tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-988599552908585128.post5455753842660271482..comments2023-10-16T01:09:58.286-07:00Comments on BC Iconoclast: Newfoundland and Labrador RedistributionBernardhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15951619465188564252noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-988599552908585128.post-61698489873328769052012-05-28T19:48:29.776-07:002012-05-28T19:48:29.776-07:00Why change it? Because it violates the the concep...Why change it? Because it violates the the concept of all votes being equal. There are many people that run in federal elections can come third and fourth that have more support than the MP elected from Labrador.<br /><br />Labrador is not a province or territory, it is a region within a province. Provincially Labrador has 8.3% of the representation in the province, but federally it gets 14.3% of the federal representation for the province.<br /><br />Also, in 2002 Labrador did not have the lowest population in Canada of any riding. I think a good rule nationally should be no riding in a province can have fewer people that the smallest territorial populationBernardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15951619465188564252noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-988599552908585128.post-27214176992166615322012-05-28T19:27:00.583-07:002012-05-28T19:27:00.583-07:00Your comments on Labrador make sense, except for o...Your comments on Labrador make sense, except for one point. In 2002 that Commission's Report states "It is of interest, however, that of the submissions received from other electoral districts, none objected to Labrador continuing as a single electoral district. In fact, many expressed support for this position. That being so, the Commission is satisfied that no change be made to the electoral district of Labrador." With such a consensus on the exceptional status of Labrador, why change it?Wilf Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05546880754492040363noreply@blogger.com