2. Summary Overview

2.1 Population Patterns

There have been significant shifts in the distribution of the population in the province since the last adjustment to New Brunswick's electoral boundaries. The overall population grew by approximately 6,000 people. Naturally, this growth was not reflected equally in all regions. New Brunswick experienced a shift in population from north to south as people moved to larger urban areas. In fact, while the overall population in the province increased, the northern part actually lost approximately four percent of its total population. Population growth tended to take place in urban centres, with the most significant increases occurring in Fredericton and Moncton. Growth in Greater Moncton alone was in excess of 10,000 people. Despite the migration to urban communities, almost 50 percent of the province's population still lives in rural areas.

Another factor that has to be taken into account when considering population trends is cultural distribution. Since New Brunswick is Canada's only officially bilingual province, the distribution of Anglophones and Francophones also has an impact, and assessing changes in that distribution could also play a role.

Although the migration of people from north to south and the overall population increase have suggested that some modifications are required to the electoral boundaries, much has stayed the same. The distribution of the population across the province still allows, with some modifications, the historical urban-rural electoral division of the province into three urban and seven rural electoral districts. However, continued population growth in urban centres suggests that this traditional division could be revisited in the future.

2.2 Commission Challenges

Ensuring that every voter in New Brunswick has his or her voice heard equitably at election time is not an easy task, and the Commission faced a number of challenges in redrawing the electoral boundaries in the province.

First, an increasing population concentration in urban areas and a decreasing population in some rural electoral districts had created imbalances. Certain rural electoral districts were relatively overpopulated, and the Commission felt that it was critical that a reasonable population balance be achieved.

Second, it was important that the Commission respect the bilingual nature of some electoral districts, and take into account the communities of economic interest of these and others regarding boundaries.

In addition, the simple geographic realities that would face an elected official who needed to be accessible to his or her constituents had an impact on the final boundary definitions.

Furthermore, many neighbouring communities historically have had natural affinities with one another both in terms of electoral and social traditions, and thus would prefer to remain within the same electoral district.

Also, Elections Canada had sensitized the commissions during a conference in Ottawa to the need to encourage more participation in the electoral process by members of First Nations communities.

Finally, the public participated in the process through public hearings, offering alternate solutions, opposition in some cases, support in others, as well as a wealth of information and background related to individual riding concerns and issues.

2.3 Public Hearings

As required under the Act, well-publicized public hearings were held across the province. The Commission was pleased to see more people participating at these hearings than at any other time in the history of the province. Others submitted written briefs.

A key and repeated view presented at the hearings was the overwhelmingly strong level of support for protecting and maintaining communities of economic interest. Presenters in both oral and written submissions repeatedly called for boundary revisions to be based more on this factor than on any other.

The Commission was pleased and heartened to hear many presenters articulate their belief that New Brunswick is bilingual in more than law; it is bilingual in spirit, with Anglophones and Francophones in many communities sharing the same concerns and wanting to have the same elected official representing them.

The Commission considered all presentations and made an effort to incorporate many of these representations when possible in accordance with the principles set out in the Act. Although not all suggestions could be incorporated, the Commission was able to adopt many into this report.

2.4 Media

In addition to the required advertising of the hearings as mentioned earlier, the Commission decided early in the process to better engage the public through the media in an effort to encourage discussion regarding possible boundary changes prior to the hearings. The media's role in terms of public awareness of and engagement in the process proved even more successful than anticipated and resulted in, as mentioned previously, one of the highest participation rates in Canada.

2.5 Commission Approach

The Commission was given the Act and administrative guidelines to follow throughout this process. The Act is intended to ensure that the establishment of electoral boundaries is independently conducted, fair, consistent, and results in each person's vote carrying the same weight as any other person in the province.

In addition to the Act, the Commission set out a number of principles at the beginning of this process that would guide it from the proposal stage to the completion of its final report.

• Respect for public input. The Commission recognized that the public hearings would be crucial to understanding the desires of the people in each electoral district, their natural affiliations, their communities of interest and how they identify themselves and their communities.
  
  
• A limited population variance. The Act allows population variances to exceed 25 percent in "extraordinary circumstances". The Commission concluded there was no justifiable reason to go beyond the 25 percent figure and therefore would arrive at boundaries that resulted in a population "as close as reasonably possible" to the electoral quota.
  
  
• One person, one vote. The Commission concluded that this fundamental principle for electoral representation should be followed as closely as possible, subject to adjustments for community of interest, community of identity, historical patterns and geographical challenges where justified.

2.6 General Trends

The Commission heard many calls for the status quo to be maintained. That was not surprising. Change, its inevitable disruptions and people's fear of the unknown, tend to create negative reactions. So, it was not surprising to hear general satisfaction among New Brunswickers with the status quo. People tend to invest in relationships, affiliations and alliances over time. Changing these is not simple or easy. The Commission was sensitive to the concerns expressed. While not all recommendations could be accommodated, the Commission did modify certain recommendations in its Proposals in order to respond to these sensitivities and concerns.

The Commission also witnessed how, after an electoral boundary change, people who live in a readjusted electoral district often go through new bonding experiences. They advocate together, work on community projects together, establish partnerships, practise politics and react to federal issues together. Concrete evidence of this was demonstrated in at least one electoral district where the Commission's Proposals addressed a court challenge to the previous electoral boundary adjustment. The communities in question had adamantly expressed a desire to remain within their former electoral district. During these hearings, many of those same voices argued on behalf of leaving the present boundary as is. John Courtney in Commissioned Ridings describes this phenomenon as indicative of the accuracy of "the old administrative adage used to describe a reversal of opinion: 'the initial judge becomes the later advocate'."

The Commission considered with care the regulation calling for the "historical patterns" of electoral districts to be taken into account. At the same time, the Commission also considered shifting population patterns and trends. The changes the Commission is recommending represent as closely as possible a balance between New Brunswick's tradition and history and its current and future population.

The Commission recognizes that in some cases its pre-hearing Proposals did not strike the correct balance, having gone too far in altering some electoral boundaries. Commission members benefited greatly from the public hearings in this regard and are pleased to incorporate in this report many of the suggestions received from the public.

The final boundary adjustments will result in 87 percent of New Brunswickers (about nine out of ten) remaining in the electoral district in which they now reside.

2.7 One Person, One Vote

The rules the Commission and other electoral commissions across Canada must follow are clearly laid out in the Act. This means that the Commission must redraw the federal electoral map of New Brunswick into 10 electoral districts with approximately 73,000 persons in each electoral district, ensuring adherence to the key principle of effective electoral representation – one person, one vote.

Some intervenors at the public hearings expressed the view that this rule ought to be disregarded. They argued that other rules in the Act should be the overriding considerations, i.e. "the community of interest", "the community of identity", "the historical pattern of an electoral district", and "the manageable geographic size for districts in sparsely populated, rural or northern regions of the province".

The Commission understands the reasons for these arguments, but without hesitation rejects them on the basis that they ignore the guiding principle of the legislation and Canadian law, and would result in threats to the overriding principle of the equality of each citizen's vote. The Commission remains convinced that parity of vote in a democratic system must be preserved. Adherence to the objectivity offered by the use of population distribution as the primary rule, modified reasonably by other factors, prevents the equality of each person's vote from being jeopardized by placing more weight on often temporary, difficult to define and sometimes competing communities of interests and concerns.

The guiding principle of one person, one vote is set out for a very simple reason: it is meant to ensure that, as intended in a democracy, each person's vote carries the same weight as any other's. The Commission has in fact made moderate adjustments as allowed in the legislation and, given priority to certain sub-rules at times, but only when it was demonstrated that it was justified to do so and that a reasonable and fair population variance could be achieved.

The courts are clear in their support of this principle. In the case of Reference Re Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) (1991) 2 SCR 158, often referred to as the Carter decision, the Supreme Court stated:

"I adhere to the proposition asserted in Dixon … that only those deviations should be admitted which can be justified on the ground that they contribute to better government of the populous as a whole, giving due weight to regional issues within the populous and geographic factors within the territory governed. … beyond this the dilution of one citizen's vote as compared with another should not be countenanced."

2.8 Urban and Rural Electoral Districts

Historically in Canada, the tendency has been to avoid the creation of electoral districts with an urban and rural mix. Urban electoral districts are generally those electoral districts where by far the majority of the population lives in an urban environment. Rural electoral districts are those where by far the majority live in a rural environment. As well, urban electoral districts tend to have a higher population density within far smaller geographic areas than rural electoral districts. Elected representatives in rural electoral districts face greater challenges in terms of accessibility.

New Brunswick's electoral districts have traditionally been divided on an urban and rural basis, with three densely populated urban and seven largely rural electoral districts. As the population continues to shift in the province, swelling in urban while decreasing in certain rural areas, this traditional division has become more difficult to sustain.

As anticipated, changes to this division were vigorously opposed at several public hearings. However, at some hearings, proposals advocating the division of two of the province's urban electoral districts were presented (Moncton–Riverview–Dieppe and Saint John), receiving support that appeared strong in one but was opposed by the majority of presenters in another. Of interest in terms of trends is the observation that the boundary readjustment in one urban electoral district (Fredericton) has essentially resulted in a "mixed" riding. That departure was not opposed based on an already accepted and recognized shared community of interest.

The Commission modified the province's historical urban-rural division somewhat in two instances: 1) Moncton–Riverview–Dieppe electoral district where population growth had caused the electoral district to exceed the permissible population variance, and 2) Fredericton electoral district where there was under-population as an urban electoral district. However, should the population migration continue into urban centres, the issue of split urban-rural electoral districts will inevitably be revisited.

For the purposes of this electoral boundary adjustment, the Commission believes it is justified to allow a larger population in urban electoral districts because of their smaller geographic size. The three urban electoral districts – Moncton–Riverview–Dieppe, Saint John and Fredericton – are the smallest in terms of geography. Likewise, the Commission believes it is also justified to have smaller populations in certain rural electoral districts that are much larger in size (Miramichi) or where geographical features present challenges in terms of accessibility and availability (St. Croix). That same reasoning also justifies larger populations in a rural electoral district with a smaller geographic expanse (Fundy and Acadie–Bathurst).

The Commission reviewed various written authorities on this subject, including John C. Courtney, author of Commissioned Ridings, and Dr. David Johnson, Associate Professor, Political Department of Politics, Government and Public Administration, University College of Cape Breton. The Commission has also taken notice of the previously mentioned Carter decision, in which the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that higher populations in urban electoral districts than rural electoral districts did not constitute a violation of the Charter's right to vote. To allow wide variances without justification would lead to the erosion of equal and effective representation.

2.9 Community of Identity and Community of Interest

The Commission began this process with the assumption that community of identity would be an important factor to the people of New Brunswick. This is the rule that allows populations to be grouped by race, religion or language. However, the public hearings clearly revealed that that assumption was erroneous and, in fact, in most cases the opposite was true.

New Brunswickers clearly, and at times vigorously, expressed their opposition to dividing electoral districts on the basis of language. For example, in Madawaska–Restigouche and Tobique–Mactaquac, both French and English groups repeatedly and forcefully asked to remain together as a community of interest rather than be partitioned as a community of identity based on language.

This view was overwhelmingly evident with public reaction to the proposed return of three communities to Madawaska–Restigouche. Because of a legal court challenge to the report of the previous federal electoral boundaries commission, we suggested in our pre-hearings Proposals to return the communities of Grand Falls and Saint-André and most of the area of the Parish of Drummond to the electoral district of Madawaska–Restigouche. At the public hearings, the vast majority of people of those three communities along with neighbours in Tobique–Mactaquac strongly advocated on behalf of remaining together based on their shared community of interest, identified as the Saint John River Valley potato belt. Tobique–Mactaquac is 81 percent Anglophone and 17 percent Francophone, which is exactly the opposite language mix of electoral districts like Madawaska–Restigouche and Acadie–Bathurst. Commission members were pleased to hear New Brunswickers – both Anglophone and Francophone – express the view that the province is now, in spirit as well as in law, a bilingual province. The vision of those who promoted official bilingualism for the province is being realized as the economic, social, and cultural benefits and opportunities of working together continue to reap rewards.

Another example of this maturing of official bilingualism was evident at the hearings regarding proposed changes to the electoral district of Acadie–Bathurst. Based on its geographic location and the long history attached to the name Chaleur, the Commission had suggested changing the name of the electoral district to "Chaleur–Péninsule". Without exception, those who made presentations before the Commission opposed this recommendation. The community of Bathurst is the Anglophone portion of an electoral district that is 84 percent Francophone and 15 percent Anglophone. The Commission was asked to respect and retain the bilingual nature of an electoral district where Francophones and Anglophones live and work in harmony and wish to remain together. Since most Anglophones live in Bathurst, the people of the electoral district, both French and English, wished to retain the name "Bathurst" to reflect the Anglophone community's presence.

The same was true of race as well as language. Across Canada, there have been a number of attempts to establish better representation for and greater participation of First Nations communities in the electoral process. Elections Canada encouraged the Commission to consider ways to address the issue of low electoral participation by First Nations people.

In its Proposals, the Commission opted to test new approaches to this challenging problem. It recommended that the First Nations population vote be centralized into one electoral district, rather than be distributed across the current 10. Miramichi was the selected electoral district based on its already significant Aboriginal population. As a result, First Nations peoples living on a reserve would have constituted approximately 10 percent of the electoral district, and thus would be empowered by having more input and influence on the outcome of an election. Ideally, this could have resulted in an increased motivation to participate in the electoral process.

While there has been some discussion of similar approaches elsewhere in Canada, this option has yet to be put into practice. It has, however, been tried in other countries with some success.

However, the Commission wished to ensure that the Proposals received wide acceptance before being adopted. As a result of consultation prior to and input during the hearings, it became clear that First Nations people, as well as the non-Aboriginal community in general, did not want the division of electoral districts on this community of identity basis, preferring instead to retain a presence and influence in multiple electoral districts. The Commission welcomes the feedback it received and will respect the wishes of the people. The recommendation has been withdrawn from the Commission's proposal considerations.

The Aboriginal issue remains a constitutional one. Further remedies are beyond the scope and mandate of this Commission. However, experience in other jurisdictions facing similar challenges and feedback from Commission consultations suggest that representation (as included in the Charlottetown Accord) may be the preferred option by Aboriginal communities.

2.10 Other Considerations

As requested by many presenters, the Commission also respected the natural affinity that some communities have with their neighbours, as well as communities with common interests, and those with historical bonds. For example, the parishes of Acadieville and Carleton will remain in Miramichi, where they have been for many years; the Village of New Maryland that was actually in Fredericton was returned to Fredericton; the Kingston Peninsula will remain in Fundy where it has been for more than a hundred years; and Saint John River Valley communities were returned to Tobique–Mactaquac based on a long history of shared economic interests. Wherever possible, and provided that it did not create an unreasonable population variance or violate the guiding principle of one person, one vote, changes were made to incorporate communities of common interest and identity, historical ties, and those with natural affinities for a variety of reasons.

2.11 Federal Electoral District Names

As part of its mandate, the Commission reviewed the names of all 10 federal electoral districts in New Brunswick. Since Confederation, only two electoral district names have not been changed – Saint John and Restigouche. Electoral district names have usually reflected geographical features based on historical place names. Several were, and are, of Maliseet or Micmac origin, such as Madawaska–Restigouche and Tobique–Mactaquac. These names have tremendous historical and cultural importance for the people of New Brunswick.

When considering name changes, the Commission felt that it was important to retain a Maritime flavour, while at the same time better representing historical and geographic realities. Certain name changes recommended in the original report were dropped, as the boundaries did not change as initially proposed (e.g. Canaan–Tobique).

Changes in certain electoral districts were recommended simply because the newly established boundaries made the existing names inaccurate. Fundy–Royal, for example, was changed to Fundy because the Royal designation was no longer accurate, given that Kings County and Queens County were no longer exclusively encompassed by the proposed electoral boundaries. In the same way, Beauséjour–Petitcodiac became Beauséjour, as Petitcodiac was moved outside of that electoral district. In other cases, such as re-naming New Brunswick Southwest, the change to St. Croix was made with strong support to better reflect the electoral district's cultural and historical realities rather than a generic geographic description unrelated to the pattern of nomenclature and rationale of other electoral districts in the province.

During the public hearings, the Commission received a great deal of feedback regarding electoral district names. For example, there was consensus at the hearings, as mentioned previously, that the name Acadie–Bathurst should remain the way it is now, rather than be changed to Chaleur–Péninsule.

The Commission greatly appreciates the feedback it received from the public on naming federal electoral districts. For more details regarding the rationale for the proposed electoral district names, see Section 3. (Federal Electoral District Summaries).

2.12 Conclusion

Throughout this entire process, the Commission felt that one of its most important roles was to listen to the people of New Brunswick. The unprecedented turnout at the public hearings, and the number and quality of oral and written presentations to the Commission made it clear that the people of this province wanted their opinions to be heard, and that they wanted to have significant input into the establishment of new electoral boundaries. Wherever and to whatever extent possible, the Commission made public involvement an integral part of the process. This involvement of the public resulted in what we firmly believe is a fair, reasonable and accurate establishment of electoral boundaries within this province.

In some cases, the Commission made adjustments to its initial recommendations based on that input, while at the same time adhering to the spirit and letter of the Act.

However, while sympathetic to and understanding the reasoning behind certain opposition presented at the hearings, the Commission regrets that it could not accommodate all views without jeopardizing the principle of one person, one vote.

The Commission also acknowledges the repeated desire by many presenters to maintain the historical division of urban and rural electoral districts. However, ongoing population distribution challenges have resulted in the traditional urban-rural electoral district division requiring modifications in some instances.

Other provinces have already moved in that direction.

Based on this final report, almost nine out of 10 New Brunswickers (87 percent) will remain in the electoral district they were in prior to the readjustment process. This was accomplished while at the same time not exceeding a reasonable variance of more than 14 percent.

[Previous]   [Next]

 Privacy Statement, Important Notices and Disclaimers