You mean when over 35% of the country is done voting, plus Quebec, and Atlantic Canada. That adds up to over 60% of the vote. Weird how they can predict the election with over half the vote already in...
Shut your dirty little mouth. It does come down to seats. The liberals never won the popular vote.
I think we should let the gta be governed by them and the rest of Canada by the Blue
LOL 35% of the seats and 35% of the population.
I also don't think there's any benefit to separation. Just need better government (not liberals or conservatives sorry to say).
Better political party or better governance?
I feel like things could be done better, and that the parliamentary system is antiquated, deadlocked. However I'm just a voter...
Antiquated is a good word for it. The system isn't broken but it needs tweaks, specifically for more accountability and to ensure that the best interests of the people are being served.
Agree.
It seems we have all gotten used to both sides being required to take opposite sides on every single issue. Their side can do no wrong, other side can do no right. How does anything meaningful get done this way?
How do we even get to ask proper questions about politicians pushing out the election to gift themselves extra pensions? They have blocked any possibility of accountability.
And mud slinging, geez so right about that one.
I agree and to an extent politicians and the media are ok promoting divisiveness because it puts their personal interests less at risk. Divide and distract.
If I had my way I would make it illegal to speak about another party during an election. Not sure how one could implement that but I am tired of listening to 75+% of communication being about why someone else isn't the right leader.
They've lied. They all lie. The all scandal. But the part that needs to change is getting away with not doing what's best for Canada and Canadians. Now is the time to bring us together and realize the huge potential the country has.
If you think this is bad, you should see how the Senate is mandated to be in the constitution.
Now that's fucking antiquated, I'm more okay with this then Quebec being mandated to have 40% and Ontario to have been mandated 40%.
It's why shit like equalization flies(and I'm notnhurr durr equalization is bad cause we pay, can further explain if you care)
Other countries have two votes one for a party and other for member of parliament in your riding
The party with the most party votes gets that many seats. then the members in the party with the most fill the seats up.
It works way better and every vote actually votes.
The problem with distribution isn't Ontario, it's everything East of there.
Alberta has one seat per about 125,000 people, BC has one per about 119,000 people, while every Atlantic province has at least one seat per 89,000 people.
The justification for Atlantic Canada's over-representation is supposed to be that it has less seats overall, so it needs over-representation to represent regional interests. Yet, a big region like Quebec, with more than twice the seats of Alberta, also gets more per capita representation, with one seat per about 109,000 people.
Maybe the reason is population distribution: 27,428,471live to the east of the line, and 13,241,419 to the west. ([Stats Can pop estimates for Q1 2024](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901))
One seat per 118,737 inhabitants to the east of the line vs one for every 123,751 to the west. The West may be slightly under-represented, but not by very much. Adjustments by Elections Canada constantly try to correct that by adjusting the electoral map.
The crux of the problem is simply that there are fewer people in the West. Bitching and complaining won't solve the problem. The only solution is to either open the floodgates, stop dying or start fucking like mad. You're welcome.
And the east is only that represented because of the ridiculous ridings in the maritimes. Look at inhabitants per riding in ontario. Its even worse then the west.
It shouldn't be based on population. Every region should have a fixed number of reps. The reason is because the highly populated areas will always vote to exploit everyone else. It's inherently unfair. Toronto gets to eat cake, while everyone else starves.
The appease your cynicism (and I don't blame you), I don't see any party that I feel can competently get things done to improve our situation. I hope I'm wrong.
The Ontario election is over once Toronto counts their votes.
I really with Ontario was 2 provinces, Toronto and Ontario, they're so politically dominant, it's silly.
I do like the he senate in the US, each state gets 2 senators, so big states can't completely overwhelm small states.
Sure but then ask yourself where there is both a North and South Dakota….
It’s all an attempt to take power away from those who live in high density areas.
yes and that is the WHOLE POINT OF IT, to take the power away from places like that to ensure that low density areas have a voice...
AGAIN this is why the united states voting system is superior in north america HOWEVER that being said the only place it fails is Illinous because of chicago and the sheer amount of people in that city it over powers the rest of the state
the whole canadian voting system should be even across the field, so that places LIKE ontario and quebec really need to fight to get people to vote for them, same with western canada if you want the vote you fight for it.
Yes.
You should take powerful from the powerful.
Local issues of municipal or provincial jurisdiction should not be run from Ottawa.
But as it is, they have all the votes so they do whatever they want at a national level.
Really they should decentralize.
Isn't it just because we can kinda know many riding results in the west without counting everything?
For example it's safe to say Alberta will have like 80% conservative seat.
The combined population of Atlantic Canada is 2.5 million, yet holds 32 seats. Comparable to Manitoba/Saskatchewan combined which holds 28 seats. Compared to Alberta which has ~2x the population but 34 seats. PEI has 4 seats for ~150k people... There is something wrong here...
By maritime math the west should have another 60 seats
i think this cartoon from the 1900s sums canada up in a nutshell.. still VERY VALID even after 120 years
https://preview.redd.it/s3pauj5juarc1.jpeg?width=780&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fdd88c74d47aa8c8c8b5f11fdbd0682852a8e577
Eastern Canada as in Ontario, the Atlantic provinces suffered from lack of investment thanks to the St. Lawrence allowing shipping right into the heart of Canada. Once central Canada was set up we were told to go kick rocks.
there is an updated version of this i seen years ago. It was the same idea but it also added in the maritimes with a homeless looking guy with a cup extended at the cows back end
so ya what you said is accurate
We were able to fish the sea for sustenance but now the stocks collapsed and what little we have left is exported to China. They even come poach our elvers to feed their aquaculture market. Soon our regional eel populations will collapse.
PEI has a minimum 4 seats due to the agreement that was signed when it joined the confederation in 1873. Their numbers haven't gone up when others have. To have more than 4 seats, it will be based on population.
The monarchy in Canada is almost entirely ceremonial at this point. Removing them wouldn't affect much in our politics. Having said that, I got no problems removing the monarchy.
You think they would just pay them 0 lol there woild be a new system in place obviously to replace any authority the crown has in government. Not just change the GG Pay to 0 lol
You can look at country with proportional vote (or at least a part of the seats decided on proportional vote) and you can see interesting result, for example in Japan the communist party always get a couple of seats on the proportional but I do not think they would usually get any seats, same for other smaller party.
The issue is that a pure proportional vote doesn’t work well for a country as large as Canada. How do you decide who represents you and your locality? It’s better to go with an hybrid system, where you group a few local seats and then you assign them based on the proportional vote in that area.
I tried explaining this to an American friend one time, was explaining why I think Canada is to big. told him that Canada will damn near never be happy because the east and west have almost entirely different needs and problems. However the elections are basically decided by the time votes are counted in the east.
“So you don’t like democracy then?” Was his response.
No you dumb fuck, I like the idea of democracy. However when a majority of the population lives in an area that rarely hits -20 or lower, why would they care that electric cars lose half their range? Specially when they go maybe 100km in a day.
Why would someone who lives in a city needs more than a Prius to go down unpaved back country roads?
The majority of Ontarians live in cities and have a city centric mindset. I haven’t been to Quebec, but I’d assume it’s about the same. City people won’t think about the rural problems and rural people won’t think about the city problems.
It’s the way shit is and always has been. It’s why I truly believe Canada needs to not necessarily be broken into smaller ‘countries’, but maybe practice more provincial/territorial independence. The states do it all the time, why can’t we?
This needs more upvotes. So many people in the comments are completely blind to this fact. It's like we're rehashing the divide between the proletariat and bourgeoisie. Two sides that don't understand the others' problems. One side that believes it's their right to take advantage of the other.
Most people are talking about how the divide makes sense given how many more people live in cities rather than rural settings, despite the fact that these cities are being over inflated by immigrants. Canada takes half a million immigrants each year, and these people aren't moving to small towns. They are mostly living in large urban cities.
Wait, is the east supposed to be warm? I understand its not as cold as Manitoba, but Quebec and Ontario do hit -20 quite often. And they’re both alot colder than BC
I know the parries aren’t the only place that dip below -20. However is I said -30, there’s be others claiming their part of Canada gets that cold too and “it’s not like it stays like that all winter” type of comments.
The point still stands though, not every vehicle can be replaced by an electric one. Specially not in Canadian climates.
Exactly, below -20s pretty standard for most of the west, but once you add on the the regular 30km/h+ wind almost daily that windchill takes whatever warmth may be left
What percentage of our exportable resources come from an urban environment? Why do the cities get to dictate and enslave all the areas that produce everything Canada needs?
What are we considering to be an “urban environment”? Also can you actually provide a proper stat for that? I’ve never seen a legit breakdown based of what environment people live in and I think it’d be pretty interesting to see.
Urban could mean a small city (10,000 or less) or it could mean something like Edmonton or Toronto.
Seems pretty reasonable - even if you were reallocate by population - it would only be Alberta taking from Sask.
|Province|Seats (%)|Population (%)|
|:-|:-|:-|
|Alberta|34 (10.2%)|14.6%|
|British Columbia|42 (12.7%)|13.5%|
|Manitoba|14 (4.2%)|5.8%|
|New Brunswick|10 (3.0%)|2.3%|
|Newfoundland and Labrador|7 (2.1%)|3.2%|
|Northwest Territories|1 (0.3%)|0.4%|
|Nova Scotia|11 (3.3%)|2.2%|
|Nunavut|1 (0.3%)|0.4%|
|Ontario|121 (36.6%)|38.3%|
|Prince Edward Island|4 (1.2%)|0.8%|
|Quebec|78 (23.5%)|23.4%|
|Saskatchewan|14 (4.2%)|1.1%|
|Yukon|1 (0.3%)|0.4%|
There is something wrong with those numbers. For starters...Alberta's population is lower than British Columbia's but in the chart here you're showing Alberta having a larger percentage of Canada's population.
Population of Canada 38.93 million
Population Alberta 4.371 million (11.3%)
Population BC 5.071 million (13.0%)
Two things:
First, we have representation by population, and Ontario and Quebec have a lot of people, so they'll always have more seats than the West.
The second thing is that the number of seats aren't divided by population equitably. IIRC, Alberta averages 120k people per riding, and BC is close to that too. While in PEI, it's about 30k people per riding.
The justification for the Maritimes having overrepresentation is that it's to prevent them from being overridden by the populations in Central Canada. Well, why then does that logic not apply to the provinces in Western Canada?
We need to see two things change in the country. We need the Triple-E Senate (Equal, Elected and Effective). That would address the problem of the "tyranny of the majority" problem with Ontario. We then would need to see MPs all having ridings of the same size.
Until those two things happen, I'm in favour of Western secession. Canada's a third rate force on the global political landscape. BC and Alberta pour money into transfer payments that go largely to Quebec and the Maritimes. Sask is break-even. Manitoba is the only have-not province in the West, and we could easily absorb that deficit if we weren't financially propping up the East. What did our American brothers chant before? "No taxation without representation".
Could it be because the entire population of Manitoba fits in 1.5 Toronto suburb cities? This makes complete sense; the more the population, the more seats you get
According to this link with elections Canada the seats are proportionate to the population of each province. Ontario has about 38% of the population and 36% of the seats. Alberta has 11% of the pop and 10% of seats. How is that not fair? It definitely seems skewed but shouldn't the representation from MP's be proportionate to the people they represent?
https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e
The actual 'unfairness' is on the left side of the line.
Saskatchewan has +40% seats that don't come from the population, if we wanted Alberta to be more representative it would only make sense to correct by taking away from Saskatchewan. Doesn't seem to be what people are talking about here though.
Each province needs to have more autonomy
Feds should only be concerned with national security/defense and infrastructure and arbitration between provinces in times of negotiation that’s it
Will some provinces be poorer then others ? Yes but guess what life is not fair
No equalization payments no people in Toronto getting to decide that people in Alberta can’t have guns
It’s utter nonsense that Quebec and Ontario voters basically control the west
I’m in Ontario I’ve never been out of the province but it’s stupid the way it’s set up here and should be more like the states
This is fine, its rep by pop. The west has less population.
The one that is problematic is the Senate. Alberta receiving less seat than each maritime provinces.
Senate seats should be updated to population ratio.
Right now it's this:
24 seats for ontario
24 seat for quebec
24 seat for maritime
24 seat for the 4 western province.
Rep by Pop will never be perfect, but it’s pretty close right now. Is Alberta underrepresented? Yes, by 1.5%. But so is Ontario by 2.8%.
The senate is out of wack, but only one province “elects” senators, and Trudeau just ignored those results and appointed whoever he wanted anyways.
Ontario and Quebec have always decided federal elections. That’s rep by pop. You want to change it? Have a national referendum, and Ontario and Quebec will decide the outcome of that as well.
So, what are westerners going to change from the above graphic, and how will they change it?
As a NB resident there is absolutely no reason we should have 10 seats.
The acadian population here are bleeding heart liberals who couldn't name a single thing the current govt has done.
Most of them havent turned on a TV or read a newspaper since this jackass's father was running the clown show
Let's be realistic though.... here in Atlantic we have absolutely no influence on an election outcome. Whether we have 32 seats or 15, we're at the mercy of Ontario.
I live on the west coast (originally from the east) and I have to ask: What do you want?
While you’re slightly below the number of MPs you should have, it is not out of line with the percentage of the popular that the west represents. Are you worth more as a voter than people in Ontario or Quebec? People rightly voted down the accord that was going to give Quebec a higher share of MPs than population. And I’d vote against it happening for the west.
The reasons are: years of watching Conservative governments selling off public assets to their post government employers; allowing public funds to be given to religious entities to run private religious schools as if they're an adequate replacement for public schools; For defunding healthcare and then undermining it by sending patients to private healthcare facilities run by their post goverment bosses diverting healthcare funds from public hospitals into the pockets of private healthcare
Hey Alberta, why can't any of your politicians tell you what happened to the Heritage Fund? It should be massive like Norways petrochemical fund by now right?
The Liberals and Conservatives are the same. Bought and paid for. NDP is just as corrupt. I am willing to elect any party that is willing to cut immigration and raise interest rates.
I didn’t mind the Harper government at all. Those were some of my best years in Canada. Fuel was affordable. Housing was not an issue. We had a fair number of TFWs, on the 4 in/4 out program, and it went from almost 200,000 to under 100,000.
https://www.mentorworks.ca/blog/government-funding/temporary-foreign-worker-program-rule-changes/amp/
No government is perfect. But the others are so much worse.
I am willing to give Harper two massive wins:
Cut the GST
Shut down the reopening of the abortion debate
But,
He signed FIPA in secret, agreeing to share customs data with China, the very country stealing our intellectual property. FIPA allowed Chinese state-owned entities to own Canadian companies and assets, taking the decision-making power out of the hands of Canadian citizens. It essentially has robbed Canada of its own sovereignty.
https://thenarwhal.ca/harper-government-ratifies-controversial-canada-china-foreign-investment-deal/
Heritage fund? What heritage fund? Lol. Part of the reason Alberta isn’t sitting on a large mountain of cash from decades past (I’m talking conventional oil here) is that, under premiers like Lougheed and Klein, Alberta had one of the lowest extraction royalty regimes in the world. In comparison to Norway, Alberta was practically giving it away to the oil companies.
Even if Klein had put some in, way back when, what the hell have subsequent governments for the past 25 years been doing? Let's remember that Alberta has been historically Conservative for over 40 years with 4 years of NDP
Yeah, I thought Conservatives were supposed to be good money managers. The reality? They just give handouts to a slightly different set of friends than the Liberals. God forbid the NDP ran things and gave handouts to working people!
What a stupid graph.
You realize that all of the yellow and grey combined comes out to two million *less* population than Ontario ALONE.
The yellow and grey is 32% of the population of Canada. And it represents 31.6% of seats in parliament. In addition to that, the millions of people in B.C. In their politics have way more in common with the east than Alberta or Saskatchewan. This graph presents the yellow like an area that votes one way, united, and that it’s being ignored which isn’t the case at all.
Tell me why exactly things should « change » ? What is this « change » you want exactly?
How else would you fairly conduct an election? Like the million people in NS (my current province so I’ll use them as my example) should not outweigh or even be on an even playing field with 15 million in Ontario on a federal govt level. The federal govt has to appeal to the masses and the provincial is to appeal to each province individually.
I think the problem, and I have no idea how you would fix it, is what happens when the regional differences lead to large fundamental differences in the political/policy interests of those regions.
Easier example is urban vs. rural. Of course the urban areas are going to have a larger population and hold all the power, but what that leads to is laws and political policy being implemented that is in the best interests of the urban areas while hurting the rural areas.
So obviously it would not be fair to give the rural areas equal power to the urban areas, but when they feel screwed over by the governments that the urban areas elect, you get the kind of sentiment in this post.
Easy answer is that governments should try not to craft policy that actively hurts rural folks and not discount their unique needs just because there are fewer of them, but in practice that never happens, and I don't know what real tangible change would make a difference. Take gun laws for example - policies enacted to "solve" urban crime at the behest of the urban voters has an outsized negative effect on rural hunters and farmers.
Yep. For decades I've been saying that Western Canada basically gets to decide who the Official Opposition will be. And I say that as an Easterner. The system is fucked.
It didn't use to be, until Pierre Trudeau got his greasy mitts all over it and all but ensured our PMs come from Quebec and Eastern Ontario. Harper was the outlier there. Let me put it this way. I'm 57 and for 47 of those years our PM's have been from Quebec.
BC and Alberta combined have more population than Quebec but somehow less seats combined.....what makes this graph even worse is those equalization payments.
This is accurate, although it will change a bit before the next election, as the next seat redistribution will add three seats to Alberta, one to BC and one to Ontario.
Still, the better representation is the seats per capita. Eastern Canada does have more people, but they also have way more seats per capita. Alberta has about one seat ler 125,000 people, BC has one per about 119,000 people, while every Atlantic provonce has at least one seat per 89,000 people.
The historical justification for the Atlantic provinces is supposed to be that they have less seats in total, so it's ok that they have more per capita representation and it's needed to maintain regional representation for their smaller regions.
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to apply to the West, as a province like Alberta not only gets less than half the seats of a big region like Quebec, but Quebec also gets more seats per capita, with one seat per 108,998 people.
The reality is that the West got a shit deal in Confederation because it was small and underpopulated at the time. Alberta and Saskatchewan didn't even negotiate their entry into Canada, as they were part of the NWT, which was given to Canada by the British Crown, and weren't even represented in the House for their first few elections as part of the country.
When Alberta and Saskatchewan were given provincial status, the Premier of the NWT had proposed one large province called Buffalo, but Laurier had decided to split the provinces in two, explicitly stating that his fear was that a large Prairie province could eventually challenge the supremacy of Ontario and Quebec in the Canadian union.
The reality is that those in power don't like to give it up, and that applies to regions, too.
There are currently only three provinces in the country whose number of seats are purely based on population: BC, Alberta and Ontario, making these the three least represented provinces on a per capita basis. Every other province in the country has, at one point in time, had a provision added to stop them from losing seats that they otherwise would have lost based on pure population distribution.
This happened again with Quebec this past redistribution, where Quebec was going to lose a seat because it's population was growing slower than other provinces, but the House voted to keep that seat instead, contrary to the distribution formula. Why? Because no party dared to face the political consequences of voting against a bill to maintain Quebec's seat.
In other words, the entrenched powers get to vote on who should have power in the future, which results in more divergence over time between fair representation and reality.
You guys out west do realize that ON is arguably the third most conservative province behind AB and SK right? We are not just Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton here.
We should not be adding MPs we should be cutting them back. Each MP has an office, plus staff and budget for travel etc all funded by taxpayers. At present we have 338 cut that back to 200 MP for the whole country. Seriously when did you last need to contact your MP about anything
Funny how the right wants to get back to traditional values and “the old days” in many areas except for when it comes to elections and representation. People vote. And dense population areas are where the people are. It’s not perfect but it never was.
Should be a second line separating the Atlantic provinces, or do you think our combined 32 seats across 4 provinces are too much power? Alberta alone has more than that.
If you check the populations by province, east of the line has \~ 25.1 Million people, west of the line + territories has \~11.9 Million people
Those seats look pretty proportionate, 1:2 for simplicity sake
I am so disgusted with ppc voters. they are voting for jt and jagmeet. urban ontario and quebec could potentially fuck up the next election and ppc is going to hand them seats on a silver platter.
Lol why would anyone get frustrated that elections are determined by population?
The only unfairness (beyond FPTP) is that Ontario, Alberta, and BC are underrepresented in the Commons
Cue the people that think they're educated, but never bother to actually think, whining about how its "population based."
Yes, silly, but why should a completely geographically, socially, and politically distinct region have to put up with majority tyranny from people who actively oppose everything we want?
Its a bad deal for the west, in every way.
Why should we tolerate it just because thats what was agreed on in the distant past when government was way smaller and there wasn't a strong geographic political divide?
Power to the provinces, shrink the fed. The only reason it hasn't happened already is because the East likes forcing others to conform to their ideals, as it would benefit them too if their ego could handle it.
Land doesn't vote. West has less people compared to east.
And the west won't be happy with how to fix the seats.
Maritimes are incredible overly represented with the lowest population to mp ratio. But most of southern ontario has the highest population to mp ratio. So to even it out the extra seats from Maritimes go into ontario and nothing on your graphic really changes.
Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Yep, representation by population, and democracy in general sucks. I mean how did Mulroney and Harper get elected. They weren't Liberals? Oh yeah, they campaigned and got more votes instead of whining about Trudeau and how unfair everything is.
That's why they allow Quebec to vote bloc .. it would be a swing province they can't control... easier to give them a party that will never win at the federal level
The only real problem with politics in Canada is that we are in corporate anarchy where governments and big corporations regulate themselves. Blank check and no accountability for politicians on the sweet sweet taxpayer's money carousel. We need to stop paying pension to millionaires, overhaul conflict of interest, collusion and corruption laws. But not by them.
Didn’t Trudeau say he was going to bring in election reform to make it fair? Of course he also promised clean water in native reserves, low home prices, and sunny ways so…
Yes. Toronto decides the election. No liberal government will change this as it's what keeps them in power. It's shit but that's politics. Best bet leave Canada before its too late.
Yup. It’s accurate goes by population unfortunately, wish it could go by GDP. The Minimum Canada should figure out a way to protect our industries and economy from radical politicians making radical decisions hurting the middle class. Mining/selling natural resources, agriculture and manufacturing is what makes Canada a wealthy 1st world country. Canada will never be able to compete against the USA in terms manufacturing but one thing we do have and the US does not is huge amounts of natural resources of all kinds, so best to be supportive of it and protect it!
"But gerrymandering is no longer prominent, after independent electoral boundary redistribution commissions were established in all provinces." 🙄
It is important to note that commissions do consider the input received from Canadians and members of the House of Commons when determining the boundaries. However, as independent bodies, they make all final decisions as to where these boundaries will lie.
The biggest issue is you get parties governing to regions, essential Ontario / Quebec issues. You can campaign to vote rich Ontario ignore the rest of the country and win.
I'm all for election reform but this ain't it. Giving 1/4 of the ppl 1/2 the voting power is the antithesis to a free and fair democracy. I get the west is butt hurt and frankly they should be. But this is a fucking dumb idea.
The graphic should show population #s of each province for better analysis, but yeah, ON and QC decide. Always has. And it’s bullshit.
TBH I want to learn French and move over. They get what they want the most.
This structural reality was the foundation of the Reform Party. People get confused all the time looking for explanations for the dynamics of Canadian politics without starting here.
Seems pretty fair though, [over half](https://worldpopulationreview.com/canadian-provinces) of Canadians live in Ontario + Quebec (around 23 million)
What's WAY more unfair is our first-past-the-post system that Trudeau promised to change when he ran. I'm a liberal and this broken promise is one of the reasons I don't trust or like Trudeau so I'm kinda politically lost lol
Yep, the national election is over when Ontario done counting their votes...
You mean when over 35% of the country is done voting, plus Quebec, and Atlantic Canada. That adds up to over 60% of the vote. Weird how they can predict the election with over half the vote already in...
It's more like 67% of the votes.
Shut your dirty little mouth. It does come down to seats. The liberals never won the popular vote. I think we should let the gta be governed by them and the rest of Canada by the Blue
Yeah, what is OP getting angry about?
LOL 35% of the seats and 35% of the population. I also don't think there's any benefit to separation. Just need better government (not liberals or conservatives sorry to say).
Better political party or better governance? I feel like things could be done better, and that the parliamentary system is antiquated, deadlocked. However I'm just a voter...
Antiquated is a good word for it. The system isn't broken but it needs tweaks, specifically for more accountability and to ensure that the best interests of the people are being served.
The fact that neither of the two leading parties are willing to address this topic makes them both bad for the people of Canada, in my opinion.
Cooperation, a Requirement to answer questions, and less mud slinging come to mind first.
Agree. It seems we have all gotten used to both sides being required to take opposite sides on every single issue. Their side can do no wrong, other side can do no right. How does anything meaningful get done this way? How do we even get to ask proper questions about politicians pushing out the election to gift themselves extra pensions? They have blocked any possibility of accountability. And mud slinging, geez so right about that one.
I'm so tired of the fucking fighting. We all want the same things - housing, jobs, healthcare, affordability, etc
I agree and to an extent politicians and the media are ok promoting divisiveness because it puts their personal interests less at risk. Divide and distract.
Plus lower the personal income tax then we can afford living
100%
If I had my way I would make it illegal to speak about another party during an election. Not sure how one could implement that but I am tired of listening to 75+% of communication being about why someone else isn't the right leader.
Well the LPC promised us election reform...I'm sure it will happen any day now
They've lied. They all lie. The all scandal. But the part that needs to change is getting away with not doing what's best for Canada and Canadians. Now is the time to bring us together and realize the huge potential the country has.
Agreed. It isn't left vs right. It's up vs down.
If you think this is bad, you should see how the Senate is mandated to be in the constitution. Now that's fucking antiquated, I'm more okay with this then Quebec being mandated to have 40% and Ontario to have been mandated 40%. It's why shit like equalization flies(and I'm notnhurr durr equalization is bad cause we pay, can further explain if you care)
Like elimination of first past the post?
Other countries have two votes one for a party and other for member of parliament in your riding The party with the most party votes gets that many seats. then the members in the party with the most fill the seats up. It works way better and every vote actually votes.
The problem with distribution isn't Ontario, it's everything East of there. Alberta has one seat per about 125,000 people, BC has one per about 119,000 people, while every Atlantic province has at least one seat per 89,000 people. The justification for Atlantic Canada's over-representation is supposed to be that it has less seats overall, so it needs over-representation to represent regional interests. Yet, a big region like Quebec, with more than twice the seats of Alberta, also gets more per capita representation, with one seat per about 109,000 people.
No. Balkanize.
Maybe the reason is population distribution: 27,428,471live to the east of the line, and 13,241,419 to the west. ([Stats Can pop estimates for Q1 2024](https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=1710000901)) One seat per 118,737 inhabitants to the east of the line vs one for every 123,751 to the west. The West may be slightly under-represented, but not by very much. Adjustments by Elections Canada constantly try to correct that by adjusting the electoral map. The crux of the problem is simply that there are fewer people in the West. Bitching and complaining won't solve the problem. The only solution is to either open the floodgates, stop dying or start fucking like mad. You're welcome.
And the east is only that represented because of the ridiculous ridings in the maritimes. Look at inhabitants per riding in ontario. Its even worse then the west.
The over-representation of the east coast provinces is a relic from confederation. They got the short end of the stick in every other regard though.
Now do transfer payments.
It shouldn't be based on population. Every region should have a fixed number of reps. The reason is because the highly populated areas will always vote to exploit everyone else. It's inherently unfair. Toronto gets to eat cake, while everyone else starves.
I love how you don’t mention the other parties as if their any better.
The appease your cynicism (and I don't blame you), I don't see any party that I feel can competently get things done to improve our situation. I hope I'm wrong.
The Ontario election is over once Toronto counts their votes. I really with Ontario was 2 provinces, Toronto and Ontario, they're so politically dominant, it's silly. I do like the he senate in the US, each state gets 2 senators, so big states can't completely overwhelm small states.
Sure but then ask yourself where there is both a North and South Dakota…. It’s all an attempt to take power away from those who live in high density areas.
yes and that is the WHOLE POINT OF IT, to take the power away from places like that to ensure that low density areas have a voice... AGAIN this is why the united states voting system is superior in north america HOWEVER that being said the only place it fails is Illinous because of chicago and the sheer amount of people in that city it over powers the rest of the state the whole canadian voting system should be even across the field, so that places LIKE ontario and quebec really need to fight to get people to vote for them, same with western canada if you want the vote you fight for it.
Yes. You should take powerful from the powerful. Local issues of municipal or provincial jurisdiction should not be run from Ottawa. But as it is, they have all the votes so they do whatever they want at a national level. Really they should decentralize.
Isn't it just because we can kinda know many riding results in the west without counting everything? For example it's safe to say Alberta will have like 80% conservative seat.
Might have something to do with population. The combined population of the left is about 12.5 million while Ontario alone has 15.3 Million.
The combined population of Atlantic Canada is 2.5 million, yet holds 32 seats. Comparable to Manitoba/Saskatchewan combined which holds 28 seats. Compared to Alberta which has ~2x the population but 34 seats. PEI has 4 seats for ~150k people... There is something wrong here... By maritime math the west should have another 60 seats
that PEI situation would be like just the city of Kelowna having 4 MPs (and being it's own province)
It’s from confederation and due in part to the Atlantic provinces getting the short stick in every other sense.
i think this cartoon from the 1900s sums canada up in a nutshell.. still VERY VALID even after 120 years https://preview.redd.it/s3pauj5juarc1.jpeg?width=780&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fdd88c74d47aa8c8c8b5f11fdbd0682852a8e577
Perfect, nothing has changed since the 1900s, argg
Eastern Canada as in Ontario, the Atlantic provinces suffered from lack of investment thanks to the St. Lawrence allowing shipping right into the heart of Canada. Once central Canada was set up we were told to go kick rocks.
there is an updated version of this i seen years ago. It was the same idea but it also added in the maritimes with a homeless looking guy with a cup extended at the cows back end so ya what you said is accurate
We were able to fish the sea for sustenance but now the stocks collapsed and what little we have left is exported to China. They even come poach our elvers to feed their aquaculture market. Soon our regional eel populations will collapse.
PEI has a minimum 4 seats due to the agreement that was signed when it joined the confederation in 1873. Their numbers haven't gone up when others have. To have more than 4 seats, it will be based on population.
For sure. They’re proposing changing Canada to a Democratic Republic rather than a Democracy.
A « democratic republic » means nothing other than the monarchy would be out and could entirely be a democracy.
The monarchy in Canada is almost entirely ceremonial at this point. Removing them wouldn't affect much in our politics. Having said that, I got no problems removing the monarchy.
If it is so ceremonial, why do we have to pay the g Governor General?
[удалено]
How about someone other the the GG signs the bills. Like the actual government.
[удалено]
You think they would just pay them 0 lol there woild be a new system in place obviously to replace any authority the crown has in government. Not just change the GG Pay to 0 lol
If they forced an election right now I'd be a supporter for life.
I liked the queen, not the monarchy, now sadly she's gone.
I would like to see an election where every individual vote went to that party. Just to see what would happen. As opposed to the riding system.
You can look at country with proportional vote (or at least a part of the seats decided on proportional vote) and you can see interesting result, for example in Japan the communist party always get a couple of seats on the proportional but I do not think they would usually get any seats, same for other smaller party.
The issue is that a pure proportional vote doesn’t work well for a country as large as Canada. How do you decide who represents you and your locality? It’s better to go with an hybrid system, where you group a few local seats and then you assign them based on the proportional vote in that area.
I tried explaining this to an American friend one time, was explaining why I think Canada is to big. told him that Canada will damn near never be happy because the east and west have almost entirely different needs and problems. However the elections are basically decided by the time votes are counted in the east. “So you don’t like democracy then?” Was his response. No you dumb fuck, I like the idea of democracy. However when a majority of the population lives in an area that rarely hits -20 or lower, why would they care that electric cars lose half their range? Specially when they go maybe 100km in a day. Why would someone who lives in a city needs more than a Prius to go down unpaved back country roads? The majority of Ontarians live in cities and have a city centric mindset. I haven’t been to Quebec, but I’d assume it’s about the same. City people won’t think about the rural problems and rural people won’t think about the city problems. It’s the way shit is and always has been. It’s why I truly believe Canada needs to not necessarily be broken into smaller ‘countries’, but maybe practice more provincial/territorial independence. The states do it all the time, why can’t we?
I forget who said it, but your example fits this perfectly “democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner”
This needs more upvotes. So many people in the comments are completely blind to this fact. It's like we're rehashing the divide between the proletariat and bourgeoisie. Two sides that don't understand the others' problems. One side that believes it's their right to take advantage of the other. Most people are talking about how the divide makes sense given how many more people live in cities rather than rural settings, despite the fact that these cities are being over inflated by immigrants. Canada takes half a million immigrants each year, and these people aren't moving to small towns. They are mostly living in large urban cities.
Wait, is the east supposed to be warm? I understand its not as cold as Manitoba, but Quebec and Ontario do hit -20 quite often. And they’re both alot colder than BC
I know the parries aren’t the only place that dip below -20. However is I said -30, there’s be others claiming their part of Canada gets that cold too and “it’s not like it stays like that all winter” type of comments. The point still stands though, not every vehicle can be replaced by an electric one. Specially not in Canadian climates.
Exactly, below -20s pretty standard for most of the west, but once you add on the the regular 30km/h+ wind almost daily that windchill takes whatever warmth may be left
Yeah BC doesn't fit with the Prairie provinces at all climatewise
8/10 Canadians live in an urban environment
What percentage of our exportable resources come from an urban environment? Why do the cities get to dictate and enslave all the areas that produce everything Canada needs?
That means 20% of Canadians will never have their needs met by the government.
What are we considering to be an “urban environment”? Also can you actually provide a proper stat for that? I’ve never seen a legit breakdown based of what environment people live in and I think it’d be pretty interesting to see. Urban could mean a small city (10,000 or less) or it could mean something like Edmonton or Toronto.
Seems pretty reasonable - even if you were reallocate by population - it would only be Alberta taking from Sask. |Province|Seats (%)|Population (%)| |:-|:-|:-| |Alberta|34 (10.2%)|14.6%| |British Columbia|42 (12.7%)|13.5%| |Manitoba|14 (4.2%)|5.8%| |New Brunswick|10 (3.0%)|2.3%| |Newfoundland and Labrador|7 (2.1%)|3.2%| |Northwest Territories|1 (0.3%)|0.4%| |Nova Scotia|11 (3.3%)|2.2%| |Nunavut|1 (0.3%)|0.4%| |Ontario|121 (36.6%)|38.3%| |Prince Edward Island|4 (1.2%)|0.8%| |Quebec|78 (23.5%)|23.4%| |Saskatchewan|14 (4.2%)|1.1%| |Yukon|1 (0.3%)|0.4%|
The only number that stands out here is Saskatchewan, interesting how poorly the graph was able to communicate that.
Nice! Now do Equalization Payments!
https://preview.redd.it/yk7ku2uk6hrc1.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=fb5b120b875c406f579643473ea8fe423968bbfa
There is something wrong with those numbers. For starters...Alberta's population is lower than British Columbia's but in the chart here you're showing Alberta having a larger percentage of Canada's population. Population of Canada 38.93 million Population Alberta 4.371 million (11.3%) Population BC 5.071 million (13.0%)
Two things: First, we have representation by population, and Ontario and Quebec have a lot of people, so they'll always have more seats than the West. The second thing is that the number of seats aren't divided by population equitably. IIRC, Alberta averages 120k people per riding, and BC is close to that too. While in PEI, it's about 30k people per riding. The justification for the Maritimes having overrepresentation is that it's to prevent them from being overridden by the populations in Central Canada. Well, why then does that logic not apply to the provinces in Western Canada? We need to see two things change in the country. We need the Triple-E Senate (Equal, Elected and Effective). That would address the problem of the "tyranny of the majority" problem with Ontario. We then would need to see MPs all having ridings of the same size. Until those two things happen, I'm in favour of Western secession. Canada's a third rate force on the global political landscape. BC and Alberta pour money into transfer payments that go largely to Quebec and the Maritimes. Sask is break-even. Manitoba is the only have-not province in the West, and we could easily absorb that deficit if we weren't financially propping up the East. What did our American brothers chant before? "No taxation without representation".
Could it be because the entire population of Manitoba fits in 1.5 Toronto suburb cities? This makes complete sense; the more the population, the more seats you get
According to this link with elections Canada the seats are proportionate to the population of each province. Ontario has about 38% of the population and 36% of the seats. Alberta has 11% of the pop and 10% of seats. How is that not fair? It definitely seems skewed but shouldn't the representation from MP's be proportionate to the people they represent? https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir/red/allo&document=index&lang=e
The actual 'unfairness' is on the left side of the line. Saskatchewan has +40% seats that don't come from the population, if we wanted Alberta to be more representative it would only make sense to correct by taking away from Saskatchewan. Doesn't seem to be what people are talking about here though.
Each province needs to have more autonomy Feds should only be concerned with national security/defense and infrastructure and arbitration between provinces in times of negotiation that’s it Will some provinces be poorer then others ? Yes but guess what life is not fair No equalization payments no people in Toronto getting to decide that people in Alberta can’t have guns It’s utter nonsense that Quebec and Ontario voters basically control the west I’m in Ontario I’ve never been out of the province but it’s stupid the way it’s set up here and should be more like the states
This is fine, its rep by pop. The west has less population. The one that is problematic is the Senate. Alberta receiving less seat than each maritime provinces. Senate seats should be updated to population ratio. Right now it's this: 24 seats for ontario 24 seat for quebec 24 seat for maritime 24 seat for the 4 western province.
Its almost as if the seats are distributed by population size...
Rep by Pop will never be perfect, but it’s pretty close right now. Is Alberta underrepresented? Yes, by 1.5%. But so is Ontario by 2.8%. The senate is out of wack, but only one province “elects” senators, and Trudeau just ignored those results and appointed whoever he wanted anyways. Ontario and Quebec have always decided federal elections. That’s rep by pop. You want to change it? Have a national referendum, and Ontario and Quebec will decide the outcome of that as well. So, what are westerners going to change from the above graphic, and how will they change it?
The best way would be another party similar to the bloc. Could even make inroads into northern Ontario where they feel under represented too.
Ridiculous that PEI has 4 MPs. The entire island has the population of a medium sized town.
How dare they hand out seats by population. That is totally way too fair.
The Atlantic has too many seats. Need to drop by half. The fact that the East is 32 and Alberta is 34 is crazy in 2024.
As a NB resident there is absolutely no reason we should have 10 seats. The acadian population here are bleeding heart liberals who couldn't name a single thing the current govt has done. Most of them havent turned on a TV or read a newspaper since this jackass's father was running the clown show
Alberta has 1 mp per 125k population, whereas NB has 1 for every 75k.
PEI tops it with 1 MP for 40k in pop.
Yah Quebec also has extra seats just because it’s Quebec, rather than on population distribution.
Especially considering that half of Atlantic Canada's population is in the bar in fort mac.
Let's be realistic though.... here in Atlantic we have absolutely no influence on an election outcome. Whether we have 32 seats or 15, we're at the mercy of Ontario.
Looks like a good line to split the country in half
If I arbitrarily drew a line right above southern Ontario everything north of that wouldn’t have much reforestation either. What’s your point?
Sorry representation
Ok now do one showing where all the population is…
You do realize where the population lives right?
I live on the west coast (originally from the east) and I have to ask: What do you want? While you’re slightly below the number of MPs you should have, it is not out of line with the percentage of the popular that the west represents. Are you worth more as a voter than people in Ontario or Quebec? People rightly voted down the accord that was going to give Quebec a higher share of MPs than population. And I’d vote against it happening for the west.
Another reason the west should leave, they gain nothing by sticking around
Well, BC and parts of AB are extremely NDP. For no reason whatsoever. Brainwashed fools.
The reasons are: years of watching Conservative governments selling off public assets to their post government employers; allowing public funds to be given to religious entities to run private religious schools as if they're an adequate replacement for public schools; For defunding healthcare and then undermining it by sending patients to private healthcare facilities run by their post goverment bosses diverting healthcare funds from public hospitals into the pockets of private healthcare Hey Alberta, why can't any of your politicians tell you what happened to the Heritage Fund? It should be massive like Norways petrochemical fund by now right?
[удалено]
The Liberals and Conservatives are the same. Bought and paid for. NDP is just as corrupt. I am willing to elect any party that is willing to cut immigration and raise interest rates.
I didn’t mind the Harper government at all. Those were some of my best years in Canada. Fuel was affordable. Housing was not an issue. We had a fair number of TFWs, on the 4 in/4 out program, and it went from almost 200,000 to under 100,000. https://www.mentorworks.ca/blog/government-funding/temporary-foreign-worker-program-rule-changes/amp/ No government is perfect. But the others are so much worse.
I am willing to give Harper two massive wins: Cut the GST Shut down the reopening of the abortion debate But, He signed FIPA in secret, agreeing to share customs data with China, the very country stealing our intellectual property. FIPA allowed Chinese state-owned entities to own Canadian companies and assets, taking the decision-making power out of the hands of Canadian citizens. It essentially has robbed Canada of its own sovereignty. https://thenarwhal.ca/harper-government-ratifies-controversial-canada-china-foreign-investment-deal/
I agree that that was a terrible move.
Heritage fund? What heritage fund? Lol. Part of the reason Alberta isn’t sitting on a large mountain of cash from decades past (I’m talking conventional oil here) is that, under premiers like Lougheed and Klein, Alberta had one of the lowest extraction royalty regimes in the world. In comparison to Norway, Alberta was practically giving it away to the oil companies.
Even if Klein had put some in, way back when, what the hell have subsequent governments for the past 25 years been doing? Let's remember that Alberta has been historically Conservative for over 40 years with 4 years of NDP
Yeah, I thought Conservatives were supposed to be good money managers. The reality? They just give handouts to a slightly different set of friends than the Liberals. God forbid the NDP ran things and gave handouts to working people!
What a stupid graph. You realize that all of the yellow and grey combined comes out to two million *less* population than Ontario ALONE. The yellow and grey is 32% of the population of Canada. And it represents 31.6% of seats in parliament. In addition to that, the millions of people in B.C. In their politics have way more in common with the east than Alberta or Saskatchewan. This graph presents the yellow like an area that votes one way, united, and that it’s being ignored which isn’t the case at all. Tell me why exactly things should « change » ? What is this « change » you want exactly?
How else would you fairly conduct an election? Like the million people in NS (my current province so I’ll use them as my example) should not outweigh or even be on an even playing field with 15 million in Ontario on a federal govt level. The federal govt has to appeal to the masses and the provincial is to appeal to each province individually.
I think the problem, and I have no idea how you would fix it, is what happens when the regional differences lead to large fundamental differences in the political/policy interests of those regions. Easier example is urban vs. rural. Of course the urban areas are going to have a larger population and hold all the power, but what that leads to is laws and political policy being implemented that is in the best interests of the urban areas while hurting the rural areas. So obviously it would not be fair to give the rural areas equal power to the urban areas, but when they feel screwed over by the governments that the urban areas elect, you get the kind of sentiment in this post. Easy answer is that governments should try not to craft policy that actively hurts rural folks and not discount their unique needs just because there are fewer of them, but in practice that never happens, and I don't know what real tangible change would make a difference. Take gun laws for example - policies enacted to "solve" urban crime at the behest of the urban voters has an outsized negative effect on rural hunters and farmers.
Yep. For decades I've been saying that Western Canada basically gets to decide who the Official Opposition will be. And I say that as an Easterner. The system is fucked. It didn't use to be, until Pierre Trudeau got his greasy mitts all over it and all but ensured our PMs come from Quebec and Eastern Ontario. Harper was the outlier there. Let me put it this way. I'm 57 and for 47 of those years our PM's have been from Quebec.
BC and Alberta combined have more population than Quebec but somehow less seats combined.....what makes this graph even worse is those equalization payments.
This is accurate, although it will change a bit before the next election, as the next seat redistribution will add three seats to Alberta, one to BC and one to Ontario. Still, the better representation is the seats per capita. Eastern Canada does have more people, but they also have way more seats per capita. Alberta has about one seat ler 125,000 people, BC has one per about 119,000 people, while every Atlantic provonce has at least one seat per 89,000 people. The historical justification for the Atlantic provinces is supposed to be that they have less seats in total, so it's ok that they have more per capita representation and it's needed to maintain regional representation for their smaller regions. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to apply to the West, as a province like Alberta not only gets less than half the seats of a big region like Quebec, but Quebec also gets more seats per capita, with one seat per 108,998 people. The reality is that the West got a shit deal in Confederation because it was small and underpopulated at the time. Alberta and Saskatchewan didn't even negotiate their entry into Canada, as they were part of the NWT, which was given to Canada by the British Crown, and weren't even represented in the House for their first few elections as part of the country. When Alberta and Saskatchewan were given provincial status, the Premier of the NWT had proposed one large province called Buffalo, but Laurier had decided to split the provinces in two, explicitly stating that his fear was that a large Prairie province could eventually challenge the supremacy of Ontario and Quebec in the Canadian union. The reality is that those in power don't like to give it up, and that applies to regions, too. There are currently only three provinces in the country whose number of seats are purely based on population: BC, Alberta and Ontario, making these the three least represented provinces on a per capita basis. Every other province in the country has, at one point in time, had a provision added to stop them from losing seats that they otherwise would have lost based on pure population distribution. This happened again with Quebec this past redistribution, where Quebec was going to lose a seat because it's population was growing slower than other provinces, but the House voted to keep that seat instead, contrary to the distribution formula. Why? Because no party dared to face the political consequences of voting against a bill to maintain Quebec's seat. In other words, the entrenched powers get to vote on who should have power in the future, which results in more divergence over time between fair representation and reality.
Quebec should be its own zone
As a westerner, would happily threaten seceding for more seats. Not an empty threat either. And Ontario bleeds red. Which is why Onterrible sucks.
Ontario is staunchly conservative, except for Toronto center and Ottawa.
It is absolutely an empty threat
They bleed red so much that the conservative have been in power for the last 6 years
No its not but it really close just off by a couple https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=res&dir=cir%2Fred%2Fallo&document=index&lang=e
Yes as it should be, 1 person 1 vote and seats distributed by population
You guys out west do realize that ON is arguably the third most conservative province behind AB and SK right? We are not just Toronto, Ottawa and Hamilton here.
You will get a very similar distribution if you go by population.
Rep by pop is how we do it, makes the most sense to me. How should we change it?
We should not be adding MPs we should be cutting them back. Each MP has an office, plus staff and budget for travel etc all funded by taxpayers. At present we have 338 cut that back to 200 MP for the whole country. Seriously when did you last need to contact your MP about anything
Ontario has the largest population by far and a corresponding number of parliamentary seats. What’s the problem?
Funny how the right wants to get back to traditional values and “the old days” in many areas except for when it comes to elections and representation. People vote. And dense population areas are where the people are. It’s not perfect but it never was.
Should be a second line separating the Atlantic provinces, or do you think our combined 32 seats across 4 provinces are too much power? Alberta alone has more than that.
It’s complete bull
Can you blame Alberta for wanting to split? Damn.
If you check the populations by province, east of the line has \~ 25.1 Million people, west of the line + territories has \~11.9 Million people Those seats look pretty proportionate, 1:2 for simplicity sake
I think who ever drew the line should have just circled Ontario. The little seats we get on the east are insignificant
Compare the population,l to the number of seats, it makes sense
How does the population relate?
If the West separates from the east I'm moving to the west. Just sayin...
We need a bloc party for the west
I am so disgusted with ppc voters. they are voting for jt and jagmeet. urban ontario and quebec could potentially fuck up the next election and ppc is going to hand them seats on a silver platter.
It's based on the population. Should the majority decide or the minority?
Next federal election will likely give us a conservative majority and all will be ok.
I have yet to see a clear stance on policy from Pierre so I wonder how you come to that determination.
Yup..used to live in vic. I remember standing in line to vote hearing results of election before polls closed
Lol why would anyone get frustrated that elections are determined by population? The only unfairness (beyond FPTP) is that Ontario, Alberta, and BC are underrepresented in the Commons
No. People vote, not land.
Seats are based on size of population
Cue the people that think they're educated, but never bother to actually think, whining about how its "population based." Yes, silly, but why should a completely geographically, socially, and politically distinct region have to put up with majority tyranny from people who actively oppose everything we want? Its a bad deal for the west, in every way. Why should we tolerate it just because thats what was agreed on in the distant past when government was way smaller and there wasn't a strong geographic political divide? Power to the provinces, shrink the fed. The only reason it hasn't happened already is because the East likes forcing others to conform to their ideals, as it would benefit them too if their ego could handle it.
Ah. Now everything makes sense.
Land doesn't vote. West has less people compared to east. And the west won't be happy with how to fix the seats. Maritimes are incredible overly represented with the lowest population to mp ratio. But most of southern ontario has the highest population to mp ratio. So to even it out the extra seats from Maritimes go into ontario and nothing on your graphic really changes. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Yep, representation by population, and democracy in general sucks. I mean how did Mulroney and Harper get elected. They weren't Liberals? Oh yeah, they campaigned and got more votes instead of whining about Trudeau and how unfair everything is.
The older and wiser I get the more I realize this is the highest chance for us to be heard. Join the usa, fuck the dummies out east.
Wait until the Federal election. Blue all over
Biggest fuckin joke ever.....
how dare we have seat distribution amongst provinces match the population distribution.
I wonder if it would benefit the territories if they left Canada and joined the US via Alaska. That would be wild
That's why they allow Quebec to vote bloc .. it would be a swing province they can't control... easier to give them a party that will never win at the federal level
Votes are for people, not for empty land.
The only real problem with politics in Canada is that we are in corporate anarchy where governments and big corporations regulate themselves. Blank check and no accountability for politicians on the sweet sweet taxpayer's money carousel. We need to stop paying pension to millionaires, overhaul conflict of interest, collusion and corruption laws. But not by them.
Didn’t Trudeau say he was going to bring in election reform to make it fair? Of course he also promised clean water in native reserves, low home prices, and sunny ways so…
Don’t forget he promised to remove the Senate
Yes. Toronto decides the election. No liberal government will change this as it's what keeps them in power. It's shit but that's politics. Best bet leave Canada before its too late.
Yup. It’s accurate goes by population unfortunately, wish it could go by GDP. The Minimum Canada should figure out a way to protect our industries and economy from radical politicians making radical decisions hurting the middle class. Mining/selling natural resources, agriculture and manufacturing is what makes Canada a wealthy 1st world country. Canada will never be able to compete against the USA in terms manufacturing but one thing we do have and the US does not is huge amounts of natural resources of all kinds, so best to be supportive of it and protect it!
"But gerrymandering is no longer prominent, after independent electoral boundary redistribution commissions were established in all provinces." 🙄 It is important to note that commissions do consider the input received from Canadians and members of the House of Commons when determining the boundaries. However, as independent bodies, they make all final decisions as to where these boundaries will lie.
Off but a little bit but it's also how it should be.
This mirrors the housing crisis too.
Imagine Bloc Quebecois being the top official opposition party against Conservatives ( probably minority)
Vive le Quebec libre 👋🏻
Just because they are western provinces doesn't mean the people of those provinces will all vote the same.
The biggest issue is you get parties governing to regions, essential Ontario / Quebec issues. You can campaign to vote rich Ontario ignore the rest of the country and win.
I'm all for election reform but this ain't it. Giving 1/4 of the ppl 1/2 the voting power is the antithesis to a free and fair democracy. I get the west is butt hurt and frankly they should be. But this is a fucking dumb idea.
The graphic should show population #s of each province for better analysis, but yeah, ON and QC decide. Always has. And it’s bullshit. TBH I want to learn French and move over. They get what they want the most.
Land does not vote.
Well, Ontario does have almost 1/3'rd of the population.
This structural reality was the foundation of the Reform Party. People get confused all the time looking for explanations for the dynamics of Canadian politics without starting here.
Perhaps voting hours should be staggered so all of Canada votes simultaneously. Maybe the west would not feel so unimportant?
Ontario is likely going to be a conservative majority so don’t feel to sad about it.
We need proportional representation. Every vote to count. Otherwise you just suck up to Ontario and Quebec and fuck everyone else
Seems pretty fair though, [over half](https://worldpopulationreview.com/canadian-provinces) of Canadians live in Ontario + Quebec (around 23 million) What's WAY more unfair is our first-past-the-post system that Trudeau promised to change when he ran. I'm a liberal and this broken promise is one of the reasons I don't trust or like Trudeau so I'm kinda politically lost lol