Canada Federal Representation 2024

[DL]

Realistically does anything change once the final reports are in? I was under the impression that the maps are now more or less final and that any House of Commons hearings now are just MPs putting objections in the record but nothing will change

[emmettmark]

The @FedBoundaries Elections Canada Twitter account has some interesting 'likes' ...  😂

[Krago]

Realistically does anything change once the final reports are in? I was under the impression that the maps are now more or less final and that any House of Commons hearings now are just MPs putting objections in the record but nothing will change

Sit right back, and you'll hear a tale...

During the 2002-03 Redistribution cycle, I submitted a bunch of proposals to the Ontario Commission.  The only one they accepted was my plan for four seats in Waterloo Region.  I even got a shout-out in their final report!

My suggestions included creating a riding comprised solely of the City of Cambridge.  Another riding would take suburban Kitchener and add to it the four rural townships (Wilmot, Wellesley, Woolwich, North Dumfries) to create Kitchener-Conestoga.  I chose the name 'Conestoga' because it was used as a regional name in the area (Conestoga College, Conestoga Mall, Conestoga Parkway); having one riding named 'Kitchener-Waterloo' and another called 'Kitchener-Waterloo Region' was a non-starter.

One person who didn't like my plan was the Liberal MP for Cambridge, Janko Peric.  He insisted that North Dumfries had to be included with Cambridge, regardless of how beautifully the populations balanced.  His objections were included in the House Committee's report that was sent to the Commission.  The Commission accepted his objection, noted that the population change wasn't too bad, and changed my perfect boundaries to move North Dumfries township from Kitchener-Conestoga to Cambridge.

Fortunately, karma is a b***h.  In the 2004 federal election, Peric narrowly won the city of Cambridge, but lost North Dumfries by a slightly larger margin.  As a result, Gary Goodyear won the riding of Cambridge for the Conservatives by 224 votes.

[MaxQue]

Realistically does anything change once the final reports are in? I was under the impression that the maps are now more or less final and that any House of Commons hearings now are just MPs putting objections in the record but nothing will change

Here is the scorecard for the last two times (successful oppositions/total oppositions):

2003:
Newfoundland: 0/0
Prince Edward Island: 0/0
Nova Scotia: 0/1
New Brunswick: 3/7 (but with the courts pretty much forcing the a 4th one and 1 of the 7 being rejected by the House of Commons committee itself)
Québec: 11/30 (mainly about names)
Ontario: 8/28
Manitoba: 1/4 (actually accepting the only border opposition but rejecting all naming ones)
Saskatchewan: 0/0
Alberta: 0/5
British Columbia: 6/10

2015:
Newfoundland: 3/3
Prince Edward Island: 0/0
Nova Scotia: 0/0
New Brunswick: 4/4
Québec: 14/16 (including some very passive-aggressive comments about bills to change constituencies' names being an attack on independent redistricting)
Ontario: 18/47 (including a proposal by 4 Scarborough MPs to actually return to the first proposal)
Manitoba: 0/0
Saskatchewan: 2/9 (refusing to study the 3 oppositions not recommended by the committee)
Alberta: 4/10
British Columbia: 5/24 (only 1 about borders)

[Poirot]

The National Assembly has adopted a motion wishing the federal boundary commission reexamine the recommandation to abolish the riding of Avignon-La Mitis-Matapedia-Matane. It was tabled by the PLQ and adopted unanimously without debate. Maybe it would have had more influence if it was done earlier in the process but that is difficult when the proposal comes out in the middle of summer and the election was starting.

«Que l'Assemblée nationale prenne acte de la proposition de la Commission de délimitation des circonscriptions électorales fédérales de supprimer la circonscription fédérale d'Avignon-La Mitis-Matane-Matapédia;

«Qu'elle souligne l'immensité du territoire, son éloignement, la longueur des distances à parcourir et la dispersion de l'ensemble de la population de cette région;

«Qu'elle rappelle qu'un territoire aussi vaste éloignerait encore davantage les citoyens de leur député, affecterait la qualité des services offerts dans les bureaux de circonscription et ne pourrait refléter adéquatement les multiples particularités régionales de cette circonscription;

«Qu'elle souligne que toute perte de poids politique que subissent nos régions québécoises met en péril la santé démocratique de notre nation;

«Qu'enfin elle souhaite que la Commission de délimitation des circonscriptions électorales fédérales révise sa recommandation de supprimer cette circonscription.»

[Poirot]

Realistically does anything change once the final reports are in? I was under the impression that the maps are now more or less final and that any House of Commons hearings now are just MPs putting objections in the record but nothing will change

At the House hearings they ask MPs a list of questions like Have you takled to your colleagues about your objection, did the communities had a chance to speak up, does your proposal has a domino effect on other ridings. I view this has objections that have a chance to succeed with the commissions are last minute change that were not in the first proposal and that don't change a lot of things. I'm thinking like in Manitoba, the two communities that were removed from Churchill in the final report, both MPs agree, communities could not give opinion because it was not proposed before. Or in Saskatchewan, the swap in the city between two ridings, it was not in the proposal and seems to be fairly even in numbers.

[Hatman 🍁]

The commission is not going to re-consider their removal of the Avignon riding, despite the huge objections. The population does not warrant it. The Gaspesie is losing people. The Montreal exurbs are gaining. Simple math. Just like in Ontario where John Tory complained about Toronto losing a riding. We haven't seen the final report yet, but I would be shocked if the commission reconsidered removing a riding from Toronto. Again, it all comes down to math.

[Krago]

The B.C. report is out.

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/index_e.aspx

Here are some better maps:

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/othaut/p3_e.aspx


It features the first federal riding named after a Borg: Vancouver Arbutus.

Jagmeet Singh may have to fly back to Brampton.

Two Kamloops ridings are twice the fun!

Of the 43 ridings, 32 are within 5% of the provincial quotient, 10 are between 5%-10%, and just one (Skeena--Bulkley Valley) is beyond 10%.

[Dave 2]

As expected, the Fraser River is once again used for boundaries, eliminating proposed cross river ridings (other than a new Richmond Centre – Marpole). I swear, they do this every time, proposing cross river ridings and then walking it back.

RIP Vancouver – Granville. I think this is the first time the City Of Vancouver has had two ridings that extend into adjacent municipalities.

I’m not overlythrilled about splitting Burnaby across four ridings, but at least it’s better than six.

The proposal to join Fort Langley with Port Coquitlam is gone.

Many changes w.r.t. the addition of a new riding to the Okanagan.

The names are mostly fine, my only quibble is Howe Sound – West Vancouver should be West Vancouver – Howe Sound. More traditional.

Overall grade: B+

[DL]

The B.C. report is out.

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/index_e.aspx

Here are some better maps:

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/othaut/p3_e.aspx


It features the first federal riding named after a Borg: Vancouver Arbutus.

Jagmeet Singh may have to fly back to Brampton.

Two Kamloops ridings are twice the fun!

Of the 43 ridings, 32 are within 5% of the provincial quotient, 10 are between 5%-10%, and just one (Skeena--Bulkley Valley) is beyond 10%.

Why would Jagmeet Singh need to go anywhere when the new Burnaby Central seat overlaps a lot with his current seat and may even be better for him

[lilTommy]

The B.C. report is out.

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/index_e.aspx

Here are some better maps:

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/bc/rprt/othaut/p3_e.aspx


It features the first federal riding named after a Borg: Vancouver Arbutus.

Jagmeet Singh may have to fly back to Brampton.

Two Kamloops ridings are twice the fun!

Of the 43 ridings, 32 are within 5% of the provincial quotient, 10 are between 5%-10%, and just one (Skeena--Bulkley Valley) is beyond 10%.

Why would Jagmeet Singh need to go anywhere when the new Burnaby Central seat overlaps a lot with his current seat and may even be better for him

Agreed, Jagmeet would run in Burnaby Central, Peter Julian would still stay in BNWM (if he runs again). In fact Vancouver Fraserview-South Burnaby isn't that bad for the NDP, If I ridingbuilt it correct (the booths don't look to be the same but best guess here), that about 42% LPC 31% NDP in large part thanks to Burnaby being added.

Vancouver West Broadway is also better for the NDP at a similar vote spread 40% LPC 31 NDP; Vancouver Centre also at 41% LPC 30% NDP... is that right? the number being SO similar? 

The NDP have to worry more about the elimination of South Okanagan—West Kootenay; it looks like the new Similkameen-West Kootenay is a razor edge NDP seat, 39% to CPC 37%; Columbia-Kootenay-Southern Rookies is about the same even with added territory, so still worth targetting. 

[EastAnglianLefty]

Richmond Centre-Marpole seems totally unnecessary, when you could add Queensborough to a Richmond riding (as already happens provincially) and shuffle the Burnaby and Vancouver ridings round accordingly, for a much cleaner and less disruptive map.

[DL]

Vancouver West Broadway is also better for the NDP at a similar vote spread 40% LPC 31 NDP; Vancouver Centre also at 41% LPC 30% NDP... is that right? the number being SO similar?  

The NDP have to worry more about the elimination of South Okanagan—West Kootenay; it looks like the new Similkameen-West Kootenay is a razor edge NDP seat, 39% to CPC 37%; Columbia-Kootenay-Southern Rookies is about the same even with added territory, so still worth targetting.  

Keep in mind that these new seats will create very new dynamics. For example, there is a lot of natural NDP territory in Kitsilano (David Eby's provincial seat) in the new Vancouver West Broadway that was not really tapped in the last few elections when it was all part of the totally unwinnable Vancouver-Quadra seat - so the NDP vote in that area is likely a lot higher than last election results would indicate. Similarly, Vancouver South was never a winnable seat for the NDP but the easternmost part of it that is now merged with a chunk of Burnaby is solidly NDP provincially and could all yield more votes than the 2021 poll by poll results in that area would suggest.

I call this the "assimilation effect" - when redistribution puts an area in a new riding with totally different dynamics and all of a sudden the party you might have voted for in the past but didn't because they were not competitive in the seat, is now no longer a wasted vote.

[lilTommy]

Vancouver West Broadway is also better for the NDP at a similar vote spread 40% LPC 31 NDP; Vancouver Centre also at 41% LPC 30% NDP... is that right? the number being SO similar?  

The NDP have to worry more about the elimination of South Okanagan—West Kootenay; it looks like the new Similkameen-West Kootenay is a razor edge NDP seat, 39% to CPC 37%; Columbia-Kootenay-Southern Rookies is about the same even with added territory, so still worth targetting.  

Keep in mind that these new seats will create very new dynamics. For example, there is a lot of natural NDP territory in Kitsilano (David Eby's provincial seat) in the new Vancouver West Broadway that was not really tapped in the last few elections when it was all part of the totally unwinnable Vancouver-Quadra seat - so the NDP vote in that area is likely a lot higher than last election results would indicate. Similarly, Vancouver South was never a winnable seat for the NDP but the easternmost part of it that is now merged with a chunk of Burnaby is solidly NDP provincially and could all yield more votes than the 2021 poll by poll results in that area would suggest.

I call this the "assimilation effect" - when redistribution puts an area in a new riding with totally different dynamics and all of a sudden the party you might have voted for in the past but didn't because they were not competitive in the seat, is now no longer a wasted vote.

Bang-on; the NDP almost won Van-Granville and this distribution does benefit the NDP in Vancouver. As you say, the NDP can put greater focus on candidate and money, ground-game in three more Vancouver seats (If only Hedy Fry would retire in Van-Centre LOL) all with a path for NDP wins.

[Hatman 🍁]

Absolutely disgusting map. Kelowna looks like a US style gerrymander. Oh well.

When looking at redistributed results, we should also pay attention to the provincial results for the new ridings. They could be a better indicator if a riding is winnable, though the dynamics are a lot different with BC lacking a centrist party to mirror the Liberal vote.

[mileslunn]

Vancouver West Broadway is also better for the NDP at a similar vote spread 40% LPC 31 NDP; Vancouver Centre also at 41% LPC 30% NDP... is that right? the number being SO similar?  

The NDP have to worry more about the elimination of South Okanagan—West Kootenay; it looks like the new Similkameen-West Kootenay is a razor edge NDP seat, 39% to CPC 37%; Columbia-Kootenay-Southern Rookies is about the same even with added territory, so still worth targetting.  

Keep in mind that these new seats will create very new dynamics. For example, there is a lot of natural NDP territory in Kitsilano (David Eby's provincial seat) in the new Vancouver West Broadway that was not really tapped in the last few elections when it was all part of the totally unwinnable Vancouver-Quadra seat - so the NDP vote in that area is likely a lot higher than last election results would indicate. Similarly, Vancouver South was never a winnable seat for the NDP but the easternmost part of it that is now merged with a chunk of Burnaby is solidly NDP provincially and could all yield more votes than the 2021 poll by poll results in that area would suggest.

I call this the "assimilation effect" - when redistribution puts an area in a new riding with totally different dynamics and all of a sudden the party you might have voted for in the past but didn't because they were not competitive in the seat, is now no longer a wasted vote.

Bang-on; the NDP almost won Van-Granville and this distribution does benefit the NDP in Vancouver. As you say, the NDP can put greater focus on candidate and money, ground-game in three more Vancouver seats (If only Hedy Fry would retire in Van-Centre LOL) all with a path for NDP wins.

Vancouver-Granville was more due to local politics as Liberal candidate caught flipping several homes and with high housing prices that is a good way to lose any Vancouver riding.

Keep in mind that these new seats will create very new dynamics. For example, there is a lot of natural NDP territory in Kitsilano (David Eby's provincial seat) in the new Vancouver West Broadway that was not really tapped in the last few elections when it was all part of the totally unwinnable Vancouver-Quadra seat - so the NDP vote in that area is likely a lot higher than last election results would indicate. Similarly, Vancouver South was never a winnable seat for the NDP but the easternmost part of it that is now merged with a chunk of Burnaby is solidly NDP provincially and could all yield more votes than the 2021 poll by poll results in that area would suggest.

I call this the "assimilation effect" - when redistribution puts an area in a new riding with totally different dynamics and all of a sudden the party you might have voted for in the past but didn't because they were not competitive in the seat, is now no longer a wasted vote.

I don't know you can really use provincial results as you have a lot of federal Liberal-BC NDP voters as BC Liberals seen more as conservatives than liberals and living right next door to Eby's riding, it tends to be more your well to do urban educated liberal types who would only go NDP if Liberals fell to third or disappeared as would take NDP over Conservatives.

[lilTommy]

Vancouver Granville - That's very true, local issues matter. So if we look at probably the most non-local election here, 2015, the NDP still pulled in 26% (2019 was when Wilson-Raybould ran and won as an indie so not the best comparison)

BC is interesting in that sense; with no devoted centrist Liberal party, the last election looked like the NDP captured all of the left and centre vote. Mileslunn, as someone in BC, best guess, what would be the split of the provincial NDP vote federally? maybe 60/40 of the BCNDP vote would go LPC then NDP?
Regardless, the federal NDP is impacted by their provincial wing, maybe more then any other, and right now the BCNDP are still very popular (47% support them based on the last poll from December)

I agree with Hatman on Kelwona; what on earth was their justification for that? these types of gerrymandering should be a just avoided at all costs! On the provincial side they are trying that with Mallardville in Coquitlam, but look at this map, it does a better job of "community of interest" then the provincial redistribution. This is just nasty... I really hope MPs try and fight that one

[Krago]

The Ontario Report is out, and honestly, it's pretty good.

The Commissioners took local input very seriously, even if they had to exceed their self-imposed 10% limit.

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/on/rprt/on_rprt_e.pdf

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/com/on/rprt/index_e.aspx

[DL]

FWIW, my own riding of University-Rosedale becomes marginally more NDP-friendly, ceding a chunk of Rosedale dead zone and annexing the very NDP friendly part of Spadina-Fort York that is between Dundas and Queen Sts. This will shore up Jessica Bell provincially (assuming that Ontario against uses the federal map) and will make UR that much more up for grabs in the post-Freeland era

[emmettmark]

Absolutely disgusting map. Kelowna looks like a US style gerrymander. Oh well.
.

Interesting enough re: Kelowna, it actually makes sense. Big White Ski Resort/Town, which is the strange rural appendage in the Kootenay region, has lobbied for years to be put with Kelowna-based MLAs and MPs.

Case in point: it appears they were successful with the federal redistribution, but unsuccessful with the concurrent provincial redistribution we are undergoing right now:

https://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/news/article_a0f6dc28-6c3f-11ed-bb6c-87d08fd087bf.html

Ultimately, I'm not deeply aggrieved by the new BC maps - although the map may not look 'normal,' communities of interest have been preserved to a reasonably high degree

[toaster]

I'm sorry, why is Kapuskasing named before Timmins?

The North West getting 3 ridings, all three needing to be exceptional circumstances is insane.  This is to the detriment of the people in the North East in particular - where they have to make up that difference.  Whoever wrote this report sounds like they are from that area.  I've never seen something so blatantly unfair (other than Labrador) in this country.  Shameful. Thunder Bay is an urban city - it is NOT DESERVING BY ANY MEANS of exceptional circumstance.  An urban city with over 110k+ residents, and the HIGHEST POPULATION DENSITY in Northern Ontario is NOT what was the intended use of EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCE. Whoever on the commission allowed for this needs to be removed.  This is gerrymandering. This is unfair. This is unequal.  Shame. 

York South Weston Etobicoke is interesting..  might make more sense than what was proposed.
Mabelle Avenue (low income area) in Etobicoke gets put into ultra rich Etobicoke-Centre so that the Kingsway BIA doesn't get split in two? Make it make sense. Who are we serving?

[Hatman 🍁]

The Ontario map is generally pretty good, though I think they screwed up Ottawa the most. Perhaps the commission hates me?

They moved Heron Park and Riverside Park from Ottawa South to Ottawa Centre to make way for adding the new suburban Findlay Creek development in Ottawa South. Had this been done in the initial proposal it would've resulted in large opposition. Riverside Park doesn't fit in well with Ottawa Centre at all.

This has the affect of weakening the NDP in both Ottawa Centre and Ottawa South (not that the party has any chance in the latter). Ottawa Centre also loses Carlington and parts of Westboro to Ottawa West-Nepean, which will help Chandra Pasma keep her seat.

I agree with toaster that it makes no sense for two predominantly urban ridings to be considered extraordinary circumstances. Might as well make Thunder Bay 1 seat and have the remainder the extraordinary seat. And agreed that Timmins should go first in the riding name.

In Eastern Ontario, I HATE that Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands-Rideau Lakes keeps its ridiculously long name. Apparently people wanted to keep it! In 10 years, we need to have a letter writing campaign demanding the riding name return to just Leeds-Grenville. Anyway, the commission also went too far uniting all of Kingston in one riding, creating the most populous riding in the province. Had they kept the old boundary, it would've had a more balanced population with the now under populated Lanark-Frontenac riding. I know Mark Gerretsen was calling for this, but the commission still kept Belleville and Quinte West divided, two smaller cities downstream.

In Halton, the commission changed the name of the proposed "Georgetown-Milton East" riding to "Milton East-Halton Hills South" with no explanation. Having Georgetown in the name is less awkward, as that's the part of Halton Hills it covers.

Interestingly, to maintain county and municipality borders, almost every riding west of London is overpopulated by over 10%. This area is rather stagnant though, so this might not be a problem for long.

[Krago]

Hey Hatman! I have an Ottawa-ish question for you.

Should the Commission have followed the existing federal boundaries west of Kanata?  It would have kept Stittsville together.

[toaster]

I agree with toaster that it makes no sense for two predominantly urban ridings to be considered extraordinary circumstances. Might as well make Thunder Bay 1 seat and have the remainder the extraordinary seat. And agreed that Timmins should go first in the riding name.

Well and the argument becomes why couldn't whatever is left over after one normal sized (urban/dense) riding of Thunder Bay, simply join the Kenora riding, and just have 1 exceptional case riding.  There is nothing unique about the size of a northern riding being large, the northern Quebec riding is geographically larger, Nunavut is larger, Northwest Territories is larger, I can go on.  The judge made excuses for keep 3 ridings - every point made about lack of highway access to time it takes to travel from one end of the riding to the other, is seen across not only many ridings in the country - but also within other ridings in Ontario (the new Kap-Timmins-Mush riding would is a longer KM distance from South to North, and they don't seem to have a problem with that).  It's totally unfair.  Is there an opportunity to for the public to present any more objections? Or is this pretty much the final report (other than MP objections)?

[Hatman 🍁]

Hey Hatman! I have an Ottawa-ish question for you.

Should the Commission have followed the existing federal boundaries west of Kanata?  It would have kept Stittsville together.

Yes, the current map splits Stittsville. I was the only one who brought up this issue during the hearings though, and only briefly because I only had 5 minutes to go through my entire map of Eastern Ontario.

I agree with toaster that it makes no sense for two predominantly urban ridings to be considered extraordinary circumstances. Might as well make Thunder Bay 1 seat and have the remainder the extraordinary seat. And agreed that Timmins should go first in the riding name.

Well and the argument becomes why couldn't whatever is left over after one normal sized (urban/dense) riding of Thunder Bay, simply join the Kenora riding, and just have 1 exceptional case riding.  There is nothing unique about the size of a northern riding being large, the northern Quebec riding is geographically larger, Nunavut is larger, Northwest Territories is larger, I can go on.  The judge made excuses for keep 3 ridings - every point made about lack of highway access to time it takes to travel from one end of the riding to the other, is seen across not only many ridings in the country - but also within other ridings in Ontario (the new Kap-Timmins-Mush riding would is a longer KM distance from South to North, and they don't seem to have a problem with that).  It's totally unfair.  Is there an opportunity to for the public to present any more objections? Or is this pretty much the final report (other than MP objections)?

I don't think the public can provide feedback anymore, but I would imagine making these 2 ridings exceptional cases could be challenged in court. We've seen successful court challenges over riding boundaries before, though they weren't over making ridings exceptional.