would now extend further down the valley to include Sheffield. Most of the riding’s population is along the river, and it is appropriate that the name of the riding reflect that fact.
- (d) The riding of Fundy Royal would become Fundy—Quispamsis to reflect the addition of the urban area of Quispamsis.
No additional name changes are proposed. For a historical background related to the names of New Brunswick’s electoral districts, refer to the previous commission’s informative proposal and report.
Part Ⅲ
Notice of Public Hearings
The public hearings will be held at the following places, dates and times:
(1) MADAWASKA—RESTIGOUCHE
Saint-Quentin, Auberge Évasion de Rêves, 11 Canada Street, E8A 1J2
Monday, September 10, 2012, from 2:00 to 7:00 p.m.
(2) ACADIE—BATHURST
Caraquet, Cultural Centre, 220 St-Pierre Boulevard West, E1W 1A5
Tuesday, September 11, 2012, from 2:00 to 7:00 p.m.
(3) MIRAMICHI
Newcastle, Kinsmen Centre, 100 Newcastle Boulevard, E1V 2L7
Wednesday, September 12, 2012, from 2:30 to 7:00 p.m.
(4) FREDERICTON
Fredericton, Saint Thomas University (Oak Maple Room), 368 Forest Hill Road, E3B 5G3
Thursday, September 13, 2012, from 2:00 to 7:00 p.m.
(5) TOBIQUE—MACTAQUAC
Woodstock, Best Western, 123 Gallop Court (Exit 185), E7M 3P7
Friday, September 14, 2012, from 2:30 to 7:00 p.m.
(6) NEW BRUNSWICK SOUTHWEST
St. Andrews, W.C. O’Neill Arena Complex, 24 Reed Avenue, E5B 1B4
Monday, September 17, 2012, from 2:30 to 7:00 p.m.
(7) SAINT JOHN
Saint John, Delta Brunswick, 39 King Street, E2L 4W3
Tuesday, September 18, 2012, from 2:30 to 6:00 p.m. and 7:30 to 9:00 p.m.
(8) FUNDY ROYAL
Sussex, All Seasons Inn, 1015 Main Street, E4E 2M6
Wednesday, September 19, 2012, from 2:30 to 6:00 p.m. and 7:30 to 9:30 p.m.
(9) MONCTON—RIVERVIEW—DIEPPE
Moncton, Delta Beauséjour, 750 Main Street, E1C 1E6
Thursday, September 20, 2012, from 2:30 to 5:00 p.m. and 7:00 to 9:00 p.m.
(10) BEAUSÉJOUR
Shediac, Multipurpose Centre, 58 Festival Street, E4P 1S4
Monday, September 24, 2012, from 2:30 to 6:00 p.m. and 7:30 to 9:00 p.m.
(11) BELLEDUNE
Belledune, Recreation and Cultural Centre, 2404 Main Street, E9G 2X9
Thursday, September 27, 2012, from 2:00 to 7:00 p.m.
Please note that the Commission will hear representations regarding any New Brunswick electoral district at any scheduled hearing.
If a hearing cannot be held as scheduled, notice of the postponement will be given through local radio stations. Details of any new hearing will be published in an appropriate newspaper, and the commission secretary will advise persons who had given notice of intention to appear.
The Commission will also accept any written representations. Members of the public are not required to appear at a hearing if they wish to submit their views and comments in writing.
Notice of Representation
The Commission encourages representations from interested persons or representatives of interested groups. Any person or group desiring to make a representation must give written notice in accordance with subsection 19(5) of the Act, which provides:
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.
This advertisement is the advertisement referred to in subsection 19(2) of the Act. Persons desiring to make a representation should take note of the rules of the Commission, as set out in Part ⅠV.
Notices must be received no later than Wednesday, August 29, 2012; notices and inquiries should be addressed to:
Ms. Georgette Thibault
Commission Secretary
Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for New Brunswick
Frederick Square
77 Westmorland Street, Suite 350
Fredericton, NB E3B 6Z3
Telephone (toll-free): 1-855-726-4109
Fax (toll-free): 1-855-726-4110
E-mail: nb@rfed-rcf.ca
Notices may also be submitted electronically by sending an e-mail to the above address or by completing the online form available at www.federal-redistribution.ca under New Brunswick > Public Hearings.
Part ⅠV — Rules
The following rules will apply to public hearings:
1. These rules may be cited as “The Rules of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for New Brunswick”.
2. In these rules:
- (a) “Act” means the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E-3;
- (b) “advertisement” means a notice or notices published as directed in subsection 19(2) of the Act, setting forth the times and places when the sittings shall be held for the hearing of representations;
- (c) “Commission” means the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for the Province of New Brunswick established by proclamation dated February 21, 2012;
- (d) “notice” means a written expression of intention to make a representation in compliance with subsection 19(5) of the Act;
- (e) “map” means the map published with the advertisement showing the proposed division of the province into federal electoral districts;
- (f) “representation” means any expression of opinion presented by any interested person at a duly convened sitting of the Commission relating to the division of the province into electoral districts as proposed by the Commission;
- (g) “Secretary” means the Secretary to the Commission;
- (h) “sitting” means a public hearing convened by the Commission in accordance with and for the purpose set out in section 19 of the Act.
3. A person giving notice shall state therein at which of the places designated in the advertisement such person wishes to make the representation.
4. If a person giving notice fails to comply with the provision of Rule 3, the Secretary shall ascertain from such person the place at which the person wishes to appear to make a representation.
5. Rules 3 and 4 are made for administrative purposes only and do not operate to prevent a person who has given notice from making the representation at any place of sitting that the Commission set out in the advertisement, subject only to the power of the Commission pursuant to Rule 6 to cancel a sitting at that place.
6. If it appears that no one will make a representation at any place designated by the advertisement as a place of sitting, the Commission, or the Chairperson thereof, may cancel the sitting at such place.
7. If a quorum cannot be present at a place of sitting on the date set by the advertisement, the Commission, or the Chairperson thereof, may postpone that sitting to a later date.
8. The Secretary shall inform any person who has given notice, but has not been heard, of such cancellation or postponement. Public notice shall also be given by the Chairperson or the Commission by such means as they consider adequate.
9. Two members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum for the holding of a sitting.
10. When the hearing of a representation cannot be completed within the time allotted, the Commission may adjourn the sitting to a later date.
11. The Commission shall have the power to waive any requirement that the Commission deems to be a defect in form and not in substance.
12. Any person wishing to make a representation to the Commission shall advise the Secretary in writing of the language of preference to be used and accommodation needs they may have.
Dated at Fredericton, New Brunswick, this 16th day of June, 2012.
MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDRE DESCHÊNES
Commission Chairperson
Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission
for the Province of New Brunswick
MR. JUSTICE THOMAS RIORDON
Commission Member
Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission
for the Province of New Brunswick
DR. PATRICK N. MALCOLMSON
Commission Member
Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission
for the Province of New Brunswick
SCHEDULE
Maps, Proposed Boundaries and Names of Electoral Districts
There shall be in the Province of New Brunswick ten (10) electoral districts, named and described as follows, each of which shall return one member.
The following definitions apply to all the descriptions contained in this publication:
- (a) reference to a “county” or “parish” signifies a “county” or “parish” as named and described in the Territorial Divisions Act, Chapter T-3 of the Revised Statutes of New Brunswick, 1973;
- (b) reference to a municipality such as a “city”, “town” or “village” signifies a “city”, “town” or “village” as named and described in the Municipalities Order – Municipalities Act, New Brunswick Regulation 85-6;
- (c) reference to an “Indian reserve” signifies a “reserve” as defined in the Indian Act, Chapter I-5 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985;
- (d) 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, 2011;
- (e) all counties, parishes, cities, towns, villages, rural communities and Indian reserves lying within the perimeter of the electoral district are included unless otherwise described;
- (f) reference to “highway”, “drive”, “road”, “river”, “brook” and “creek” signifies their centre line unless otherwise described;
- (g) the translation of the term “street” follows Treasury Board standards, while the translation of all other public thoroughfare designations is based on commonly used terms but has no official recognition; and
- (h) all coordinates are in reference to the North American Datum 1983 (NAD 83).
The population figure of each electoral district is derived from the 2011 decennial census.
Acadie—Bathurst
(Population: 79,340)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Gloucester;
- (b) that part of the County of Restigouche consisting of that part of the Village of Belledune lying within said county.
Beauséjour—Dieppe
(Population: 92,072)
(Map 2)
Consisting of:
- (a) that part of the County of Kent consisting of:
- (i) the towns of Bouctouche and Richibucto;
- (ii) the villages of Rexton, Saint-Antoine and Saint-Louis de Kent;
- (iii) the parishes of Dundas, Richibucto, Saint-Charles, Saint-Louis, Saint-Paul, Saint Mary and Wellington;
- (iv) Bouctouche Indian Reserve No. 16 and Indian Island Indian Reserve No. 28; and
- (b) the County of Westmorland, excepting:
- (i) the City of Moncton;
- (ii) the villages of Petitcodiac and Salisbury;
- (iii) the Parish of Salisbury;
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Moncton lying westerly of the City of Moncton and southerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway).
Fredericton
(Population: 78,359)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the City of Fredericton;
- (b) that part of the County of York consisting of:
- (i) the Village of New Maryland;
- (ii) Devon Indian Reserve No. 30 and St. Mary’s Indian Reserve No. 24;
- (iii) that part of the Parish of Saint Marys lying southerly of Campbell Creek;
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Kingsclear described as follows: commencing at the point of intersection of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 8 and the westerly limit of the City of Fredericton; thence generally southwesterly along said highway to the point of intersection with the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway); thence southeasterly along said highway to the limit of the Parish of Kingsclear; thence generally northeasterly and northwesterly along the limit of the Parish of Kingsclear and the limit of the Town of Fredericton to the point of commencement; and
- (c) that part of the County of Sunbury consisting of:
- (i) the Town of Oromocto;
- (ii) Oromocto Indian Reserve No. 26;
- (iii) the Parish of Burton lying easterly of Highway No. 7 and northerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway);
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Lincoln lying northerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway).
Fundy—Quispamsis
(Population: 79,387)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Albert, excepting that part of the Town of Riverview described as follows: commencing at the point of intersection of the Petitcodiac River with the brook known locally as Gray’s Brook; thence generally southeasterly along the most westerly branch of said brook to the westerly production of Whitepine Road; thence easterly along said production and Whitepine Road to Pine Glen Road; thence northerly along Pine Glen Road to McAllister Road; thence easterly along McAllister Road to its most southeasterly corner; thence easterly along the production of said road to the New Brunswick Power Corporation transmission line; thence generally northerly along said line and its production to the rear baseline of the lots fronting on the western right-of-way of Point Park Drive; thence northerly along said rear baseline and its production to the Petitcodiac River; thence southwesterly along said river to the point of commencement;
- (b) the County of Kings, excepting:
- (i) the towns of Grand Bay-Westfield and Rothesay;
- (ii) the parishes of Greenwich and Kars;
- (iii) the Parish of Springfield, excepting that part of the Village of Norton lying within said parish;
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Westfield lying northerly and westerly of the Saint John River;
- (c) that part of the County of Queens consisting of:
- (i) the Village of Chipman;
- (ii) the parishes of Brunswick, Chipman and Waterborough;
- (iii) the Parish of Canning, excepting that part of the Village of Minto lying within said parish;
- (d) that part of the County of Saint John consisting of:
- (i) the Village of St. Martins;
- (ii) the Parish of Saint Martins; and
- (e) that part of the County of Westmorland consisting of:
- (i) the villages of Petitcodiac and Salisbury;
- (ii) the Parish of Salisbury.
Madawaska—Restigouche
(Population: 62,515)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Madawaska, excepting:
- (i) that part of the Town of Grand Falls / Grand-Sault lying within said county;
- (ii) the Rural Community of Saint-André;
- (iii) the Parish of Saint-André; and
- (b) the County of Restigouche, excepting that part of the Village of Belledune lying within said county.
Miramichi
(Population: 53,587)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Northumberland;
- (b) that part of the County of Kent consisting of:
- (i) that part of the Village of Rogersville lying within said county;
- (ii) the parishes of Acadieville, Carleton, Harcourt, Huskisson and Weldford;
- (iii) Richibucto Indian Reserve No. 15; and
- (c) that part of the County of York consisting of that part of the Rural Community of Upper Miramichi lying within said county.
Moncton—Riverview
(Population: 80,825)
(Map 2)
Consisting of:
- (a) that part of the County of Westmorland consisting of:
- (i) the City of Moncton;
- (ii) that part of the Parish of Moncton lying westerly of the City of Moncton and southerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway); and
- (b) that part of the County of Albert consisting of that part of the Town of Riverview described as follows: commencing at the point of intersection of the Petitcodiac River with the brook known locally as Gray’s Brook; thence generally southeasterly along the most westerly branch of said brook to the westerly production of Whitepine Road; thence easterly along said production and Whitepine Road to Pine Glen Road; thence northerly along Pine Glen Road to McAllister Road; thence easterly along McAllister Road to its most southeasterly corner; thence easterly along the production of said road to the New Brunswick Power Corporation transmission line; thence generally northerly along said line and its production to the rear baseline of the lots fronting on the western right-of-way of Point Park Drive; thence northerly along said rear baseline and its production to the Petitcodiac River; thence southwesterly along said river to the point of commencement.
New Brunswick Southwest
(Population: 65,592)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Charlotte;
- (b) that part of the County of Kings consisting of:
- (i) the Town of Grand Bay-Westfield;
- (ii) the parishes of Greenwich, Kars and Springfield;
- (iii) that part of the Parish of Westfield lying northerly and westerly of the Saint John River;
- (c) that part of the County of Queens consisting of:
- (i) the villages of Cambridge-Narrows and Gagetown;
- (ii) the parishes of Cambridge, Gagetown, Hampstead, Johnston, Petersville and Wickham;
- (d) that part of the County of Saint John consisting of the Parish of Musquash;
- (e) that part of the County of Sunbury consisting of:
- (i) the villages of Fredericton Junction and Tracy;
- (ii) the parishes of Gladstone and Blissville;
- (iii) that part of the Parish of Burton lying westerly of Highway No. 7 and southerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway);
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Lincoln lying southerly of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway); and
- (f) that part of the County of York consisting of:
- (i) the villages of Harvey and McAdam;
- (ii) the parishes of Dumfries, Manners Sutton, McAdam, New Maryland and Prince William;
- (iii) Kingsclear Indian Reserve No. 6;
- (iv) that part of the Parish of Kingsclear lying westerly of a line described as follows: commencing at the point of intersection of the eastbound lane of Highway No. 8 and the westerly limit of the City of Fredericton; thence generally southwesterly along said highway to the point of intersection with the eastbound lane of Highway No. 2 (Trans-Canada Highway); thence southeasterly along said highway to the limit of the Parish of Kingsclear.
Saint John
(Population: 85,838)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) that part of the County of Saint John consisting of:
- (i) the City of Saint John;
- (ii) the Parish of Simonds;
- (iii) The Brothers Indian Reserve No. 18; and
- (b) that part of the County of Kings consisting of the Town of Rothesay.
Tobique—Saint John River Valley
(Population: 73,656)
(Map 1)
Consisting of:
- (a) the County of Carleton;
- (b) the County of Victoria;
- (c) that part of the County of Madawaska consisting of:
- (i) that part of the Town of Grand Falls / Grand-Sault lying within said county;
- (ii) the Rural Community of Saint-André;
- (iii) the Parish of Saint-André;
- (d) that part of the County of York consisting of:
- (i) the villages of Canterbury, Meductic, Millville, Nackawic and Stanley;
- (ii) the parishes of Bright, Canterbury, Douglas, North Lake, Queensbury, Southampton and Stanley;
- (iii) that part of the Parish of Saint Marys lying northerly of Campbell Brook; excluding Devon Indian Reserve No. 30;
- (e) that part of the County of Sunbury consisting of:
- (i) that part of the Village of Minto lying within said county;
- (ii) the parishes of Maugerville, Northfield and Sheffield; and
- (f) that part of the Village of Minto lying within the County of Queens.