Skip to content

Our View: Does Langley need a third MLA?

Our fast-growing population needs more representation
29195016_web1_210408-ALT-MLA-grant-response-grants_1
Langley MLAs Andrew Mercier and Megan Dykeman. (Black Press Media files)

Langley is having some issues of late with its representation at the provincial and federal levels.

Earlier this month, we got our first look at proposed plans for new federal ridings, including a truly bizarre Pitt Meadows-Fort Langley riding that would see folks in North Langley represented by an MP who also served parts of Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, Surrey, and Port Coquitlam.

Now the Greater Langley Chamber of Commerce is asking that Langley get another MLA, to fairly represent the rapidly-rising number of locals.

The City and Township are currently served by two MLAs, representing the Langley and Langley East ridings.

It’s true, if Langley doesn’t deserve three full MLAs right now, based on our population, we likely will by the time the next provincial election rolls around.

Even the recent Canadian Census doesn’t capture the full scope of the explosive growth Langley is currently experiencing. Consider the fact that the Langley School District has added more than 1,000 new enrolments this school year. Yes, since September, Langley has added more than 1,000 new residents who are between the ages of five and 18! Add in all the moms and dads, little brothers and sisters, college students, seniors, childless couples, and so on, and you can see that we’re in the middle of an unprecedented population boom.

READ ALSO: Our View – Flood risk on Fraser River ever-present

Without adequately adding more MLAs and MPs, Langley won’t have a loud enough voice in our provincial and federal parliaments.

It would be nice, as the chamber would prefer, to have all three MLAs within the bounds of Langley. But we’ll settle for having more MLAs with boundaries that represent relatively organic communities – Langley City with Cloverdale, perhaps, or Aldergrove and South Abbotsford together.

But not Pitt Meadows and the Fort, again!

– M.C.