A question of representation

When it comes to reducing government spending, some cuts are easier to make than others. Cuts that affect those outside of government, such as the municipal sector, not-for-profit organizations and students for example, can be made with impunity without affecting operations within departments.

There may even be political benefits to making these types of cuts, especially when they are aimed at critics of government policy or advocates for social change. As citizens, we should be especially wary of any spending reductions that affect the ability of citizens to hold their government to account or represent their views to those in power.

In this regard, the announced intention to reduce the number of representatives in the Legislative Assembly is largely a self-serving initiative on the part of the Executive. It is a cynical bid to exploit public antipathy to “politicians” while reducing the ability of the Legislative Assembly to hold the Premier and Cabinet to account. Further, this action would undermine the representation ordinary New Brunswickers currently have and would reduce the quality of governance that we receive.

If there is a general principle about public governance in Western democracies, it is with regard to benefits of separating the executive from the legislative and judicial branches of government. The executive, which is responsible for the delivery of services, the enforcement of laws, and the raising and spending revenue, is represented by the Premier and Cabinet. The legislative branch, which consists of the MLAs, is responsible for monitoring and approving government spending, debating legislation, representing local and sectoral interests, and keeping Cabinet accountable to the electorate. Even members of the government caucus, who are not members of the Executive but are necessary for its existence, play a key role in keeping Ministers and Premiers in line.

It is in the interest of the Premier and the Cabinet to diminish the ability of the Legislative Assembly to hold them to account. By cutting the number of MLAs, they reduce the level of oversight on government activities in a number of ways. Fewer MLAs means that there are fewer people to ask questions, to inquire into government activities, or to represent local interests in a province that is geographically and demographically diverse.

Ridings that are larger in size and in the number of voters also increases the constituency workload of the remaining MLAs. As one person, who may have the assistance of part-time secretary and some research support in Fredericton, an MLA is expected to represent the views of just over 13,000 New Brunswickers in their riding. Even in a relatively compact urban riding in Saint John or Moncton, this can be a daunting task. In rural ridings, where the issues can vary from community to community, MLAs are constantly on the road.

Aside from representing riding concerns, MLAs are expected to help constituents who are having difficulty accessing government services or need help complying with the regulatory and reporting requirements that come when dealing with the provincial government. In those rural areas covered by Local Service Districts, approximately two-thirds of New Brunswick’s land area, the MLA is the only representative of government that people can turn to for help.

Although municipal officials in northern communities are the most vocal in expressing concern about this loss of representation, everyone will lose out if this plan goes ahead. There will be fewer seats to contest, which means that the influence of money in determining the election outcome is increased. Fewer ridings will make it more challenging to recruit women and other under-represented groups as candidates.

Riding boundaries are meant to represent communities that share common interests or attributes. Significantly reducing the number of ridings will have a profound impact on the way these boundaries are drawn. In Saint John, for example, boundaries would need to be redrawn to create four riding where there were once six. In Miramichi, four ridings which are already quite large would become two even larger ridings.

It is also fair to ask how linguistic rights would be affected by this change. Currently, one riding is allowed to have a smaller-than-average number of electors in order to respect the language difference between this riding and ones that surround it. The riding in question is Tantramar, which gives the Anglophone communities centered on Sackville a representative in the Legislature. Reducing the number of MLAs would mean that this riding would be absorbed into the largely Francophone ridings in the Southeast.

This rash pledge to reduce the number of MLAs will have a number of unexpected and unpleasant consequences. That said, future Governments would likely enjoy the reduced oversight and scrutiny that would come with a smaller Legislative Assembly.

Frankly, if the Premier and Cabinet wanted to demonstrate that belt-tightening should start at the top, then they should have looked to their own offices and salaries than on the Legislature that holds them accountable.

- 30 -

Orginially published in the Telegraph Journal, December 3, 2011