· 58 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 16, 2026 at 7:58 PM

India plans to expand parliament and reserve 33% seats for women, linked to delimitation

Posted by Working_Yesterday386


Women bat for 33% reservation Bill, take out bike rally in Visakhapatnam
The Hindu
Women bat for 33% reservation Bill, take out bike rally in Visakhapatnam
Women in Visakhapatnam rally for 33% reservation in politics, supporting the Women’s Reservation Bill with solidarity and enthusiasm.

🚩 Report this post

58 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +35
Misleading headline. But makes sense because our Govt is trying to mislead. 33% reservation is a mask under which they are giving majority representation to 2 states where the ruling party is strongest, thereby making those two states to outnumber representatives from every other state, making the other states' (where the ruling party doesnt have support) influence irrelevant in central govt formation and their policies. Especially the southern states which contribute maximally to the GDP/Tax revenue and has overall better development and succesfully has reduced fertility rate by family planning are now perversely being penalised for it by this delimitation where the division and the no. of representatives are based on population. Pathway to legal dictatorship for Modi and his regime, to stay forever in power by just managing to get enough votes from these 2 states. If this gets passed, India will likely break into civil war. EDIT: Errors correction.
35
KerashQSA 2 days ago +22
But the government has already clarified kno? Current representation of South India -> 23.74% After delimitation representation -> 23.90% It remains almost the same in fact it increases slightly
22
Consistent-Tie962 2 days ago -1
I think there's a difference between maximum seats as per formula and the actual seats as per population criteria that will be allotted eventually. Gray area. If they say this increase is in maximum seats and eventually the actual seats lower it then it would be harmful to the South and in general to federal structure the country. And for the revenue they bring, the South should have almost 30% representatives if not more. There needs to be some incentive for the progress they've made. Maybe other states will focus on that too for next delimitation then..
-1
gymAndmuthi 2 days ago +7
More incentive lmao, so now you want to violate 1 person 1 vote? The current explanation if it is true should mean no actual change to the status quo. Sure if the Southern representation is down and central India gets more then it is wrong, but to say that South Indian votes deserve more value than other votes is not right.
7
Consistent-Tie962 2 days ago -12
South Indian votes deserve more value than other votes is not right. It does imo. Any state that does the heavy lifting of tax collection should have more representation. Their people should have a loud say in who forms the government at the center. So include Maharashtra, Gujarat too.
-12
gymAndmuthi 2 days ago +8
You are dumb and ignorant, there can't be a rational conversation with an idiot who keeps changing goalposts.
8
Consistent-Tie962 2 days ago -3
Ok.
-3
Introvertloner101 2 days ago -7
Only in some press release with no traceable legit source. Because the bill CLEARLY doesnt mention that, in fact forbids it, and only mentions it will be based solely on population. Deliberate confusion created by the Govt.
-7
KerashQSA 2 days ago +18
> Only in some press releases > With no traceable legit sources Excuse me? What??
18
Introvertloner101 2 days ago -6
That puts southern states which controlled population based on the national policies at a clear disadvantage and leaves them with negligible representation in the parliament, wont even have the power to stop bills that could threaten their autonomy, governance etc. Makes them mere spectators in their own Govt, no say in who gets to be PM, what laws/policies get passed, etc. The constitutional freeze was precisely to prevent this. It was a deliberate decision to ensure that states following national population control policies weren't 'punished' with less political power. Population-only model creates a major moral hazard: it rewards states that failed to stabilise their population while diminishing the voice of those that succeeded in development and education. EDIT: This reply was clarifying the injustice of seat division merely based on population, which the person above me has edited out from their question.
-6
KerashQSA 2 days ago +15
Bro Modi clarified in Parliament yesterday that each state will get a 50% increase in its total representation Let's wait till we hear anything more about it
15
Introvertloner101 2 days ago -2
If thats truly the case there wont be any issue at all man. And honestly I wish they would do it. India cannot afford this instability right now.
-2
KerashQSA 2 days ago +11
I mean it's not like delimitation is going to do anything good for the country, what they are doing is that they are increasing seats by 50% but are going to reserve 33% for women So in the end all the existing politicians will at least maintain their share 542 + 50% -33% = 542 🤣
11
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +3
Exactly. They can give all the seats to women for all I care.
3
KerashQSA 2 days ago +5
Yeah they only introduced delimitation because all politicians wanted to preserve their seats in the parliament while also allowing women to get additional seats Although I know most politicians will introduce their mother/sister/wife in the election campaigns but whatever now
5
Resident_Cat_4292 2 days ago
Except for all the increased taxation that will follow now that you have to pay all these guys incl. their housing, cars, servants etc.
0
Sam_Fisher91 2 days ago +3
How is this upvoted So many incorrect and blatantly false information in this post By the way democracy is based on representation and not who is more rich By your logic people who pay more income tax should get higher representation than poor people Kerala has 20 seats while having similar population to Haryana which has 10 seats. But somehow it was never an issue because current distribution is based on 1971 population level And current increase is 50% for all states. There is literally a press release bit somehow misinformation is being spread by DMK turds on internet
3
Pikachuraichuuu 2 days ago +5
Since when ruling party became strong in those two states ? In Bihar BJP never won on their own and have vote share below 25 percent most of the time. And in uttar Pradesh too they have one only once with big gap that was in 2017. Plus both these states have 20 percent around muslim population which no matter what will never give vote to ruling govt. Govt gave them homes subsidy everything but they will always go for madrasa 
5
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +6
Translation: “My vote counts for more representation than someone else’s in another state, which I agree with because I see myself as superior, and people from those states as less than human, they should provide free labor when we have a demographics crisis and go back to their shantytowns in their states.” Do you have this kind of tantrum when money from your taxes goes to help someone starving get his rations? Had the other areas developed, we wouldn’t have to do this, so maybe your states shouldn’t have hoarded wealth. When the Adanis and Ambanis hoard wealth, the govt steps in and taxes them and redistributes it to the less fortunate, downtrodden, and oppressed. This is the exact same thing. Funny how in the US, the refrain is that the red states votes count for more due to their low population, and all of the leftist progressive liberals want to change to a population based voting system for proper representation, but in India, it’s the opposite. Anything to preserve one’s own power, no integrity to uphold the ideals of universal adult franchise and the founding principles of democracy.
6
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +3
LOL Stop misleading. TN has never opposed its funds being used on other states, nor will it in future. TN and other southern states have a problem with being made their votes negligible and devalued. Our 'PM', the one who will rule us, only need enough votes from 2-3 states to rule all of India. Nor would he have any issue passing any law/policy that are detrimental to our states because, again, our representation wont be enough. We will be reduced to mere spectators in our own Govt. That is NOT democracy.
3
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +9
So just like in the US, where a vote of someone in Utah, counts way more than someone in, say, California, you think this is appropriate representation? Again: Translation: “My vote counts for more representation than someone else’s in another state, which I agree with because I see myself as superior, and people from those states as less than human, they should provide free labor when we have a demographics crisis and go back to their shantytowns in their states.” Why’d you ignore the rest of my comment and focus on “funds being used”? Hence proved: Anything to preserve one’s own power, no integrity to uphold the ideals of universal adult franchise and the founding principles of democracy.
9
Introvertloner101 2 days ago -2
LOL. Are you fr comparing India with the US?! One of them is a developed country and much more demographically and economically homogenous compared to our diverse federal structure. It isnt as simple as 'one person, one vote' here. It must be balanced to prevent few populous regions from completely dominating the national policy. Here's the most probable future scenario. Center passes a bill making Hindi national language. Southern states wont be able to stop it anymore. Or any other bill that violates their autonomy or identity. So according to you, democracy is one part of the country's complete loss of voice on who rules them while the other part dictates it forever?! We will make sure our say matters in who rules us, simple as that.
-2
BodybuilderUpbeat786 2 days ago +7
Would making the Rajya Sabha more powerful help Southern states? How about delaying delimination like Vajpayee did? The reality is there is a constitutional compulsion to do this unless the government formally delays it.
7
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +4
Delaying would be the ideal scenario now because many of the states haven't controlled the population like the national population control policy recommended before unfreezing the constitution, precisely so that the states who followed the policy wont be punished with less political power.
4
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +1
ABSOLUTELY NOONE has made even the *smallest step* in making Hindi the de facto language everyone is mandated to use. At maximum, a supplementary language that those who don’t speak the same one can fall back on. This conjured boogeyman of someone “vIoLaTiNg” identity is **ONLY** insecurity, sprinkled with a dash of supremacism. (Also lol at the US being economically homogeneous, lmao even). Democracy is majority rule. End. Of. Story. Either everyone’s vote counts for the same or you condone the philosophy of **”some are more equal than others”**. Talking about “controlled the population”: now you want to take their choice away regarding that as well? Only certain people have the right to reproduce? Eugenics or forced sterilization akin to Sanjay Gandhi now as well, along with the Orwellian discrimination? You people are the exact same as the emergency period congressi. No change, just pick and choose which part of the constitution you want to follow. Constitution mandates delimitation? Just ignore it for now! Why not? I wonder which other parts of the constitution we can ignore temporarily. And you have the gall, the sheer audacity to call someone else fascist. All the dictatorship nonsense is just sheer projection. Fact is you want maximum control over the country all only for your region and won’t allow other regions to get their constitutional rights. Supremacists should be dealt with as anywhere else in the world: with extreme prejudice.
1
Introvertloner101 2 days ago -1
Oh wow! We are merely asking to have a say in who rules us, to not devalue our vote and have the ability to have a say in laws being passed for us! The sheer audacity of you REFUSING that very basic right as a democratic citizen is perhaps the realest exposé of this whole saga, openly championing for 2-3 states to decide the rulers of an entire country, the laws that will be implemented in that country. And no democracy doesnt mean, majority 'rules' and minority is 'silenced/subdued'. But seeing how your mind works, no wonder you think thats what democracy is. We refuse to become colony in our own country. And we wont be. EDIT: LOL Learn some actual facts before blabbering. 1. Actual Anti-Hindi protests happened in TN, Political leaders were arrested in 1950's for resisting it. Moreover, recently because TN refused to introduce Hindi our share of the budget was withheld. 2. No one is shaming reproduction. It was National policy that recommended population control and the constitutional freeze was done until all the states controlled the population. Some did, some didnt. And the ones who did are being punished now for it. The constitution was supposed to come into effect when the population control was achieved by all states precisely to not punish the states who followed it with lesser political power.
-1
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +2
It’s clear you lack reading comprehension and higher level reasoning. “Merely asking”, you don’t want to acknowledge your own position, and resort to gaslighting. Democracy has always been what’s popular is what goes. As long as there are more votes, that’s what is implemented. There is no silencing or subduing of anyone, as long as you’re able to put your views forward, which you are, thats how a democracy functions. My last attempt: if there are less men than women, the amount of seats women can hold aren’t lessened because men won’t get a say. In the end, your vote will never matter more than any other Indian citizen, no matter where you live, rich or poor. The very basis of all proper democracies: **universal AND equal adult franchise**. If you don’t like democracy, China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, Pakistan are all available to move to.
2
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +1
You are the one gaslighting and also projecting. You are the one arguing that being completely stripped of our ability to have a say over the very laws that we will be expected to follow in our state as 'democracy'. Our votes wont matter. Period. Stop spinning and misleading. Your very argument is contradictory. Why should a souther state citizen suffer inequality because of where he was born then?! Because his govt followed the population scheme and controlled his population, now his say doesnt matter?! Specific states will have the concentrated power. And what do you think will happen next? Southern states will encourage their people to have more children. Thats moving backwards, not forwards but apparently only that gives us our democratic right. You lack common sense! And who tf are YOU to tell me to leave my own country?! You are truly a ChAmPiOn of democracy. Thank you for revealing yourself!
1
iPisslosses 2 days ago -3
US is federal and state has more autonomy unlike in Asia where central governments control everything and can make state governments useless.
-3
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +5
So change that then? Federalize the govt more? Why propose to not follow the constitution? Also considering what’s happening in West Bengal, do you really think giving states **EVEN MORE** autonomy will lead to *anything* good happening?
5
iPisslosses 2 days ago -1
i just pointed out to us comparison, i dont know about your individual state problems but higher income states should have more autonomy over their finances rather than subsidizing other poor states
-1
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +4
I see and should higher income individuals have more autonomy over their finances rather than subsidizing the poor as well?
4
iPisslosses 2 days ago -2
I mean everyone has autonomy over their finances, but i wish they had more autonomy over how their TAXES are being used.
-2
MajesticSuit0 2 days ago +5
Keep spouting Left-DMK propaganda. Your stalin is a bigger dictator with a very appropriate name.
5
InternalOpen7578 10 hr ago +1
Democracy: representation based on population. Doesn't matter who makes more money.
1
Sandyloam7 2 days ago +3
Well known bastion of the bjp that they sweep. Bihar :)
3
FresherInTheWorld 1 day ago +2
Didn't this vote fail in last night's session?
2
Salty_Pop_3888 1 day ago +2
Here's my current understanding of the situation and a brief historical lesson for foreigners. Back in the 1970s to combat overpopulation fears, the Government of India started incentivising States to decrease their birth rates. As part of this, they froze delimitation for 25 years in order to not punish states which could best control their populations. This ended in the early 2000s, but the Government extended this by yet another 25 years, and this free expires this year(2026). Some noteworthy points: 1. The freeze was brought by the then ruling party, the Congress, during a period known as the Emergency(Government declared a National Emergency for no apparent reason, started democratic backsliding etc.) 2. However, the next Government, formed as a Unity Government of various Opposition groups who opposed the Emergency removed several Emergency era laws, but NOT the freeze on delimitation. 3. In the Early 2000s, the BJP led Government(Today, the BJP is the current ruling party as well) chose to continue this freeze on delimitation. 4. However, this new freeze allowed Constituency Boundaries to be changed within a State as per the 2001 census so long as the Total Seats within a State remain consistent with the 1971 Census. The Current Situation: 1. The Individual States have their seats distributed as per the 1971 Census. 2. Within a State the Constituency Boundaries are based on the 2001 Census. 3. The Delimitation Freeze will expire in 2026 and new Constituencies may be drawn on the basis of the First Census after 2026 unless a Constitutional Amendment pushes it further back. The Politics: 1. Census Delay: The 2021 Census was not conducted due to Covid-19...but then inexplicably delayed to this year. The likely reason is that this census will end by 2027, and will count as the first census after 2026, rather than the 2031 Census. Thus, new Constituency Boundaries can be used for the 2029 General Elections rather than the 2034 General Elections. 2. The Women's Reservation Provision is structured in such a way so as to only apply after the first Census and Delimitation after the Commencement of the Amendment. 2a. There are talks going about the Amendment having commenced recently(16th April). What it means is that the Date of Commencement in the Constitutional Amendment was upto the Government of India by Offical Notification. This is what has actually happened. The reservation of seats will ONLY happen AFTER a new Delimitation occries. (Explanation: If delimitation had occurred without the Government notifying this Act had commenced; Seats wouldn't have been reserved for women in that Delimitation) 3. What this has done is that Women's Reservation has been linked to Delimitation: so if the Opposition votes against or otherwise opposes the Delimitation then Women's Reservation doesn't occur. This gives PR material to the Government to portray the Opposition as 'Anti-Women'. 4. The Government also wishes to increase the number of MPs in Parliament, something that has remained constant since the last Delimitation in the 1970s. This is not an unreasonable move in my personal opinion, however this requires a Delimitation and we get to the benifits for the Government with the Delimitation. 5. The Benefits of Delimitation for the Government: The ruling BJP is very weak in South India, and South India is culturally and linguistically quite distinct from North India. The South having lower birth rates than the North since the 1970s, means that they will lose a significant percentage of control over Parliament should the latest census be used. This will be to the benefit of the ruling BJP who are weak in the South. Furthermore, BJP is strong in Urban Areas, and the population of Urban Centre has grown since 2001, when the last Delimitation occured(within States). What this means is that even if the Number of Seats for States is kept constant. The Ruling BJP benifits from Delimitation due to increase in Urban Seats! What actually happened? 1. The BJP introduced the 131st Amendment Bill(which would rather confusingly become he 107th Amendment Act of passed, confused the f*** out of me as well), which does 3 things: Increase the number of seats in Parliament, allow for delimitation before the 2026 expiry and on the basis of the 2011 Census, and enact Women's Reservation in Legislatures on the basis of this. 2. The Home Minister(in this Government basically the #2 after Modi), orally said in Parliament that they intend to keep the 1971 Census as basis for Delimitation of Seats to the States, but use 2011 for seats within a State. This will still be to the benefit of the BJP, however this is more defensible. 3. The Amendment doesn't actually specify the 2011 Census or that the 1971 Census will be used as the Basis of either Delimitation(to states and within each State), so this may well be a lie by the HM. 4. The Bill failed to pass in the Lower House by the requisite 2/3rds Majority, and even if it did, it would have been difficult to pass by a similar margin in the Upper House, and if it did that, it would require Ratification by half of the State Legislatures(this would be easy because the BJP controls half the State Legislatures). 5. However, this doesn't actually stop the 2026 Expire on the Freeze, and so the BJP can still start Delimitation after the census is complete in 2027, and this would enact the Women's Reservation Provision, but it will not increase the number of seats in Parliament. Is this Democracy Backsliding? (Personal Opinion) 1. All of this will be fully Constitutional and would only increase Democractic Representation. 2. The two States which will gain the most are: UP and Bihar. Neither of these are guaranteed BJP Strongholds. Case in point: these were the 2 of the states that cost BJP a majority in the 2024 General Elections. 3. To an extent the opposition to this is driven by Bigotry towards 'Backwards' UP and Bihar. 4. That being said, the Southern States do have a point. They DO contribute more to the economy and to Taxes, and they did do a better job of controlling their populations. This does feel as a betrayal to them. (Though it should be noted that ALL States except Bihar have a fertility rate close to or below 2 at this point.) 5. So, this is really a question of the Federal Structure vs Individual Democracy. 6. The best solution in my opinion, is to carry out the delimitation as per the latest census for the lower House, while creating greater representation for the Southern States in the Upper House and giving State Legislatures more power over their policy and revenue. (The Indian Upper House is ALSO based on Population (& thus the 1971 census); deviating from that might be a possible compromise.)
2
OptimistIndya 12 hr ago +1
Good understanding
1
Working_Yesterday386 2 days ago +5
While the move could significantly increase women’s representation, linking it to delimitation means the timeline and political impact remain uncertain
5
Original-Front-9577 1 day ago +2
Good. 1 person 1 vote. Racists who don't like it can whine about it.
2
Proper_Card_5520 1 day ago +1
Lol i am an Indian and it is a shity thing to do, what is point of having this big country is your going to make northeast and South Indian irrelevant ? Just make new india with up, Bihar bro. Just to let you know i am from Maharashtra and i am completely opposite of this law or whatever.
1
Original-Front-9577 1 day ago +2
No just let the northeast and south control most of their revenue.
2
Late_Faithlessness24 2 days ago -2
Great news
-2
B-L-A-N-K-S-P-A-C-E 2 days ago +15
It's not. We're going full fascist. Edit: Keep downvoting me you bots, Idc
15
Late_Faithlessness24 2 days ago +15
How?
15
No_Tree_8144 2 days ago +1
so this bill is being paired with another bill called "delimitation" which is basically increasing the seat share for each state in the country. the seats haven't changed since like 1971 I I believe based on the population census then. the thing is in the past 50ish years south india maintained a pretty decent level of population growth and economic growth. while a few North Indian states haven't. they're currently doing another census right now and a lot of people thought that if they allocated seats by population again, some of these northern states would get far too dominant politically. while the southern states get sidelined. basically a lot of ppl were upset that the states that focused a lot on economic growth and population control are getting "rewarded" by losing influence at the federal level. another thing is the current party BJP is very dominant in some of those northern states while not so much in the south (although honestly idk, out of the 5 southern ones one called Karnataka has a huge bjp presence, and another called Andhra Pradesh is allied with the bjp rn. a third state called Telangana, honestly it feel like a matter of time before they break in there as well). so ppl thought the bjp was trying to gain complete dominance over the country by pulling this bill off. but as far as we can tell for now, they clarified pretty specifically that the increase in seats is going to be proportional. so for example if south india as a region held 20% of all the seats in parliament. even with the delimitation passed, they'll hold 20% of the newer seat tally. so if what they say is right, this is actually a pretty fantastic bill and no reason to hate on it. theres just a lot of misinformation, and indians on social media have a habit of making *everything* toxic asf for everyone involved. even when theres zero clarity on what's actually going on.
1
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +3
The proportion is not mentioned anywhere in the bill and they are refusing to put it in writing. Sus AF. And stop speaking for 'all' Indians.
3
No_Tree_8144 2 days ago +7
honestly idk. this is what they said: [https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2252748®=3&lang=2](https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2252748®=3&lang=2) that's about how specific as they've got. I cant see how this would be an issue at all if south indias percentage share is still identical. ppl initially thought it was based purely on population, which is a valid concern, but at this point with the info thats available ESPECIALLY this publicly, there doesn't seem to be an issue at all. and I never spoke for all indians??
7
Introvertloner101 2 days ago +5
Thats a press release, similar to what the Home Minister been saying/lying all day at the parliament because the actual bill clearly states it will only be based on population. We may get clarified on that today. And I meant your point about Indians on social media in general being toxic about everything. We, South Indians hardly ever engage in anything political at all, until this.
5
B-L-A-N-K-S-P-A-C-E 2 days ago -5
Basically they're doing what every fascist govt has been doing. Just like viktor orban in hungary, the crux of it is gerrymandering. They said they would increase the seats proportionately without hurting representation all this while. Except cut to the actual draft which reveals, seats will changes based of population proportions which means southern states which have performed batter and controlled population are getting penalised (also conveniently the states where the ruling party is far less dominant) but the states which breeded like rabbits(conveniently those where they are most dominant hmm) will see a much steeper increase in the number seats which btw is based on 2011 census and not even the current which is ongoing. There will be bots or paid shills who might take extensive time out of their day to write elaborate responses. Don't listen to these govt mouthpieces.
-5
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +12
I remember a (in)famous person, I believe Churchill was his name, that described all Indians in a similar fashion: ”beastly people, breeding like rabbits”, were his exact words, no? And now you echo his words. I believe we’re getting a repeat of the madras presidency.
12
B-L-A-N-K-S-P-A-C-E 2 days ago -11
Sorry i didn't mean to be racist. But just making a point. Bihar's TFR is 4 and it's seeing the biggest growth in seats
-11
Future-Analyst-6677 2 days ago +6
The same point that racists from the West love to use when they talk about Asian and African countries (very common when talking about pollution responsibility). Also learn the actual definition of gerrymandering: redrawing constituencies according to certain voting affiliation to guarantee winning a seat in parliament. No change in constituencies has happened. Only the proper implementation of universal adult franchise, since until now it was only South>North voter franchise.
6
B-L-A-N-K-S-P-A-C-E 2 days ago -2
That's not true. They ARE obviously going to redraw constituencies. How tf else will they increase the seats??
-2
BodybuilderUpbeat786 2 days ago +14
Its funny how in America liberals ask for one person one vote and want states with lower populations to lose the minimum 3 electoral college votes they get but liberals in India want to preserve the extra voting rights individuals in less populous states have. That said I'm a pragmatist above all else and delimination will end the Indian union and could lead to insurgencies, just as the Naxals are surrendering another insurgency will wreck havoc on the nation, Modi must delay delimination for another 25 years, birth rates in UP and Bihar are falling, they just need some more time. I am terrified of civil war and I hope Modi does what Vajpayee did and delays delimination again. Also breed like rabbits sounds very racist don't you think, you can't possibly be against facism and show such hate towards poor Bihari workers. This is the same language the BJP uses for religious minorities, be better.
14
ihatewonderwall99 2 days ago
The party obviously has fascist elements like the very obvious link to RSS but i don't think this specific thing is fascist. My concern was them going back on thr promise of consistent voting power of my state if we had less kids which some states did not follow through, but union govt has clarified that my voting power will stay consistent and my ancestors won't be punished for not pushing out kids like people in some hellhole state did. So am all good w this.
0
B-L-A-N-K-S-P-A-C-E 2 days ago
Except that they didn't follow through with what they said. The draft bill does not indicate that you will be protected from being punished. It straight up implies population based increase keeping 2011 census as the basis. That's the whole point.
0
← Back to Board