Statistics Canada Reports II

[ToxiK]

Originally Posted by Wigs

What are your new Provincial capitals?

Oshawa, Hamilton, Barrie...

[Wigs]

Of the 3, at least Hamilton has some really nice older commercial and residential building stock from the 19th to early 20th century

[craner]

I’m going to go with:
London
SSM
Kingston

[Paper Boy]

Originally Posted by craner

I’m going to go with:
London
SSM
Kingston

Gotta love the twists and turns that the Statistics Canada thread does 😀

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by Beedok

More reason the rest of Canada should want Quebec to stay. Does Alberta really want to live in a majority Ontarian nation?

Western Canada could be better off without Quebec.

[BlackDog204]

Originally Posted by phone

How about: "Little known fact, but did you know that this proportion has stayed relatively constant for over 25 years, despite all the population growth?"

Population clock for May 15:

Ontario: 16,076,300 (39.0%)
Western Canada: 13,401,300 (32.5%)
Quebec: 9,059,400 (22.0%)
Atlantic Canada: 2,654,500 (6.4%)


It's interesting seeing BC/Alberta pulling away from Quebec so quickly. There was a time not too long ago, where Quebec had a greater population than both provinces combined (early 2000s?). Today, there are roughly 1,500,000 more people in Alberta/BC than Quebec.

[thebasketballgeek]

Even when people say Ontario should be broken up into multiple parts NW Ontario still gets ignored. At this point NW Ontario should just get swallowed up by Manitoba so Manitoba can have another city with >100k residents (Thunder Bay). Besides Kenora already feels like a place that should’ve been part of Manitoba a long time ago.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by shreddog

Ummm, it's been that way since about 1998.

In 1996 Ont vs Can-QC was 10.754/10.956 and then in 2001 it was 11.410/11.360 (SC pop #'s).

Sorry, but this news is over 25 years too late

Worse than that, Ontario’s share is actually trending down: in earlier times, Upper Canada wasn’t just barely over 50% of Canada-without-Lower-Canada as is the case today.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by thebasketballgeek

Even when people say Ontario should be broken up into multiple parts NW Ontario still gets ignored. At this point NW Ontario should just get swallowed up by Manitoba so Manitoba can have another city with >100k residents (Thunder Bay). Besides Kenora already feels like a place that should’ve been part of Manitoba a long time ago.

I hope everyone here knows none of those provincial border changes is ever happening? We’ve been trying to do much easier stuff for decades and can’t.

[MolsonExport]

What about giving the former Rupert's Land to Nunavut?

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The solution to this problem is to break up Ontario into five parts. Make the GTA a city-state province, make Ottawa a federal district, and the rest of Ontario divided into three new provinces, one each for the Southwest, North, and East.

If anything we should be encouraging provinces to merge so that we can get rid of excess bureaucratic structures, in parallel with stripping down the federal government to only dabble in its core competencies. An Atlantic union would make a lot of sense. Alberta + BC or Alberta + Prairies would probably work as well, and could chunk off NW Ontario in the process.

Ontario already struggles to develop its own identity, and pretty much exists as a void at this point. Creating 3 have-not provinces from it would probably lead to more identity dilution, structural poverty, lower QOL and more inter-provincial squabbling.

Agreed that it probably makes sense to hive off GTA as a city-state, and Ottawa as the federal district. It should be autonomous like Shanghai or Beijing.

[thewave46]

I don't see how more or fewer provinces amounts to more than reshuffling the deck of cards. The large-scale programs and responsibilities still remain, regardless.

It's just a bureaucratic make-work project, because the big, expensive responsibilities still have to be done by some level of government. Smaller provinces just have problems with scaling upwards as specialized demands increase.

Unless there's a tangible cultural difference between the regions that justifies a new sub-national government to address those particular demands (see: UK devolved powers to Scotland, Northern Ireland), I don't particularly see the advantage.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

If anything we should be encouraging provinces to merge so that we can get rid of excess bureaucratic structures, in parallel with stripping down the federal government to only dabble in its core competencies. An Atlantic union would make a lot of sense. Alberta + BC or Alberta + Prairies would probably work as well, and could chunk off NW Ontario in the process.

Ontario already struggles to develop its own identity, and pretty much exists as a void at this point. Creating 3 have-not provinces from it would probably lead to more identity dilution, structural poverty, lower QOL and more inter-provincial squabbling.

Agreed that it probably makes sense to hive off GTA as a city-state, and Ottawa as the federal district. It should be autonomous like Shanghai or Beijing.

The point that I'm making is that if you cut out the GTA & Ottawa, the remaining Ontario is a weird mess, geographically and will inevitably be extremely regionalized without a central nexus like what the GTA used to be. Identity dilution, as you call it, would be an even worse problem. Chopping Ontario up further lets you use the existing regions as the basis for an identity for each successor province.

I suppose instead of 3 parts, Rest-of-Ontario can be 2. One province for the Southwest and one for the Northeast & East; while the Northwest can unite with MB.

As for the "have-not" argument, this is a case for reforming equalization so that the "have-not" provinces, instead of just getting blanked grants to their operating budgets, get infrastructure & economic development money instead. This is what the EU does for its equivalent program and it has been far more successful at bringing up the QoL in poorer regions than Canada's model has been.

Arguably equalization as structured right now is a welfare trap. If NS cuts their excessive taxes to try and attract more investment, they'll just lose their equalization money at the exact rate their economy grows their revenue.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by thewave46

I don't see how more or fewer provinces amounts to more than reshuffling the deck of cards. The large-scale programs and responsibilities still remain, regardless.

It's just a bureaucratic make-work project, because the big, expensive responsibilities still have to be done by some level of government. Smaller provinces just have problems with scaling upwards as specialized demands increase.

Unless there's a tangible cultural difference between the regions that justifies a new sub-national government to address those particular demands (see: UK devolved powers to Scotland, Northern Ireland), I don't particularly see the advantage.

I see it more as an governance exercise. The GTA as a large metropolitan area has very different needs than the rest of the province and governing the two parts with the same set of policies is detrimental to all. The regions of Ontario are critically neglected by a provincial government that is insanely GTA focused. My region of Ontario doesn't have a single cabinet minister despite the fact that the governing party holds most of the seats here.

[Wigs]

1overcosc, it sounds like you're more upset with feeling like your Kingston region has taxation without proper representation more than anything else.

I don't see how cutting up Ontario really solves anything because there's going to be an additional Ministry of Environment, Education, Transportation, Health (new provincial healthcare system), etc. for each Province you create by dividing Ontario. Then you have to coordinate provinces for things like highway expansions, transit expansions, etc

I thought Ron Swanson libertarian types wanted less government not more

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

I see it more as an governance exercise. The GTA as a large metropolitan area has very different needs than the rest of the province and governing the two parts with the same set of policies is detrimental to all. The regions of Ontario are critically neglected by a provincial government that is insanely GTA focused. My region of Ontario doesn't have a single cabinet minister despite the fact that the governing party holds most of the seats here.

I suppose, but I consider somewhat distant governance not hyper-focused on exactly meeting the needs of the nationally irrelevant region I live in a small price to pay for being to take advantage of scale that being part of a larger entity gives.

An example: Sending children from remote northern Ontario hospitals to CHEO/Sick Kids is a non-issue from a bureaucratic standpoint. They're Ontario residents, so all the behind-the-scenes messiness is largely mitigated. Coordinating physical transfer, having medical records follow, billing, etc. etc. move quite nicely within one entity. It is more difficult to coordinate inter-province patients in such a scenario. Not impossible, but more difficult.

If said entity is cut into chunks for reasons, who is to say that CHEO/Sick Kids doesn't favour 'local' residents versus 'out of province' ones. Or that these new provinces implement standards that are incompatible or bureaucratically difficult to navigate.

[Wigs]

thewave46,
Yes. One of the benefits of being an Ontarian is being able to send your kid to the best Children's hospital in the nation and one of the top in the entire world, and Princess Margaret hospital is one of the best cancer treatment hospitals in the entire world as well.

Newsweek also ranks Toronto General/University health system as #3 hospital system in the world after Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, and Cleveland Clinic.

https://www.newsweek.com/2024/03/15/...d-1873871.html
https://www.newsweek.com/rankings/wo...hospitals-2023
https://www.newsweek.com/rankings/wo...023/pediatrics

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

If anything we should be encouraging provinces to merge so that we can get rid of excess bureaucratic structures, in parallel with stripping down the federal government to only dabble in its core competencies.

I agree. Our decentralized federation where most power, and certainly most of the services that people and firms rely on, lies in the hands of provinces is what we have to work with and, frankly, it's probably the reason Canada survives at all.

But not all provinces are created equally, and Ontario succeeds because it actually has the population and economic heft to function like a midsized country. I feel like we're the only province that actually thinks about things like industrial strategy or diversifying our economy. We do things like build and refurbish nuclear plants. If we were a bunch of provinces of 3 million people or less, with our topography, we'd probably still be burning coal. We have 3 of the Maple 8, largely because hundreds of thousands of public sector workers can support centi-billion dollar funds and these funds can hire leaders from Wall Street and the City to move to Toronto.

We need more Ontario-sized provinces, not less.

Perhaps a good counter-example is Winnipeg, which is the largest Canadian city that's not in a "big" province. Big cities need big infrastructure investments, and I feel like they're really kneecapped by what Manitoba can deliver.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

But not all provinces are created equally, and Ontario succeeds because it actually has the population and economic heft to function like a midsized country. I feel like we're the only province that actually thinks about things like industrial strategy or diversifying our economy. We do things like build and refurbish nuclear plants. If we were a bunch of provinces of 3 million people or less, with our topography, we'd probably still be burning coal. We have 3 of the Maple 8, largely because hundreds of thousands of public sector workers can support centi-billion dollar funds and these funds can hire leaders from Wall Street and the City to move to Toronto.

This is a very good point. I've had coworkers who've left the Ontario Public Service to work for smaller provincial governments (or vice versa) and the culture seems very different. Not saying we're always great at it - and there are notable exceptions - but the goal is usually to create sector-leading policy. And there is the knowledge base to actually back it up. Whereas smaller places tend to emulate existing best practices, whether by desire or simply the lack of resources.

On this point the few times I've had a chance to do some work with the Quebec government has always been interesting. Since they also do their own thing there's been a lot more back and forth. Other places I won't name have basically said "we copied what you did" on various policy files.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by craner

I’m going to go with:
London
SSM
Kingston

London & Kingston are obvious and I think even people in other cities looking for the crown, would agree that these cities are the "heart" of their respective regions.

I also agree with you on SSM but for a different reason. It not the heart of the North but it would be a real battle between Sudbury & Thunder Bay and hence SSM would probably be chosen as a reasonable compromise.