Redistribution of Federal Electoral Districts 2012

[lilTommy]

Well, thanks to the new SK borders, 2 Tory MPs have announced they'll be running in rural seats that will be vacated, rather than run in the new urban ridings that make up most of their current ridings. Also, Nettie Wiebe and Noah Evanchuk have announced they will be running in the two new NDP friendly ridings.

Fantastic! Nettie and Noah will make amazing MPs; they are just the types the NDP need from the West. Even though Nettie will be representing an urban riding, as former president of the National Farmer union she brings needed rural "cred" to the NDP.
At any rate that's great news for the opposition who can see two, maybe three or even four seats in SASK.

Any word on a final report for Ontario? God i hope they make changes to Toronto

[Wilfred Day]

Well, thanks to the new SK borders, 2 Tory MPs have announced they'll be running in rural seats that will be vacated, rather than run in the new urban ridings that make up most of their current ridings. Also, Nettie Wiebe and Noah Evanchuk have announced they will be running in the two new NDP friendly ridings.

Fantastic! Nettie and Noah will make amazing MPs; they are just the types the NDP need from the West. Even though Nettie will be representing an urban riding, as former president of the National Farmer union she brings needed rural "cred" to the NDP.
At any rate that's great news for the opposition who can see two, maybe three or even four seats in SASK.

On the 2011 votes, New Democrat voters would have elected two MPs, as compared with the five MPs their vote share deserved and any decent proportional system would have given them.
http://fed2013.pollmaps.ca/

Conclusion: the electoral map was less than half of the problem. Winner-take-all remains the principal villain of the piece.

[Krago]

Proportional representation is all about taking seats away from winning candidates from popular parties, and giving them to losing candidates from unpopular parties.

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, thanks to the new SK borders, 2 Tory MPs have announced they'll be running in rural seats that will be vacated, rather than run in the new urban ridings that make up most of their current ridings. Also, Nettie Wiebe and Noah Evanchuk have announced they will be running in the two new NDP friendly ridings.

Fantastic! Nettie and Noah will make amazing MPs; they are just the types the NDP need from the West. Even though Nettie will be representing an urban riding, as former president of the National Farmer union she brings needed rural "cred" to the NDP.
At any rate that's great news for the opposition who can see two, maybe three or even four seats in SASK.

On the 2011 votes, New Democrat voters would have elected two MPs, as compared with the five MPs their vote share deserved and any decent proportional system would have given them.
http://fed2013.pollmaps.ca/

Conclusion: the electoral map was less than half of the problem. Winner-take-all remains the principal villain of the piece.

You're really just preaching to the choir around here, I think.

[lilTommy]

Proportional representation is all about taking seats away from winning candidates from popular parties, and giving them to losing candidates from unpopular parties.

Just to prove you wrong... FPTP results for SASK:

CON - 56% - 13 - +3% over 2008
NDP - 32% - 0 - +7%
LIB - 8% - 1 - -6%

The party with the biggest positive support change still wins nothing... the tories are entitled even under PR to win half the seats though. In MMP the tories could still win all the seats BUT the NDP would win List seats BECAUSE almost a third of the population have no representation and would receive it if seats were allocated based on vote distribution.
The NDP was not unpopular since it saw huge growth but no seats... and the Liberals were obviously unpopular but still won a seat.  

[Wilfred Day]

Proportional representation is all about taking seats away from winning candidates from popular parties, and giving them to losing candidates from unpopular parties.

Actually, no. It's about giving voters power to elect an MP who was their first choice, or of a party that was their first choice. This does take away 1/3 of the local seats in order to elect 1/3 regional MPs without expanding the House, but it doesn't mean a winning candidate is somehow deprived of his or her seat:
http://wilfday.blogspot.ca/2013/06/moderate-proportionality-for-canadas.html

[Krago]

MMP: Why appoint the Leader's pals to the Senate when you can appoint them to the House of Commons!

[Hatman 🍁]

Dude, that's already how it works. It's rare to have actual nomination contests, and besides- in MMP they candidate lists would probably be elected in nomination contests as well.

There's no real good argument against MMP. It's not that complicated, it keeps local representation, and it accurately represents the will of the public. Can't go wrong with that.

[Smid]

And then in PEI, the party winning the most votes province-wide won a quarter of the seats, while the second party won the-quarters of them. It benefits the government in some provinces, and the opposition in others.

[DC Al Fine]

Dude, that's already how it works. It's rare to have actual nomination contests, and besides- in MMP they candidate lists would probably be elected in nomination contests as well.

There's no real good argument against MMP. It's not that complicated, it keeps local representation, and it accurately represents the will of the public. Can't go wrong with that.

It's an excellent compromise between FPTP & PR. My only complaint about it is the 5% threshold that usually comes along with it.

[Wilfred Day]

MMP: Why appoint the Leader's pals to the Senate when you can appoint them to the House of Commons!

Only in Canada do we think it`s democratic for a leader to appoint candidates, while in Germany, even in the jurisdictions that use closed lists, it`s illegal to appoint candidates.
http://wilfday.blogspot.ca/2009/10/democratic-nominations-why-is-germany.html

But luckily, the model on the table for Canada does NOT have closed lists, it lets voters vote for the local candidate they prefer AND for their party's regional candidate they prefer.
http://wilfday.blogspot.ca/2010/01/law-commission-of-canada-report.html

It's an excellent compromise between FPTP & PR. My only complaint about it is the 5% threshold that usually comes along with it.

That's a separate issue. New Zealand has been debating for many years between a 5% and 4% threshold. Scotland and Wales have no threshold except the natural threshold from the region size, letting the Green Party win a seat in its strongest region or pair of regions in Scotland even with less than 5% overall. Stephane Dion used to say, when he favoured the Law Commission model, that a party should need 5% in a province to win seats in that province, but should not need 5% nationally.

Five important decisions must be made, with consultation, about how to combine direct election by electoral district with proportional representation. http://wilfday.blogspot.ca/2012/03/how-to-get-to-fair-voting-system.html

[Hatman 🍁]

Dude, that's already how it works. It's rare to have actual nomination contests, and besides- in MMP they candidate lists would probably be elected in nomination contests as well.

There's no real good argument against MMP. It's not that complicated, it keeps local representation, and it accurately represents the will of the public. Can't go wrong with that.

It's an excellent compromise between FPTP & PR. My only complaint about it is the 5% threshold that usually comes along with it.

Indeed. There should be no thresholds, as they are arbitrary. If 1% of Canadians vote Communist, they should be entitled to 1% of the seats.

[Wilfred Day]

Indeed. There should be no thresholds, as they are arbitrary. If 1% of Canadians vote Communist, they should be entitled to 1% of the seats.

The only place that agrees with you is the Netherlands, with 11 parties in the 150-MP Parliament:
People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) 41    
Labour Party (PvdA) 38
Socialist Party (SP) 15    
Party for Freedom (PVV) 15    
Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) 13    
Democrats 66 (D66) 12    
Christian Union 5    
Green Left 4    
Reformed Political Party (SGP) 3      
Party for the over 50 (50Plus) 2    
Party for the Animals (PvdD) 2  

Given that the Christian Union is centre-left as is Democrats 66 (D66), you could assemble a 6-party left coalition with 76 seats: Labour--Socialist--Democrats 66--Christian Union--Green Left--Party for the Animals. But they aren't quite that crazy. So the government is yet another centrist grand coalition of the two largest parties: the centre-right VVD and the centre-left Labour.

[Hatman 🍁]

This is getting off topic, but has anyone adopted a model of having coalitions come together by democratic vote? It would be interesting if when in the voting booth, an elector could vote for what coalitions he/she would support in addition to his/her vote(s).

For example, I could say I would support an NDP-Green-Liberal coalition.

That way we can avoid situations like in Belgium where they had no government for over a year. This would force coalitions together.

[DC Al Fine]

This is getting off topic, but has anyone adopted a model of having coalitions come together by democratic vote? It would be interesting if when in the voting booth, an elector could vote for what coalitions he/she would support in addition to his/her vote(s).

For example, I could say I would support an NDP-Green-Liberal coalition.

That way we can avoid situations like in Belgium where they had no government for over a year. This would force coalitions together.

My main concern is that it takes away any flexiblity of the system for when sh**t happens. Suppose this surprise election result happened
Nazi - 45% of seats
Conservative - 20%
NDP - 20%
Liberal - 15%

Now you'd have a bunch of ABC voters with votes to avoid coalitions with the Tories and the government is unworkable. Obviously that example is hyperbole, but it shows what happens when unexpected results occur. Also I'm not quite sure why it's needed. Other countries with PR seem to do an ok job of figuring out voters' coalition preferences.

Otherwise, I agree with your view. I'd love to see the MLP & CHP in parliament and both could probably swing 1-3% of the vote in the right circumstances.

[Hatman 🍁]

Parliament should reflect the diverse political views of the Canadian public. Even if that means a Nazi MP

[DC Al Fine]

Parliament should reflect the diverse political views of the Canadian public. Even if that means a Nazi MP

I'm talking about coalition building, not who gets seats in parliament. I imagine it'd be impossible to do a cordon sanitaire if voters were allowed to pick and choose coalitions.

[lilTommy]

Well, thanks to the new SK borders, 2 Tory MPs have announced they'll be running in rural seats that will be vacated, rather than run in the new urban ridings that make up most of their current ridings. Also, Nettie Wiebe and Noah Evanchuk have announced they will be running in the two new NDP friendly ridings.

Fantastic! Nettie and Noah will make amazing MPs; they are just the types the NDP need from the West. Even though Nettie will be representing an urban riding, as former president of the National Farmer union she brings needed rural "cred" to the NDP.
At any rate that's great news for the opposition who can see two, maybe three or even four seats in SASK.

Any word on a final report for Ontario? God i hope they make changes to Toronto

Back on track... in the new riding of Saskatoon West Pat Atkinson a former NDP cabinet minister has been asked & is thinking about running for the nomination. A couple other Liberals/Cons with "name" are mentioned too

[Krago]

Well, thanks to the new SK borders, 2 Tory MPs have announced they'll be running in rural seats that will be vacated, rather than run in the new urban ridings that make up most of their current ridings. Also, Nettie Wiebe and Noah Evanchuk have announced they will be running in the two new NDP friendly ridings.

Fantastic! Nettie and Noah will make amazing MPs; they are just the types the NDP need from the West. Even though Nettie will be representing an urban riding, as former president of the National Farmer union she brings needed rural "cred" to the NDP.
At any rate that's great news for the opposition who can see two, maybe three or even four seats in SASK.

Any word on a final report for Ontario? God i hope they make changes to Toronto

Back on track... in the new riding of Saskatoon West Pat Atkinson a former NDP cabinet minister has been asked & is thinking about running for the nomination. A couple other Liberals/Cons with "name" are mentioned too

Do you have a link?

[Wilfred Day]

"Pat Atkinson The former provincial NDP cabinet minister said Thursday that party organizers have asked her to run in Saskatoon West. Atkinson hasn't decided yet. "You never say never in this life. ... I'm certainly interested in changing the government."
http://www.canada.com/news/Pundits+predict+campaign+shakeup/8824210/story.html

[lilTommy]

"Pat Atkinson The former provincial NDP cabinet minister said Thursday that party organizers have asked her to run in Saskatoon West. Atkinson hasn't decided yet. "You never say never in this life. ... I'm certainly interested in changing the government."
http://www.canada.com/news/Pundits+predict+campaign+shakeup/8824210/story.html

Thanks, I just got swamped with work... work pfft

[minionofmidas]

The actual problem with MMP is how it takes representation away from low-turnout areas (the bigger and more diverse the constituency, the bigger the problem, with national pr of course worst in that respect).

[Hatman 🍁]

The actual problem with MMP is how it takes representation away from low-turnout areas (the bigger and more diverse the constituency, the bigger the problem, with national pr of course worst in that respect).

This would be fixed with mandatory voting.

[Wilfred Day]

The actual problem with MMP is how it takes representation away from low-turnout areas (the bigger and more diverse the constituency, the bigger the problem, with national pr of course worst in that respect).

Yes, for German federal elections, they have this odd seat calculation formula which is done first at the national level, and each party's national seats are divided between states in proportion to the votes cast for that party in that state. Some East German states have sometimes lost seats because of low turnout or because of wasted votes cast for a party that falls below the threshold and wins no seats.

This cannot happen in Canada, where the number of MPs per province is fixed.

The Law Commission model does not use a province-wide calculation, so the number of seats in each region of a large province is also fixed.

If one region is, for example, Vancouver-Burnaby-Richmond-North Shore, with eight local MPs and five regional "top-up" MPs, it might be argued that the turnout on the North Shore and westend Vancouver will be higher than in eastend Vancouver, so the additional proportional MPs might be skewed slightly towards the higher turnout areas.

I have actually never seen anyone suggest this before, or provide a sample calculation to show this effect. It would be interesting to see. Until I see it, I have to consider this a far-fetched objection to MMP in Canada.

[minionofmidas]

It obviously depends how big you make the constituencies. Thing is, the smaller you make them, the odder and more random the seat distributions can be.