Canada Federal Representation 2024

[Hatman 🍁]

I guess no one here saw my Tweets with the 2021 result breakdowns of the new ridings, due to all the speculation:





Not much changes, except for Churchill River. It went NDP in 2019, so I suspect it will be a Liberal vs NDP battle next election.

[Hatman 🍁]

2021 results:

[Hatman 🍁]

How is it possible for Churchill River to now be notionally Liberal? In the 2021 election the Tory MP won by 22 points 49% to 27%. How can a relatively marginal change in the map turn that into a double digit Liberal lead??!

Marginal change!? They removed basically the entire White population of the riding.

[Hatman 🍁]

The Newfoundland and Labrador commission will be to blame, historically, as the reason for the death of representation by population (read equity in voting).  Shameful.  Labrador has no legal protections being so small (unlike the PEI or territories).  Still not sure how they get away with this.  Other commissions are noticing that they can get away with these minuscule ridings (Ontario with new Far North riding) and Manitoba's North now, we will see this more and more, to the detriment of people living in the rest of Canada.  Other areas across the country have no problem crossing big bodies of water within a riding or huge islands - otherwise we'd have dozens of riding for Nunavut, or massive geographical areas (Northern Quebec riding, for example).

I think you mean Saskatchewan. Churchill is still within the 25% parameters (and has more people than reported in the Census due to uncounted reserves). However, I could see a Manitoba commission making a smaller Churchill riding in the future. And also Quebec, as you suggested.

[Hatman 🍁]

Jasper--Banff--Canmore?  Who the f**k proposed that?

https://redecoupage-redistribution-2022.ca/ebv/en/?locale=en-ca&prov=ab

A return to the very brief "Rocky Mountain" riding that existed in in the 70s.

The Alberta map is all over the place. Some of the issues have been fixed, but there are new issues. Disappointed they got rid of that southern Calgary riding (below Fish Creek). That area has the perfect population for a riding, and with nice natural borders. Sad!

The Quebec map is generally very good. One oddity is the long Megantic-L'Erable. It now goes from the US border to the St. Lawrence. Strange decision.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Hatman 🍁]

The commission could also propose several different maps at first, and people can debate the pros and cons of each one, and the commission can then use the debate to draft the ideal map. That way there would likely be no surprises in the report, as every possibility would be discussed.

[Hatman 🍁]

•   I don’t know enough about the west end of Ottawa to understand if Golden Ave is the western limit of Westboro neighbourhood, but that jog around Berkley Ave, Tay St, and Dominion Ave seems rather odd to me.

Agreed, that is weird. As best as I can tell, they got that boundary by matching the municipal ward boundary north of Richmond Road. Which still doesn't make much sense because the municipal boundary south of Richmond Road is 5-6 blocks west at Denbury Ave. The local community association also considers Denbury to be their western boundary.

Neighbourhood boundaries can be rather nebulous, but I have heard of Golden Ave being the unofficial border for Westboro, even if the community association uses Denbury.

[Hatman 🍁]

•   I don’t understand why they let Stittsville remain divided between two seats when they could have just followed the existing federal boundary in the area and kept Stittsville together.

Considering I was the only one to complain about Stittsville being split, they didn't bother to do anything about it.

[Hatman 🍁]

https://twitter.com/drowldr/status/1625567614574514176

[Hatman 🍁]

I have prepared an alternative map for Ottawa that:
- keeps Stittsville together in a single riding
- uses a simpler boundary in the Westboro area, north of Richmond Rd
- places voters on both sides of Innes Rd (from Hwy 417 to Navan Rd) in the same riding
- places voters on both sides of Hwy 417 (from Hunt Club Rd to Carlsbad Rd/Frontier Rd) in the same riding

You can find my alternative map here:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=18OrFn4Zs3JXgs9Yj-0LXuPgCN8vB94E&usp=sharing

much better!

[Hatman 🍁]

Carole Hughes already lives in Nickel Belt.

[Hatman 🍁]

Why was Spadina kept in the riding name last time anyway? They could've kept Trinity instead, as it still contained Trinity-Bellwoods Park.

[Hatman 🍁]

One thing I’ve learned in all my years of dealing with redistribution: people care far more about riding names than riding boundaries.

The toponymy is half the fun!

[Hatman 🍁]

In honour of Hatman, here are my suggested name changes:

Commission Name	Better Name
Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke	Renfrew—South Algonquin
Brampton—Chinguacousy Park	Brampton—Bramalea
Brampton North—Caledon	Brampton North—Mayfield West
Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound	Bruce—Grey
Elgin—St. Thomas—London South	Elgin—Lambeth
Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands— Rideau Lakes	Leeds—Grenville
Manitoulin—Nickel Belt	Nickel Belt—Manitoulin
Milton East—Halton Hills South	Milton East—Georgetown
Mississauga—Lakeshore	Mississauga—Port Credit
Niagara North	Niagara Falls or Niagara East
Niagara South	Niagara Centre
Ottawa—Vanier—Gloucester	Ottawa—Vanier
Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong	Lambton
Scarborough Centre—Don Valley East	Scarborough—Don Valley East
Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park	Scarborough—Rouge Park
Scarborough—Woburn	Scarborough Centre
Spadina—Harbourfront	Fort York
Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park	Parkdale—High Park
Wellington—Halton Hills North	Wellington—Guelph—Acton
York Centre	Downsview
York South—Weston—Etobicoke	Weston—Humber Heights

Most of these are better, or at least just as good.

I think I would re-name Niagara South to Welland—Erie. Not sure Guelph needs to be in the Wellington—Acton name, since Guelph is geographically part of Wellington County. Also, why not York—Humber or York South—Humber? The former borough of York makes up a substantial part of that riding and should be included.

In honour of Hatman, here are my suggested name changes:

Commission Name	Better Name
Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke	Renfrew—South Algonquin
Brampton—Chinguacousy Park	Brampton—Bramalea
Brampton North—Caledon	Brampton North—Mayfield West
Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound	Bruce—Grey
Elgin—St. Thomas—London South	Elgin—Lambeth
Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands— Rideau Lakes	Leeds—Grenville
Manitoulin—Nickel Belt	Nickel Belt—Manitoulin
Milton East—Halton Hills South	Milton East—Georgetown
Mississauga—Lakeshore	Mississauga—Port Credit
Niagara North	Niagara Falls or Niagara East
Niagara South	Niagara Centre
Ottawa—Vanier—Gloucester	Ottawa—Vanier
Sarnia—Lambton—Bkejwanong	Lambton
Scarborough Centre—Don Valley East	Scarborough—Don Valley East
Scarborough—Guildwood—Rouge Park	Scarborough—Rouge Park
Scarborough—Woburn	Scarborough Centre
Spadina—Harbourfront	Fort York
Taiaiako’n—Parkdale—High Park	Parkdale—High Park
Wellington—Halton Hills North	Wellington—Guelph—Acton
York Centre	Downsview
York South—Weston—Etobicoke	Weston—Humber Heights

Oooh this is what I'd do for BC riding name changes:

Commission Name	Better Name
Abbotsford—South Langley	Abbotsford—Langley South
Capilano—North Vancouver	North Vancouver—West Vancouver
Columbia—Kootenay—Southern Rockies	Kootenay
Courtenay—Alberni	Mid Island
Cowichan—Malahat—Langford	Cowichan—Langford
Fleetwood—Port Kells	Surrey—Fleetwood
Howe Sound—West Vancouver	West Vancouver—Howe Sound
Kamloops—Shuswap—Central Rockies	Kamloops—Columbia—Shuswap
Langley Township	Langley—Fraser Heights
Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford	Abbotsford—Mission
Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna	Okanagan—Kelowna South
Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge	Maple Ridge—Pitt Meadows
Port Moody—Coquitlam	Coquitlam—Port Moody
Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies	Prince George—Peace River
Richmond Centre—Marpole	Richmond West—Marpole
Skeena—Bulkley Valley	British Columbia Northwest
Vancouver Arbutus	Vancouver Southwest
Vancouver Fraserview—South Burnaby	Vancouver South—Burnaby
Vernon—Monashee	North Okanagan

Thoughts?

Can't say I like many of them. "British Columbia Northwest" is particularly egregious.

[Hatman 🍁]

Northern Ontario MPs want to keep the ten federal ridings in their part of the province. That would require squeezing another seat out of Toronto and Markham.

Here’s my plan:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=18OrFn4Zs3JXgs9Yj-0LXuPgCN8vB94E&usp=sharing

That will fly over well.

[Hatman 🍁]

I can see why they wanted the "Mer Bleue" area in Prescott-Russell-Cumberland, as that area has a large Francophone population, and is rather rural, so belongs in the riding for COI reasons.  It would actually be more preferable to move the boundary westward to include some of the more French communities in Carleton like Piperville.

[Hatman 🍁]

So it looks like the NDP plan actually splits up the Indigenous population? Are they trying to use Indigenous population as a reason to have Saskatoon Centre exist?

[Hatman 🍁]

Why the heck does the ferry go to PEI anyway? Are there no good ports in Gaspe?

[Hatman 🍁]

Maybe drop Émard from the name? I don't mind triple-barrelled names, but  I think 4 names is way too long. Émard is in the St-Henri section of the provincial riding of St-Henri-Ste-Anne, so you can make the argument it's not needed if St-Henri is part of the name.

[Hatman 🍁]

The New Brunswick map has been approved. RIP united City of Saint John.

[Hatman 🍁]

I only recognize the curling border.