babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Electoral Maps 5

409 replies [Last post]

Comments

Vortigern
Offline
Joined: Sep 6 2009

The deadline is supposed to be December 21st, though the commissions can ask for an extension.

 

The final report for PEI is also in. Not a very exciting read, since no changes are proposed!


nicky
Offline
Joined: Aug 3 2005

I have had a closer look at the Newfoundland and Labrador final report.

The initial proposal left much of central St John's in St J Mt Pearl. This has now been transferred to St J N.

I think this weakens Ryan Cleary's hold on his seat by adding NDP polls to augment Jack Harris' massive majority.

So the pattern is pretty evident through the first few reports. Every major change between the preliminary and final reports has been to the detriment of the NDP. I am not saying this is deliberate. It may simply reflect the organizational acumen of the other parties in promoting changes beneficial to them. But let's hope it doesnt continue.

 


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Wilf Day wrote:
Interesting how all the comments here are about a small number of metropolitan communities.

We Canadians don't all live in metropolitan areas the size of Winnipeg or larger. In fact, only half of us do.

Analyzing the results of the 2011 Canadian census, 50.3% of us live in the top eight metropoltian areas: Toronto, Montréal, Vancouver, Ottawa - Gatineau, Calgary, Edmonton, Québec, and Winnipeg. The NHL cities (well, if the Nordiques can be brought back).

The other 49.7% of us don't. Where do we live?

The typical resident of the other half of Canada lives in an area of 55,000 people.

Continuing this point, some people assume NDP voters and MPs are primarily urban. Not so, on the 2011 results and those 103 ridings (ignoring the fact that two of those MPs are no longer in caucus).

From those top eight metropolitan areas, the NDP elected 54 MPs, 52% of caucus, just right: 27 Montreal, 8 Toronto, 7 Vancouver, 6 Quebec City, 1 Edmonton, 1 Winnipeg, 3 Gatineau, 1 Ottawa.

From the third quartile of Canada's population (Hamilton to Courtenay): 26 (25% of caucus), just right: 3 Hamilton, 3 Halifax, 2 Windsor, 2 St. John’s, 2 Thunder Bay, 2 Victoria, 2 Chicoutimi—Jonquière, 2 Sherbrooke, 1 each in London, Sudbury, Nanaimo, Drummondville, Saint Hyacinthe, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Shefford (Granby), and Trois-Rivieres.

From the fourth quartile 23 (22% of caucus), almost right: Saint-Maurice-Champlain (Shawinigan 55,009), Rimouski-Neigette—Temiscouata—Les Basques (Rimouski 50,912), Welland (City 50,631), Joliette (city & area 46,932), Timmins—James Bay (Timmins 43,165), Abitibi – Temiscamingue (Rouyn-Noranda 41,798), Beauharnois-Salaberry (Salaberry-de-Valleyfield 40,077), Acadie—Bathurst (Bathurst 33,484), Abitibi—Baie James—Nunavik—Eeyou (Val D’Or 33,265), Manicouagan (Baie-Comeau 28,789, Sept-Iles 28,487), Montmagny—L’Islet—Kamouraska—Riviere-du-Loup (Riviere-du-Loup 27,734), Brome—Mississquoi (Magog 25,358), Nickel Belt (Valley East 20,676, Azilda/Chelmsford 11,689, etc.), Western Arctic (Yellowknife 19,234), Skeena - Bulkley Valley (Terrace 15,569, Prince Rupert 13,052), Gaspésie-Iles-de-la-Madeleine (Gaspe 15,163), Laurentides—Labelle (Mont-Laurier 13,779, Saint-Adele 12,137, Saint-Agathe 10,115), Berthier—Maskinonge (Lavaltrie 13,267, Louiseville 7,517, and 37,280 in part of Trois-Rivieres), Churchill (Thompson 12,839), Argenteuil-Papineau-Mirabel (Lachute 12,551, but almost half the riding is in the metro Montreal area), Algoma - Manitoulin – Kapuskasing (Elliott Lake 11,348, Kapuskasing 8,196), BC Southern Interior (Nelson 10,520, Trail 9,276, Castlegar 8,992), Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord (La Malbaie 8,862, but 43% in Quebec City metro area).

A remarkably well balanced group.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Wilf Day wrote:


But poor Courtenay B.C. (55,213) is proposed to be split between two ridings: VANCOUVER ISLAND NORTH centred on Campbell River (36,096), and NANAIMO--ALBERNI centred on Parksville (27,822) and Port Alberni (25,465).

I am not sure what you are including in Courtenay but that town is nowhere near 50,000 people.  Even if you add in Comox and Cumberland it still doesn't get to 50,000. I suspect you have gotten the stats for the Comox Regional District mixed up with the stats for the City of Courtenay.  However I agree that this is a gross way to split up the riding. 

City of Courtenay Website wrote:

The City of Courtenay is a culturally diverse, scenic city of approximately 24,000 people. Courtenay is on the east coast of Vancouver Island and located within the traditional lands of the K'ómoks First Nation.

http://www.courtenay.ca/

Village of Cumberland Website wrote:

Cumberland’s 2011 census population was 3,398, an 23% increase from 2,762 in 2006.

https://cumberland.ca/about/

Comox Website wrote:

Comox population 13,627 in 2011.

Statistics Canada has released the first data from the 2011 Census (house counts and total population). Our population grew 10% to 13,627 in 2011, from 12,385 in the 2006 census.

http://comox.ca/hall/latest-news/2011-census-first-data/


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Wilf Day wrote:


But poor Courtenay B.C. (55,213) is proposed to be split between two ridings: VANCOUVER ISLAND NORTH centred on Campbell River (36,096), and NANAIMO--ALBERNI centred on Parksville (27,822) and Port Alberni (25,465).

I am not sure what you are including in Courtenay but that town is nowhere near 50,000 people.  Even if you add in Comox and Cumberland it still doesn't get to 50,000. I suspect you have gotten the stats for the Comox Regional District mixed up with the stats for the City of Courtenay.  However I agree that this is a gross way to split up the riding. 

I am using Stats Can's definition for Courtenay's Census Agglomeration Area (like a metropolitan area, but for areas below 100,000 they don't call them "metropolitan"). That includes Courtenay, Comox, Comox Valley B (Lazo North), Comox 1 Reserve, Pentledge 2 Reserve, Cumberland, and Comox Valley A. For example, Comox Valley B includes two or three odd enclaves within Comox or between Comox and Courtenay.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

No wonder I can't follow your population stats.  Courtenay is a small town and not near the size of Sudbury or Halifax which are real urban cities.  If you add a few other towns and villages and all the rural areas then it becomes larger but if you add all of the environs to Sudbury then it would be over 100,000. 

Seems like it is comparing apples to oranges. Courtenay is the same as Sudbury but only if you add towns to Courtenay and remove the Nickel Belt from Sudbury. I'm lost as to the rationale for those kinds of decisions.


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

nicky wrote:

I have had a closer look at the Newfoundland and Labrador final report.

The initial proposal left much of central St John's in St J Mt Pearl. This has now been transferred to St J N.

I think this weakens Ryan Cleary's hold on his seat by adding NDP polls to augment Jack Harris' massive majority.

So the pattern is pretty evident through the first few reports. Every major change between the preliminary and final reports has been to the detriment of the NDP. I am not saying this is deliberate. It may simply reflect the organizational acumen of the other parties in promoting changes beneficial to them. But let's hope it doesnt continue.

 

The final report in Alberta was just as good for the NDP in Edmonton as the first proposal - if not better


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

kropotkin1951 wrote:
if you add all of the environs to Sudbury then it would be over 100,000.

The Sudbury CMA had 160,770 people in the 2011 census, of which 92,048 are in Sudbury riding and 68,722 are in Nickel Belt, making 74% of Nickel Belt. So you're right, it is really a second Sudbury riding, which puts 27 in the third quartile, and only 22 in the fourth quartile, 21% of caucus. Still not bad. I have trouble thinking of Nickel Belt that way because, politically, it is not just 74% part of Sudbury plus a few other areas like Sturgeon Falls. It is a collection of francophone communities which are in the Sudbury CMA, and some are even in the Greater Sudbury municipality, but they are identifiable: Valley East (20,676), Azilda/Chelmsford (11,689), Coniston/Garson/Falconbridge (9,928), Capreol (3,276), Onaping/Levack (2,042), and Dowling (1,690).


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

While many of those areas in the Nickel Belt have large francophone communities, they are still a minority of the population. Much of Nickel Belt is in fact suburban sprawl dating from the '60's and '70's.  I found the numbers interesting because I grew up in that region and now have major ties to the Courtenay area. 

http://www.rdee.ca/statistique/en/ontario/region-nickel-belt/coup_oeil.html


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Krago sent me a great link regarding linguistic preferences.

The map for Vancouver area shows that the part of Burnaby i live in has more than 56% of the population whose mother tongue is other than French English or Aboriginal.  The areas surrounding me are between 35 and 56%.  Despite a century and a half of anti-Asian racism the West Coast was and still is as much an Asian community as it is a white European one.

What is telling is no one would take the language data and say that Burnaby is a Chinese community but the Nickel Belt with lower numbers has Francophone communities.  Systemic racism is the kind that is embedded in our thinking not from bad intentions but from the predominate world view.

http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/geo/map-carte/ref/the...


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

kropotkin1951 wrote:
While many of those areas in the Nickel Belt have large francophone communities, they are still a minority of the population.

Large minorities, though, and they are in geographic communities. By mother tongue, a majority in the three census tracts of Chelmsford/Azilda (10,720).

Moncton is an interesting one. Will Moncton-est get a riding including all of it, along with the francophone communities to its east and north? Or be split?


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

I just heard from someone who presented in Oshawa November 13, 2012, that, after the hearing, those presenters got an e-mail from the Commission stating that the Commission was preparing a revised proposal and they would be notified of a second round hearing in Oshawa in due course. Which I suppose will be posted on the Commission website next week.

Anyone else in Ontario heard of this?


Arthur Cramer
Offline
Joined: Nov 30 2010

We are stuck with that scumbag Lamoureux in Winnipeg North, AGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! How the hell did a working class riding end up going Liberal. Thank you oh NDP leadership geniuses. You did SO good!


Arthur Cramer
Offline
Joined: Nov 30 2010

We are stuck with that scumbag Lamoureux in Winnipeg North, AGGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! How the hell did a working class riding end up going Liberal. Thank you oh NDP leadership geniuses. You did SO good!


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

The BC Report is tabled. I have seen a comment that "Surrey has been rejigged to be way better for the NDP and ditto with Vancouver Island - unfortunately north Burnaby is still stuck folded in with North Vancouver." Comments?

The Saskatchewan Report is tabled. The new urban ridings have prevailed!

The New Brunswick Report is tabled. Is the new Saint John better?


6079_Smith_W
Offline
Joined: Jun 10 2010

Wilf Day wrote:

The BC Report is tabled. I have seen a comment that "Surrey has been rejigged to be way better for the NDP and ditto with Vancouver Island - unfortunately north Burnaby is still stuck folded in with North Vancouver." Comments?

The Saskatchewan Report is tabled. The new urban ridings have prevailed!

The New Brunswick Report is tabled. Is the new Saint John better?

Good to see, but don't all of these still have to make it over the PM's desk (formerly known as parliament)?


Left Turn
Offline
Joined: Mar 28 2005

Wilf Day wrote:
The BC Report is tabled. I have seen a comment that "Surrey has been rejigged to be way better for the NDP and ditto with Vancouver Island - unfortunately north Burnaby is still stuck folded in with North Vancouver." Comments?

I'm really disappointed that they kept Burnaby North--Seymour in the final report. Looks like they got more opposition to this than to anything else they proposed. There was a way around this, but they unfortunately placed a higher priority on other things.Frown

Also disappointed that they kept the east-west division of the two ridings on Vancouver's westside. I really think that a north-south divison would have made more sense.

Agree that Surrey is much better for the NDP in the final report.


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

Yeah Burnaby North-Seymour blows for sure.

Anyway - I look forward to seeing these ridings reflected at PollMaps.


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

The Sask report is a really interesting read. Apparently the Commission was flooded with pro-rurban submissions but they rejected all the reasons and stuck with the proposal more or less.

http://www.redecoupage-federal-redistribution.ca/content.asp?section=sk&...

Example:

Currently, voter apathy is at an all-time high. The Commission will compound this problem if it makes significant changes to the electoral boundaries.

The Commission did not accept this argument. Assuming that voter apathy is a significant problem, the Commission fails to see how maintaining the status quo will alleviate that problem. The commissioners heard from young urban dwellers – among them immigrants, refugees, Aboriginal people, Francophones and gay people – who felt disenfranchised by having to share their member of Parliament with others who did not understand their current, largely urban, concerns. Many of these urban dwellers also expressed a lack of knowledge of rural concerns. It is not the role of the Commission to set boundaries encompassing people whose community of interest is weak in an attempt to force them to become more knowledgeable about the situation of others.

Those in favour of the proposal for solely urban ridings in Regina and Saskatoon acknowledged that there were similarities in the issues facing both urban and rural dwellers, but argued that the nature of those issues was significantly different. For example, everyone is concerned about crime; however, gang violence, drug addiction, prostitution and incarceration of criminals are issues that take on a far different focus and immediacy in Saskatoon and Regina than they do in Rosetown or Humboldt.

The Commission heard a recurring theme in submissions from a significant number of people who favoured the proposal, which was the need for the member of Parliament to focus on their concerns and to emphasize solutions acceptable to people living in the cities. As stated by one presenter, "I would like to take this opportunity to say that as an urban resident ... I am in full support of the boundary changes. I feel that the proposed changes would ensure that my own voice, as well as the voices of the vast majority of other urban voters, are actually heard."

 


nicky
Offline
Joined: Aug 3 2005

I notethat there is a dissenting opinion in the Saskatchewan Report which reccommends keeping the blended urban -rural ridings and asking the Parliamentary Committee to restore them. 

I think we can expect the Conservatives who control that committee to seize on the minority report and perpetuate the blended riidings which have proved so advantageous to them.


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

nicky wrote:

I notethat there is a dissenting opinion in the Saskatchewan Report which reccommends keeping the blended urban -rural ridings and asking the Parliamentary Committee to restore them. 

I think we can expect the Conservatives who control that committee to seize on the minority report and perpetuate the blended riidings which have proved so advantageous to them.

Except the Committee has no such power.

The dissent is weird. "I ask that the parliamentary committee reject the proposal put forward by Mr. Justice Mills and Professor Courtney of the Saskatchewan Commission. I would also ask that the committee request the commission to redraft the federal electoral boundaries report in order to come back with fairer representation for Regina and Saskatoon and to revisit the blended urban-rural ridings requested by approximately 75% of all submissions received." Does he seriously think the majority will change their minds just because the Conservative MPs ask them to? The MPs already made their views well-known and well-supported by submissions that the other two Commissioners, thank heavens, rejected. Is this a man who can't see that the horse he has been flogging has just died?


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

Wilf Day wrote:

The BC Report is tabled. I have seen a comment that "Surrey has been rejigged to be way better for the NDP and ditto with Vancouver Island -

Well. It's still not that good. The Burnaby riding combined with North Van.

Fin Donnelly's riding of Port Moody-Coquitlam has now gone heavier Con than what the proposed boundaries initially were. It now includes parts of higher-end Heritage Mountain in Port Moody as well as neighbouring Belcarra and Anmore. These areas went heavily Con in 2011.

As for Surrey, Jasbir's seat is essentially the same. The only other NDP potential would be Surrey-Newton, but based upon the new boundaries, the Libs would have won that seat in 2011, believe it or not.

And then we have Atamenko still losing South Okanagan-West Kootenay in 2011.

I've just gone through Krago's colour-coded riding maps.

 

Haven't had a chance to check out Van Isle yet.


nicky
Offline
Joined: Aug 3 2005

 Wilf, do I understand you correctly that the parliamentary committee only has the power to ask the redistribution commissioners to reconsider their report and not impose changes?

If so it is reassuring that the Cons cannot simply dictate changes to their liking.

Thanks for pointing this out.

 


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Centrist wrote:

Well. It's still not that good. The Burnaby riding combined with North Van.

Fin Donnelly's riding of Port Moody-Coquitlam has now gone heavier Con than what the proposed boundaries initially were. It now includes parts of higher-end Heritage Mountain in Port Moody as well as neighbouring Belcarra and Anmore. These areas went heavily Con in 2011.

As for Surrey, Jasbir's seat is essentially the same. The only other NDP potential would be Surrey-Newton, but based upon the new boundaries, the Libs would have won that seat in 2011, believe it or not.

And then we have Atamenko still losing South Okanagan-West Kootenay in 2011.

I guess NDP prospects in these seats will depend on a number of factors. First of all in 2011 the Tories beat the NDP by 13 points in BC (46% to 33%). If in 2015 BC is more of a tossup (whihc most current polls indicate) then the NDP would easily win all these seats regardless of the new boundaries. The other factor to consider is that the NDP vote will probably go up in areas that go from having been in an NDP dead zone riding to being in an NDP incumbent riding. For example in North vancouver in 2011 the NDP vote was almost non-existent since it was a riding that was expected to be a tight CPC-Liberal contest. I suspect that while the NDP will not actually win the north Van part of Burnaby-North Vancouver - the NDP vote in that section will probably be far higher than it was in 2011 because people will find themselves in an NDP/CPC tossup contest. Similarly, the NDP vote will probably go up once the campaign "invades" previously unexploited territory in Penticton etc...

 


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

Centrist wrote:

Well. It's still not that good. The Burnaby riding combined with North Van.

Fin Donnelly's riding of Port Moody-Coquitlam has now gone heavier Con than what the proposed boundaries initially were. It now includes parts of higher-end Heritage Mountain in Port Moody as well as neighbouring Belcarra and Anmore. These areas went heavily Con in 2011.

As for Surrey, Jasbir's seat is essentially the same. The only other NDP potential would be Surrey-Newton, but based upon the new boundaries, the Libs would have won that seat in 2011, believe it or not.

And then we have Atamenko still losing South Okanagan-West Kootenay in 2011.

I guess NDP prospects in these seats will depend on a number of factors. First of all in 2011 the Tories beat the NDP by 13 points in BC (46% to 33%). If in 2015 BC is more of a tossup (whihc most current polls indicate) then the NDP would easily win all these seats regardless of the new boundaries. The other factor to consider is that the NDP vote will probably go up in areas that go from having been in an NDP dead zone riding to being in an NDP incumbent riding. For example in North vancouver in 2011 the NDP vote was almost non-existent since it was a riding that was expected to be a tight CPC-Liberal contest. I suspect that while the NDP will not actually win the north Van part of Burnaby-North Vancouver - the NDP vote in that section will probably be far higher than it was in 2011 because people will find themselves in an NDP/CPC tossup contest. Similarly, the NDP vote will probably go up once the campaign "invades" previously unexploited territory in Penticton etc...

 


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

And again, an overarching effect is going to be - what will the reprecussions be for federal politics after 2 years of the BCNDP under Adrian Dix? Never in BC's history has the NDP made federal gains while under BCNDP rule, with the one exception of a federal election that was held only a few months after Dave Barrett became premier. If Dix's idea of incremental, predictable change actually still manages to resonate halfway through his term, he could help deliver federal votes. But if there is a big backlash by then, it could play right into the fortunes of federal Liberals.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

The NDP to win more seats needs to have three way races.  Even provincially the NDP does not win elections when it runs against one right of centre party.  The BC Liberals are still polling respectably and the voters who have abandoned them are not going to the NDP in droves instead they are looking for another right wing alternative.  In federal ridings when the Liberal vote collapses it often leads to Conservative wins since the reality is that many Liberal voters would rather eat glass than vote NDP.  Of course the same goes for many NDP voters and the Liberal party.


adma
Online
Joined: Jan 21 2006

Centrist wrote:
The only other NDP potential would be Surrey-Newton, but based upon the new boundaries, the Libs would have won that seat in 2011, believe it or not.

With Sukh Dhaliwal's peculiar ethno-bloc out of the picture, it should be much easier, I presume.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

adma wrote:

Centrist wrote:
The only other NDP potential would be Surrey-Newton, but based upon the new boundaries, the Libs would have won that seat in 2011, believe it or not.

With Sukh Dhaliwal's peculiar ethno-bloc out of the picture, it should be much easier, I presume.

WTF

Last time I looked every major party in BC had a significant South Asian constituency and presence.  What about the white ethno-bloc how do you think it is effecting the results?

 


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Stockholm wrote:
As I suspected, the Montreal riding of st. Leonard shifts to the NDP on the new map and it isn't even close!

Before the Quebec Commission proposal passes into history, let's record what it did for the NDP. Six new NDP seats, less one loss to the Bloc, net gain of five. One of the new NDP seats is indeed the gain of St. Leonard from the Liberals, offset by the Liberals picking up a new seat.

New:

Outaouais NDP 59.81%, new riding. (The majority of Hull-Aylmer goes to Aylmer, the majority of Gatineau goes to Petite-Nation.)

Lignery NDP 49.93%, new riding. (The majority of Châteauguay--Saint-Constant goes to Châteauguay, the majority of Brossard--La Prairie goes to Urbain-Brossard.)

Sainte-Rose NDP 48.64%, new riding. (Partly from Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, but the majority of Marc-Aurèle-Fortin goes to Mille-Îles. Part of new Terrebonne NDP 51.54% is from Terrebonne—Blainville, but more of Terrebonne-Blainville goes to Mille-Îles. Terrebonne is mostly from Montcalm, but the majority of Montcalm stays as Montcalm.)

Saint-Léonard NDP 38.96%, gain from Lib Saint-Léonard--Saint-Michel

Maurice-Richard NDP 31.89%, gain from Bloc Ahuntsic.

Lévis NDP 39.85%, gain from Conservative Lotbinière--Chutes-de-la-Chaudière.

New Liberal seat: George-Étienne-Cartier Lib 40.92%. (From leftover parts of Saint-Laurent--Cartierville and Ahuntsic.)


Net loss of one Conservative. Net loss of one Bloc, since Haute-Gaspésie--La Mitis--Matane—Matapédia disappears, but Bloc takes Gaspésie—Les Îles from NDP, but loses Ahuntsic.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments