Bill C-22 Shows Dark Side of Canadian Social-Democratic Values

All pigs are created equal, but some pigs are more equal than others.

When George Orwell penned those words in 1945, who would have thought he was talking about Canada?

But Bill C-22, whose goal is to “restore the principles of representation by population” by giving more seats in the House of Commons to the country’s three fastest growing provinces (Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia), could have been written by Orwell himself.

The bill’s seat redistribution formula would give Alberta five more seats and B.C. seven, bringing their number of Commons seats more in line with their proportion of the population. Ontario stands to gain the largest number of new seats with 10, but this number represents only half of the number needed to keep Ontario’s share of seats comparable to its share of the population. Ontario, the biggest pig in the pen, keeps getting bigger.

Critics (including Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, who is attempting to recruit support among federal Ontario MPs against the bill) say this is blatant discrimination against Ontario. Others say Prime Minister Stephen Harper is rewarding the two western provinces for supporting his party – and it’s always politically expedient to shaft Ontario.

In Orwell’s Animal Farm, the head pig, Old Major, had his sidekick Squealer – a smaller, but still fat pig that served as his mouthpiece. In the Canadian context, Harper’s little fat pig is Peter Van Loan. Apart from his ridiculous public comments about McGuinty being the “small man of Confederation,” and his nonsensical logic that Ontario should be happy with “more” even if it’s not “enough”, Van Loan also spun us a crash course in Ontario’s historical role in Canada:

“Dalton McGuinty seems to be abandoning the traditional role of an Ontario premier, which would see Ontario's interests protected while at the same time advancing the strength of Confederation.”

Is this revisionist history, or does he have a point?

Going back to 1867, the biggest provincial pig in British North America, Ontario, recruited a couple of Atlantic piglets to join with fellow fat but perpetually poorer pig, Quebec, and create a new Canadian pen where there would be strength in numbers against their giant and increasingly bellicose neighbour to the south. (Hey, who let the elephant in?)

An informal wealth distribution system was created to raise the standard of living in the smaller provinces to that of Ontario’s, with Ontario helping foot the bill. And thus began the Canadian experiment in socialism.

Since adopting a more formal system of equalization payments in 1957, the federal government has taken some of Ontario’s wealth – the only province never to receive equalization payments – and spread it to less wealthy regions. Alberta is now a contributor, but received funds for a long time. B.C. has also been on both sides of the trough, while Newfoundland and Labrador and Saskatchewan are poised to become the newest members of the have club. Quebec, as the most populous of the have-nots, has been the largest benefactor of equalization payments since Confederation.

There was one time in the 1970s when Ontario qualified for equalization payments but everybody agreed that this would put too much strain on the federal treasury (and you thought Quebec was expensive!) so Ontario didn’t receive any funds that year, or any other year. It was the right thing to do. The pig was put on a diet, so there would be enough feed for everyone.

So in a sense, Van Squealer is correct: Ontario has been an upstanding provincial partner and shown great leadership in keeping this country strong and united. But it is also in Ontario’s interest to do so – better to be the captain of a championship team than the MVP on a perennial loser (just ask Alex Rodriguez).

However, diluting the clout of Ontario voters doesn’t do anything to strengthen the federation, or level the playing field. It merely normalizes anti-Ontario sentiment by entrenching it in law. There is no greater good being served here.

If we were a more mature democracy that truly valued the principle of representation by population, seat distribution would not be subject to manipulation by the party in power. We need a standard formula that automatically allocates seats fairly without even the slightest perception of partisanship in the process. Otherwise, the system suffers twofold: it becomes less democratic as it becomes less fairly representative; and people lose faith in the system when it becomes less democratic.

But we do not live in a true democracy.

We live in a pig pen.

Canadian bacon, anyone?