Gerrymandering in Alberta?

Author: Tim Platnich

Date: November 4, 2026

There has been a lot of press lately on the recently proposed Alberta electoral map. It has been called 'US-style gerrymandering' by any press quoting the Alberta NDP. But is it?

Every 8-10 years the Alberta government must appoint an independent Electoral Boundaries Commission under the Electoral Boundaries Commission Act. The timing cannot be shorter than 8 years or longer than 10 years. The last Commission was appointed by the NDP in 2016 following their election to government. The UCP appointed a Commission in 2025 following its election to government in 2023.

The Commission consisted of 4 members plus a Chair. Two members were nominated by each of the NDP and the UCP. These members were then formally appointed by the Speaker of the Legislature. The Chair, Justice Dallas K. Miller, was appointed by the Lieutenant Governor in Council. The foregoing procedure is that required under the Act.

As a side note, Justice Miller was a Stephen Harper appointee to the Court of Queen's Bench in 2006. At the time of his appointment to the Commission he had become a supernumerary judge.

The Commission issued an Interim Report to the Speaker on October 27, 2025. Subsequently, the Final Report was issued on March 26, 2026. The process followed by the Commission in making these Reports is well documented in the Final Report and will not be outlined here.

The Final Report made recommendations. These recommendations were the result of a majority decision consisting of the two NDP-nominated members and Justice Miller. The recommendations were not a unanimous decision of the Commission. The two UCP-nominated members dissented and wrote a separate report which came to be coined the 'Minority Report'. A response to the Minority Report is contained in the Final Report. The response to the Minority Report is scathing. Indeed, without using the word, the majority calls it gerrymandering. The majority says as follows: "The majority objects in the strongest terms to this unconstitutional minority report and wishes to warn the Legislature against its adoption."

When tasked with making recommendations, the Commission was given 89 electoral divisions to work with. The majority noted that this resulted in some necessary "shoehorning".

One contentious issue in the Final Report was the recommended elimination of two rural electoral divisions. Justice Miller, recognizing that the Legislature might not accept this recommendation, recommended an alternative course of action in his Addendum to the Majority Report. This involved: the creation of 2 more constituencies bringing the total up to 91 from 89; retaining the 2 rural constituencies; and otherwise following the remaining recommendations. [see Recommendation 5, on page 66 of the Final Report]

Justice Miller's Recommendation 5 was not agreed to by his fellow members of the Majority. In other words, the NDP nominees did not want to see the two rural constituencies retained. Notably, both of these ridings are held by UCP members and were won by a 69% majority in the 2023 election. Gerrymandering?

Faced with: the Final Report and the differing views of the Majority the Minority; and Justice Miller's Recommendation 5; the government introduced Motion 37 in the Legislature. The Motion proposed increasing the number of constituencies to 91 as recommended by Justice Miller. The motion went on to establish an expedited procedure for reconsidering the electoral boundaries given the addition of the 2 constituencies. The motion was passed with 44 in favour and 36 opposed.

Through a 'Select Special Committee on Electoral Boundaries' chaired by a UCP MLA, a new Independent Advisory Panel was created consisting of 4 members - 2 nominated by the UCP and 2 nominated by the NDP. Separately, a Chair for the Panel was appointed by the government. The Chair was retired Alberta Court of Appeal Justice Brian O'Ferrall.

The O'Ferrall Panel rendered its Report to the Legislature on November 2, 2026. The recommendations in this Report are now before the Legislature.

Comparing the Final Report of the Miller Commission and the O'Ferrall Panel Report, one notes the following:

1. the 2 rural constituencies were restored with some consequential changes to neighbouring constituencies;

2. the Miller Commission recommended 4 hybrid constituencies for Calgary. The O'Ferrall Panel retained these 4 with one modification and added 2 more; and

3. under the Miller Commission recommendations, the City of Lethbridge would retain its two existing constituencies with some boundary adjustments. Under the O'Ferrall Panel recommendations, the City would retain 1 exclusively urban constituency and the other constituency would be hybridized with 3 other rural constituencies.

The NDP members of the O'Ferrall Panel agreed with the restoration of the two rural constituencies and consequential changes but did not agree with the Calgary and Lethbridge hybridized constituencies.

The O'Ferrall Panel substantially accepted the boundaries of three Calgary hybrid ridings as proposed by the Miller Commission: Calgary-East; Calgary-Falconridge-Conrich; and Calgary-Glenmore-Tsuut'ina. The fourth Calgary hybrid constituency (Calgary-West-Elbow Valley) was extended west to include a southern portion of Springbank. Note that 'Springbank' is not a municipality or riding. It is a sprawling country-residential community within the County of Rocky View. The same is true for Bearspaw.

The 2 hybrid constituencies added by the O'Farrell Panel to Calgary are: Calgary-Bow-Springbank and Calgary-North-Bearspaw. In these new hybrids, a northern portion of Springbank and Bearspaw, respectively, are added to existing Calgary ridings. The addition of northern Springbank to the existing Calgary North constituency will add about 3,692 people to an existing population of about 54,981. The addition of Bearspaw to the existing Calgary North constituency will add approximately 1,900 people to the existing population of about 52,488. These additions will increase the population of these new hybrid ridings to 58,673 and 54,388 respectively. The average constituency population per the Miller Commission Report was 54,929. Under O'Ferrall Panel's Report, after adding the two seats, the average constituency population falls to 53,722. So the populations in the new hybrid ridings in Calgary will be higher than the average under the O'Farrell Panel's recommendation. Under the Miller Commission recommendations, the highest population in a riding was to be 61,775 - Calgary-McKenzie. The Miller Commission determined that being within a range of 25% was acceptable.

Under the Lethbridge hybridization, the 4 ridings are within the 25% range with one riding being as low as 41,943 and one as high as 58,897. Instead of having 2 MLAs, Lethbridge, as hybridized, arguably has 4 MLAs.

The issue between the majority and the minority in the Miller Commission Report and the O'Farrell Report is not about hybridization of urban and rural ridings per se. The issue is about the extent of hybridization. As a matter of strict politics, the NDP knows its support is strongest in urban centres especially Edmonton and to some extent Calgary. The UCP knows that its base support is in rurual ridings. Hence there is a tension between the two parties in drawing electoral boundaries. Undoubtedly, the NDP representatives on the Miller Committee saw the loss of two rural ridings as a boon to their chances of electoral success. The UCP representatives saw this as a partisan loss. The restoration of the 2 rural ridings as recommended by Justice Miller was unanimous on the O'Farrell Panel. This is a preservation of what already exists.

It seems the NDP are afraid that the 2 additional hybridizations of Calgary ridings is a threat. Given the number of people involved, this is hard to fathom. The hybridization of the Lethbridge riding is also hard to fathom as a threat to the NDP.

In the latter case, at present, there are 4 existing ridings in and about Lethbridge. Two of the ridings are urban, that is within the City of Lethbridge. The other 2 ridings are rural surrounding Lethbridge. The NDP were elected in one of the 2 urban Lethbridge ridings. The UCP holds the other Lethbridge riding and the 2 rural ridings. The O'Farrell Panel recommends redrawing the ridings. No new ridings are being added.

The NDP must assume that their chance of gaining the existing second urban seat in Lethbridge is almost certain. Is this assumption correct? If this assumption is correct, at most, the NDP might be disadvantaged by losing that potential seat. Is this what the cry of 'gerrymandering' comes down to? Perhaps. A seat is a seat.

Maybe the NDP simply needs to start courting the votes of rural voters by being more sympathetic to their issues. Likewise, maybe the UCP needs to be more in tune with the issues of urban voters, especially in Edmonton.

The cry of 'gerrymandering' seems to be mostly partisan rhetoric.

Hybridized ridings that blend urban and rural voters is an interesting concept. A discussion of the concept is beyond the remit of this post.