this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2026
388 points (98.7% liked)

Canada

12083 readers
1026 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 Sports

Baseball

Basketball

Curling

Hockey

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] thisorthatorwhatever@lemmy.world 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Riding are too big, imagine if we had riding of 30,000 instead of 100,000. You'd get very local candidates making their way to Parliament, with very local issues to deal with. It would be less polarizing, and help solve local problems.

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

And the cost of implementation would be enormous. You are talking about a huge supporting infrastructure, the cost of just the MP salaries alone would be triple the current expenditure. The Law of Diminishing Returns gone ballistic.

[–] thisorthatorwhatever@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The wages of the extra politicians would be completely insignificant. People can't really seem to comprehend the money governments spend, and on what.

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

I am afraid that the only thing this would result in is even more political posturing and politicking by three times as many politicians. The more diverse the political spectrum represented in the HoC, the less likely that any decisions would be made. How do you get that many MP's to decide on anything? Toronto suffered this fate when the number of counselors rose to unmanageable levels.

[–] thisorthatorwhatever@lemmy.world 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

unmanageable levels

We went from 47 to 25. Toronto has a population of 3.3 million. That's 132,000 per councilor, currently. Previously it was 70,000 people per city councilor. Nothing is being done in this city because there are too few councilors! Currently a handful of very rich developers get to decide most things.
Even the few things that this city council managed to decide, those decisions were still overturned by Doug Ford.

Collingwood Ontario has 9 city councilors and has a population of 30,000. That's like 1 representative for every 3,000 people!!!

[–] ProudCanadianCitizen@lemmy.ca 0 points 4 hours ago

It is not the ratio of population to councilors that results in the Law of Diminishing returns, it is the overall number of councilors. Toronto had reached a point of absurdity in their meetings with 47 councilors all wanting to put in their two cents worth on every issue. Politicians by their nature demand to be heard and thrive on posturing in front of the public.