Electoral Boundaries Commission Report In

Thursday, February 14, 2008 02:12 PM

Map of the proposed electoral boundaries for Prince George and north, see below for Quesnel area

The Electoral Boundaries Commission has filed it’s report, and maintains there should only be 7 MLAs in the North as was recommended in the preliminary report . It also recommends a change in the division lines.

Here are the highlights of the report:

the number of electoral districts in the region we have defined as the North remain at seven;( that’s a loss of one for the North, as there are currently 8 northern ridings.)
the number of electoral districts in the region we have defined as the Columbia-Kootenay be increased to four
the number of electoral districts in the region we have defined as the Cariboo-Thompson remain at four;
the number of electoral districts in the Okanagan, Fraser Valley, Surrey, Burnaby/Tri-Cities, and Vancouver regions remain as proposed in the Preliminary Report; and
the number of electoral districts in the Vancouver Island and South Coast region be increased to 15.

This will result in a net increase of four electoral districts, for a total of 83 single member plurality electoral districts.

The number of proposed BC-STV electoral districts remains at 20.

In Prince George, the City will be divided by Highway 97. East of 97 will be Prince George- Valemount, west of 97 is Prince George- Mackenzie

Earlier today, Deputy Premier Shirley Bond told reporters she would not be able to support any changes that result in the reduction of representation in the North or in the Kootenays which had been proposed in the preliminary report last year. (click here for the Commission's reasoning for the northern designations)

The Premier had also pressed the Commission against recommending any losses in the north, legislation to hold the number of electoral boundaries was introduced but it died on the table.

Prince George Mayor Colin Kinsley says he will talk with other northern Mayors and the MLA’s about the proposed loss of one riding. Currently Prince George has representation from three M.L.A’s Prince George North, Prince George- Mount Robson, and Prince George-Omineca. Prince George would lose the Prince George- Omineca which would become "Bulkley-Nechako"

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, February 14, 2008 02:12 PM in News by 250 News

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: BCRacer on February 14 2008 6:17 PM

In my opinion it ought to be interesting now watching the backstabbing that is bound to go on trying to convince Campbell that they are one of his better stooges. One of them are gonna get fired if this goes through!

Posted by: Andyfreeze on February 14 2008 6:27 PM

One or more of them SHOULD get fired!
I still think there is more to this than we are being told?
Who is the big push behind this and why?

Posted by: enviro on February 14 2008 6:41 PM

The government introduced legislation last fall to ensure that the boundaries commission keep the northern interior seats and gave them greater leverage with 87 seats to keep within population quotients.

So what happended? The NDP would not support the legislation. F@#% the NDP.

Posted by: darkken on February 14 2008 7:00 PM

Not surprising....none of the commission members lived outside the Lower Mainland, so they have really no idea what happens up here.So who will fall on the sword? Bond, Rustad or Bell?

So what did we want? This proposal with 5 exta seats(less the 1 PG seat) or the one that the NDP shot down that would have kept 8 reps in the North but added 8 seats in the Lower Mainland.

Whatever. We will never see the equality of a rural voice that some want anymore and we probably will never see another premier from outside the Lower Mainland-Southern Vancouver Island area.The Interior does not pack the political muscle to influence the province and all the media and political attention is focused on 2010.

Any ideas out there? Maybe I am too cynical about the political process

Posted by: EdH on February 14 2008 7:08 PM

BC needs a bicameral legislature so badly. An upper chamber whose seats are assigned by region (Prince George area gets one seat, Vancouver area gets one seat, etc) and then a lower chamber distributed by population, equivalent to the districting proposed above.

The lower chamber would be dominated by the population centers like the Lower Mainland, and the upper chamber would have one representative from each geographical region, roughly the same in area regardless of population.

New legislation would have to pass both houses to take effect.
This would require both chambers (effectively the lower mainland and the rest of the province) to continually accommodate the interests of the other. Otherwise, with only a single chambered population based representation like the province currently has, the population centers can bloc and there would be no built-in relief from their oppression of the sparsely populated areas of BC.

Posted by: enviro on February 14 2008 8:06 PM

Well, things may not be so bad afterall!

From the Vancouver Sun:

"In its olive-branch proposal, the commission suggests a scenario where the government accepts the 83 proposed ridings as set out in the report, but keeps the two controversial rural seats as well.

"We are not proposing these boundaries for these two regions," reads the report, adding it is only providing the 85-seat scenario to assist the legislature if that is the direction it chooses to take."

Posted by: astro on February 14 2008 8:32 PM

As David Schreck reported today at http://www.strategicthoughts.com/
"The Boundary Commission didn't quite refuse to bow to the bullying tactics of the Campbell government. Bill 37 which would have required the Commission to preserve unequal (by population) representation in select areas of the province was abandoned when opposed by the NDP, but the Campbell government announced that it would not implement recommendations of the Commission if it failed to accommodate the essence of the abandoned legislation. If the Campbell government carries through on that threat it could put the legitimacy of the May 12, 2009 election in question." Schreck also pointed out that there is a way out for the gov't if it so chooses. It would have been better if "enviro" determined that the NDP was more interested in representation by population rather than gerrymandering by Campbell and the BC Liberals.

Posted by: enviro on February 14 2008 8:55 PM

Astro: "It would have been better if "enviro" determined that the NDP was more interested in representation by population rather than gerrymandering by Campbell and the BC Liberals."

Well, Mr Justice Cohhen made this comment in his report:

"The commissioners couldn't do the same in the Cariboo and North regions because of the **key principle of representation by population.**"

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/15647832.html

So, in other words the NDP supports the removal of the 2 seats in the north and central interior as is proposed in the final report????

And again from the Vancouver Sun:

"NDP MLA Bruce Ralston..."To reject this report I think would be a very serious step...".

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=d7e07408-d22d-4598-bb56-f90b4ceafb78&k=4774

Again, are you suggesting that the NDP
is supporting the retention of the two interior seats???

As the above illustrates, I don't have much time for former NDP MLA David Schreck.

Posted by: Chester on February 14 2008 9:16 PM

What is the point of having the Electoral Boundaries Commission Draft a preliminary report and a final report with recommdations if the government has no plans or obligation to implement them? Kind of a waste of time and money, don't you think? It doesn't matter if I agree or disagree. Or anyone else for that matter. Chester

Posted by: Eagleone on February 14 2008 9:17 PM

EDH has it right in regards to the clear need for a bicameral legislature in BC, but that will never happen. The lower mainland has empire fever to control the rest of the province politically so the only option is to Free Northern BC as its own province....

Posted by: astro on February 14 2008 9:52 PM

Enviro says, "As the above illustrates, I don't have much time for former NDP MLA David Schreck." An d you don't have much time for representation by population as well. However the real problem is that we don't have representation at all. We have members who represent the party that they are a part of, they do not represent the population in their riding. When they disagree with their leader, they are removed from caucus. Remember what happened to Paul Nettleton, he was removed from the BC Liberals because he spoke out against the privatization of BC Hydro. Now we are seeing hydro development being done by firms outside BC Hydro and it's going to cost us billions of dollars. None of this was or will be debated in the legislature, it will be done behind closed doors by Order-in Counsel under Campbell's direction and orders.

Posted by: YamaDooPolCat on February 14 2008 11:09 PM

Remember Paul Nettleton, he was removed because he was plain silly (I'm trying to be nice). Paul was very mixed up and just wanted his gold plated parachute out. Clever way to get out, wasn't he a lawyer?

Posted by: Andyfreeze on February 15 2008 7:27 AM

"We have members who represent the party"...
That line says it all in a nut shell, and that is also exactly what is wrong with the political system in B.C.
They represent the "party"...but they DO NOT represent the people!
The party and the leader are god,even if that same leader is nothing more than a powerbroking opportunist.
It is also that same "party" mentality that keeps the power on the lower maniland, and to hell with rest of us.
And don't think for one second that is is not supposed to be that way!

Posted by: EdH on February 15 2008 8:12 AM

Bang on, Andyfreeze.

The politicians in BC think themselves TRUSTEES to the people's interests, when instead they should be DELEGATES. It's a simple matter of mindset but it is dangerously usurping authority from British Columbians.

Posted by: Andyfreeze on February 15 2008 8:53 AM

Exactly EdH.
One of the things that get's forgotten about politicians,is that like, mechanics or let's say,plumbers etc.,they are not all good at what they do.
(no disrespect to mechanics or plumbers intended or implied,example only)!
Some who we elect have a talent for politics and some don't!
Unfortunately for the people of B.C. under our present polticial system,all that is required to succeed is a lack of (and I'm trying to be polite here) backbone and blind loyalty.
And oh ya...check your brain at the door.
You are not there to do what the PEOPLE who elected you want you to do,you are there to do what your LEADER and the PARTY tells you to do!
And ain't that a party?
Sit back,shutup,do as your told when you are told,and you will get your paycheck and your pension!
Otherwise...we eat you.

Posted by: Eagleone on February 16 2008 12:26 AM

IMO we should make Yukon a province, but expand it to include Northern BC north of Valemount, 100 Mile House, and Bella Coola.

PG would have about 1/4 the population, Cariboo around 1/4, Skeena Bulkly Valley about 1/5, and Yukon Peace River the rest.

With about a half million people in total and an economy that boasts an international container and bulk goods port; huge hydro capacity; huge forestry and mining base; vast farm lands; large energy development in oil, gas, and coal; an Artic ocean port as well as a Pacific port, and eco-tourism potential unmatched anywhere in the world. There is no reason why together that could not form the basis of a diversified enough of an economy to run a provincial government of its own that directs tax dollars to infrastrcuture needs closer to home as well as the benefits of an economy that can engage in its own strategies to compete with our southern competitors without the need to get their approval for our audacious attempts to rival them in economic potential. Just a thought... we could also make Mackenzie the capital or maybe have a contest between competing cities through a voting process.

IMO it would be better then working as the donnars to the Vancouver majority economic empire of public expendature. Less votes in a 'majority-takes-all' legislature means just that....

Posted by: votemike on February 16 2008 3:48 PM

Arrrgh!! There is a solution and I can't talk about it here...