allabootmatt
Senior Member
Yeah...I would like to second the thesis that it's ludicrous to suggest Ontario needs to 'take one for the team' by accepting a second-class status of representation in Parliament.
under Bill C-22, and following the 2011 census, Alberta and British Columbia stand to get approximately one new seat for every additional 100,000 people. Ontario, on the other hand, would receive roughly one new seat for every additional 200,000 people. That is a formula for unfairness.
Ontario will remain short-changed. With over 39 per cent of the expected population, the new formula would give Ontario only about 35 per cent of the House of Commons seats after the next redistribution - 116 of 330. This represents virtually no improvement from the status quo.
Ontario’s growing population will not be adequately represented. For example, with a projected population increase of around two million people from 2001 to 2011, based on Census projections, Ontario would only receive 10 new seats – about one new seat for roughly every new 200,000 people. Yet Alberta and B.C. would get a new seat for about every new 100,000 people.
Probably because this is blatantly political, with the way they're assigning new seats per 100,000 people in Alberta and BC (where they got a lot of votes) versus 200,000 in Ontario (where they don't get as many votes). That and the fact that they're trying to pretend like this is HELPING Ontario by giving it 10 seats.
And the Liberals have short changed Alberta for YEARs, heck, I dont even think any seats where added to Alberta until the first minority government was formed. Its about time Ontario is getting short changed.
And the Liberals have short changed Alberta for YEARs, heck, I dont even think any seats where added to Alberta until the first minority government was formed. Its about time Ontario is getting short changed.