From the Liberal Caucus, July 31st

The Stelmach administration should amend legislation to make it possible for the Electoral Boundaries Commission to redistribute Alberta’s 83 constituencies rather than add new ones.

The Commission, whose members were announced today, has a legislated mandate to add four new seats to Alberta’s already large 83-seat Legislature. Four new MLAs could cost Alberta taxpayers an additional $10 million or more over a four-year term.

“At a time when the Stelmach administration says Alberta can’t afford to hire desperately needed doctors, nurses and other health care professionals, how can the Premier justify hiring four new MLAs?” asks Dr. David Swann, Leader of the Official Opposition. “With a deficit that creeps closer to $10 billion every day, is this really where the Premier wants to spend more?”

In the 1990s, the Alberta Liberals proposed reducing the number of MLAs from 83 to 65.

“We should think about cutting the number of MLAs before cutting public services,” Swann says. “At the very least, we need to hold the line at 83.”

Swann believes that the Premier knows Alberta doesn’t need more MLAs, and that the legislation his administration forced through in the spring, which directed the Commission to add more seats, was a purely political maneuver.

“Here’s what’s really going on,” Swann argues. “The Premier knows that Edmonton and Calgary are underrepresented, and that rural Alberta is overrepresented in the Legislature. But he doesn’t want any of his rural MLAs to have to face nomination battles if their seats are eliminated by redistribution. Instead, he’s just manipulated matters so that seats will likely be added to the major cities. He wants to placate voters in Edmonton and Calgary without upsetting his rural applecart.”

“83 MLAs is enough,” Swann concludes. “The Premier should untie the hands of the Commission members and allow them to redistribute Alberta’s 83 constituencies in a way that reflects Alberta’s population, without adding MLAs. If his government is looking for ways to cut costs, here’s a good start.”