• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Chris
    June 15, 2013 - 08:38

    I cannot figure out exactly what the author is trying to say. So a majority of our Senators come from the Avalon. So do a majority of our population. He lists the total area of NL vs that of the Avalon and uses this to argue why more representation needs to come from West of Goobies. What the author fails to point out is the relative population density of the two regions. NL may be over 405,000 sq.km but how much of that land (mostly in Labrador and the main portion of the island) is uninhabited? Because some in Brigus is further from an uninhabited region in central NL than someone in Gander, does it make them less entitled to a say over it? His argument also fails to mention the mobility of our population. I would be regarded as a townie by anyone (7th generation even) yet even a die-hard urban townie like me has roots from all over the island. And seeing the various forms of accents I hear in town these days not to mention the rapid growth of the Pentecostal church in McDonald Drive I would argue that there are many with much stronger rural roots than me. I'm all for a Triple-E Senate. But the E for equality means provincial. To continue to divide it further is pointless.

  • Neglected Point
    June 13, 2013 - 14:20

    What the author forgot to mention is how the more highly populated areas of the province, largely the Avalon, support all of those tiny little communities spread out around the island. Do you really think those scattered remote towns that require their own power source, ferries, bridges, etc, send in as much tax as it takes for them to have the luxury of services in the middle of nowhere? Before you go pointing fingers at the EVIL Avalon, you might want to remember that those evil townies in CBS, Mt. Pearl, St. John's, Holyrood, etc, pay for a lot of services that people in remote communities couldn't afford otherwise.

  • Other side of the coin
    June 13, 2013 - 08:15

    I'm not sure what the point is of this letter. There will never be any one system of representation that will please everyone. I'm of the belief that politicians are selected to represent people and not the rocks and trees of square kilometers. Representation should be, and usually is, by population regions. It's not always an equitable representation. The NE Avalon accounts for 39% of the population (something not mentioned in the letter) but has 29% of the seats in the HOA and 29% of the province's seats in the HOC. Likewise, the Avalon is home to over half of the provincial population but representation in the HOA and HOC do not reflect this population. At the other end is Labrador, with 5% of the population but holding 8% of the seats in the HOA and 14% of our seats in HOC.