Federal redistributions have recently commenced in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia.
The AEC yesterday published the enrolment data to be used to draw New South Wales federal electorates.
There are two sets of data – enrolment data as of August 2023, and projected enrolments as of April 2028. This data has been published at the level of SA1, but for this post I’m just looking at it at the electorate and regional level.
Electorates must be drawn within 10% of the average as of August 2023, but just 3.5% of the average as of April 2028. That latter number is thus more important, and there are some notable differences.
I’ve previously written about possible enrolment trends twice, but that was only based on current enrolments.
This next table groups electorates into nine regions, and shows how much each region falls short or exceeds the quota. So if a region currently has six electorates, but is projected to only have 5.2251 quotas, that is written as -77.49.
When you compare the two sets of numbers, you see that the projections are expected to increase Sydney’s population relative to regional NSW by about half a seat between now and early 2028.
That growth is entirely within the north-west and south-west of Sydney. Those areas collectively have about the right number of voters at the moment for their eleven seats (impressive considering NSW is losing one seat), but by April 2028 are projected to have 80% of an extra seat’s population.
The north coast and the Hunter regions are just slightly over quota. When you look at the map, most of that surplus is in Paterson, which is 11.7% over quota.
Western NSW is quite a long way under quota, but about a third of that can be sorted by taking in some extra voters from the Hunter.
In Sydney, there is a very stark difference between the east and west. The six electorates in northern Sydney, stretching as far west as Bennelong and Berowra, fall 78% of a seat short of a quota. I can’t see how they avoid abolishing one seat in this area.
In central and southern Sydney, these ten seats are also almost 80% of a seat short of a quota, so again I suspect a seat could be abolished in that area. The seat of Wentworth is more than 20% under quota, but it won’t be abolished because it fits neatly into its corner. It’s more likely a seat like Blaxland would be abolished, as the deficits of all the seat further east accumulate.
But NSW only needs to lose one seat! So this frees up one seat to be created somewhere else, and the obvious choice would be straddling the north-west and south-west. Just two seats in the south-west (Macarthur and Werriwa) are projected to have more than 2.5 seats worth of enrolment by April 2028.
There’s also about a half quota of surplus enrolment projected to join Lindsay, Greenway, Chifley and Mitchell between them. Plus if the northern suburbs lose one seat, they’ll have about 1/5th of surplus voters to be added to Mitchell or Parramatta.
Antony Green pointed out on my podcast, and again in his excellent blog post from yesterday, that it’s likely that this will force the commissioners to draw a seat crossing Windsor Road, which currently separates Mitchell from Greenway, and is usually a strong electoral boundary.
Once they have sorted out all the internal changes within Sydney, losing one electorate, Sydney will collectively have about one quarter of a seat of surplus population. Meanwhile there will be about a quarter of a seat’s deficit in western NSW electorates.
The easiest way to resolve this imbalance is through the seat of Hume, which has a bizarre set of boundaries which include Goulburn and the Wollondilly and Camden areas, but skip over much of the Southern Highlands in between. Shifting Hume further into Sydney would resolve that imbalance.
That’s it for now. If you want to see the quotas for each seat, check out the map below. Antony’s blog post also has some nice maps with the same data.
The Illawarra and South Coast changes (making Whitlam a purely Wollongong and Shellharbour district) and Eden-Monaro losing its inland parts in the Snowy Mountains are also good.
Alternatively, the revised Cunningham district (straddling the northern Wollongong suburbs and inland parts of Sutherland Shire) could be given the name Hughes, and a new name applied for the Liverpool and Chipping Norton based district.
@darren on cook ive given hughes part of gymea to cunningham instead of cook and given it all of sutherland instead
Cunningham – Current Enrollment 118123 – Projected enrollment 117869
After redistribution – Enrollment 124845 – Projected enrollment 127369
@Mark – so similar to Darren’s map?
@David Walsh – I think you rubbished my criticism and then immediately validated it. The proposed new boundary between Berrowa and Bradfield should run east-west, not north south. This would make both seats more compact.
> In essence, this revised Hughes could be seen as a newly created seat and could be renamed, although they may wish to keep the name as Billy Hughes was a well-known (albeit controversial) figure as PM.
It wouldn’t be the first time. Recently Bruce was radically redrawn from a middle-ring eastern suburbs to an outer south-eastern suburbs seat. One of the advantages of using generic names for seats is they can be massively changed and still retain their name.
@ High Street
I was defending the choice of drawing seats within the north shore suburban corridor. Where the boundary is drawn between two seats within that corridor is a secondary matter. You were suggesting inferior alternatives like jumping Garigal National Park.
Cook – Current Enrollment 111384– Projected enrollment 125069
After redistribution – Enrollment 116012 – Projected enrollment 131487
ive got what il call tmporary “hughes’ until i wrk out a name to the follwing
Hughes – Current Enrollment 108110 – Projected enrollment 120601
After redistribution – Enrollment 115804 – Projected enrollment 131683
s far werriwa is
Werriwa – Current Enrollment 132460– Projected enrollment 159054
After redistribution – Enrollment 112486 – Projected enrollment 148821
@david walsh pm and federation names are retained where possible
Chifley – Current Enrollment 126954 – Projected enrollment 148639
After redistribution – Enrollment 112676 – Projected enrollment 120398
Werriwa – Current Enrollment 132460– Projected enrollment 159054
After redistribution – Enrollment 109746 – Projected enrollment 133533
Agree John i am supporter of retaining Federation names
@nimalan except where its a place name ofc
Chifley – Current Enrollment 126954 – Projected enrollment 148639
After redistribution – Enrollment 113039 – Projected enrollment 129300
i got lindsay close but about 407 electors short on new enrollment im sure they can make a sliht boundary somewhere…
Lindsay – Current Enrollment 127763– Projected enrollment 144334
After redistribution – Enrollment 108503– Projected enrollment 126739
@High Street, yeah I looked at it and thought I wasn’t sure of it extending from the Harbour to basically Broken Bay. To be honest, I think it’s fine, as it’s a single continous community as David says. And really, it’s not different than similar communities elsewhere in the state or other states. At least on this forum there seems to be a lot of attention on the North Shore, I’m guessing there’s a lot of local representation here so maybe the hyper-local focus is distracting from other areas of the state that need attention.
@Yoh An, yes indeed, North Sydney is gone – although there are more North Sydney electors than Bradfield ones. It just doesn’t make sense to keep the name North Sydney, despite it being a federation name.
I’ve moved Hughes into Liverpool and Cunningham into Sutherland, the numbers show more Cunningham electors going into the new seat than Hughes. In reality, my proposed Hughes contains only about 28,000 Hughes electors and about 75,000 Werriwa electors, so strictly it should be called Werriwa. That means Hughes is abolished and my proposed Weriwa (which contains about 65,000 Werriwa electors) is really a new seat. But Hughes is a seat named for a PM so we can’t abolish the name.
I guess I could have kept Blaxland, made the Cumberland based seat Blaxland instead of McMahon and the Prospect based seat McMahon instead of making it a new seat. Then I could have used the new name Bellear in the south-west and abolished Cunningham (which coincidentially I suggested back in 2014 with a similar proposal).
@john, I originally kept Gymea in Cunningham, but then though it’s really disconnected from the rest of Hughes, especially if I put Kirrawee into Cook. I’d prefer to split Sutherland and keep some of the “outer” parts of the Shire together.
I have a whole speil about how keeping federation names is impractical and there is repeated precedent to abolish them (Gwyder, Kalgoorlie, Melbourne Ports, Denison* and Wakefield* were all federation names abolished in the last 20 years). The AEC count the 1903 divisions in SA and Tas as federation names.
@Darren for similar reasons ive abolished Cunnigham in favour of keeping Hughes and Werriwa as one is a pm and the other an aboriginal word and federation name. as there is more of hughes in cunningham as there is in werriwa. also im proposing Cook be a joint namesake of James Cook and Joseph Cook
My Parkes ended up gigantic after I realised that if I were to retain my desired form of Macquarie, Calare must take Dubbo. The summary of my regional seats are:
– Parkes: Loses Dubbo, gains a lot of the Riverina region (not electorate) including Griffith and Leeton, is now centered on Broken Hill
– Farrer: Gains Wagga Wagga, loses a lot of the Riverina Region but retain most of the Murray region (bar Wakool)
– Riverina: Abolished
– Macquarie: Emu Plains to Bathurst and Rylstone (incl Blue Mountains, Lithgow and Oberon)
– Hume: Centred on Cootamundra and Goulburn with most of Wingecarribee
– Calare: Based on Dubbo and Orange, loses Bathurst and anything west of it
I haven’t done anything in Southwest Sydney (unless McMahon counts) but I calculated that basically 4 seats can fit in that area between McMahon and Hume.
Link (These are all meant to follow LGA or former LGA boundaries, except for the northeast of Hume):
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1zjp8bTN7_lxMspLIqQIucxa7OtVwvzU&usp=sharing
@leon i dont like that parkes tbh it needs to get smaller not bigger ive increased its electors without incresing its area ( tbh i think it might be smaller) it gains liverool plains from new england and forbes and parkes from riverina while losing moree plains and gwydir to new england. i think you will get the usual complaints about wagga nad albury in the same division
it already takes up nearly 1/2 of nsw based on boundaries it will be more then. i dont think thats gnna fly
@John
Tbh making Parkes this big wasn’t ever part of my plans but it turned out to be unavoidable in any scenario where Macquarie splits (which I think it should given what the hell is happening to Hume rn).
Also, I remember one of the usual complaints for Wagga and Albury was about TV from Melbourne coming to Albury, but the current form takes areas quite far north of the NSW-Vic border like Griffith and Leeton. Sometimes it even goes to Broken Hill (2006-2016)!
Tbh I tried keeping Farrer without any changes given it is only like -1.43% below quota but I realised that unfortunately there was no way to draw a Calare that doesn’t include half of Wagga Wagga otherwise. I am sure Wagga Wagga is better paired with Albury if the alternatives are Orange or Goulburn. Also if the Macquarie split is deemed unviable (which I really hope is not going to be the case – the connectivity between BM and Hawkesbury is REALLY poor!), I would mostly support @Darren McSweeney’s regional seats (that keeps Calare and Farrer unchanged and make Parkes take Forbes and Parkes (the latter being just like your suggestion))
@leon i wanted to split it as well but there just currently isnt the right configuration and numbers given what i had to substitute on the north coast and not do what i wanted with hunter but im putting that in the next redistribution basket as i have done a bit towards that end but the numbers just arent there this time around.
update
Greenway – Current Enrollment 125882 – Projected enrollment 144152
After redistribution – Enrollment 112954 – Projected enrollment 129323
Chifley – Current Enrollment 126954 – Projected enrollment 148639
After redistribution – Enrollment 114143 – Projected enrollment 131354
Lindsay – Current Enrollment 127763– Projected enrollment 144334
After redistribution – Enrollment 109096 – Projected enrollment 127922
I am planning to go ahead with my plan on the basis that this is necessary to resolve the connectivity issue in McMahon (at St Clair and Erskine Park – I will move this to Chifley) and Macquarie as well as preventing Hume from being so clearly hybrid Urban-Rural (my proposed Macquarie isn’t as bad imo because it uses natural boundaries on the east and Emu Plains was formerly in Blue Mountains LGA). My McMahon fix only works with the Macquarie split because otherwise Parramatta would go into half of Blacktown Proper (It wouldn’t even stop at something like Seven Hills)
I note that this screws up Parkes and Farrer but that is fixing 3 electorates at the expense of 2 (and I am not convinced that the latter is severe)
If AEC won’t adopt my western sydney/regional boundaries then I have to hope that my eastern Sydney gets adopted at least
my mcmahon moves further west absorbing territory from lindsay and werriwa and will probably be a new division since it will undergo massive changes. i will most likely merge the remainder with the remainder of fowler which retreats from liverpool across the georges river in to what is probably a fairfield lga based seat. long story short we could see a chris bowen v dai le matchup. bowen would no t contest the new divsion as he problably lose being in liberal territory. dai le could move with her friendleier liverpool voters but if she doesnt its fight night in western sydney
@leon im putting emu plains as oberon into macquarie as well
I’ll say it again – if a seat can extend from the habour to broken bay because it’s a single line of community, then why can’t parts of the northern beaches and the upper north shore go in a single seat?
@High St
Bradfield used to go into Forestville and Belrose. I haven’t done the numbers with that idea but yes, if a seat can be drawn from Manly to Mona Vale then that definitely is valid.
@John
I have made 2 additional alternatives on how to draw regional electorates. The largest electorate (Riverina this time) in the one called “Regions3.pdf” is far smaller than the largest electorate in the other maps but the appearance is… Uhhh… Not great… I wonder if community of interest criterion works but I am doubtful that Wagga Wagga and Broken Hill in the same electorate is great (though the old (2006-2016) Farrer is worse IMO)
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fVsuLopbfR0YTs70fzDrBrgL3oqhKj7o?usp=sharing
@leon farrer should not change the current version doesnt need any changes, im not in favour of abolishing any regional electorates. but i do support the splitting of amcquarie however based on the current numbers its not possible at this redistribution but i believe it will be next time (possibly)
McMahon – Current Enrollment 111293 – Projected enrollment 125817
After redistribution – Enrollment 119794 – Projected enrollment 133533
Fowler – Current Enrollment 112414 – Projected enrollment 127624
After redistribution – Enrollment 113128 – Projected enrollment 129539
@High Street
You can look at linking the Upper North Shore and Northern Beaches if you want.
Just personally, I felt having only one Division crossing Middle Harbour was a better outcome than having two. And since Warringah already takes in a chunk of territory on the western side, it made sense to simply extend it further rather than create a new crossing somewhere else.
given major renovation to fowler im suggesting the name be changed to Pemulwuy
There aren’t that many seats named after women.
Parramatta – Current Enrollment 109049 – Projected enrollment 119570
After redistribution – Enrollment 116267 – Projected enrollment 124787
update
McMahon – Current Enrollment 111293 – Projected enrollment 125817
After redistribution – Enrollment 115711 – Projected enrollment 129076
Fowler – Current Enrollment 112414 – Projected enrollment 127624
After redistribution – Enrollment 119785 – Projected enrollment 130971
Kingsford-Smith – Current Enrollment 115481 – Projected enrollment 120776
After redistribution – Enrollment 121116 – Projected enrollment 132125
parramatta sheds holroyd lga and takes in the rest of parramatta lga from bennelong. becoming a solely parramatta seat
Kingsford-Smith – Current Enrollment 115481 – Projected enrollment 120776
After redistribution – Enrollment 119755 – Projected enrollment 131324
Sydney – Current Enrollment 122549 – Projected enrollment 121661
After redistribution – Enrollment 130232 – Projected enrollment 128914
Grayndler – Current Enrollment 111079 – Projected enrollment 111454
After redistribution – Enrollment 120659 – Projected enrollment 125899
update
Grayndler – Current Enrollment 111079 – Projected enrollment 111454
After redistribution – Enrollment 123982 – Projected enrollment 129529
Reid – Current Enrollment 116485 – Projected enrollment 125674
After redistribution – Enrollment 123982 – Projected enrollment 129529
Watson – Current Enrollment 110765 – Projected enrollment 123370
After redistribution – Enrollment 113432 – Projected enrollment 125423
reid update
Reid – Current Enrollment 116485 – Projected enrollment 125674
After redistribution – Enrollment 119059 – Projected enrollment 130613
Banks – Current Enrollment 108512 – Projected enrollment 119557
After redistribution – Enrollment 124843 – Projected enrollment 127271
Banks loses all territory west of salt pah creek and the Riverwood Sa2
now ive just got a gigantic Blaxland to split into 2 divisions.
I don’t know why anyone hasn’t noticed that Darren’s proposal abolishes the PM’s seat of Grayndler by converting the three seats of Sydney, Grayndler and Watson into two. His proposal also abolishes North Sydney by merging North Sydney with Bradfield, while creating a new seat based on Cumberland City Council that borders the electorates of McMahon, Greenway, Parramatta, Reid, Blaxland and Fowler.
By the way, I think Werriwa should be renamed Walton, after Nancy-Bird Walton. The Western Sydney International (Nancy-Bird Walton) Airport will be located in the Walton electorate that shares its namesake, just like the Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport is located in the electorate of Kingsford Smith that shares its namesake. The fact that Werriwa is the local aboriginal name for Lake George located in South Eastern NSW that is very far from the current division of Werriwa means the name Werriwa is no longer meaningful enough to retain when there is a much better alternative. https://api.mapbox.com/styles/v1/dmcsw/clnuxh0jd000601mvdafe944r.html
@joseph I noticed I did suggest that doing so will most likely create a mass complaints. Hence why I have abolished Barron and transferred the name to grayndler. It isn’t named after the airport. And unlike KS it could move around and most likely the airport will cease being there. I have named it Bradman. Werriwa will most likely be retained due to being a federation name and an Aboriginal word. I think most people will find my suggestions practical and agreeable. Will post early next week. I’m away for the weekend all that left is Blaxland which I need to finish splitting in two as I’ve had it absorb the excess from Watson banks and Fowler.
Joseph, its actually Blaxland that is abolished.
Sydney takes Balmain and Annandale.
Grayndler moves south and west and takes Canterbury, Earlwood and Campsie.
Watson moves west into Bankstown, Sefton and Yerringa.
Banks moves north into Bankstown and Condell Park.
Fowler takes Georges Hall and Chester Hill.
The Cumberland based seat is now McMahon.
The seat around Prospect is a new one called Beliear.
I actually did consider making my Werriwa – the one around Badgerys Creek Walton. In the end, 8 called it Werriwa and the seat Hughes l.
I’ve already lodged my suggestion so its not changing now. But i wouldn’t be against Walton, Werriwa taking Liverpool and Hughes taking Sutherland with Cunningham abolished.
It’s interesting to see your interpretation of it without labels though.
John, please don’t suggest Bradman. He’s not deserving of a division named after him. He did nothing of substance except hit a ball. I already argued against it last time.
Overall consensus seems to be that Whitlam should lose the Southern Highlands, but Eden-Monaro could take on quite a few different configurations depending on decisions elsewhere.
It looks like it will cause some significant flow-on through Eden-Monaro and Hughes, but since Wollongong + Shellharbour + Kiama + Shoalhaven + Eurobodalla + Bega Valley is basically exactly 3 quotas, should that seat arrangement be prioritised?
Gilmore would take in everything from the border to the Shoalhaven River. Strong border, but would it be right to split Bomaderry-Nowra in half like that?
Whitlam would take in everything up the Dapto area with Mullet Creek and Lake Illawarra as another strong bounday.
@darren too late the aec considered it last time. And I’m sure are considering it again
I think I will upload this soon.
Other than the insanely big Parkes I think every electorate genuinely makes sense on communities of interests.
I need to ensure I have made no serious mistakes in my calculations.
I will also check if my PDF File that I submit is somewhat easy to understand.
Basically, my main changes are:
– Grayndler, North Sydney and Riverina abolished
– Ruse (around Hawkesbury) and Lang (basically 2000-20006 Reid) are created
– Whitlam moves completely out of the Illawarra and takes Goulburn
– 5 seats are drawn from Cook to Eden-Monaro
– Parkes becomes massive (sorry) but still smaller than Kennedy
– Hume becomes a Sydney seat (currently hybrid, was completely rural until 2016)
– Blaxland, Banks and Reid becomes undeniably based on Bankstown, Hurstville and Strathfield respectively
Google Maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1zjp8bTN7_lxMspLIqQIucxa7OtVwvzU&usp=sharing
PDF File:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1g2O4s-5htt4lDeqVZD7vT3RdwrK05-LE/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115783152550328944777&rtpof=true&sd=true
SORRY WRONG FILE FOR THE PDF
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GJXx_z-mLWwL4_GnlBpPWkDJetMPHWlj/view?usp=sharing
@Leon
I’ll be submitting a suggestion that covers only the northern half of Greater Sydney. It seems you and I have the same idea for this region.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lCb3A8jCMD7mxCI2gVdphTa8kg1K7EI0/view?usp=sharing
Comments are closed.