Normally only political wonks and politicians-to-be would care about how Canada will add four more MPs to the house in the next election, bringing the total to 342 MPs. But this time, Elections Canada added five seats: three to Alberta, one to British Columbia, and one to Ontario while subtracting one from Quebec..The Bloc Quebecois was predictably outraged. Bloc leader Yves-François Blanchet brought forward a motion demanding the House of Commons reject “any scenario for redrawing the federal electoral map that would result in Quebec losing one or more electoral districts or that would reduce Quebec’s political weight in the House of Commons” and that the representation rule be amended..The motion passed on March 2nd with the support of the Bloc, Liberals, NDP, and about half of the Conservative caucus. Former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole voted for the motion while his leadership rival, Dr. Leslyn Lewis, voted against. Conservative Interim Leader Candice Bergen voted for the motion, while potential leadership candidate Michelle Rempel Garner voted against. Pierre Poilievre — who many see as the front runner in the Conservative leadership race — did not attend the vote. The lone vote against the motion from outside the Conservative party came from John McKay, a Liberal MP from Toronto. Blanchet went on to demand that Quebec gain a seat instead of losing one, bringing Quebec’s total to 79..The representation formula — and the section of the Constitution that mandates it — is a convoluted mess of jargon that can best be summarized as: “Democracy be damned, give more seats to Quebec and Atlantic Canada.” This historic unfairness is perpetrated via three mechanisms: the senatorial clause, the grandfather clause, and the representation rule..The descriptions from Elections Canada for the first two hardly sound nefarious: “The senatorial clause guarantees that no province has fewer seats in the House of Commons than it has in the Senate. The grandfather clause guarantees each province no fewer seats than it had in 1985.”.These two rules benefit every other province at the expense of Alberta, BC, and Ontario. Under the 342-seat proposal, the senatorial clause provides three additional seats to New Brunswick, one to Nova Scotia, two to Prince Edward Island, and one to Newfoundland & Labrador. The grandfather clause provides four additional seats to Saskatchewan, two to Manitoba, four to Quebec, one to Nova Scotia, and one to Newfoundland & Labrador..The representation rule only applies to a province that was previously over-represented and guarantees extra seats so it will not fall below being proportionally represented. Quebec is the only province to benefit from this rule and would get two additional seats. It is unfair nonsense designed to continually over-represent Quebec and it is part of Canada’s constitution. The Bloc’s demand for 79 seats without additional seats for Alberta, BC, and Ontario is undemocratic, unfair, and unconstitutional..That said, it’s possible to respect the constitution while giving Quebec 79 MPs: you just add more seats to Alberta, BC, and Ontario. As outlined in the spreadsheet below, this brings the total number of MPs in the house of commons to 353.. 353-MPs .Under my proposal, BC gets three additional seats, Alberta gets four, Ontario gets seven, and Quebec gets one. While Alberta, BC, and Ontario remain underrepresented in the house; my proposal increases each province’s share of the house relative to the 342-seat proposal. My proposal also brings an end to Quebec being overrepresented by making them the only province that’s proportionally represented..Our constitution is an imperfect document. But If the Bloc insists on 79 MPs for Quebec, then it’s only fair that we follow the constitution and give Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario the correct number of MPs. Anything less would be undemocratic, unfair, and unconstitutional..Alex McColl is the National Defence Columnist for the Western Standard
Normally only political wonks and politicians-to-be would care about how Canada will add four more MPs to the house in the next election, bringing the total to 342 MPs. But this time, Elections Canada added five seats: three to Alberta, one to British Columbia, and one to Ontario while subtracting one from Quebec..The Bloc Quebecois was predictably outraged. Bloc leader Yves-François Blanchet brought forward a motion demanding the House of Commons reject “any scenario for redrawing the federal electoral map that would result in Quebec losing one or more electoral districts or that would reduce Quebec’s political weight in the House of Commons” and that the representation rule be amended..The motion passed on March 2nd with the support of the Bloc, Liberals, NDP, and about half of the Conservative caucus. Former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole voted for the motion while his leadership rival, Dr. Leslyn Lewis, voted against. Conservative Interim Leader Candice Bergen voted for the motion, while potential leadership candidate Michelle Rempel Garner voted against. Pierre Poilievre — who many see as the front runner in the Conservative leadership race — did not attend the vote. The lone vote against the motion from outside the Conservative party came from John McKay, a Liberal MP from Toronto. Blanchet went on to demand that Quebec gain a seat instead of losing one, bringing Quebec’s total to 79..The representation formula — and the section of the Constitution that mandates it — is a convoluted mess of jargon that can best be summarized as: “Democracy be damned, give more seats to Quebec and Atlantic Canada.” This historic unfairness is perpetrated via three mechanisms: the senatorial clause, the grandfather clause, and the representation rule..The descriptions from Elections Canada for the first two hardly sound nefarious: “The senatorial clause guarantees that no province has fewer seats in the House of Commons than it has in the Senate. The grandfather clause guarantees each province no fewer seats than it had in 1985.”.These two rules benefit every other province at the expense of Alberta, BC, and Ontario. Under the 342-seat proposal, the senatorial clause provides three additional seats to New Brunswick, one to Nova Scotia, two to Prince Edward Island, and one to Newfoundland & Labrador. The grandfather clause provides four additional seats to Saskatchewan, two to Manitoba, four to Quebec, one to Nova Scotia, and one to Newfoundland & Labrador..The representation rule only applies to a province that was previously over-represented and guarantees extra seats so it will not fall below being proportionally represented. Quebec is the only province to benefit from this rule and would get two additional seats. It is unfair nonsense designed to continually over-represent Quebec and it is part of Canada’s constitution. The Bloc’s demand for 79 seats without additional seats for Alberta, BC, and Ontario is undemocratic, unfair, and unconstitutional..That said, it’s possible to respect the constitution while giving Quebec 79 MPs: you just add more seats to Alberta, BC, and Ontario. As outlined in the spreadsheet below, this brings the total number of MPs in the house of commons to 353.. 353-MPs .Under my proposal, BC gets three additional seats, Alberta gets four, Ontario gets seven, and Quebec gets one. While Alberta, BC, and Ontario remain underrepresented in the house; my proposal increases each province’s share of the house relative to the 342-seat proposal. My proposal also brings an end to Quebec being overrepresented by making them the only province that’s proportionally represented..Our constitution is an imperfect document. But If the Bloc insists on 79 MPs for Quebec, then it’s only fair that we follow the constitution and give Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario the correct number of MPs. Anything less would be undemocratic, unfair, and unconstitutional..Alex McColl is the National Defence Columnist for the Western Standard
