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.
Nicholas, your redrawn North Sydney doesn’t contain North Sydney CBD, and probably doesn’t contain much of North Sydney LGA. Do you think that should be named Bradfield?
@votante it doesn’t contain much of Bradfield either and would most likely need a new name
@Votante
Probably. I’ve assigned names based on resemblance to existing electorates. I’ll be making a point in my submission that I’m only suggesting boundaries, not names.
I spent all day yesterday reworking my proposals. This was motivated by not being able to get Grayndler and Barton to work. My original plan was that Warringah and Cunningham be abolished and a new seat be created around Camden. Warringah abolition still stands but Grayndler has now got the chop with Barton moving north. The new seat is somewhere in Western Sydney but not Camden. Haven’t pinned it down yet.
I’m really curious to see how people deal with South West Sydney. I gave up trying. It’s hard not to run into the problem of having a division that is both below tolerance on current enrolment, and above tolerance on projected enrolment.
Nicholas, it was a real struggle. I managed to put northern parts of Camden with Austral, Greendale and the more stable parts of Liverpool around Bonnyrigg. I excised all of Campbelltown to Macarthur, and Glenfield, Macquarie Fields and Edmonson Park to Hughes.
My version of Werriwa is 109,175 (so only 265 electors under the low threshold) for current and 134,051 (106 below the high threshold) for projected. It’s precariously balanced and I can’t properly split the SA1s along the Liverpool-Penrith border (my ideal boundary in the area) without it falling over.
Alright, I have finished (THIS TIME FOR REAL)
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1iCSOrcKUCUSD3CD4Rgm5QZybMkEV3s5Q?usp=sharing
My main changes include:
– Abolishing Grayndler, North Sydney and Riverina
– Creation of Ruse (Hawkesbury) and Lang (Cumberland)
– Whitlam leaves the Illawarra (to prevent the abolition of Cunnignham) and becomes composed of similar amounts of Whitlam, Hume (incl. Goulburn) and Riverina with a bit of Eden-Monaro too
– Hume becomes a Sydney-based seat (While no calculations were done for Southwest Sydney beyond the sum, nearly 70% of the current Hume would be in this area)
– Community of interest issues in the current Banks, Reid and McMahon fixed, making each based very clearly on Hurstville, Strathfield and Fairfield respectively
@Nicholas
My Hume, Macarthur, Werriwa and Fowler all have the same issue, with their projected enrolment summing to 3.97ish quota but their current enrolment summing to 3.61ish quota. One fix (which I decided not to bother with) is to move Mt Vernon, Cecil Park and Horsley Park from McMahon to one of these seats but even then it seems quite precarious – it only still adds up to 3.63ish quota on current enrolment.
@Nicholas
I merged northern Camden with southern Penrith (Glenmore Park, St Clair, etc). So my new seat ranges basically from the M4 to the M5.
I put more of the Camden growth area into Hume, and was able to confine Macarthur almost completely east of the M5. Then Werriwa becomes the main ‘Liverpool’ seat.
So all 4 seats contain a mix of growth and stable areas. But yes it was definitely a bit of a struggle. I think it’s inevitable that a couple of seats will end up with a few “bits and pieces” to try to ensure the huge growth is spread around evenly.
@leon i can almost guarantee you that wont get up no offence.
my 2 seats will be next 2 each other one around cobbity/camden the other in mulgoa/penrith
@John
What exactly about Leon’s proposal “won’t get up”? It looks sensible to me and is concurrent with what others have suggested.
Putting Wagga and Albury in one division creating a monstrosity Parkes that’s already half the state. Elongating New England. I could keep going
As a former resident of Riverina, Parkes, Farrer and Leon’s new Whitlam, I soundly agree with John’s assessment. Leon’s statement of knowing very little of Regional NSW rings very true.
Ah, regional NSW… well I don’t know much about regional NSW either and haven’t looked at it at all in this redistribution.
@nicholas thats his point people who live i the city have no idea how people in the regions live and community relationships.
@John
@Witness
I just found a new solution fir the region (and the sum of SW Sydney) and I am reworking on it right now (if Goulburn and Wagga Wagga together is fine with you)
Nevertheless it would help if you would elaborate on what is wrong with Wagga + Albury. And I will assume you both have read through my justification of it.
@Nicholas, if you look at https://handbook.aph.gov.au/Electorate/Farrer/State/New%20South%20Wales you’ll see that Wagga Wagga and Albury have been in separate division since 1984.
Generally the AEC tries to keep each large regional centre in a separate divsion. In NSW this generally means Albury is in Farrer, Wagga Wagga is in Riverina, Dubbo is in Parkes, Goulburn is in Hume and Queanbeyan is in Eden-Monaro. In the past Coffs Harbour was in Cowper, Port Macquarie in Lyne, Grafton was in Page and Lismore was in Richmond.
Merging them together is controversial, because it basically means the the two regional centres has to compete within the same electorate.
Although, it does look inevitiable that it will need to occur at some point in the near future. Unless they decide to contort and gerrymander divisions to fit them in.
Goulburn and Wagga also don’t really work together in my opinion. If Goulburn needs to leave Hume it should go to Eden-Monaro as Queanbeyan (Canberra) is just down the road.
Wagga and Albury together (apart from leaving Griffith/M.I.A. in a mess) are distinctly different regional cities of significant size. Any politician from one would be treated with disdain by the voters of the other and seen as not representing the interests of the 50,000+ people from the other city. You mentioned having Dubbo and Orange in the same electorate wasn’t ideal, well Wagga and Albury is significantly worse than that.
The Regional Public Transport network you mentioned in your justification is virtually unused by locals. Almost zero people catch a train between Wagga and Albury, because there are only 2 per day and one of those leaves in the middle of the night and is extremely expensive.
@witness we have the same issue here in indi in vic Wodonga and Wangaratta. here in Wodonga people are seen to be neglected in favour of Wangaratta but its inevitable atm.
last 2 division created one is temporarily named X until i come up with a name. as its made of parts of Blaxland Fowler McMahon Parramatta and Reid and cant justify calling it fowler given i chopped that place up between the new Werriwa and McMahon
A new division named X has been created.
X – Current Enrollment 229424 – Projected enrollment 253915
Blaxland – Current Enrollment 0 – Projected enrollment 0
Blaxland After redistribution – Enrollment 112277 – Projected enrollment 126202
X After redistribution – Enrollment 117147 – Projected enrollment 127713
@leon il get back to you i know every time it is suggested the change there minds due to complaints. you will probably find theyre will be the same number of complaints for abolishing Grayndler
@john My Parents live in Wang, but at least those 2 are a little bit smaller than Wagga and Albury. It is weird that Wangaratta although smaller, seems to hold the power since McGowan got in. Where was Mirabella based (and don’t say Melbourne)?
im gonna go ahead and support the suggestion for a division called Walton after Nancy Bird Walton
@witness wangaratta is actually bigger. like Haines and McGowan before her she was based in Wangaratta. ive been to the farm too.
name changes
Cunningham becomes Hughes to preserve the name of a PM
Hughes becomes Werriwa to preserve a federation name and aboriginal word
Grayndler becomes Barton to preserve the name of a PM
The new South West Sydney division named Bradman after Donald Bradman no explanation needed of who he is.
The new North West Sydney division named Walton after Nancy Bird Walton who was a pioneering Australian aviator, known as “The Angel of the Outback” and the founder and patron of the Australian Women Pilots’ Association.
The New Central Sydney division named Pemulwuy after aboriginal political and resistance leader Pemulwuy.
Calare renamed Brock after motor racing legend Peter Brock and as the “Calare” name no longer applies as the Lachlan River is no longer in the division
Cook namesake now includes PM Joseph Cook.
Fowler takes over much of the former territory of McMahon so becomes the new McMahon to preserve the name of a PM.
Warringah becomes Sydney Harbour
update
A new division named Pemulwuy has been created.
Pemulwuy – Current Enrollment 227201 – Projected enrollment 253929
Blaxland – Current Enrollment 0 – Projected enrollment 0
Pemulwuy After redistribution – Enrollment 116490 – Projected enrollment 127677
Blaxland After redistribution – Enrollment 110711 – Projected enrollment 126252
@John
You have any maps? It’s hard to follow just textual descriptions.
@nicholas coming shortly
@ John, I like the suggestion of Brock, apart from winning a number of races in NSW, what is his connection to NSW that would see the redistribution committee support it as he was born and lived most of his life in Victoria?. Which I suggest might be a better state to use the name
@John
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jd0oearJ41wluP7TXlLJx4waaDv5QNRx/view?usp=sharing
I will try and split Albury and Wagga Wagga again but is this any better?
Actually ignore that I made a mistake in my calculation
@John
Amended to split Dubbo and Orange. I will do further work with Farrer’s Problems
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YFCSpKmtTN6vwfvjTVXWT65Nyd5MSwS0/view?usp=sharing
@Leon
I was originally going to keep Macquarie as Blue Mountains + Hawkesbury, but I’ve been been playing around with the Blue Mountains + Lithgow + Oberon + Bathurst after seeing some of your earlier maps.
If we’re going to delete Calare, then it’s possible to leave Parkes largely unchanged by taking in the rest of Dubbo and Mid-Western, plus some minor adjustments with New England. No changes would need to be made to the borders with Farrer and Riverina. Consensus seems to be that Broken Hill should stay paired with Dubbo in Parkes.
Seems like dramatic changes to the regional seats are likely to draw opposition, even if they do happen to improve community of interest across the state.
Following on from that, Riverina would have to take in Orange and would be about 25% over quota, but can only really lose territory to Hume/Eden-Monaro around the Cowra/Young/Cootamundra area, which would create a pretty distorted electorate.
Unless… We move Wagga Wagga into Farrer instead of Albury. That would actually be an improvement to Farrer by creating an actual Riverina-based seat. But we’d have to put Albury into “Eden-Monaro”. Would an Albury-Queanbeyan electorate or Albury-Goulburn electorate be too offensive? I get that there’s a mountain range in between, but there’s also probably some community of interest along the Hume Highway.
@captain His connection is mount panorama but I will take your
this is my nsw redistribution document. maps to follow.
Hunter is going to become more cohesive by losing Muswellbrook to Calare/New England/Parkes and gaining Kurri Kurri from Paterson, but I’m considering doing a larger swap between Hunter and Paterson.
Hunter would gain all of Maitland LGA from Paterson in exchange for its share of Lake Macquarie LGA. Paterson would extend all the way from the Nelson Bay Peninsula to Wyee at the bottom of Lake Macquarie, but would become a coastal community electorate, allowing Hunter to become a compact Maitland/Cessnock/Singleton electorate.
@angas ive just moved the lgas between shortland and hunter to create 2 divisions that fit within quota
@John
Does that mean you’re rotating Hunter and Shortland counterclockwise around the lake so that Hunter takes in the Central Coast part of Shortland, and Shortland becomes a 2nd urban seat next to Newcastle?
For my Shortland, I’ve just topped it up at both ends by taking in Argenton and Glendale in the North and Wyee in the South.
@angas yes
ive used the swansea channel as the boundary
@John That’s a neat arrangement. I like it.
The decision around whether to push Macquarie West to Bathurst or to keep it paired with Hawkesbury is going to be the most important one of this redistribution. The choice made here will have flow on effects to 20 or more seats. I think I’m going to draw boundaries for both options before deciding which is the best overall arrangement.
Going West leads to some solid borders for the Northern half of Greater Sydney. Penrith LGA + Blacktown LGA + everything North of the M4-Duck River-Parramatta River-Sydney Harbour is close enough to 11 quotas.
But that causes issues with Western NSW and something ugly is going to have to happen along the Hume Highway coridoor. There’ll likely be strong opposition to abolishing a regional seat even if a new one is created further towards Sydney. Then there’s the impact to the South Coast, Sutherland, and the seats around Southwestern Sydney.
Keeping Macquarie with Hawkesbury leaves the regions relatively unchanged, but makes for more challenging borders in Northwestern Sydney and the Cumberland area.
Hard to say which option is better until both have been tried, but the committee is likely to opt for the least controversial choice even if it results in a bunch of disconnected half-half electorates (like Macquarie, McMahon, Hughes, Hume, Whitlam).
@angas i wanted o split macquarie bu the numbers just werent available for what i waned to do. for now ive added emu plains and oberon and hopefully the split will possible next time.
in other news the new camden seat will most likely be notionally liberal
Darren, I have no objections to the boundaries you proposed, but I would like to make some comments in terms of the names of these electorates and the political implications for two seats that will be merged with another seat.
On the North Shore, there seems to be a general consensus that North Sydney and Bradfield will be merged into one seat. Since most of the North Sydney Council won’t be in the merged seat, the name of North Sydney is no longer worth retaining, therefore North Sydney is likely to be abolished and merged with Bradfield. This will force the member for North Sydney Kylea Tink to run against Paul Fletcher in Bradfield. Although Nicolette Boele has intended to run for Bradfield again at the next election, since Kylea Tink is an incumbent MP, more well known and more likely to win the new Bradfield, Nicolette Boele will likely step aside in favour of Kylea Tink. Although moving Bennelong east to take in Hunters Hill, where the Liberal party enjoyed large lead on 2PP terms in the 2022 federal election, would reduce the Labor margin in Bennelong, there will be no alternative proposal available for Labor to put forward. The Voice’s defeat will also make Hunters Hill Voice Yes voters turn against or harden against the Liberals (the three polling booths in Hunters Hill recorded an overall majority Yes vote at the referendum), which means Labor still has a chance to overcome an unfavourable redistribution and make history to retain Bennelong.
In the South West and South of Sydney, “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”. To ensure as fewer voters changing electorates as possible, the Liverpool based seat should be called Werriwa, and the new seat covering Austral and Leppington given a new named called 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.
Since Hughes is named after a former PM and its name should be retained, the seat containing part of the Sutherland Shire and part of the Wollongong City Council should be called Hughes with Cunningham abolished. The new Hughes is essentially a merger of Hughes and Cunningham, forcing the member for Cunningham Alison Byrnes to run against Jenny Ware in Hughes. Although the new Hughes has more electors from the old Cunningham than the old Hughes, the name of Hughes is retained since it is named after a former PM. Since pushing Hughes into Illawarra will greatly reduce the Liberal margin in Hughes and putting the Liberals at risk of losing Hughes for the first time since 1998, such option will be fiercely resisted by the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party will suggest pushing Hughes north of the Georges River and take in part of Banks instead, with Barton abolished, and rename Grayndler to Barton (Barton is named after Australia’s 1st PM, therefore its name must be retained).
The old McMahon is abolished, with its territory split the Cumberland-based seat, the Prospect Reservoir based seat and the new Fowler, with the largest number of voters transferred to the Cumberland based seat, therefore I think the Cumberland-based seat should be named McMahon, the Prospect-based seat given a new name. I think Bob Bellear, who was an Australian social activist, lawyer and the first Aboriginal Australian judge, does deserve a division named after him.
The old Blaxland is abolished, with its territory split between the new Cumberland-based McMahon, the new Watson and the new Banks. Although it’s possible to retain the name of Blaxland by naming the new Cumberland-based seat Blaxland, naming a seat after a pre-federation era white man like Gregory Blaxland who wasn’t even Australian, has become an outdated practice and is against the spirit of reconciliation. Bob Bellear definitely deserves a seat much more than Gregory Blaxland. At the next election, the current member for Blaxland Jason Clare could decide to transfer to either Bellear or McMahon, with the current member for McMahon Chris Bowen either recontesting McMahon or transferring to Bellear.
In summary:
Seats abolished: North Sydney (merged with Bradfield), Cunningham (merged with Hughes), Blaxland
Seats created: Bellear, Walton
@joseph my McMahon will be centred on Fairfield and Holroyd. Fowler is abolished in favour of Pemulwuy as the old Fowler sheds large amounts of territory to werriwa and McMahon. Only a small portion of Fowler remains and as such the name can’t be justified as being retained as the new division is made up of 5 different divisions including McMahon Fowler Parramatta Blaxland and Reid
Seats created Sydney Harbour, Walton Bradman Brock Pemulwuy. Seats abolished north Sydney Cunningham Grayndler Warringah calare fowler
Joseph, I would agree with pretty much everything you said. I don’t look at the political implications when I’m drawing divisions, I try to avoid even thinking about who the incumbent member for each division even is (obviously this is not actually possible, but I limit thinking about who wins or loses politically as much as I can).
I have already submitted by suggestion keeping the names Cunningham, Hughes and Werriwa, but I would have absolutely no issue abolishing the name Cunningham. Like Blaxland, it’s named for a colonial British man. Allan Cunningham was English and I doubt would ever have called himself Australian who sailed around. I’d be happy renaming that division Hughes. I think the Liverpool based seat could easily be Werriwa, and then the new division, I would happily call it Walton – or even Bird Walton as Bird was her maiden name, and she was generally known as Nancy Bird Walton with both names.
Everything else is basically what I’ve done. Bradfield and North Sydney are combined, with North Sydney LGA (except a little bit around St Leonards due to the numbers) going to Warringah and Hunters Hill going to Bennelong.
The Cumberland based seat is McMahon, Blaxland is abolished and the new Prospect area seat stretching from the Penrith railway line at St Marys into Blacktown, down through Erskine Park, Horsely Park to Bossley Park, Abbotsbury, Cecil Hills and Bonnyrigg Heights is called Bellear. I’ve suggested it be named after both Bob and Sol Bellear.
I think I’ll include in my comments on suggestions that I’d agree with changing the names of my divisions to accommodate the Walton-Werriwa-Hughes combination.
That in addition to objecting to any new division name suggested for colonial explorers, pioneers or sports stars that did nothing else, like Bradman, and looks like I’ll have to include Brock as well – c’mon, a race car driver with allegations of DV really doesn’t deserve a division named for him.
John, I’m not a fan of a generic geographic name like Sydney Harbour. Especially since it in part replicates an existing division name.
As I just mentioned above, I’m all for a division named for Nancy-Bird Walton.
Bradman just did nothing to warrant a division. He never put his fame or reputation to help anyone or did anything outside of cricket. By most accounts, he was a bit of an @®$€ as well.
Brock, like I mentioned above, is in a similar boat. He raced cars. Sure he was involved in .05 campaign to reduce the road toll and had a charitable foundation, but his reputation is partially shadowed by the allegations of DV against his ex-wife.
Pemulwuy is ok for a division name. I’m not objecting to it, but I do feel like we can find some more contemporary references though. It’s time to move away from giving new names to anyone from the penal colony era.
Happy to see North Sydney and Cunningham go. Warringah and Calare being both Aboriginal names will likely be retained, even though they’re geographic, and in Calare’s case mostly doesn’t include the feature it’s named for. I wouldn’t be upset if they were removed. As long as the new names are suitable.
I don’t think they’ll take to abolishing Grayndler lest they are seen to be political for abolishing the PMs division.
Fowler is named for the first woman elected to a council in Lilian Fowler. There are only three divisions in NSW named for women, and Fowler is the only one not a writer, so they’ll definitely keep the name.
Finally, I doubt they’ll make that many name changes. They’re usually pretty conservative with renaming divisions – Victoria in 2018 aside, where they tried to rename four divisions and got three through. Six is most definitely a bridge too far.
I look forward to seeing everyone’s suggestions on Monday. I’m almost done with WA, just writing the report and loading my maps into mapbox. Just in time to start on Victoria which comes out today! Phew!
@adarren allegations don’t amount to having done something. Being Aboriginal isn’t likely to protect them the only reason why corangamite and werriwa have survived is because they are also federation names. In relation Grayndler it’s abolished in name only if you’ve followed my comments. It maintains most of its territory under the Barron name. And yes they do remember when they abolished gwyder? The seat of the deputy. They do what is best without any bias. In regards to fowler it’s losing most of its former territory so it’s hard to justify keeping it and there will be another named Walton most likely. In regards to names this is a suggestion only they don’t necessarily need to abide by all of them.
I will be redacting my submission to the AEC, and will not be resubmitting due to time constraints from study commitments.
Comments are closed.