The proposed changes are outlined in Bill C-12, which would add 30 new seats to Parliament, 18 in Ontario, 5 in Alberta and 7 in BC. The Quebec Liberal caucus, along with the Bloc, see this as unfair because the additional seats would reduce the percentage of Quebec's seats in the House below it's percentage of population by a small margin.
Electoral and political math rarely make sense but the Liberal caucus and Bloc have little to complain about in the proposed changes.One Quebec Liberal has gone so far as to make the link between Quebec's distinct society and it's need for parity or better.
But let's do the math.
Under the current electoral map and using 2009 census figures from Statscan, Ontario has 34.4% of seats in Parliament while it has 38.74% of the population, meaning on a strictly Rep by Pop basis, the province is under represented by nearly 4.5%. Similarly, Alberta and BC are under represented in Parliament by 1.84% and 1.52% respectively. Quebec, meanwhile, is currently over represented, when comparing number of seats to population, by 1.15%, meaning it has approximately 4 seats too many.
No one in Quebec, be it the Bloc or the federal Liberal caucus, is demanding the government reduced its current allotment nor is the Bloc willing to give up seats out of electoral fairness. That would be silly.
Yet even under the proposed changes, Ontario would still be under-represented by 2% when compared to its population (124 seats divided by 338 = 36.7%). While Alberta and BC come closer to parity, the two provinces would still be under represented in absolute terms (-1.17% and -0.48% respectively). Quebec, under the new regime, would be under represented by just 1% or similar to Alberta.
In other words, Alberta, BC and Quebec would have very similar levels of representation based on 2009 population while Ontario still loses out of seven additional seats it deserves.
Yet this change is still unacceptable and patently unfair according to both the Bloc and the federal Liberals.
If the goal of the proposed changes is to try and balance out electoral misrepresentation by adding seats to Parliament, then clearly Quebec has no case beyond the narrow politics of self-interest and self-delusion (distinct society means more seats?? what kind of logic is that?).
Moreover, why should the Bloc care about the distribution of seats within the House since its raison d'etre is separation? Reducing Quebec's representation in the House plays into the Bloc's hand; the less Quebec is represented in federal politics the greater the need for separation.
This is just the usual small-town cheap politics we've come to know and love from Quebec politicians.
| House of Commons Seat Distribution, 2010 and Proposed by Bill C-12 | ||||||||
| Current % of Seats minus % Population | ||||||||
Current | Bill C-12 Proposed | Abs Diff | % Current | % Chg Proposed | % Pop | % Diff Current | % Diff Proposed | |
| N.L. | 7 | 7 | 0 | 2.3% | 2.1% | 1.5% | 0.8% | 0.6% |
| P.E.I. | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1.3% | 1.2% | 0.4% | 0.9% | 0.8% |
| N.S. | 11 | 11 | 0 | 3.6% | 3.3% | 2.8% | 0.8% | 0.5% |
| N.B. | 10 | 10 | 0 | 3.2% | 3.0% | 2.2% | 1.0% | 0.7% |
| Que. | 75 | 75 | 0 | 24.4% | 22.2% | 23.2% | 1.1% | -1.0% |
| Ont. | 106 | 124 | 18 | 34.4% | 36.7% | 38.7% | -4.3% | -2.0% |
| Man. | 14 | 14 | 0 | 4.5% | 4.1% | 3.6% | 0.9% | 0.5% |
| Sask. | 14 | 14 | 0 | 4.5% | 4.1% | 3.1% | 1.5% | 1.1% |
| Alta. | 28 | 33 | 5 | 9.1% | 9.8% | 10.9% | -1.8% | -1.2% |
| B.C. | 36 | 43 | 7 | 11.7% | 12.7% | 13.2% | -1.5% | -0.5% |
| Nunavut | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.3% | 0.3% | |||
| N.W.T. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.3% | 0.3% | |||
| Yukon | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.3% | 0.3% | |||
| Canada | 308 | 338 | 30 | 100.0% | 109.7% | |||
| Source: CBC | ||||||||
1 comment:
This is the kind of data that should have been in news articles. Good job.
Post a Comment