I have toyed with the idea of proportional representation, but have never really made up my mind one way or another. One thing I am convinced of is that the amount of seats allotted to each province should be proportional to the amount of people living there. Currently that is not the case. Places such as PEI and Saskatchewan, for example, have way more clout on a per capita basis than either Alberta or Ontario. Part of this is an artifact of the past. PEI, for example, can not have less seats than senators.
As I said in my last post, this situation can be corrected if somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 new MPs are added to the house. If the government where to commit itself to giving an MP for every 70,000 people the new numbers would break down as follows. Ontario would gain 67 seats, Quebec 27, BC 23, Alberta 19, and Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia 2 each. All total, a 142 seats should be added, most of those in Urban areas. There would still be outliers. PEI, and the territories would still be over represented, but I do not think this would bother anyone.
How would such an expansion be paid for? The senate should be abolished.
9 comments:
yep
Saskatchewan and PEI have too much clout? Really.
So, where is this mighty clout in evidence? The number of Prime Ministers from those political juggernauts? Nope. The number of all-powerful cabinet ministers? Hmm, don't think so.
Oh, it must be the influence exerted by their large and powerful caucuses? No PM or party leader could ignore the plight of their constituents when the PEI caucus speaks as one voice, right? Wrong.
Political clout cannot be measured by simply looking at the voter to representative ratio. Urban ridings benefit from the sheer number of members they send to Parliament, the fact that they are located within media centres, the financial resources available to riding associations and the ability of these constituencies to band together for common cause.
Rural MP's, meanwhile, are challenged by huge geographic boundaries, limited media, limited financial supporters, and isolated and hard to reach communities.
“Saskatchewan and PEI have too much clout?”
Ask a stupid question, and you will get a snide answer.
PEI has a population of 135, 851 and has 4 MPs and Oak Ridges - Markham has population of 169,642 and one MP.
On these basis it is safe to say that PEI has way more clout on a per capita basis than Markham Oak Ridges. Of course, “Political clout cannot be measured by simply looking at the voter to representative ratio.” PEI and its population of 135,851, as a province, has revenue streams available to it that are simply not available to Oak Ridges Markham and its population of 169, 642. Furthermore being located in the competitive media market of greater Toronto local issues simply do not get as much play as local issues do in a less competitive media market such as PEI.
….
The unit of comparison here is population. It can not be province to province.
According to the Elections Canada site, Markham actually has two ridings - Oak Ridges - Markham and Markham - Unionville. One of their representatives, John McCallum, has been a high profile member of the Liberal Cabinet for many years.
Markham is located in the Toronto area; the Toronto caucus has numerous members, often from a variety of parties, all working for the betterment of the economy and addressing the issues of this area. When one riding benefits, the others generally benefit too. When an issue arises, there is always a Cabinet Minister ... often several ... with a sympathetic ear.
All political parties pay attention to this area because of the number of seats at play. This creates a particular sensitivity to the concerns of all ridings in this area. Can the same be said of PEI with its four members? Hardly.
"local issues simply do not get as much play"
Of course these members do not address strictly local issues - these are not municipal politcians that we are talking about ... unless of course you are a Liberal and would like to extend Federal tentacles to every pothole in the country.
"PEI and its population of 135,851, as a province, has revenue streams available to it that are simply not available to Oak Ridges Markham"
Naturally PEI would have more streams of revenue since it is a provincial government dealing with provincial issues; not municipal issues such as those of Markham.
Koby,
Who would have thought that you would want to change Canada into the next New Zealand? No senate, proportional representation. All Canada needs next is a woman PM for the Liberal party.
Mushroom
Ouch, that was an embarassing gaffe that Markham only has one representative, eh, Koby?
You also state that, under your plan, the Territories would continue to be over-represented. This could only suggest that they are vastly over-represented now.
This is absolute hogwash. Nunavut, Yukon, NWT as well as Labrador are all geographically massive ridings with many remote and isolated communities ... often, they are only fly-in communities. The communities in these ridings have limited infrastructure, communication facilities, riding fund-raising sources, and sources of media for contact with constituents. While Toronto MPs catch a 30 minute flight to reach their ridings, the MP's for northern ridings can take a day or two to get home. Try doing that every weekend!
Also, try running an election campaign or maintaining contact with constituents under those circumstances and then talk about over-representation.
But, to you, its just a simple matter of numbers, isn't it?
You are missing the point. Small population centers such as PEI, and territories have extra representation and resources available to them that similar populations in other parts of Canada do not. Keeping in mind that I have never suggested taking away MPs from these regions and not at opposed to the need of having more offices and staff in these ridings, why should these Canadians have 1.5 to 6 times the representation on a per capita basis?
“According to the Elections Canada site, Markham actually has two ridings - Oak Ridges - Markham and Markham - Unionville.”
Yep, and I was talking about the riding of Oak Ridges Markham and hence I referred to it has Oak Ridges Markham. MP Lui Temelkovski.
“Ouch, that was an embarassing gaffe that Markham only has one representative, eh, Koby?”
Ha ha. Learn to read. It must be embarrassing going off half cocked like that.
“Naturally PEI would have more streams of revenue since it is a provincial government dealing with provincial issues; not municipal issues such as those of Markham.”
You are missing the point. Small population centers such as PEI, and territories have extra representation and resources available to them that similar populations in other parts of Canada do not. Keeping in mind that I have never suggested taking away MPs from these regions and not at opposed to the need of having more offices and staff in these ridings, why should these Canadians have 1.5 to 6 times the representation on a per capita basis?
The Tories have been reading your blog.
"Allan Woods
Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA – Ontario could have an extra 30 federal seats within three decades – and significantly more clout in the House of Commons – under legislation expected this week from the Conservative government.
Sources have told the Toronto Star that a bill to be unveiled by government House leader Peter Van Loan (York-Simcoe) will use the predicted growth in population, particularly in the GTA, to call for a boost in the number of federal representatives from Ontario. Alberta and British Columbia are also expected to receive additional representation under the plan outlined in the bill, but Canada’s largest province will get the biggest boost."
Post a Comment