Redistribution of Federal Electoral Districts 2012

[MaxQue]

My riding in Abitibi returns to its previous name and Outremont is very safe for Mulcair now, since they expand it into Plateau instead of the other side and removed all the part on the other side of Mount Royal.

Globally, Quebec map is ''Let's screw it, we keep current map and adjust it''.

[MaxQue]

Ugh. I'm looking at the Ottawa numbers, and the three safest Tory seats are also the three least populated ridings in the city (Nepean, Rideau-Carleton and Kanata-Mississippi Mills).  Rideau-Carleton, perhaps the most Tory of the three has less than 90,000 people!


Ottawa South, a safe Liberal seat will be the largest in the city at over 120,000 people.

Isn't the theory that suburban places like those three ridings are rapidly growing so you purposely make them underpopulated now with the understanding that they are growing as we speak?

That's the theory. But then the commission also makes ridings that are losing people (Northern Ontario) really small. So that means ridings (like Ottawa South) with relatively stable populations are hugely over populated.

Now Rideau-Carleton could experience much growth, but I'm not sure it will get more than 15,000 over the next ten years. Maybe. But that it would only put it at the provincial average. Ideally, it should be at the provincial average half way between redistributions.

If you read the report, they mainly focused on putting communities together, as participants didn't care about the equalization and the population numbers.

They also accused Carol Hugues and Charlie Angus of having an innapropriate behaviour during the process.

[MaxQue]

Carol Hugues:
The municipal association of the Highway 11 communities wrote in a letter they wanted to move from Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing to Timmins-James Bay. When she learned that at the North Bay hearings, she said than the association would sent a contrary request in the following days, which happened. They suspect she pressured the association in renouncing their former request.

As for Charlie Angus, he had a wierd definition of interest community which he seemed to use to keep his current riding without change.

[MaxQue]

Procedure Committee heard 4 MPs today:
Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior       
David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia       
Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca   
Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River
 

[MaxQue]

Procedure Committee heard 4 MPs today:

Nest Tuesday (March 5th), they will hear 3 MPs:
Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster
Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas   
Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley

[MaxQue]

Procedure Committee heard 4 MPs today:

Nest Tuesday (March 5th), they will hear 3 MPs:
Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster
Kennedy Stewart, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas   
Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley

Next Thursday (March 7th) is about New Brunswick:
Mike Allen, Conservative, Tobique—Mactaquac
John Williamson, Conservative, New Brunswick Southwest
Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst
Robert Goguen, Conservative, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe

[MaxQue]

Here are two more downtown Toronto scenarios to consider.

• The ridings have roughly equal populations
• Forest Hill and Rosedale are placed in the same seat
• Kensington/Chinatown is kept together, as is the St. Lawrence neighbourhood
• Davenport (which really should change its name) would become even more Portuguese
• Carolyn Bennett would really REALLY hate it

This is much better, I think. Forest Hill-Rosedale is an extremely natural seat and should be kept more or less this way as the others are changed.

I would keep the southern border of Davenport and expand it in the north instead, though (to prevent University-Oakwood from being so elongated, and take the southern addition to Davenport and put it in University-Oakwood instead).

Alternatively, is it possible to combine Chinatown in the inland seat instead, and have the condo seat push into Toronto Centre to take in the Garden District? That involves splitting up downtown, but I don't think that's so bad. Basically, changing the focus from north-south districts (as historically) to east-west districts. Maybe a Toronto-Fort York seat and a University-Chinatown seat (maybe Wellesley-Dundas?) and then something inland (maybe just called Oakwood? Or Bloor-Oakwood?).

I wish I had the data to more easily fiddle around with.

The proposed (and current) riding of Davenport has 102,360 people.  The Oakwood-Vaughan neighbourhood in the NW corner of St. Paul's (west of Winona) has 10,980 people, so adding that area to the existing riding would throw off the population balance in downtown Toronto.

However, here's an alternative for you to consider, based on your later comments.

Benj Alternative - Federal

Benj Alternative - Provincial

I really like the flow, and how easily these proposals fit together. Communities of interest for the most part look to be held together utilizing Queen street for the most part as a dividing line between Trinity-Spadina, TC and Fort York.
Federally - The NDP wins handily (by the looks of it) Fort York and TC becomes a battle ground for between the LIB/NDP.
Provincially - The NDP has a long way to go to win over Davenport, Fort York and Toronto Centre.

Do we know if the final report is the last word on the boundaries? Cause we have some great ideas being thrown around here... Olivia should see the "Benji Alternative"

MPs can object to the Procedure committee, the committee writes a report to the commission, which has to answer them and modify the map or justify their refusal to not do the change. The process already began and today, the Procedure committee sent the report to the Alberta commission.

[MaxQue]

Parliament? Isn't that name reserved for the Ottawa one, while Toronto one is an Assembly?
(Or even Queens' Park?)

[MaxQue]

Usually, the Elections Office is calculating notionals after the map is definitive and publish them.

For the process, Harry, it began last spring. Each province has a commission and it's appointed. Each commission is chaired by a judge, which is selected by the Chief Justice of each province and two other members, which are selected by the Speaker of the House (Andrew Scheer, Conservative).

The commission is then drawing a proposition (proposed limits) (late spring and early summer). After that, people have a time to send comments and documents. The Commission must also tour the province and hold public hearings in various locations of the provinces, to hear comments about it.

After that, they write a report (limits at the report). That report is sent at the House of Commons where the Procedure Standing Committee has to hear the objections of every MP to the report map. After hearing the objections of MPs, they write a report about which changes are supported by the Committee which is sent to the Commission. Then, the commission must answer the objections, either by modifying the map or explaining why they keep the map as they drew it in the report.

[MaxQue]

Here are two more options for you folks to chew on.

Longueuil Alternative Map - Option 2

Longueuil Alternative Map - Option 3

I like the second one the best, but there's still some awkwardness. I guess it can't really be avoided...

Well, the municipal limits in that area were very wierd, too.

[MaxQue]

On April 16 the House Committee will finish hearing MPs on the Saskatchewan boundaries. On April 18 they start the first three MPs from Quebec.

Whats the feeling coming from the Sask hearings? I've heard the tories have ranged from overt racist comments to feelings of self loathing for dropping the ball (and allowing urban ridings).
When will the Ontario MPs speak? or did i miss that boat

After Quebec.
For Saskatchewan, I fully expect a majority report by Tories for rurban ridings approving the dissident report of the commission and a dissident report by NDP/Lib for urban ones approving the majority report of the commission.

[MaxQue]

On April 16 the House Committee will finish hearing MPs on the Saskatchewan boundaries. On April 18 they start the first three MPs from Quebec.

Whats the feeling coming from the Sask hearings? I've heard the tories have ranged from overt racist comments to feelings of self loathing for dropping the ball (and allowing urban ridings).
When will the Ontario MPs speak? or did i miss that boat

After Quebec.
For Saskatchewan, I fully expect a majority report by Tories for rurban ridings approving the dissident report of the commission and a dissident report by NDP/Lib for urban ones approving the majority report of the commission.

Not sure the Liberals would join the NDP. They get Wascana either way and have no shot anywhere else. They may prefer rurban ridings to keep the NDP weak.

Goodale backed urban ridings at the House Committee hearings.

[MaxQue]

Also, Alberta's page was updated to announce us than one of the commissionners sadly died last month.

[MaxQue]

Was that the only change?

No, Bay d'Espoir-Central-Notre Dame became Coast of Bays-Central-Notre Dame.

[MaxQue]

Only a few objections made in Quebec, and most were related to names, including the infamous Saint-Léonard--Villeray which include none of Villeray.

[MaxQue]

Well, I don't like Maxime Bernier, but he is right. Beauce is Beauce and they are VERY regionalist. Don't try to split them.

And Saint-Lambert-de-Lauzon is usually considered as a Lévis suburb, not a part of Beauce.

And the idea of putting Les Etchemins with the east is wierd. Land division and roads are perpendicular to the St. Lawrence in that area, so it's quite non-sensical to propose that. Anyways, Montmagny--L'Islet--Kamouraska--Rivière-du-Loup is big enough.

For other quebec proposals, I don't now Ahuntsic and Cartierville enough to comment, Mattawan is obviously going into Joliette and Suroît is a really fine name.

For Timiskaming Shores, I already went there and it would be wierd to remove the surrounding farmland (canola, if I remember well) to put it in a rural, remote and mining area.

[MaxQue]

Algoma-Manitoulin-Kap is one of the most unique ridings in the country.  It's fascinating to me that communities do not want to belong to that riding.  Like Carol Hughes has said, if you want to be in a riding with a large urban centre, they will get most of the attention. 

Well, Kapuskasing is along another road (11) than the rest of the riding (17). Bruce Mines (have family there) prefer to be linked with nearby Sault Ste. Marie than with a vague rural area streching from distant Manitoulin Island to very distant Hearst.

[MaxQue]

Oh, they met in camera.  That's Canadian democracy for you....

Not their choice. Committees always meet in camera when discussing a report, usually.

[MaxQue]

Ravignat comes fron Cantley, so I suppose he will stay in the riding containing it.

[MaxQue]

Saskatchewan apparently held its ground.

[MaxQue]

In Quebec, all names changes were accepted, even when the Commission was not agreeing with it, because it wasn'r worth it, since MPs changed the names last time.

They should have resisted. "Centre-du-Bas-Saint-Laurent" is terrible in French and even more in English.

[MaxQue]

Not many changes, as expected. Some truly awful names though. Disappointed that no one had the balls to contest the Chomedey area riding being named "Vimy".

Vimy isn't even in Vimy! (Vimy is in France, in Pas-de-Calais-2, exactly).

[MaxQue]

Interestingly, the Quebec commission decided for ridings with long names, each place would be listed alphabetical. This is a terrible idea. The largest part should be listed first.

Also, why did they go with "Centre-du-Bas-Saint-Laurent"? It has the same boundaries as the current Rimouski-Neigette--Témiscouata--Les Basques (technically 3 MRCs). Also, they've given the neighbouring riding a really long name (Avignon-La Mitis-Matane-Matapedia). One issue with that riding that they've ignored is that "Matane" changed its name to "Matanie" a few months ago.

Matane = City, Matanie = MRC.
Anyways, they were clear in their report. Sinc eht MPs decided to overule the commission last time by altering, they accepted all proposed names since they figured they would be changed anyways.

[MaxQue]

Some of your proposals aren't good. Suroît is a very good name.

[MaxQue]

Some of your proposals aren't good. Suroît is a very good name.

Why? I've never heard the term.

Suroît refers to the area covered by the MRC of Vaudreuil-Soulanges (through, not really Vaudreuil area), Beauharnois-Salaberry and Haut-Saint-Laurent.

The western Montérégie, in short. It's used by various things, including a tourism board and an health authority. Its use was quite limited until a few years (I suppose than the failed project of the Suroît power plant helped to publicize it).