Northern Ontario’s superballots

Unsatisfied with your democratic franchise? Want to really make a difference? Head north, young Ontarian. The massive provincial ridings of Kenora-Rainy River and Timmins-James Bay, in the province’s far north, have populations of 73,000 and 76,000, respectively. That’s just two-thirds of the provincial average of 110,000 — a significant if not unique … improvement, shall we say, on the bedrock principle of one-vote-per-citizen. And this week, as part of ongoing efforts to spiff up Ontario’s democracy, Attorney General Yasir Naqvi announced further “improvements” in the far north. If the legislature approves, as of the 2018 election it will have two more ridings.

Naqvi acted on advice from the Far North Electoral Boundaries Commission (which was mandated to add at least one riding). Its proposed realignment would see Kenora-Rainy River lose 20,000 people, leaving its voters with a 52-per-cent democracy bonus. Timmins would lose 25,000, for a 62-per-cent bonus. The new riding of Kiiwetinoong, with a population of just 33,000, would enjoy a 70-per-cent advantage. And Ontario’s new champion supervoters would be in Mushkegowuk, where one ballot would be worth 1.73.

Representation by population isn’t set in stone. We fiddle with it all the time, for all kinds of reasons — geographic, linguistic, socioeconomic, historic. That’s the case here: the commission considered the vast territory involved, with its communication and transportation challenges, and the needs of francophone communities and First Nations, including their languages and dialects. But the generally accepted variance limit when taking such things into account is 25 per cent — and that was established pre-internet, when communication was in many cases a much bigger hurdle. The commission proposes to nearly triple that, and the case it makes for doing so is muddled at best.

“In our view, enhanced political representation for Indigenous peoples in Ontario’s political system is a necessary component of the broader movement toward reconciliation,” writes commission chair Joyce Pelletier, a Thunder Bay judge. She does not quite explain why the commissioners think that. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission made 94 recommendations. Giving Indigenous Canadians superballots in provincial elections wasn’t one of them.

Pelletier notes that “the history of Indigenous suffrage is … part of a broader discussion of issues relation to exclusion, inclusion, … self-determination and sovereignty, and the concept of citizenship” — which is true, of course.

There’s precedent in New Zealand for giving Indigenous citizens their own seats in parliament, and the commission urges the province to examine such an arrangement (while acknowledging not all Indigenous Ontarians would necessarily want it, their primary-to-sole focus being in Ottawa).

But the precedent for enfranchising previously disenfranchised people — women, notably — is generally to give them the vote, not 1.25 or 1.5 or 1.75 votes. And what the commission proposes isn’t a half-measure on the way to specific Indigenous seats, but simply a tangent. It does nothing for any Indigenous Ontarian not living in the far north. Franco-Ontarians were never disenfranchised, yet the report folds their concerns into the Indigenous ones: it observes that one riding would be 87-per-cent Indigenous or francophone, as if this were some kind of democratic milestone. And while Kiiwetinoong would be 68-per-cent Indigenous, and Mushkegowuk 60-per-cent francophone, this proposal gives the non-Indigenous and non-francophone majorities in the other ridings the same superballot. Why?

In theory, it could be justified on geographic grounds. Sarah Campbell, the MPP for Kenora-Rainy River, told the commission she only has the budget to tour the far north twice a year. Gilles Bisson, the MPP for Timmins-James Bay, famously flies his own plane around to visit his constituents — a time-consuming and costly undertaking.

But the new Mushkegowuk and Kiiwetinoong ridings would still be gargantuan, stretching from Hudson Bay to Timmins and Kenora, respectively. To function properly, those ridings would require vastly greater constituency resources than their southern and urban counterparts, just as they do now. So give them the resources and be done with it. Effective representation does not hinge on the number of times one’s MPP touches down in one’s little village, and surely two more MPPs will be of little use solving the area’s “significant challenges for transportation, communication and election administration.”

(The report helpfully provides proof of concept: “All 11 northern MPPs were invited to a meeting held on May 29, 2017. (Bisson) was the only MPP to attend, though others sent staff members.” Eureka!)

To be fair, it wasn’t the commission’s idea to further enhance representation for Indigenous Ontarians who live in the north, thereby weakening everyone else’s. That was its mandate from the government. I would have a tough time justifying it too, and so might the government if it ends up defending the move in court. It’s especially ironic to see NDP MPPs like Bisson and Campbell supporting this, considering the party’s fervent support for proportional representation. Any superballot is a move in the opposite direction. Superballots rewarded as apologies for past mistreatment are an invitation to democratic incoherence.