After each decennial census – the federally run count of Canada’s total population that occurs every 10 years – the number of members of the House of Commons and the representation of each province are adjusted according to the rules found in section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
The chief electoral officer (CEO) makes a calculation to determine the number of members of the House allotted to each of Canada’s 10 provinces; this calculation is mathematical, and therefore the CEO cannot exercise any discretion in the matter.
Further, Canada’s three territories are assigned one seat each under section 51(2) of the Act and are thereby excluded from the readjustment process.
Under the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, an independent, three member electoral boundaries commission must be established for each province. The mandate of these commissions is to consider and report on the division of their province into electoral districts, the description of the boundaries and the name of each electoral district.
The Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act also sets out the rules that govern the division of a province into electoral districts. The population of each electoral district in a province must correspond as closely as possible to the electoral quota for that province, which is the figure obtained by dividing the population of the province by the number of members of the House of Commons to be allocated to it under section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
In setting the boundaries of an electoral district, each commission is legally obliged to take into account communities of interest, communities of identity and the historical pattern of an electoral district. In addition, electoral districts must have a manageable geographic size, especially sparsely populated, rural or northern regions.
A commission may depart from the provincial electoral quota by plus or minus 25% in order to respect a community of interest, a community of identity or the historical pattern of an electoral district, or to maintain the manageable geographic size of sparsely populated districts. In circumstances that a commission views as extraordinary, the variance from the electoral quota may exceed 25%.
In conducting its work, a commission is required to hold at least one public meeting to hear representations by interested persons. Once the public hearings conclude, each commission prepares a report on the boundaries and names of the electoral districts of the province. These reports are tabled in the House of Commons and referred to its Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs (PROC). Members of the House have 30 calendar days after tabling to file objections to the proposals contained in any of these reports.
PROC then has the next 30 sitting days to consider the objections, unless an extension is granted by the House. Reports on members’ objections prepared by PROC are referred back to the relevant commissions, after which each commission must, within the next 30 calendar days, consider the merits of any objection and prepare its final report.
Once all the commission reports have been finalized, the CEO prepares a draft representation order setting out the boundaries and names of the new electoral districts. This is sent to the Governor in Council who, within five days, must proclaim the new representation order to be in force for any general election that is called seven months after the proclamation is issued.
After each decennial census, Canada’s House of Commons readjusts both the number of members who represent each province and the boundaries of every provincial electoral district.
For their part, Canada’s three territories are assigned one seat each in the House under the Constitution Act, 18671 and are consequently excluded from the readjustment process.
The chief electoral officer (CEO) is responsible for calculating the number of members of the House allotted to each province; given that this calculation is mathematical, the CEO cannot exercise any discretion in the matter.
The work of readjusting electoral boundaries is carried out in each province by an independent and neutral three-member electoral boundaries commission.
This paper describes the formula used for determining how seats are allotted to each province and the work conducted by the commissions to readjust and name each provincial electoral district.
The legal basis for redistributing seats in the House of Commons is found in section 51 of the Constitution Act, 18672 which vests the authority, manner and time frame for seat readjustments in the Parliament of Canada.
This redistribution process takes place after each decennial census and involves only the 10 provinces; as mentioned, Canada’s three territories are assigned one seat each in the House under section 51(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867.3
Further, the federal Parliament possesses the power to amend the constitutional formula for assigning the number of members seated in the House of Commons. Section 44 of the Constitution Act, 19824 grants Parliament the power to act alone (i.e., without provincial consent) to make laws that amend the Constitution of Canada concerning the executive government of Canada or the Senate and House of Commons. However, this power does not apply to the constitutional matters delineated in sections 41 and 42 of the Constitution Act, 19825 which are subject to separate amending formulas.
Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1867 adds that Parliament may act alone to increase the number of seats in the House of Commons provided that the principle of proportionate representation of the provinces in the House is not disturbed.6
The formula for assigning seats in the House of Commons to Canada’s 10 provinces is set out in sections 51(1), 51(1.1) and 51A of the Constitution Act, 1867. Section 51(1) contains the six rules put in place through the Fair Representation Act,7 which became law in December 2011. Bill C-14, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (electoral representation) amended rule 2 in June 2022.
Currently, a province can be allocated its share of seats in the House according to four mechanisms that stem from the six rules mentioned above.8 The mechanism or combination of mechanisms that grants the province its highest number of seats is the one that applies to that province. These mechanisms are:
The application of the rules found in sections 51(1), 51(1.1) and 51A of the Constitution Act, 1867 determines the number of members in the House of Commons and the representation for each province. Table 1 shows the results of the 2021 seat readjustment.
| Province/Territory | Provincial Population 2011 | House of Commons Seats 2011 | Provincial Population 2021 | House of Commons Seats 2021 | Reasons for Seat Allotment 2021 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newfoundland and Labrador | 510,578 | 7 | 520,553 | 7 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Senatorial clause Amended grandfather clause |
| Prince Edward Island | 145,855 | 4 | 164,318 | 4 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Senatorial clause |
| Nova Scotia | 945,437 | 11 | 992,055 | 11 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Senatorial clause Amended grandfather clause |
| New Brunswick | 755,455 | 10 | 789,225 | 10 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Senatorial clause |
| Quebec | 7,979,663 | 78 | 8,604,495 | 78 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Amended grandfather clause |
| Ontario | 13,372,996 | 121 | 14,826,276 | 122 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient |
| Manitoba | 1,250,574 | 14 | 1,383,765 | 14 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Amended grandfather clause |
| Saskatchewan | 1,057,884 | 14 | 1,179,844 | 14 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient Amended grandfather clause |
| Alberta | 3,779,353 | 34 | 4,442,879 | 37 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient |
| British Columbia | 4,573,321 | 42 | 5,214,805 | 43 | Provincial population ÷ electoral quotient |
| Nunavut | 34,666 | 1 | 39,403 | 1 | Section 51(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867 |
| Northwest Territories | 43,675 | 1 | 45,504 | 1 | Section 51(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867 |
| Yukon | 34,666 | 1 | 42,986 | 1 | Section 51(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867 |
| Total | 34,482,779 | 338 | 38,246,108 | 343 | Not applicable |
Source: Table prepared by the Library of Parliament using data obtained from Elections Canada, House of Commons seat allocation by province 2022–2032. See Appendix B for the mathematical calculations used to create this table.
The Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act9 (EBRA) governs the process that occurs at each decennial census for readjusting federal electoral districts (also called a constituency or riding) within a province. As part of this process, each provincial electoral district is assigned a name.
The electoral boundaries for each province are set by an independent, neutral three member commission, comprising:
The EBRA specifies that no sitting federal parliamentarian or current member of a legislative assembly or legislative council of a province is eligible to be a member of a commission.11
Decisions about a province’s electoral boundaries and electoral district names are the prerogative of each commission. It is worth noting that Elections Canada has no involvement in making decisions about a province’s electoral boundaries. Rather, Elections Canada plays an important role in the readjustment process by supporting the work of the commissions through a variety of professional, financial, technical and administrative services.
In setting the boundaries of an electoral district, each commission is legally obliged to take into account communities of interest, communities of identity and the historical pattern of an electoral district in the province. Further, electoral districts ought to have a manageable geographic size, especially sparsely populated, rural or northern regions.
In its instructions to each commission, the EBRA stipulates that the population of each electoral district in the province must be as close as possible to the electoral quota for that province. This is the quotient obtained by dividing the population of the province by the number of members of the House of Commons to be allocated to it under section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
However, the commission may depart from the provincial electoral quota by plus or minus 25% in order to respect a community of interest, community of identity or historical pattern of an electoral district, or to maintain the manageable geographic size of sparsely populated districts. In circumstances that are viewed as extraordinary by a commission, the variance from the electoral quota may be greater than 25%.
The process for determining electoral boundaries requires each commission to make an initial proposal to divide its province into named electoral districts and to give the reasons for its decisions.
Following this step, a commission may receive comments from the public and it must hold at least one public hearing. After receiving feedback, the commission must prepare a report setting out the proposed electoral districts and their names for tabling in the House of Commons. Members of the House may then file objections to any proposed riding or riding name.12 Any such objections are studied by the Standing House Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and reported back to the commission for consideration.
Each commission then prepares a final report which, compiled, form the basis for the representation order that establishes the new electoral districts and their names.
The commissions establish the names of the federal electoral districts in their respective provinces as part of the electoral boundaries readjustment process. To arrive at a given name for a riding, commissioners receive representations about their proposed riding names from the public and from members of the House of Commons. In addition, since 1998, commissions consult with the Geographical Names Board of Canada (GNBC) for naming advice.13 To this end, the GNBC secretariat has prepared a set of guidelines to assist provincial commissions in their reviews of federal riding names for suitability.14
These guidelines include characteristics that federal riding names ought to have and those it ought to avoid. In naming a federal riding, a commission should bear in mind the following:
Characteristics to avoid in naming federal ridings include:
Lastly, it is worth noting that after the five previous boundary readjustment processes were completed, Parliament acted outside the process foreseen by the EBRA and passed legislation that changes the names of a large number of federal ridings. For example, the Riding Name Change Act, 201415 changed the names of 30 electoral districts and was passed after the redistribution and readjustment process was completed.
This practice was criticized in 2000 by the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs (LCJC) in its seventh and eighth reports. LCJC noted that the practice of immediately renaming ridings that had recently been named by the commissions “must be discouraged.”16 LCJC explained that the practice is confusing, has cost implications and does not follow the procedures that have been clearly established under the EBRA.
Figure 1 below gives an overview of the federal electoral boundaries adjustment process.
Figure 1 – Federal Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Process
Sources: Figure prepared by the Library of Parliament using data obtained from Constitution Act, 1867, 30 & 31 Victoria, c. 3 (U.K.); and Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. E‑3.
This section provides a step-by-step overview of the 2021 redistribution and readjustment process; the date or estimated date of each event is indicated where available.17
In this 1991 case,19 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on a challenge brought forward by a group of Regina and Saskatoon voters concerning the constitutional validity of the electoral boundaries the province of Saskatchewan adopted after its The Representation Act, 1989 became law.
Saskatchewan’s The Representation Act, 1989 established a division between the province’s southern ridings and its northern ridings. The population size of southern ridings was allowed to vary by plus or minus 25% from the province’s electoral quotient, up from a variation of 15% set out in the previous version of the law. In northern ridings, a variation of plus or minus 50% from the electoral quotient was permitted. Further, Saskatchewan’s The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act imposed a quota on urban and rural ridings, and required that urban ridings coincide with existing municipal boundaries.
The court considered whether the variance in the population size among the province’s ridings infringed on rights guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter). It also considered whether establishing a division between urban, rural and northern areas infringed on Charter rights.
The court held that, in defining equitable electoral district boundaries, strict population count should not be deemed the only consideration. Instead, the court ruled, the purpose of the right to vote as protected by section 3 of the Charter is the right to effective representation, not necessarily equality of voting power.
Relative parity of voting can be achieved by taking into account factors such as geography, community history, community interest and minority representation. The court considered these factors important for ensuring that legislative assemblies effectively represent the diversity of the country’s social mosaic. Therefore, the right to vote comprises many factors, of which equity is but one.
It may also be worth noting that the province of Saskatchewan itself proposed a variation of plus or minus 25% of its electoral quotient for provincial electoral riding readjustments. Provinces are free to set the percentage of variation from electoral quotients, provided the variation does not infringe on the democratic rights provided for in the Charter.
On 11 May 2004, the Federal Court rendered a decision in Raîche v. Canada (Attorney General).20 The applicants alleged, among other things, that the electoral boundaries commission for New Brunswick had misinterpreted the EBRA and that, as a result, certain French-speaking communities placed by the commission in the Miramichi electoral district should instead have been part of the Acadie–Bathurst electoral district.
The Court held that while the electoral boundaries commission for New Brunswick had been within its right to try keep any variance in the population of electoral districts under 10%, it did not correctly interpret the spirit of the EBRA when it failed to consider whether a greater variation in regard of community of interest and regional features would be desirable for any electoral districts. The Court declared invalid the Miramichi and Acadie–Bathurst electoral boundaries.
The Attorney General of Canada did not appeal the Raîche decision. However, the ruling did not impact the federal general election of 28 June 2004, as the Court had temporarily suspended its declaration of invalidity for a period of one year.
On 19 October 2004, the Governor in Council established a commission of inquiry under the Inquiries Act21 to consider the boundaries of the electoral districts of both Miramichi and Acadie–Bathurst, giving particular attention to the parishes of Allardville and Bathurst.22 The order in council that established the commission of inquiry required it to examine the electoral districts of Miramichi and Acadie–Bathurst following the same process set out in the EBRA. In its final report, the commission recommended that the parishes of Allardville and Bathurst be integrated into the electoral district of Acadie–Bathurst.23
Following the report’s publication, Parliament enacted An Act to Change the Boundaries of the Acadie–Bathurst and Miramichi Electoral Districts24 which amended the 2003 representation order in accordance with this recommendation. The federal general election of 23 January 2006 was held with the new electoral boundaries.
Section 51(1) of the Constitution Act, 1867 sets out the six rules that are used to assign seats in the House of Commons to all 10 provinces:
The electoral quotient that was applied in the preceding readjustment is 111,166.
This table shows for each province its 2021 population estimate as divided by its 2011 population estimate.
| Province | Population Estimate Used in 2021 Readjustment (estimate as at 15 October 2021) | ÷ | Population Estimate Used in 2011 Readjustment (estimate as at 16 December 2011) | 2021 Population Estimate ÷ 2011 Population Estimate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Newfoundland and Labrador | 520,553 | ÷ | 510,578 | 1.019536682 |
| Prince Edward Island | 164,318 | ÷ | 145,855 | 1.126584622 |
| Nova Scotia | 992,055 | ÷ | 945,437 | 1.049308415 |
| New Brunswick | 789,225 | ÷ | 755,455 | 1.044701537 |
| Quebec | 8,604,495 | ÷ | 7,979,663 | 1.078303056 |
| Ontario | 14,826,276 | ÷ | 13,372,996 | 1.108672731 |
| Manitoba | 1,383,765 | ÷ | 1,250,574 | 1.106503893 |
| Saskatchewan | 1,179,844 | ÷ | 1,057,884 | 1.115286742 |
| Alberta | 4,442,879 | ÷ | 3,779,353 | 1.175566029 |
| British Columbia | 5,214,805 | ÷ | 4,573,321 | 1.140266559 |
| Total | 38,118,215 | n/a | 34,371,116 | 10.96473027 |
Source: Table prepared by the Library of Parliament using data obtained from Elections Canada, House of Commons Seat Allocation by Province 2022–2032.
The sum of the quotients obtained by dividing the population of each province by the population of the province as at July 1 of the year of the preceding decennial census according to the estimates prepared for the purpose of the preceding readjustment, is 10.96473027.
The average of the above figure is equal to 10.96473027 ÷ 10 provinces = 1.096473027.
The 2021 electoral quotient is the product of 111,166 x 1.096473027. Rounding the remainder up to one, the 2021 electoral quotient is 121,891.
Quebec qualified to potentially receive an additional House of Commons seat or seats under rule 4 of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Quebec’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2013 representation order (78 ÷ 335 = 0.23284) is greater than its share of the total population of all 10 provinces in 2011 (7,979,663 ÷ 34,371,116 = 0.23216).
Potential additional House seats would have been apportioned to Quebec through the application of rule 3 of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
Quebec’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2021 seat readjustment (75 ÷ 340 = 0.22058823) is increased until this seat ratio is as close as possible to, without going below, Quebec’s share of the total population of all 10 provinces in 2021 (8,604,495 ÷ 38,118,215 = 0.22573185). As such, Quebec receives two additional House seats (77 ÷ 340 = 0.22647).
Manitoba qualified to potentially receive an additional House of Commons seat or seats under rule 4 of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Manitoba’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2013 representation order (14 ÷ 335 = 0.04179) is greater than its share of the 2011 population of all 10 provinces (1,250,574 ÷ 34,371,116 = 0.03638).
Potential additional House seats would have been apportioned to Manitoba through the application of rule 3 of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
Manitoba’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2021 seat readjustment (14 ÷ 340 = 0.04117647) would be increased until this seat ratio is as close as possible to, without going below, Manitoba’s share of the total population of all 10 provinces in 2021 (1,383,765÷ 38,118,215 = 0.03630193). However, as the former ratio is larger than the latter ratio, Manitoba receives no additional seats.
Saskatchewan qualified to potentially receive additional House of Commons seats under rule 4 of section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Saskatchewan’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2013 representation order (14 ÷ 335 = 0.04179) is greater than its share of the 2011 total population of all 10 provinces (1,057,884 ÷ 34,371,116 = 0.03078).
Potential additional House seats would have been apportioned to Saskatchewan through the application of rule 3 in section 51 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
Saskatchewan’s share of House seats among all provincial seats following the 2021 seat readjustment (14 ÷ 340 = 0.04117647) would be increased until this seat ratio is as close as possible to, without going below, Saskatchewan’s share of the total population of all 10 provinces in 2021 (1,179,844 ÷ 38,118,215 = 0.03095224). However, as the former ratio is larger than the latter ratio, Saskatchewan receives no additional seats.
© Library of Parliament
