Thank you, Madam Chair. I would support this motion. I think that the instructions were not clearly laid out. I think that it was assumed by this Legislature that when you selected three individuals that those three individuals would look at language and culture as being something that was very, very important and something that was paramount in the decisions, and in developing the electoral boundaries that culture and language would be something that this commission would automatically know that was essential, was paramount in our decision. However, it was not clearly laid out in the guidelines. It only refers to exception where special circumstances weren’t exceptional deviation. That’s not clear enough. If exceptional special circumstances means language and culture should be maintained within the electoral boundaries, especially one of the official 11 languages that we have, then it should clearly state language and culture as being something that should have been in there. I think that if that’s what that meant, then for the most part, with the exception of 21 seats, which is unpopular because people indicate that the only option where language and culture is considered is 21 seats, which is unpopular because of all the things that were said, or anybody could stand here or sit here and say I spoke to people and no one wants more politicians. Well, I spoke to people, and people are saying, as opposed to losing our culture, we will be forced to take more MLAs.
So I would support this motion for them to go back and do their work properly. Make sure that culture and language is paramount. It’s up to us. It’s the goodwill of this government, and I represent people that have their own language, their own culture. It’s incumbent upon this government to make sure they consult with people where their ridings are affected. There are ridings that are not affected. People didn’t come out in some communities because their ridings are not affected. When the original report came out, the ridings that we are impacted tremendously were Deh Cho, Monfwi and Tu Nedhe, so people came out. That’s where the people came out. People came out in Fort Resolution. They made statements. People came out in Lutselk’e. They made statements about it because they’re affected, and when you’re not affected, then it’s okay to sit here and say oh, we can represent the people across, I represent all kinds of cross-cultural people, I do this and I do that. The point I’m making is they’re not impacted.
So this commission has to understand that we have to have a report that recognizes language and culture and the language and cultural differences of the people that sit in this House and who they represent. I would support this motion just for that reason, because the only one that sees language and culture as paramount is 21 seats and that appears to be very unpopular. Thank you, Madam Chair.