Canada Federal Representation 2024
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:44:35 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Canada Federal Representation 2024
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 35
Author Topic: Canada Federal Representation 2024  (Read 49067 times)
trebor204
TREBOR204
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 418


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 15, 2021, 11:23:49 PM »

Only 4 more seats will added to the House of Commons
Alberta win gain 3 seats
BC and Ontario will gain 1 seat each
Quebec will lose 1 seat. (First time since 1966, a province will lose seats)

Back in 2013, the number of the seats went from 308 to 338.


https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/house-of-commons-seats-to-increase-from-338-to-342-as-early-as-2024-1.5624849

Formula:
https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e

Timeline:
https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/over&document=index&lang=e

History of Representation
https://redecoupage-federal-redistribution.ca/content.asp?section=info&dir=his/rep&document=p1&lang=e
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2021, 11:51:38 PM »

Quebec will NOT lose a seat. I am almost certain Parliament will pass an exemption so they can stay at 78.
Logged
adma
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,718
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2021, 12:17:12 AM »

(1) I don't know why Quebec, of all provinces, would lose a seat (unless it was deemed to have gotten too *many* in the last redistribution)

(2) only under a Trudeau Liberal government could they get away with even *entertaining* the idea of a lost seat--the outcry under a Conservative government would be deafening.  (Ironically, it's the Conservatives under whom Quebec gained seats for the first time in ages)
Logged
beesley
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,140
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.52, S: 2.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2021, 05:25:34 AM »

If Quebec had it's 78th seat granted back, would there be increases in Ontario, Alberta or British Columbia to further even it out?
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2021, 08:47:40 AM »

If Quebec had it's 78th seat granted back, would there be increases in Ontario, Alberta or British Columbia to further even it out?

No. It would be granted through an act of Parliament, and would bypass the representation formula all together.
Logged
Njall
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,019
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -1.55, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2021, 04:47:22 PM »

If Quebec had it's 78th seat granted back, would there be increases in Ontario, Alberta or British Columbia to further even it out?

No. It would be granted through an act of Parliament, and would bypass the representation formula all together.

Although as an Albertan who likes political maps, as unlikely as it is, I wouldn't mind at all if they tossed another seat our way.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2021, 09:20:30 AM »

Which areas are likely to gain/lose seats within provinces?

Some guesses (please feel free to correct these)

Alberta: Calgary, Edmonton each get 1. The stretch between Calgary and Edmonton gets the third seat?

BC: Surrey?

Ontario: York region should get another seat. Anywhere else going to take seats from rural Ontario?

NS: Halifax would be entitled to a 5th seat if population had to be strictly even. Likely won't happen though. It will probably go from 4 seats + little bits of Halifax County tacked onto rural seats, to four Halifax seats + a mixed Halifax/rural seat.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 19, 2021, 09:58:15 AM »

I think Brampton is slated to get the new Ontario riding.
Logged
lilTommy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,819


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -5.04

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 19, 2021, 01:06:09 PM »

What's the likelihood of major changes to existing riding boundaries outside of Alberta or BC/ON who are getting new seats.

NS was mentioned where Halifax will likely see a rurban seat in the mix, meaning the other seats will mostly increase in size?

Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,536
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 19, 2021, 01:58:59 PM »

I know the growth in Regina and Saskatoon means the rural seats all have to get larger. 
Logged
trebor204
TREBOR204
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 418


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 19, 2021, 10:12:16 PM »

It's possible that the GTA could see a gain of more than 1 seat, while another area of Ontario with lower than average population growth could lose a seat.



It might be time to revisit the Representation Formula:

https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e

Right now Manitoba and Saskatchewan each have 14 ridings, however Manitoba has a population of 200K larger (more than 1 electoral quotient -121K) than Saskatchewan. Should Manitoba (showing  my Manitoba bias) receive one more riding than Saskatchewan ?

If Nova Scotia (with 11 ridings) in the future were to overtake Saskatchewan (14 ridings) in population, the current formula will still give Nova Scotia 11 ridings (10 based on population and 1 based on the Grandfather clause)
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 20, 2021, 04:38:15 AM »

Canada's tolerance for malapportionment is honestly shocking.
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2021, 06:53:44 AM »

What's the likelihood of major changes to existing riding boundaries outside of Alberta or BC/ON who are getting new seats.

NS was mentioned where Halifax will likely see a rurban seat in the mix, meaning the other seats will mostly increase in size?

Just eyeballing it off county population estimates, only Cape Breton-Canso, Central Nova, and Sydney-Victoria need to add population. Those seats shrunk a lot, but the other rural seats are stable. Eastern NS will probably need to be changed, since the three seats that need to expand are all next to each other.

The counties northeast of Halifax have four ridings but only have the population for 3-3.5. If I were doing the map, I would turn the three undersized seats plus Cumberland-Colchester into three rural seats plus a rurban seat consisting of eastern Halifax County and southern Colchester County. You could probably do the rest of the map without too much change from the current one.

It's possible that the GTA could see a gain of more than 1 seat, while another area of Ontario with lower than average population growth could lose a seat.



It might be time to revisit the Representation Formula:

https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e

Right now Manitoba and Saskatchewan each have 14 ridings, however Manitoba has a population of 200K larger (more than 1 electoral quotient -121K) than Saskatchewan. Should Manitoba (showing  my Manitoba bias) receive one more riding than Saskatchewan ?

Probably not, but that sort of thing takes a lot of political capital to fix. Honestly, I don't know why the population quotient got bumped up to 121k. The easiest way to fix this would be to add seats at 110k a pop until MB/SK and Atlantic Canada were only slightly overrepresented.

If Nova Scotia (with 11 ridings) in the future were to overtake Saskatchewan (14 ridings) in population, the current formula will still give Nova Scotia 11 ridings (10 based on population and 1 based on the Grandfather clause)


If it makes you feel any better, there's no way that's going to happen Tongue
Logged
CumbrianLefty
CumbrianLeftie
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,601
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 20, 2021, 08:51:46 AM »

Canada's tolerance for malapportionment is honestly shocking.

Isn't it to an extent inevitable, due to its very lopsided nature population wise?
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 20, 2021, 09:34:56 AM »

Canada's tolerance for malapportionment is honestly shocking.

Very rich coming from someone from France of all places... Tongue

It's possible that the GTA could see a gain of more than 1 seat, while another area of Ontario with lower than average population growth could lose a seat.



It might be time to revisit the Representation Formula:

https://elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e

Right now Manitoba and Saskatchewan each have 14 ridings, however Manitoba has a population of 200K larger (more than 1 electoral quotient -121K) than Saskatchewan. Should Manitoba (showing  my Manitoba bias) receive one more riding than Saskatchewan ?

If Nova Scotia (with 11 ridings) in the future were to overtake Saskatchewan (14 ridings) in population, the current formula will still give Nova Scotia 11 ridings (10 based on population and 1 based on the Grandfather clause)


Very possible Southern Ontario gets 2 seats. I wonder if they will try to take away another riding from the North? They avoided it last time, since the south got 14 new ridings. Might be harder to justify it this time.

Manitoba could absolutely make the case for an additional riding. However, they don't have the clout like Quebec does to do that kind of thing. Maybe someone should start a Bloc Manitoba party Wink

Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 20, 2021, 10:16:23 AM »

Canada's tolerance for malapportionment is honestly shocking.

Isn't it to an extent inevitable, due to its very lopsided nature population wise?

It would be a one thing if it was based on something like the Norwegian rule, where part of the apportionment formula was based on land area to artificially boost rural provinces (I'd still oppose that, of course, but at least I could see the logic) but instead it's this byzantine formula cobbled together haphazardly that leads to inequality even between similar provinces like Manitoba and Saskatchewan, as previously mentioned.


Canada's tolerance for malapportionment is honestly shocking.

Very rich coming from someone from France of all places... Tongue

At least French malapportionment up to 2007 was a product of sheer inertia - we just kept using the same map over and over from the 80s (and it has since been fixed with a new map based on 2010s figures). You people keep drawing new maps every few years that just make the malapportionment worse or keep it the same.
Logged
Gary JG
Rookie
**
Posts: 68
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 20, 2021, 12:13:26 PM »

As I understand it most Canadian malapportionment results from various rules, with constitutional status, which modified the principle of representation by population. These rules can only be altered with the consent of provinces which would lose House of Commons seats as a result, so they are unlikely ever to be changed.
Logged
Hatman 🍁
EarlAW
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,978
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 20, 2021, 12:44:15 PM »

At least we don't have a district the size of Saint Pierre and Miquelon (pop. 6000, 5 times smaller than Nunavut).
Logged
mileslunn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,800
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 20, 2021, 02:19:44 PM »

My guess is in Atlantic Canada only minor changes as same seat count.  But urban or rural areas nearby  see ridings shrink while more remote rural get larger.  Cape Breton-Canso for example I could see taking up even more territory on mainland thus making it less Cape Breton and more mainland which probably helps Tories in that riding. 

For Quebec, this is probably bad news for BQ or Tories as likely rural ridings get bigger although likely hurts BQ most as I believe Gaspesie region is seeing biggest population decline.  Gaspesie-Iles de la Madeleine probably gets large enough that it will be tough for Liberals to hold.  Greater Montreal area growing so I doubt they take away a seat there.  In fact if anything Greater Montreal area should probably have more not less seats.

Ontario: GTA likely gets new one.  Northern Ontario is seeing biggest population decrease so I wouldn't be surprised if they lose one.  For rural areas, its sort of a mix.  Rural areas near the GTA like Simcoe County are growing but further away declining although in Southwestern Ontario population stagnant so not sure if they lose a seat.  Actually long term, rural areas I could see growing in next redistribution as with more working remotely and high cost of living, I think exodus from cities to countryside for those who can work remotely could happen.  Already seeing it in US as I believe New York City is losing people over this.

Manitoba: Minor changes but nothing too big

Saskatchewan: Saskatoon and Regina getting larger so seat more urban focused and rural larger.  Heck for Scheer's riding, wouldn't be surprised if they lop off a large rural part and it is more urban based.  If he switches to rural one is super safe but runs in urban one might face a tougher fight but still favoured.

Alberta: Calgary and Edmonton gain one while perhaps one in the nearby rural areas as it seems rural areas close to the two cities are growing quite rapidly, but rural areas further away are actually losing people.  So using US term, probably another exurban riding as exurbs of two cities growing fast. 

British Columbia: Lots of places growing so probably Interior loses one while Fraser Valley, South Vancouver Island, and Okanagan Valley see ridings get a bit smaller.  New one probably in Surrey as that is fastest growing part of city.  So good news for Liberals although NDP and Tories have in past been competitive in Surrey.
Logged
JerryArkansas
jerryarkansas
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,536
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2021, 02:39:19 PM »

The all also assumes that we don't see another seat increase via a formula change, which I'd expect to occur.  I'd love it if they try and link the seat numbers in BC, AB, and ON to the seat size in Quebec; so that the average size in all four provinces is around 110 thousand.  That'd take out a bit of the inequality. 
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2021, 05:25:53 PM »

At least we don't have a district the size of Saint Pierre and Miquelon (pop. 6000, 5 times smaller than Nunavut).

Wait, that's your beef with French apportionment, that we let Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon be represented in parliament? Huh What do you want to do with it exactly, disenfranchise them completely? Or put it in the same district as some other island at the other end of the world? Obviously that would be neither fair nor rational. This isn't malapportionment, it's the inevitable result of having a small, remote community that needs to be represented.

Look, you seem really desperate to prove some kind of point here and I don't get why. It's not a national pissing context. It's pretty obvious that the way Canada apportions its seats is seriously f**ked up and should be fixed, for the sake of Canadians themselves. It's not some huge assault on your country's honor or something.
Logged
mileslunn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,800
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2021, 05:42:09 PM »

At least we don't have a district the size of Saint Pierre and Miquelon (pop. 6000, 5 times smaller than Nunavut).

Wait, that's your beef with French apportionment, that we let Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon be represented in parliament? Huh What do you want to do with it exactly, disenfranchise them completely? Or put it in the same district as some other island at the other end of the world? Obviously that would be neither fair nor rational. This isn't malapportionment, it's the inevitable result of having a small, remote community that needs to be represented.

Look, you seem really desperate to prove some kind of point here and I don't get why. It's not a national pissing context. It's pretty obvious that the way Canada apportions its seats is seriously f**ked up and should be fixed, for the sake of Canadians themselves. It's not some huge assault on your country's honor or something.

Canada is a massive country and many northern ridings are big enough as is so making them even larger would be silly.  As for apportionment in each province, lots of countries that are federations do this to ensure all regions represented fairly.  Even in Europe, many countries give special seats for minority groups to ensure they have representation.  Its true Canada is imperfect but if you look at provinces now it goes like this:

Alberta, BC, and Ontario underrepresented, but they are also fastest growing so due to lag between census and change in boundaries that will always be an issue to some degree.

Quebec is pretty much bang on while Manitoba is slightly over but not too far off.

Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland definitely get more than warranted but we are talking mostly around 2 seats in each so in big scheme of things doesn't make a huge difference.

Agreed Prince Edward Island is probably the most skewed.  Even if they had only 2 seats would still be over, but changing this requires constitutional amendment.

Territories due to remoteness deserve their own seat much the way French overseas territories even if population doesn't warrant it each get their own.
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,567


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2021, 05:09:43 AM »

Territories getting a seat of their own makes sense, but the malapportionment within provinces is bad enough on its own, let alone the various oddities between different provinces.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,725


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2021, 06:19:12 AM »

Territories getting a seat of their own makes sense, but the malapportionment within provinces is bad enough on its own, let alone the various oddities between different provinces.

I mean I would argue that malapportionment within a province to give First nation groups a voice - as is done in some parts of northern Ontario - is just a different version of a VRA seat built for a nation without OMOV. Beyond that though it gets indefensible.
Logged
EastAnglianLefty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,567


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2021, 07:52:43 AM »

Would agree with that - it's much more defensible in northern Manitoba, for example, than it is in rural Nova Scotia.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 35  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 11 queries.