Alberta Increasing Provincial Seats to 91 (with Addendum)

A quick post today: the Alberta Legislature Order Papers for April 16th notes that the Government is introducing a new motion (#37, page 13) to strike a new electoral boundaries commission with a reduced public consultation mandate to redraw the boundaries to include 91 seats, up two from the prior cap.

This was a recommendation from the Boundary Commission’s majority non-partisan Final Report, who made a stink about being capped at 89 seats primarily because it forced them to draw out some rural districts. It seems the UCP government is concurring and will allow for another commission to be struck and take a look at the maps.

Putting aside my distaste for rural over-representation in Canadian legislatures, this is fairly common practice and wouldn’t quality as a red flag for potential meddling, and aside from a brief mention of its existence in the motion, the prior Commission’s minority report doesn’t seem to have had an impact. The new Commission’s structure will be the same as prior (one non-partisan chair, two partisan nominations each from the Government and the Official Opposition) and its mandate looks to be narrowed to protecting the two slashed rural seats (Lac Ste. Anne—Parkland and Rimbey—Rocky Mountain House—Sundre) within the new 91-seat cap. The lack of public consultation is a concern, but it may actually point to less modification of the maps than we think.

If all goes well, we may see a map similar to the Final Report with the rurals and some edge rurban seats modified. For now, lets hope any thought of actual gerrymandering is beyond the UCP and they stick to the non-partisan script.

I was reached out to by a representative of the Alberta NDP who shared with me their view of the motion today.

In essence, the AB NDP are concerned about the decision to throw out entirely the Final Report based on what they described as an ‘out’ given to the Government by the prior Commission’s chair to avoid using the very blatantly gerrymandered minority maps.

They’re opposed in general to creating extra seats in depopulating areas, but primarily view this as an attempt by UCP to give themselves a way to create a map of hybrid urban-rural ridings which will benefit them in future elections, bypassing public consultation and using the Legislature’s committees process and the 91-seat recommendation to give it a veneer of legitimacy. They’re also concerned about the potential for the government via the committee to select a more pliable chair that will accept unfair maps.

Personally, I find these all to be reasonable concerns, though there’s much we don’t know right now either about how the process moves forward. It would be best if the Final Report was implemented as recommended in my view.