I was a little bemused about Ontario wanting 21 extra MPs, so I did some sums to see how many MPs each province/territory should have:
| 2005 Population | ‘Fair’ Ridings | Actual Ridings | %age over/under represented | |
| Canada (total) | 32,270,500 | 308 | 308 | |
| Newfoundland and Labrador | 516,000 | 5 | 7 | +42% |
| Prince Edward Island | 138,100 | 1 | 4 | +203% |
| Nova Scotia | 937,900 | 9 | 11 | +23% |
| New Brunswick | 752,000 | 7 | 10 | +39% |
| Quebec | 7,598,100 | 73 | 75 | +3% |
| Ontario | 12,541,400 | 120 | 106 | -11% |
| Manitoba | 1,177,600 | 11 | 14 | +25% |
| Saskatchewan | 994,100 | 9 | 14 | +48% |
| Alberta | 3,256,800 | 31 | 28 | -10% |
| British Columbia | 4,254,500 | 41 | 36 | -11% |
| Yukon Territory | 31,000 | 0 | 1 | +238% |
| Northwest Territories | 43,000 | 0 | 1 | +144% |
| Nunavut | 30,000 | 0 | 1 | +249% |
The population data is from StatsCan for 2005, and the riding counts from Wikipedia, and checked on CBC’s election 2006 site. My analysis is a bit simplistic; everyone counted as population gets the same federal representation.
Ontario, BC and Alberta are getting stiffed. Quebec is the fairest of them all. But if you really want your vote to count, and you can’t handle the Territories, move to PEI.