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 part 4

Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

*


Comments

Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

And here's Alberta


Lou Arab
Offline
Joined: Jul 25 2001

The Edmonton map looks good. 

Strathcona gains some bad areas in the south west of the riding, but those losses will be more than made up for by also adding Riverdale north of the river.

Edmonton Centre gets smaller, with some poor NDP areas to the west being shaved off.

And Edmonton Greisbrecht takes some of the best areas of the provincial ridings of Highlands, Beverly-Clariview and Calder (all held by the NDP) and puts them into one riding.

With the NDPs current level of support - these three ridings should be competitive.

If the NDP were to rise a little in Alberta, Edmonton Manning and Millwoods would be competitive as well.

I don't know Calgary very well, but the basic boundaries of the old inner city ridings of Calgary Centre, Centre-North and East all seem to be more or less intact.


bagkitty
Online
Joined: Aug 27 2008

Lou... a few improvements actually on the community of interest front (moving Inglewood into Centre for example) - although I do wonder why they didn't make an effort to keep the Dover communities in the renamed East riding (Forest Lawn) - pretty clear community of interest arguments to my mind - they are going to be swamped by the deep south-east communities. Looking at the numbers (and not just for Calgary, but province-wide) I think they did a pretty good job about equalizing the number of constituents in the ridings (if only the province could do the same....). And NAMES, we get actual names!


Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

The breakup of Edmonton East seems to be a good thing from an NDP point of view, given that it was split between a more inner-city NDP section and more suburban Tory section.


Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

Looking now at the map for Vancouver.

Already (not just on rabble) I've heard suggestions these are "gerrymandered" in favor of the Tories, but I don't see it. 

Interestingly this article states that the propsosed Vancouver-Granville riding actually would have been a close Conservative-NDP battle - though I'm not so sure since it's got Shaughnessy and I'm not sure if they meant Lib (unless Fairview is the more "NDP" part of Van Centre that was transferred in).

Still, I'd wonder if a north/south split would make sense for the city's west side ridings in terms of community of interest, i.e. a Fairview/Kitsilano/Point Grey/UBC riding (somewhat along the provincial ridings of Fairview and Point Grey) and a Shaughnessy/Dunbar/Kerrisdale riding (somewhat akin to Langara and Quilchena).


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

I like that idea...extremely rich people have a community of interest so why not pack all the wealthiest neighbourhoods of vancouver into one "silk-stocking" district and then those people will be free to elect an MP whose singular job will be to promote interests of the rich!!


David Young
Offline
Joined: Dec 9 2007

Lou Arab wrote:

Edmonton Centre gets smaller, with some poor NDP areas to the west being shaved off.

So, Lou, if Lewis Cardinal carries through on his promise to run again in 2015, will Edmonton McDougall be the former riding of Edmonton Centre?

 


Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

I'm awaiting the Ontario map.  Given the growth in downtown Toronto, maybe they'll end up taking Rosedale and moving it into St. Paul's.  Then what will Bob Rae do?


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

I doubt if Rae will run again in 2015 anyways...Rosedale could also be folded in with Leaside to create all-rich riding in Toronto as well.


Lou Arab
Offline
Joined: Jul 25 2001

David Young wrote:

Lou Arab wrote:

Edmonton Centre gets smaller, with some poor NDP areas to the west being shaved off.

So, Lou, if Lewis Cardinal carries through on his promise to run again in 2015, will Edmonton McDougall be the former riding of Edmonton Centre?

 

MacDougal and Centre are nearly identical, except for the changes I noted above.  So yes.

And while I've not heard this from Lewis directly, he remains active in the NDP and everyone seems to be saying he is gung ho to run again.


Left Turn
Offline
Joined: Mar 28 2005

Stockholm wrote:

I like that idea...extremely rich people have a community of interest so why not pack all the wealthiest neighbourhoods of vancouver into one "silk-stocking" district and then those people will be free to elect an MP whose singular job will be to promote interests of the rich!!

So long as said silk-stocking riding doesn't include the predominantly renters neighbourhood of Marpole. My younger brother recently moved into a rental apartment in Marpole, and he has a only a modest income, as is the case with the majority of the renters in Marpole. He and the other modest-income renters in Marpole won't be very well served by an MP who primarily represents the interests of the rich in Shaugnessy.


Lou Arab
Offline
Joined: Jul 25 2001

What do people think of the NDP's chances in the new Vancouver South?  It looks do-able to me - but I've never been too familiar with the turf there.


ghoris
Offline
Joined: May 29 2003

A simple proposal for BC's redistribution. There are currently 85 seats in the provincial legislature, which were very recently redrawn. Under the new model, BC will have 42 seats - almost precisely half this number. Why not simply create federal seats by combining two provincial ridings into one federal riding? If I recall correctly, Toronto municipal wards are the federal ridings split into two. Any reason why the process couldn't work in reverse? Seems to me we'd have more reasonable boundaries than some of these goofy proposals.

For example, Burnaby North + Burnaby-Lougheed = Burnaby North, Burnaby-Deer Lake + Burnaby-Edmonds = Burnaby South

North Vancouver - Lonsdale + North Vancouver-Seymour = North Vancouver

West Vancouver-Garibaldi + West Vancouver-Capilano = West Vancouver

Powell River-Sunshine Coast + North Island = North Island - Sunshine Coast

Also, the prize for worst proposed new riding name has to go to the generic "Foothills" in Alberta.


Paul Gross
Offline
Joined: Jan 15 2003

Concerning the issues with the North Vancouver area discussed in the previous thread: What do people think of a single riding stretching from Horseshoe Bay to Deep Cove, called "North Shore--The Crawl"

Source: http://youtu.be/2N37oQmdlrU


Left Turn
Offline
Joined: Mar 28 2005

Paul Gross wrote:

Concerning the issues with the North Vancouver area discussed in the previous thread: What do people think of a single riding stretching from Horseshoe Bay to Deep Cove, called "North Shore--The Crawl"

I seem to recall that Wilf Day mentioned in the previous thread chunk that the north shore is more than 10% deviation above one quota, so that probably wouldn't fly.

On a slightly related note, what's the obsession with hyphated riding names? I'm not really a fan. I'm of the view that if at all possible, ridings should be named after one geographical feature, with no hyphens. Seems to me that the single north shore riding, if it were feasible, could simply be named "North Shore", no? (this isn't just about your proposed riding name Paul, but about the whole practise of long, complicated, hyphenated riding names, some a lot longer than this proposal).


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

ghoris wrote:

A simple proposal for BC's redistribution. There are currently 85 seats in the provincial legislature, which were very recently redrawn. Under the new model, BC will have 42 seats - almost precisely half this number. Why not simply create federal seats by combining two provincial ridings into one federal riding? If I recall correctly, Toronto municipal wards are the federal ridings split into two. Any reason why the process couldn't work in reverse? Seems to me we'd have more reasonable boundaries than some of these goofy proposals.

For example, Burnaby North + Burnaby-Lougheed = Burnaby North, Burnaby-Deer Lake + Burnaby-Edmonds = Burnaby South

North Vancouver - Lonsdale + North Vancouver-Seymour = North Vancouver

West Vancouver-Garibaldi + West Vancouver-Capilano = West Vancouver

Powell River-Sunshine Coast + North Island = North Island - Sunshine Coast

Also, the prize for worst proposed new riding name has to go to the generic "Foothills" in Alberta.

 

That occurred to me too, but the problem is that the new BC electoral map that came into effect before the 2009 election was based on the 2006 census and the current federal redistribution is to be based on the 2011 census.

 


ghoris
Offline
Joined: May 29 2003

Good point. Forgot about that.

I also noticed that a few municipalities (Vancouver, Surrey, Victoria/Oak Bay) have an odd number of seats within their municipal boundaries and so you would end up having some seats crossing municipal boundaries.

There seem to be quite a few seats in BC and Alberta using the Saskatchewan 'rurban' model - ie slice an urban centre into pieces and lump it in with a bunch of surrounding rural communities - eg Price George-Peace River/Cariboo-Prince George, Central Okanagan-Coquihalla/Kelowna-Lake Country, Red Deer-Mountain View/Red Deer-Wolf Creek, etc.


Stockholm
Offline
Joined: Sep 29 2002

There is something to be said for the "rurban" model when you are dealing with small cities like Prince George or Red Deer that are barely big enough to be stand along ridings...or in the case of PG, if you made PG one stand along riding - you would need to make another riding take up up about two-thirds of the territory of BC (ie: all the non-PG parts of Caroboo Prince George and Prince George-Peace River - and even that might not have enough population!).

It makes no sense at all in Sask. Regina and saskatoon are each as big as cities like Windsor or London that all have totally urban ridings in them.


Lord Palmerston
Online
Joined: Jan 25 2004

Stockholm wrote:
That occurred to me too, but the problem is that the new BC electoral map that came into effect before the 2009 election was based on the 2006 census and the current federal redistribution is to be based on the 2011 census.


That's true, although it wouldn't hurt to use the BC provincial ridings as a model and make some minor adjustments based on more recent population changes. 


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

So who wants to make a statement at the hearings? :D


Lou Arab
Offline
Joined: Jul 25 2001

A couple more points on the Alberta map:

Calgary Centre North was the best NDP riding in the city in 2011.  It get's renamed Calgary Confederation, the University area gets added to it, while some very Conservative surburban areas to the north are dropped.

Lethbridge is shrunk quite dramatically, cutting out lots of rural areas from the riding.

Both of these are positive developments for the NDP.


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Lou Arab wrote:
Calgary Centre North was the best NDP riding in the city in 2011.  It get's renamed Calgary Confederation, the University area gets added to it, while some very Conservative surburban areas to the north are dropped.

As I already noted here. (If I'd noticed it was the 99th post, I'd have started this new thread.)


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Alberta has 34 ridings, six of them new. Where are the new six ridings? That depends how you look at it. I think there are three in metropolitan Edmonton, two in Calgary, and a new Bow River riding as a result of growth east of Calgary.

There are two new ridings in Calgary city, where Calgary Southeast was 43% over quotient, Nose Hill was 42% over, Northeast and West were each 40% over, and so on. I won't speculate which of the two will have open Conservative nominations.

Wildrose (29% over quotient) loses 0.31 quotient to become the Calgary suburban riding of Banff -Airdrie, making 11 ridings in the Calgary metropolitan area.

The three new ridings in the Edmonton metropolitan area, also totalling 11, are:

  1. Edmonton Manning takes 0.50 quotient from Edmonton-Sherwood Park (28% over quotient) after Sherwood Park and Fort Saskatchewan (0.78) form most of the suburban Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan. The new Edmonton Manning picks up 0.49 quotient from Edmonton East (26% over), which in turn picks up 0.24 quotient from Edmonton-St. Albert (27% over) to become Edmonton Griesbach.
  2. The new hybrid Edmonton-Wetaskiwin comes from Edmonton-Leduc (40% over quotient) shrinking about 0.37 quotients to become Edmonton Riverbend, while Edmonton - Mill Woods - Beaumont (30% over) shrinks 0.29 quotients to become Edmonton Mill Woods. Those 0.66 quotients add 0.34 quotients from the present Wetaskiwin to make the new riding.
  3. The new suburban riding of Sturgeon River is created when Edmonton-Spruce Grove (41% over quotient) shrinks about 0.45 quotients to become Edmonton Callingwood. That 0.45 quotient joins with 0.32 (?) quotient from Yellowhead and 0.22 (?) quotient from the south part of Westlock-St. Paul.

In the North which deserves half a new riding, Peace River (41% over quotient) becomes Grande Prairie (0.96) by losing 0.45 quotient to Peace River-Westlock. Yellowhead also loses 0.25 quotient to Peace River-Westlock, while Fort McMurray - Athabasca (8% over) loses 0.11 quotient to Peace River-Westlock. The present Westlock-St. Paul contributes 0.22 (?) quotient to Peace River-Westlock, 0.33 (?) quotient to the new suburban riding of Sturgeon River, and 0.46 quotient to the renamed Lakeland (0.97). Vegreville-Wainwright (9% over quotient) shifts half a riding to the north and is renamed Lakeland after it loses 0.32 quotient to Battle River and 0.26 to the new suburban Sherwood Park-Fort Saskatchewan.

In the South, Lethbridge (17% over quotient) shrinks 0.18 quotients. Macleod (15% over) shrinks 0.18 quotients to become Foothills. Medicine Hat (12% over) shrinks 0.10 quotients.

The new riding of Bow River (0.95) picks up those 0.46 quotients and 0.49 from Crowfoot (17% over quotient), leaving the majority of Crowfoot (0.68 quotient) to be renamed Battle River.

From Red Deer (25% over quotient), the south part (0.71 quotients) takes in Mountain View (including Olds and Didsbury, 0.30 quotients, most of what's left of Wildrose after creation of Banff-Airdrie) to become the renamed Red Deer-Mountain View. The present Wetaskiwin (6% over) takes Lacombe County and Ponoka, Hobbema, etc. (0.45 quotients) and adds them to the rest of the present Red Deer (0.54) to form the renamed Red Deer-Wolf Creek, while the present Wetaskiwin loses parts of Leduc and Wetaskiwin counties with 0.34 quotients to the new suburban Edmonton-Wetaskiwin, and loses 0.27 (?) quotient to Yellowhead which has shifted south. 


JKR
Offline
Joined: Jan 15 2005
Sask. riding boundaries unique: political scientists
But do Saskatchewan's urban-rural ridings skew election results?

Quote:

At one point a distribution of seats was prepared that included some city seats. However, Smith said when the commission held public meetings there was a strong negative reaction.

"The unanimous opinion, public opinion was: No good," Smith said. "And we were told several times, several times, there is no such thing as an urban interest in Saskatchewan."

Pilon said the boundaries commission members should not have felt compelled to follow the voices heard at sparsely-attended public meetings.

"They should have stuck to their guns and said we're going to divide things rurally and urbanly so that we can do what's best for the people of Saskatchewan," he said.

The next opportunity to redraw Saskatchewan's federal riding boundaries will follow the next census. However, Smith said he does not expect any major shift in population to justify changing the current approach to creating Saskatchewan's federal ridings.

This is not what democracy looks like.


theleftyinvestor
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2008

If SK were so easy to redraw we might have heard from them by now. I would not be surprised if the committee is deliberating this quite heavily. Mulcair himself told me that a lot of the people who pushed in 2002 for the rural/urban ridings were NDPers and that they can't repeat this mistake agian.


nicky
Offline
Joined: Aug 3 2005

The comments about the Lethbridge redistribution got me curious so I have done a quick calculation deducting the 17 rural polls that are removed from the riding under the proposed redistribution.

These polls have an astounding level of support for the Conservatives: 1734 to 169 for the NDP, 79 Lib, 74 Green, and 30 for the Christian Heritage Party.

Under the new boundaries Lethbridge would have voted: C 55.3% (down from 56.5) N 28.1(27.2) L 8.8 (8.4) G 4.4 (4.4) CHP 3.7 (3.6)

The Con margin would therefore be reduced from 29.3 to 27.2 %.

Athough the margin is daunting, Lethbridge remains by far the NDP's best prospect in Alberta outside of Edmonton. 


Northern-54
Offline
Joined: Feb 1 2010

theleftyinvestor wrote:

If SK were so easy to redraw we might have heard from them by now. I would not be surprised if the committee is deliberating this quite heavily. Mulcair himself told me that a lot of the people who pushed in 2002 for the rural/urban ridings were NDPers and that they can't repeat this mistake agian.

The hard part of drawing the ridings has to do with the growth of Saskatoon and Regina while the rural areas continue to lose population.  This means that the Conservatives are unsure whether they should continue with the mixed ridings.  If the urban parts of the ridings dominate the ridings, could it in fact start to work in the NDP's favour to have the ridings remain mixed ridings?  I cynically sugggest the delay goes down to that issue...   How much smaller do the 8 mixed ridings get in area and what is the split between rural and urban.

Saskatoon has grown to the point that metro-Saskatoon has approximately 265,000 while metro Regina/Moose Jaw combined has 248,000.  The province's population, according to the census is 1,033,000, meaning each riding should have approximately 74,000 votes.  Dividing Saskatoon's population into 4, gives an urban/rural split of 66,000 urban to 8,000 rural.  Dividing Regina/Moose Jaw's population by 4, gives an urban/rural split of 62,000 urban to 12,000 rural.  The split is getting signficant enough that I think the Conservatives on the commission are considering whether these mixed ridings are still in their best interests.  I suspect that we might find that we have 4 completely urban ridings and 4 mixed ones, with boundaries drawn to make the NDP winning more than 2-4 of them unlikely.


Wilf Day
Offline
Joined: Oct 31 2002

Northern-54 wrote:
The hard part of drawing the ridings has to do with the growth of Saskatoon and Regina . . .

Indeed, it's tricky.

Saskatchewan's quotient is 73,813.

Saskatoon City is 222,189, 3.01 ridings, while Saskatoon Census Metropolitan Area is 260,600, 3.53 ridings. Do they do three city ridings plus "Saskatoon Doughnut?" Although Martensville and Warman are both north of Saskatoon, Corman Park surrounds it and other smaller municipalties are also scattered around it. And the fourth riding will have to go beyond the CMA, like Rosthern, Humboldt, Watrous and Lanigan, all in the Saskatoon Health Region.

On the other hand, Regina CMA is only 210,566, not including Moose Jaw, 2.85 ridings. Clearly three Regina ridings are feasible, with a little extra to make up. Not the same as Saskatoon. Unless you add Moose Jaw which makes 244,977, 3.32 ridings, like Saskatoon, four ridings are justified.

Stay tuned.


nicky
Offline
Joined: Aug 3 2005

If in fact the Saskatchewan map is subject to partisan influence, then Northern-54's remarks make a lot of sense. BUT.....

1. The northern Saskatchewan seat is bound to be significantly smaller in population than the rest, thereby raising the quotient somewhat for the rest of the province. 

2. Given the potential size of some of the rural ridings could the Commission not justfy a larger population for the "rurban ridings" , thereby continuing to dilute the influence of city voters?

Incidentally can anyone provide the % breakdown, urban vs rural, with the present 8 rurban ridings?


Northern-54
Offline
Joined: Feb 1 2010

nicky wrote:

If in fact the Saskatchewan map is subject to partisan influence, then Northern-54's remarks make a lot of sense. BUT.....

1. The northern Saskatchewan seat is bound to be significantly smaller in population than the rest, thereby raising the quotient somewhat for the rest of the province. 

2. Given the potential size of some of the rural ridings could the Commission not justfy a larger population for the "rurban ridings" , thereby continuing to dilute the influence of city voters?

Incidentally can anyone provide the % breakdown, urban vs rural, with the present 8 rurban ridings?

 

I can do an approximate breakdown from the poll-by-poll results in various ridings.  Not sure if I have time for all right now.  Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar was the riding where the NDP came closest to winning, losing by 538 votes.

The rural polls represented 27.3% of the vote while the urban ones were 72.7%.  The Conservatives won approximately 66.5% of the rural vote while the NDP got about 30.7% (the remaining to the Liberals and Greens).  The closer to the city the rural polls were, the higher the NDP vote.  The NDP won most of the polls in Saskatoon but not all.  The vote result was about 52.7% NDP, 41.7% Conservative in the city.  The Conservatives won the rural area by 2,956 votes while the NDP won the urban area by 2,418.

 


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