Nov/Dec 2022: Elizabeth May is to be bringing up in the House of Commons a switch to three-member districts and Single Transferable Voting (STV-PR).
She says STV is likely to appeal to those who want PR [of any sort], those who like ranked voting, and those who don't want [party-list] PR but would support riding-centric PR system. I agree. (As well, STV is now regarded by many as the "Blue-ribbon" form of PR as it allows voters to vote directly for candidates and also reduces the number of votes wasted, not used to actually elect anyone.) The STV system proposed is to have districts of 3-7 members, with allowance for single-member districts in the Territories and Labrador (what one could call the one-member areas actually named in the Confederation list of provinces and territories). The Newfoundland part of Newfoundland and Labrador then would have one riding of 6 members or perhaps two ridings of three. Do-able. the Island is 100,000 sq. kms in area (some single MPs represent an area twice that size) and 500,000 population (about five times the normal amount in a district represented by one MP). Average size of current single-member ridings in the provinces (that is, outside the Territories) is 19,000 sq. kms.
(below I peg the average at 9000 sq. kms. after I separate out the land that is covered by the large ridings in the provinces.)
All the urban ridings are considerably smaller than 19,000 or even 9000 sq. kms. and most of the rural ridings are very considerably larger:
Nine single-member ridings in the provinces are larger than 200,000 sq. kms in size 4 more are larger than 100,000 sq kms -
(as note of comparison, the United Kingdom is 244,000 sq. kms.
Labrador is 294,000 sq. kms so the one Labrador MP represents an area larger than all of the United Kingdom.) About 8 more ridings are larger than three average ridings put together (57,000 sq. kms) so currently 21 ridings in the provinces are larger than three average ridings put together.
so the size of the new ridings should not be criticized for how un-manageable ridings of that size will be - in 24 cases (including the Territories) one member currently represents an area of that size or more. and under the new system, at least three members will represent the area that 24 members now manage to do single-handedly. (lumping those super-sized ridings that already exist in the provinces into multi-seat district may be hard-sell but that is overlooked in the proposal) (Canada's total 10M sq kms minus Northern Canada 's 3.5M sq kms = 6.5M divided by 335 = 19,000 sq. kms per) PEI would be one riding of 4. the 3 to 7 seat ridings in the other provinces could be based on cities, or counties in some cases, or simple lumping of three current adjacent ridings. even if district only has 3 seats, any candidate that takes 25 percent of the district vote will take a seat, or in some cases even if only comes close to it, and there is nothing any other voting bloc can do about it. any party where voters rank candidates of same party will take a seat if it makes up 25 percent of the district. no party can take all the district seats unless it has more than 75 percent of the votes or thereabouts. in 7-seat district the percentage needed to take a seat drops to just 13 percent. if a district in a province produces mixed representation, then a province does as well. thus preventing such things as PEI's and Saskatchewan's current one-party sweeps. I personally don't see why the proposal prescribes a form of Gregory (WIGM) for transfer of surplus votes but that is in line with Scottish PR authority James Gilmour's views on STV for Wales in which he says any system that has element of random-ness in it is not appreciated.
I think whole-vote transfers as once used in western Canada (barring Calgary's city STV) is good enough although having slight risk of unbalance in how surplus transfers are done but whatever. Let's hope May gets some attention.
And let's hope the NDP starts demanding voter fairness just as much as the Green Party is.
=======================================
Despite what some might think, Canada actually has very many small ridings.
More than 200 cover less area than 9000 sq. kms. each and could be combined to make perfectly-manageable multiple-member districts, as I explain here.
-- 9000 square kms seems like a lot but it only 30 kms by kms. About 12-20 minute drive from side to side. And many are much smaller than that. The structure of Canada ridings is that 24 ridings cover about 84 percent of Canada.
These are what I call the largest ridings. We have some large ridings smaller than the largest but still 6 times the average size. Some medium-sized ridings that are smaller than six average ridings but still larger than three average ridings. There are about 75 ridings that are larger than average but smaller than three average ridings.
All the rest are smaller than average.
Some of those are in large cities. 52 are in Toronto alone.
So it seems perfectly possible to combine groups of the small ridings to make MMDs.
Ridings in order of size
First we look at the largest ridings. They would be the most difficult to combine with oher ridings to make MMDs.
if we identify them and then set aside the area that they hold, we are better able to see how to combine the other ridings to make MMDs.
(ridings are numbered from largest to smaller in order to identify the various groups (see "categories of ridings" below))
Largest ridings
1 Nunavut 2,093,000 sq. kms
2 NWT 1,346,000
3 Abiti (QU) 854,000
4 Churchill (MN) 495,000
5 Yukon 482,000
6 Desnethe (SK) 343,000
7 Skeena BC 327,000
8 Kenora ON 322,000
9 Labrador 294,000
10 Manicouagan QU 284,000
11 Timmins ON 252,000
12 Prince George C 243,000
13 Ft. McMurray AB 147,000
14 Grande Prairie AB 109,000
15 Peace River Ab 106,000
16 Algoma ON 100,000
17 Thunder Bay ON 88,000
18 Cariboo BC 83,000
19 North Island BC 80,000
20 Cypress Hills SK 78,000
21 Yellowhead AB 76,000
22 Kootenay BC 64,000
23 Lac St John QU 60,000
24 Dauphin MN 57,000
Total area above
in provinces 4,462,000 sq. kms 21 MPs
in territories (all of the Territories) 3,921,000 sq. kms 39 percent of Canada (3 members)
total area in largest ridings (above) 8,383,000 sq. kms
so the 24 largest ridings cover about 84 percent of Canada
=====
total area of Canada 9,985,000 sq. kms.
province (area not in territories) 6,064,000 sq. kms. (335 MPs = 18,000 sq. kms. per)
area not in largest ridings: 1,602,000 sq. kms.
area in provinces not in largest ridings
provinces total 6,064,000 sq. kms.
area largest ridings in province 4,462,000 sq. kms.
provinces area not in largest ridings
1,602,000 sq. kms. (314 MPs = 5000 sq. kms. per)
provinces' area not in largest ridings not in cities
rural area in provinces not in largest ridings
1,600,000 sq. kms. (187 MPs = 8556 sq. kms. per)
MPs outside largest ridings: 314
MPs in largest ridings territories 3
provinces 21
MPs in cities: 127 (as it stands today)
(list of Canada's largest cities and their expected representation is below. It adds up to about 200 members! Obviously some cities are not represented at ratio of even 100,000 voters per member and many cities are included in districts that take in much more than a single city and take in a relatively few rural voters and a multitude of urban voters.)
MPs outside cities and outside largest ridings: 187
How large an MMD
If we consider making multiple-member ridings, we have to consider how large is an acceptable size for a MM riding.
We have to accept that each Territory is to be a single-member riding and that those sparsely-settled ridings that are huge in size cannot be combined with others.
If we look at the 24 largest ridings, we see huge expanses of land at the largest, ranging down to ridings just about 6 times the average-sized riding.
what is the average I am using?
I am taking out the 24 largest ridings as being outriders and then leaving aside the city MPs (notionally set at 127 Members) because they altogether cover very little territory.
the area remaining divided by the number of Members remaining gives us an average of 8556 sq. kms. (see below for details)
This average-sized riding covers more area than any city including the City of Toronto.
So using it as a maximum size for a MMD does not prevent the creation of MMDs covering whole cities - not that all 52 MPs in Toronto would be elected in a single MMD anyway.
Generally there is an outside limit on number of Members used in any MMD we set up.
Ten members is the most ever elected in a single STV contest in Canada historically, and the representation accorded by five-member district is statistically nearly as fine as the representation accorded by 20-member district. The difference between 10 percent as quota and 5 percent as quota is not so significant. The most elected in any STV election in the world is 21 (in New South Wales).
Establishing a maximum area that an MMD could cover thus only applies to rural areas -- areas outside the cities.
Perhaps a maximum size of equivalent of three average-sized ridings could be set, thus 27,000 sq. kms. to make a 3-member district. Thus any three ridings that are each smaller than the average could be combined to make a three-member district. Any such district would be less than half the area represented by one Member in 41 districts.
Luckily there are 267 ridings smaller than the average. so we have many suitable candidates to draw from to make these rural MMDs. (see details below)
Or
Perhaps a maximum size of equivalent of two average-sized ridings could be set (18,000 sq. kms., about the size of the Miramichi riding), still to make a 3-member district. Thus any three ridings that are each smaller than two-thirds of the average could be combined to make a three-member district.
Thus 5700 sq kms would be largest size of district used to compose such an MMD. This is the size of the Argentuil riding (89th largest riding in Canada). Thus about 250 districts are smaller than that.
Any such MMD would be less than the area represented by one Member in 89 districts.
Luckily there are 249 ridings smaller than two-thirds the average. so we have many suitable candidates to draw from to make such MMDs. (see details below)
Many of these would be in cities. But these are not:
90Lambton
Acadie
92Compton
Cowichan
94Kings
Berthier
96Beauce
Beaujour
98Sturgeon River
Perth
Lees
101Richmond
Chilliwack
103Bellchsse
Haldimand
105Brome
Lethbridge
107Glengarry
Northumberland
109Becancour
Chicoutomi
111Stormont
Cardigan
113Elgin
Oxford
115Dufferin
Sallaberry
117Chatham
Pitt
119Levis
Bay of Quinte
121 Simcoe-Grey
Vimy is presumably in Montreal
Kelowna
Saanich
136th Barrie 1000 sq. kms in size is among the smallest rural districts.
it is about 136 in number-order from largest to smallest of the ridings, leaving about 200 for city members.
Abbotsford
Niagara
Thornhill
Regina
and many more
perhaps 60 or so.
thus enough to make 20 or so three-member rural MMDs. (here I am lumping small cities in with rural districts.)
the other ridings smaller than two-thirds of the average are inside the cities as listed below, which would have MMDs just within their own corporate boundaries.
MMDs smaller than single-member districts
or we could consider that MMDS could not be larger than the area that one third of the MPs represent by themselves.
The 113th largest riding is Oxford. it has 2384 sq. kms. so quite small. one third of Canadian ridings are larger.
Many are much smaller.
(The size halves quickly. in only 22 districts. the size of ridings drops from 2000 to 1000 sq. kms.
about 136th is twice that size. (Sherwood Park 1200 sq. kms.)
About the 155th largest riding (Coquitlam) is only 650 sq. kms. in size.
about 200 ridings are smaller than 1000 sq. kms. in area so there are many than can be combined to make two-seat districts that cover only 2400 sq. kms.
So about 180 ridings are small enough to make three-member districts that are smaller than what one third of the MPs each represent by themselves.
Many but not all of them would be in Canada's largest cities (see below)
=====================
Average riding
Outside of largest ridings, average size of rural ridings (including the small area that cities take up): 8556 sq kms
any MMD of 27,000 sq kms is larger than 3 average small-large ridings.
and is less than half the size of the smallest of the "largest ridings."
====================
Categories of the ridings by size
largest ridings are at least 6 times size of average rural small-large ridings. (24 in number)
large ridings are at least 3 times size of average rural small-medium ridings. (17 in number)
medium-sized ridings smaller than three average ridings but larger than average. (34 in number)
small ridings smaller than average 263 in number
338-75 = 263
Three small ridings put together are smaller than 41 ridings in Canada today.
Of small ridings, 127 are in cities where more than one member is elected.
Large ridings
25 Battle River AB 53,000
2 26 Coast
Yorkton
4 28Souris
Jonquiere
6 30long
thunder
8 32saint maurice
kamloops
10 34Abitibi
Moose
12 36mission
pontiac
14 38Ncikle
battleford
16 40mission
17 41Carleton 29,000 sq. kms.
medium ridings 34 in number
smaller than three average ridings but larger than average
42selkirk 26,000
2 bow river
44Misson
4 foothills
46Laurentiede
6 bonavista
48prince albert
8 49 Provencher QU 19000
50 Brandon
10 south
52Miramacihi
12 Gaspesie 17,145
54North okanagan 17,000
14 central okanagan
56nipissing
16 tobiqe
58avignon
18 barrie
60regina
20 west Vancouver
62portage
22 renfrew
64 banff
24 mada
66beauport
26 new
68Central Nova (NS)
28 cape
70West Nova (NS)
30 south
72hastings
32joliet
74hallibut
34 75 Courtenay 8571
average is 8556 sq. kms. (area outside largest ridings in provinces, divided by number of province's MPs not in cities and not in largest ridings.
263 small ridings
likely includes all city MPs (about 127)
(largest city in Canada today Toronto is 1800 sq. kms. so no city is larger than the average small/large riding.)
ranging in size from
Cumberland (NS) 8269 sq. kms. to Toronto Centre 6 sq. kms.
==
76th Cumberland (NS) 8269 sq. kms.
Rimouski
78 Fundy
Red Deer
80 Portneuf
Mongmargny
82 Lanark
Avalaon
84 Bruce
Red Deer
86 Megantic
Sue Sault
88 Huron
89th Argentuil is 5412 sq. kms.
90th Lambton 5278 sq. kms.
Acadie 91st largest riding in Canada 5183 sq. kms.
Now I give guideposts to ridings arranged by size
Kings-Hants 96th largest riding in Canada is half the maximum size for a small riding (4440 sq. kms.) so only 67 kms across.
Perth 101st largest riding in Canada 3782 sq, kms
Northumberland 111st largest riding in Canada 3000 sq. kms.
Pitt Meadows 121st largest riding in Canada
Malpeque 131st largest riding in Canada
Sudbury (141st largest riding in Canada) is smaller than 1000 sq. kms so only 33 kms across.
Sackville 151st largest riding in Canada 777 sq. kms. so 29 kms across if square shaped
King-Vaughan 161st largest riding in Canada
North Vancouver 171st largest riding in Canada
Repentigny 181st largest riding in Canada
Whitby 191st largest riding in Canada
Burnaby-North 201st largest riding in Canada
Port Moody 211st largest riding in Canada
Calgary Midnapore 221st largest riding in Canada
Fleetwood 231st largest riding in Canada 74 sq. kms less than 9 kms across (if square shaped)
Oshawa 241th largest riding in Canada
Brossard 251st largest riding in Canada58 sq. kms. less than 9 kms across (if square shaped)
Dorval 261st largest riding in Canada51 sq. kms. just a bit more than 7 kms across (if square shaped)
Edmonton Centre 271st largest riding in Canada
Vancouver Quadra 281st largest riding in Canada
Quebec [City] 291st largest riding in Canada36 sq. kms. only 6 kms across (if square shaped)
Surrey Newton 301st largest riding in Canada
Eglinton-Lawrence 311th largest riding in Canada
Parkdale 317th largest riding in Canada 16 sq. kms. so only 4 kms across if square shaped
Toronto St. Paul 331th largest riding in Canada
Toronto Centre is smallest in Canada only 6 sq. kms in size, less than 1 km across if square shaped
========
How many seats in each City?
average representation in provinces:
38.25M divided by 335 = 114,000 per member
cities larger than 228,000 would be eligible for two or more members
representation (MPs) could be allocated as per 100,000.
17 cities have more people than that
per 100,000 rounded down actual number of MPs 2021
Toronto 5,648,000 56 56 52
Vancouver 662,000 6
(Vancouver 2,426,000 metro 24 24)
Montreal 1,763,000 city 18 18 18
(Montreal metro 3,675,000 37 36)
Calgary 1,300,000 13 13
Edmonton 1,200,000 12 12
Ottawa-Gatineau 1,100,000 11 11
Winnipeg 759,000 8 7
Quebec City 733,000 7 7
Hamilton 730,000 7 7
Kitchener 523,000 5 5
London 423,000 4 4
Victoria 363,000 4 3
Halifax 349,000 3 3
Oshawa 336,000 3 3
Windsor 307,000 3 3
Saskatoon 265,000 3 2
St. Catharines 242,000 2 2
Total: 202 198
================================
MMDs versus MMP Finland MMDs compared to future MMDs in Canada
(added in June 2023)
"FVC told the ERRE: “Rural and urban voters in every province, territory and regional community should be represented in the MP caucuses of both government and opposition parties. " single-member ridings have nothing to do with this - these voters can be represented as prescribed, whether or not single-member districts are used. it has happened lots of times that a province or a region (say all of a city or all of a province's rural areas) will elect a one-party sweep under FPTP. to avoid this, and allow the balanced representation mentioned in the FVC statement, the question is do you prefer multi-member districts and fair voting (STV or SNTV or list PR ala Denmark), with top-up (Denmark) or without top-up (Ireland, Malta and Australia's STV systems), or single-member districts and top-up (ala NZ's MMP)? either can work - it is just a matter of whether you trust MMDs to do as good a job or better of representing voters at the district level. I think it is clear that, as far as waste of votes and ignored voters, FPTP is not the way to go.
do Canadians really like single-winner politics? is it something actually set in their brains? every province at one time or another used MMDs to elect all or some of their members. In many cities, single-winner FPTP is not used to elect city council or if it is, it is a recent adoption. in Edmonton, in every city election prior to 2010, Edmonton elected its councillors through MMDs or at-large elections.
Vancouver uses at-large voting so that is MMD, not FPTP.
Do people know that in the history of Edmonton MMDs have mostly been used?
likely not.
But likewise, do they know how FPTP works? Many don't. thinking it a majority choice.
They don't know about elections, and they don't care,
(it is important that we do)
so we can hope to change the electoral system, and as long as result will be more fair, and as long as voters have more choice and the liberty to vote how they want, and as long as they see (80-90 percent or more of) their votes used effectively to elect someone, they are not likely to complain.
They never voted for FPTP to be used in federal elections in the first place.
It may be difficult to sell this reform (how many even know the terms MMD or MMP)
but universal healthcare was not simple either,
neither was universal adult male franchise, nor female suffrage.
heck even fluoride in the city water was contentious. (I am sure there are better examples that that, but it came to me so I wrote it down!)
cities, automobiles, unions, third parties (parties other than Libs and Conservatives) all involved radical change, etc.
but change did happen.
===============================
Many ways to approach MMDs and single-member districts, PR, MMP and FPTP
Why is one area described as local in federal elections but a MMD covering the same area would be seen as not local? Would not 2 MPs representing 250,000 voters in STV or list PR be two "local champions?" Same riding, same boundaries. Keeping the House of Commons about the same may be a consideration. so I might rephrase that to "would not 2 MLAs representing the same area be just as local? same riding, same boundaries and then extend that to if a mayor of a city represents a whole city, then why not a whole group of city councillors? Still local.
size of districts Finland has 12 electoral districts electing 200 MPs, ranging from 7 to 35 MPs per district, averaging 17 per district.
someone said such districts are "not local enough for Canada." But apparently he is basing this on the idea that any MMD can be divided into smaller single-member districts, (and should be) and not on the concern that the MMDs are larger than manage-able or on concern that they are larger than many single-member districts. looking at size Finland is 338,000 kms in size 12 districts so average of 28,000 sq kms population 5.5 M 27,500 per member Canada: Average size of current single-member ridings in the provinces (that is, outside the Territories) is 19,000 sq. kms. so not much smaller than the size of an average multi-member district in Finland. a small sampling of Finland districts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_districts_of_Finland Helsinki 215 sq. kms. (yes 215!) 22 members Pirkanmaa 16,000 sq. kms. 19 members Southeast Finland 28,000 sq. kms. 7 members Savo-Karelia 43,000 sq. kms. 16 members Oulu 69,000 sq. kms. 18 members (The northernmost district, Lapland, is Finnish equivalent of our Territories - 100,000 sq. kms with only 190,000 people. it has 7 members.) Lapland apart, it seems only Oulu is larger than three of our average-size ridings in Canadian provinces put together.
and as I show next, such a 3-riding-sized district is smaller than 21 ridings in our provinces today.
Canadian provinces Average size of current single-member ridings in the provinces (that is, outside the Territories) is 19,000 sq. kms. so not much smaller than the size of multi-member districts in Finland. obviously there is a range in size (although no range in number of members per district) currently 21 ridings in the provinces are larger than 57,000 sq. kms. (three average ridings put together). so for 314 members (335 minus 21) their districts could be grouped together and still the now-larger district would be smaller than what 21 MPs represent single-handedly. if the area of 57,000 sq. kms. (or more) is considered local in one place, it I think should be considered elsewhere. (the MMD is larger than it needs to be, a district would be much smaller if it has just one MP, but then you have problem of mono-representation. as discussed below.
it comes down to personal or group opinion -- a matter of which you hate worse - larger-than-necessary districts or mono-representation. and that is something only a CA can decide. Canadian MMDs with STV and District Magnitude being no larger than 12 If districts can be as large as 12 members, we see that 33 MMDs woiuld be required across the provinces, as presented in following table. (while preserving provincial separations)
Seat counts by province Seats Number of Districts in the province (with 12 DM as max. size) ON 121 11 districts can cover 121 MPs QU 78 7 districts can cover 78 MPs BC 42 4 districts can cover 42 MPs AB 34 3 districts can cover 34 MPs SK 14 2 districts can cover 14 MPs MB 14 2 districts can cover 14 MPs NS 10 1 10-member district NB 11 1 11-member district NFLD 7 1 7-member district PEI 4 1 4-member district TOTAL 33 MM Districts
These 12-seat districts are arbitrary and take no notice of city boundaries, which I believe are natural already-existing bases for MMDs, as discussed next.
City-based MMDs MMDs are natural choices in cities where people are already grouped into an already-existing entity that I think should not be divided unless absolutely necessary. the Rural-Urban PR system captures this different treatment of cities and rural districts.
if ratio of population per member is 100,000 and MMDs are based on cities
if ratio of population per member is 100,000 and MMDs are based on cities, only cities that have population of more than 151,000 could have district of more than one MP.
Two seats is the minimum for a multi-member district and thus for any form of fair voting (including STV).
23 Canadian cities are large enough to have more than one MP if the ratio of population per member is 100,000. These cities are just the central cities, not the metropolitan areas (except GTA is metro size). If we calculate that each city should have one member per 100,000 residents (about the same ratio as we use today), we have about 23 cities that would get multiple MPs and thus be large enough for one or more MMDs. Population MPs Toronto ON 5.928M 59 Montreal QU 1.763M 18 Calgary AB 1.3M 13 Edmonton AB 1.2M 12 Ottawa ON 1.1M 11 Winnipeg MB 759,000 8 Quebec City QU 773,000 7 Hamilton ON 730,000 7 Vancouver BC 675,000 7 Kitchener ON 523,000 5 total 147 MPs London ON 423,000 4 Victoria BC 363,000 4 Halifax NS 349,000 3 Oshawa ON 336,000 3 Windsor ON 307,000 3 Gatineau QU 285,000 3 Saskatoon SK 265,000 3 St. Catherines ON 242,000 2 Regina SK 225,000 2 St. Johns NL 186,000 2 total 29 MPs Kelowna BC 181,000 2 Barrie ON 155,000 2 Sherbrooke QU 151,000 2 total 6 MPs TOTAL 18.2M 182 MPs (Total Canada pop. 38.25M 338 MPs) Under such a system, a majority of MPs elected in Canada would be elected through district-level PR (STV). This would go a long ways towards making our elections truly reflect votes cast. About half the country's people would be represented by MPs elected in MMDs just in the cities. Many rural districts would be easily grouped - they would have to be redrawn anyway if cities are slipped out of them - and even if grouped into just 2-seat districts would still be smaller than 57,000 sq. kms. in size. The cities electing MPs in MMDs would be in each province (except PEI which actually might be a province-wide MMD) so fair balanced representation would be produced, in part at least, of every province (except PEI) even if MMDs are only brought in just in cities. Note that in each city, only Montreal and Toronto must use more than one MMD. the other cities are all small enough to be well within the District Magnitude easily handled by STV. (but Edmonton, Calgary and Ottawa might be each divided into two districts, each of 5 to 7 members.) Would such an at-large contest produce local representation? the city's sports team or newspaper is considered local. can a group of elected members be expected to represent such a large unit effectively? currently in every case, the mayor of the city does. I doubt if anyone says the mayor is not either local or has too much of a job for one person to handle. and if one person can represent the city, then surely 2 to 13 can represent a city or an MMD covering just a part of it. Number of district members as mentioned, if a single member is thought to be necessary - to have both smallest possible district and to have a system where representation falls on one person and one person only - then single-member districts, dividing a city into miniscule sub-localities, is the way to go.
I don't see it that way. Here's two defences of single-member districs and my rebuttal.
"A local MP who will champion their area." Any person elected by a grouping of votes will represent those voters (or enough to be elected) or will not be re-elected. Multiple members can do it just as well or better than a single person. Is 1/13th of Edmonton worthy of dedicated representation, of a MP? City councillors do not represent so small an area. Meanwhile MLAs represent 1/26th of Edmonton, and the mayor represents the whole city. which of these four differently-sized districts are local? same likewise for each major city. "An MP whose views best reflect their values, someone they helped elect in their local riding or local region." A single rep. cannot represent the range of sentiment in a district. at best he or she represents a majority of say 51 to 65 percent of votes cast, seldom more than that. at worst just a plurality of perhaps 34 percent. As little as 18 percent support for the single member was measured in a couple cases. In many cases a majority of votes cast are not for the MLA or MP who "represents" the district. just a polite fiction. That's probably enough for now. for more info on potential 3-seat MMDs in Canada see https://montopedia.wixsite.com/montopedia/post/three-member-districts-big-improvement-on-present-fptp
======================================
Size of MMDs in MMP (10 percent top-up)
if ratio of population per member is 128,000 and MMDs are based on cities
Above I looked at existing size of House of Commons and divided seats evenly (as possible) over the population, putting large-size MMDs in each province, and then in various-size districts (MMDs) in each large city.
But say you wanted to have top-up under a MMP system at the same proportion as Denmark uses (40 top-up seats in 175-seat legislature)
In Canada that proportion (23 percent top-up) would mean about 72 top-up seats in 338-seat legislature)
We would be using MMDs (same as Denmark does) and fair voting in each MMD (either STV or list PR). Denmark uses list PR in district contests.
If the House of Commons remains the same size, then you need to make the districts larger, to free up seats for top-up.
Likely 21 percent (72 top-up seats in a 338-seat legislature) would be more than sufficient to polish up the fair results of district-level PR contests.
266 members spread over 34M people is about 128,000 per member.
say a city MP would represent more people than the average. say about 133,000 per member, then you could have a three-seat city district with 400,000 population.
any city with more than 400,000 would have at least a 3-seat city-wide district. Larger cities can be divided into more than one MMD and/or the MMDs in the city would have more than 3 members.
Range in practice would be something like 112,000 to 137,000 per member. (but provincial variation (even if we leave PEI out of the equation) could make the number vary wider than that, even. but that is just the way it is, even under FPTP.)
If ratio of population per member is 133,000 and MMDs are based on cities, all cities that have population of more than 200,000 could have district of more than one MP.
But let's just look at using three-seat districts. Cities larger than 400,000 pop are large enough to have a three-seat district at least; some will have a MMD with more than three seats; some will have two or more MMDs.
largest Canadian cities Population MPs Toronto ON 5.928M 45 Montreal QU 1.763M 13 Calgary AB 1.3M 10 Edmonton AB 1.2M 9 Ottawa ON 1.1M 9 Winnipeg MB 759,000 6 Quebec City QU 773,000 6 Hamilton ON 730,000 5 Vancouver BC 675,000 5 Kitchener ON 523,000 4 London ON 423,000 3 total 115 MPs If these cities had MMDs and fair voting, some seats in the five largest provinces would have district-level PR. and in those seats mixed, balanced rep. would be produced.
There would be no way for a one-party sweep to be produced -- in those provinces anyway. (It has happened that a three-seat district has produced a one-party sweep but no province in the above list has only three-seat district(s).
Add in PEI (as an island-wide four-seat district), and you have all five regions of Canada covered, one-party-sweep-wise anyway.
Some more cities can be listed as recipients of MMDs if we use lower ratio of pop. per member - say any city with more than 3 times 112,000.
or if we use the rounding up, where any city due just more than 2.5 members gets 3 members, then you have lower pop. figure of 280,001.
There are several cites with population between 400,000 and 336,000
and more between 336,000 and 281,000.
And if we look at creating a two-seat district in any city with more than 267,000 (2 X 133,000) or 200,000 (just more than 1.5 X 133,000), then that includes even more cities on to the list of cities eligible for MMD(s).
So a great many of our MPs could be elected in city-based MMDs, if we chose to go that route.
the city seats could be allocated according to this formula
200,000 or less one seat
200,000 - 340,000 2 seats (smallest MMD)
340,000 - 480,000 3 seats (three-seat MMD)
480,000- 620,000 4
620,000- 760,000 5
760,000-900,000 6
900,000-1,040,000 7
each additional million pop. = 7 members
seat allocated to largest Canadian cities using this formula Population MPs Toronto ON 5.928M 41 Montreal QU 1.763M 12 Calgary AB 1.3M 9 Edmonton AB 1.2M 8 Ottawa ON 1.1M 8
Quebec City QU 773,000 6 Winnipeg MB 759,000 5 Hamilton ON 730,000 5 Vancouver BC 675,000 5 Kitchener ON 523,000 4 London ON 423,000 3
London ON 423,000 3
Victoria BC 363,000 3
Halifax NS 349,000 3 total 115 MPs in cities having districts of at least three MPs
Oshawa ON 336,000 2
Windsor ON 307,000 2
Gatineau QU 285,000 2
Saskatoon SK 265,000 2
St. Catherines ON 242,000 2
Regina SK 225,000 2
overall total of 127 MPs elected in cities having MMDs
136 MPs elected in single-member districts in the provinces
3 elected in single-member districts in the Territories
266 total district seats
(some unfairness might be seen in the number of seats allocated to specific cities, but with the effective votes being upwards of 80 or 90 percent compared to just about half overall in FPTP elections, satisfaction of voters would be on a whole other scale compared to the present elections, and thus any small variation in ratio of population to members will be likely accepted due to overall satisfaction. As well in most provinces, any imbalance caused by variance in the pop.-to-member ratio would be addressed by top-up if it produced party dis-proportionality.)
Top-up (72 in total) would be something like:
whole numbers
Ontario 27.36 27
Quebec 16.55 17
BC 9.73 10
Alberta 8.29 8
Manitoba 2.61 3
Saskatchewan 2.16 2
NS 1.89 2
NB 1.50 2
NL 1 1
PEI zero top-up (already over-represented by its four district MPs)
Top-up would be awarded to parties in each province that were the most under -represented in the district seats based on party share of the province-wide vote.
===========================================
Kommentare