Comments on: federal riding boundaries being readjusted in alberta.

By: commission redrawing alberta’s federal ridings. | daveberta.ca - Alberta politics blog

Fri, 06 Jul 2012 05:02:19 +0000

[...] redrawing alberta’s federal ridings. Category: Alberta Politics TweetAs mentioned in a post earlier this week, a commission has been struck with the task of redrawing Alberta’s federal ridings for the [...]

By: ajb

ajb — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 20:13:52 +0000

The new boundaries are up! And they look a lot like the ones I suggested…
Roughly eyeballing it, I’d say the proposed Edmonton-McDougall and Edmonton-Griesbach should be slightly more hopeful for the NDP than the current Centre and East ridings. Edm-Strathcona remains basically unchanged. Edmonton-Mill Woods loses the newer suburbs south of the Henday (as well as Beaumont), and could theoretically be competitive.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 03:43:04 +0000

I would say that the riding split is pretty good. the Urban areas are part of Edmonton rideings and rural areas are not. frankly Spruce Grove, Boemont and Sherwood Park are urban, not rural and there are arguments within the municipalities themselves because the urban part of the counties ( acreages and towns near Edmonton) eg, East Parkland, Sherwood Park, Spruce Grove, Stony Plain, Fort Saskatchewan are completely Different from the truly rural areas away from these suburbanites. (Wabamun, Onaway, Gibbons, Morinville ect) and even in municipal politics the truely rural areas get beat up on. splitting these Rural areas from the Urban ones federally means that you wont likely get a Urbanite representing a rural area and vice versa.

By: ajb

ajb — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 22:43:51 +0000

Here’s what I’d do with the Edmonton area:
the quota per district should be around 107 000.
On that basis, with the Census 2011 numbers, the cities of Edmonton and St. Albert together have enough people for 8 ridings — 7 entirely in Edmonton, one split between Edmonton and St. Albert. Strathcona County plus Fort Saskatchewan adds up to just a little over the quota, so make that a riding.
That leaves, in the Edmonton area, about 60 000 people in Leduc County and the municipalities inside it, about 45 000 in Sturgeon County (and municipalities), and about 70 000 in Parkland County (and municipalities). I see a couple of options here:
A: A Parkland-Sturgeon riding, with bits of outlying counties as needed, and a Leduc-Parkland riding, likewise with a few outlying towns.
B: A Parkland-Sturgeon riding, which contains everything within those two counties, except for some of the outer fringes, which can go to more rural ridings, and a riding which covers all of Leduc County, and adds places like Wetaskiwin and Camrose as needed.

I think something like this would better represent the Edmonton area: eight ridings that were entirely urban, and then three which are mostly suburban, with a few small towns.

By: Will Munsey

Will Munsey — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 17:48:45 +0000

In the case of Beaumont, I don’t find much of a difference in interests between most of the people there and those in the nearby city… where most of the people in Beaumont do much of their working and purchasing. There is a big difference between a place like Beaumont and… say… Killam. While both are smaller communities, their interests/concerns are far different. I don’t have an issue with combining bedroom communities with nearby urban centres for the purpose of federal representation.

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 16:56:25 +0000

Will this mean nomination battles for sitting MPs in ridings where the boundaries are changed?

By: Sean

Sean — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 15:45:57 +0000

Yes, wiping that mote of orange from the clear blue eyes of Alberta’s faithful is long overdue. Killian here has outlined the excuse, and Neal knows the way; sure, such rigging will be painfully obvious and unconscionable, but it’s quite plain that such behavior by elected officials will never make much of a difference to Albertans anyway, except maybe in Strathcona, natch.

By: daveberta

daveberta — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 06:11:40 +0000

Killian – thanks for the comment. With the addition of six new ridings and a population of 2.4 million eligible voters (according to the recent provincial election), I believe that the average population per riding will go down, not up.

Like the provincial Electoral Boundary Review, I believe the Federal Commissioners have some flexibility in determining population per riding based on a predetermined percentage (example: 5% over or under).

By: Killian

Killian — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 06:00:41 +0000

Edmonton-Strathcona should change. It would only be fair for it to grow, if even slightly. Currently it has the smallest population of any riding in the province. It has 100,000 people while Edmonton-Leduc to the south has 150,000 people and Edmonton-Mill Woods has 137,000. If you look at other Edmonton ridings Edmonton-Sherwood Park has 139,000, Spruce Grove has 151,000, Centre has 122,000, St. Albert has 136,000 and East has 135,000. It would make sense for the riding to change, and if the ridings are divided up fairly there shouldn’t be one left with a population much smaller than the others.

By: daveberta

daveberta — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 05:40:11 +0000

Neal – Thanks for the comment. I agree that is a legitimate question that needs to be asked. Can one person properly represent both the needs of rural and urban voters from diverse backgrounds?

I would argue that yes, they can, and have. I would also argue that the day to day tasks that an MP performs appears to be less dependent on geographical area than a say, a municipal elected official (or in some cases a provincial elected official).

I would argue this because while a municipal elected official deals with the meat and potatoes of politics (i.e. potholes, water, garbage pickup, traffic, community centres), a federal politician is tasked with many macro level issues at the federal government level.

That said, from a political standpoint, I would also argue that urban and rural voters have unique political issues and are perhaps not best served with these mega “rurban” ridings.

By: Neal

Neal — Wed, 04 Jul 2012 05:26:33 +0000

I doubt that Linda’s riding will encounter anything too severe. The riding, as it stands now, is largely set by some fairly logical borders. It would be hard to gerrymander it without it seeming obvious, and I don’t think the committee would attempt that anyways.

Leaving aside conspiracy theories aimed as Ms Duncan, I think you raise a good point about the bizarre practice of pairing city ridings to rural areas and small towns. It does a disservice to all parties, and everyone from the capital area would be well served to go before the committee to argue in favour of city specific ridings, as well as rural/small town ridings. The needs of each community type are different and unique, and each deserves to have MPs dedicated to those needs.