[redforever]

Further to other formulae used to determine the number of constituencies in Canada is the:

Constitution Act, 2007 (Democratic representation) (clause 1).
Clause 2 replaces section 51(1) of the Constitution Act, 1867. Included are four rules that outline the calculation for readjusting seat assignments to the provinces in the House of Commons. These are as follows:

1 - The total population of the provinces shall be divided by the “electoral divisor” (see below). The quotient obtained shall then be used to divide the population of each province, which in turn produces a quotient equal to the number of seats assigned to a given province (counting numerical remainders in excess of 0.50 as one after the latter division).

2 - Should the assigned number of seats for a given province derived either through rule 1 or by the application of section 51(A) of the Constitution Act, 1867, also known as the “senatorial clause,” be lower than the number of seats assigned to that province on the date of the coming into force of the Constitution Act, 1985 (Representation), a corresponding number of members will be added to bridge the difference produced by a readjustment.

3 -Additional seats will be assigned to any province that has not experienced an increase as a result of the application of both rules 1 and 2, so that its number achieves an electoral quotient as close as possible to that of the most populous province to receive additional seats, provided that the province in question has a lower population than the most populous province to receive additional seats.

4 a) The “electoral divisor” for the first readjustment to the number of seats in the House after the coming into force of the bill is calculated by dividing the total population of the provinces, using the most recent decennial census, by the number of members in the House of Commons assigned to all provinces in the first readjustment that followed the coming into force of the Constitution Act, 1985 (Representation).

4 b) The “electoral divisor” for subsequent seat readjustments will be derived by dividing the total population of the provinces, using the most recent decennial census, by the number of members of the House of Commons thirty years prior to this most recent decennial census.



Clause 3 of the bill prescribes that, for the purposes of interpretation, a reference to the Constitution Acts, 1867 and 1982 is deemed to include a reference to this Act.
Commentary

Issues and Concerns

Bill C-56 is part of a broader package of democratic reforms introduced by the government. The purpose of the bill is to bring the Canadian electoral system closer to its original principle of representation by population. Compared with the formula currently employed for readjusting the number of seated members in the House of Commons, a readjustment using the formula prescribed by Bill C-56 arguably draws nearer to the principle of representation by population. According to the latter formula, the fastest growing provinces of Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario would be scheduled to receive a share of seats in the House of Commons after the 2011 readjustment closer to, and in some cases, virtually identical to their share of the total population of the provinces.

However, it has been pointed out by the Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, among others, that even under the new readjustment regime provided by Bill C-56, Ontario will remain under-represented in the House.

Further concerns have been raised in the Quebec National Assembly. Although the province will retain its 75 seats, Quebec’s seat percentage in the House will decline under the new readjustment regime. On 16 May 2007, the National Assembly unanimously adopted a motion calling on the government to withdraw its democratic reform package.

It may also be worth noting that Bill C-56 employs an upward moving divisor to calculate seat readjustments in the House of Commons. As such, the increases in the number of members sitting in the House will be larger than those achieved through a formula based on a fixed electoral divisor.

Further, 30 years after the coming into force of the bill, the effect of these additional seat increases will compound itself by employing a seat total as readjusted by an upward moving electoral divisor, as opposed to a seat total readjusted with a fixed electoral divisor. This may potentially lead to a situation similar to the unacceptably large seat readjustments produced by the “amalgam” formula.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/Bills_ls.asp?ls=c56&Parl=39&Ses=1