Justin Trudeau’s government will protect Quebec’s current number of seats in the Commons and therefore partially rejects Elections Canada’s proposal that would have removed a federal riding from the province. The bill to this effect tabled Thursday does not, however, prevent the addition of ridings elsewhere in Canada, to adjust to demographic changes. Quebec’s political weight therefore risks continuing to be diluted, deplore the federal opposition and Quebec.
After each census, Elections Canada must by law propose a redrawing of the electoral map to take into account, if necessary, the evolution of the population across the country. The agency therefore recommended last fall to increase the number of federal ridings from 338 to 342 by October 2023. Ontario and British Columbia should gain one each and Alberta three, according to this proposal. , which would have withdrawn a seat in Quebec.
The government of François Legault immediately opposed it, arguing that the weight of the Quebec nation in the Commons should be protected. The federal opposition parties had made the same speech in Ottawa.
The Trudeau government had agreed. His Bill C-14 would ensure that “a province’s number of MLAs remains unchanged” from its representation in the previous Parliament.
Quebec would thus keep its 78 seats, whose total in the Commons would increase to 343 with the addition of seats planned for Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. Quebec would then hold 22.7% of the seats, compared to 23% currently. Its population reached 8.5 million people in 2021, according to the last census, out of 36.7 million Canadians (22.9%, which would theoretically represent 78.5 seats).
An “unrealistic” wish
However, the Bloc Québécois demanded, through its own private member’s bill, that Quebec be guaranteed 25% of the seats in the Commons in the future — taking inspiration from the Charlottetown Accord, which had failed to be adopted. “If we have the same number of deputies with the total number increasing, the relative weight decreases,” lamented Bloc member Alain Therrien. “That means that every ten years, we will see a decrease in our relative weight. That does not make any sense. »
The Trudeau government’s lieutenant for Quebec, Pablo Rodriguez, retorts that the Bloc’s will would have required constitutional negotiations and the agreement of seven of the provinces representing 50% of the Canadian population. C-14 carries a “concrete gesture to protect the seat that Quebec was going to lose”, he argued, and this by the next election.
University of Ottawa constitutional expert Benoît Pelletier confirms the federal government’s analysis. “The article of the Constitution which contains the statements in relation to the number of seats for each province is unilaterally modifiable, except for the principle of proportional representation, which is enshrined in the Constitution and subject to the 7/50 procedure”, says -he.
Adoption as is uncertain
The office of the Quebec Minister responsible for Canadian Relations, Sonia LeBel, was not entirely satisfied, however. “This is a very good first step,” we said by email. “However, it remains necessary for us that the relative weight of Quebec remains. We will continue to make representations in this regard. »
Moreover, the passage of Bill C-14 is not guaranteed without amendment.
The New Democratic Party, which had agreed in its support agreement with the Liberal government to ensure that Quebec’s seat count “remains constant”, argued that the bill did “not go far enough and should protect the weight of the Quebec nation”.
A minority, the Liberals need the support of at least one of the opposition parties to pass their legislation.
The Conservatives, for their part, wanted to take the time to discuss the one-clause bill in caucus before making a decision. The party believes that no province should lose a seat. More than half of the caucus had opposed in early March a Bloc motion, adopted with the support of all the other elected officials, to protect the ridings of Quebec.
Elections Canada and the commissioners responsible for redistricting declined to comment.