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.
I’m generally against naming divisions after sport stars at all. In my opinion, sport stars don’t need the accolades for a divsion. They generally get enough as it is, and I think we’re better off naming a stadium or roads, a trophy, or anything else after them instead. Unless they’ve gone on to do something else that actually benefits society, like heavily involved in charity, social advocacy or something like that. Or they enter politics and become a major player with real policy background, become a minister or PM. People like John Alexander or Nova Peris wouldn’t even qualify for me. Even more so when they’re not actually a nice person (or worse), and did nothing to improve the life of, help or benefit anyone else.
I even previously objected to a suggestion that Shirley Strickland de la Hunty have a division named for her. However, she’s probably one of the few that actually made a social or political involvement after sport that would actually warrant a dvision be named for her.
True they have been known to do strange things that contradict even themselves. But on the whole they are pretty conservative when it comes to abolishing and renaming. They tend to keep the status quo going with existing seats.
And yes, they got rid of Gwyder which I admit that I didn’t rememebr was the Deputy PM seat at the time. It was also a federation name (part of my evidence of precedence that federation names can, and are, freely abolished) and tenuously it’s also allegedly related to an Aboriginal name. In reality, I’d have preferred they kept Gwyder and abolished New England, as that name has less scope for movement.
As you said, it’s just a suggestion. I doubt they’ll accept anyone’s suggestion in full, there’s always some changes and compromises.
@darren well certain geographic features are so prominent that they can be. i never understood why they named one after lake George(werriwa) until i saw it a couple months ago. some sports stars who have stood above the rest i believe deserve the recognition as they are prominent australians. i can bet you more astralians could tell you who don bradman was then nova peris. msot probably couldnt pick john alexander out of a lneup. i think someone like Bradman can be as he rendered outstanding services to the game of cricket on behalf of australia. “divisions should be named after deceased Australians who have rendered outstanding service to their country”
@Joseph
In the previous redistribution, the Liberal Party tried suggesting having a division combining Campbelltown and Wollongong LGAs. They gave some silly arguments including an old map to suggest that Appin Road represents a significant community of interest. Maybe they’ll try pulling that off again.
@leon you’ve done a great job! Please submit anyway!
@Leon
Would like to echo what Theo just said. Leave a note or something in the introduction explaining how you feel. I’m sure the committee and others will understand. You’ve done great work.
submitted my draft
Didn’t have the time make a suggestion myself, but boy is this going to be tough for the AEC to decide. The current map is a bit of a mess, growth patterns are uneven enough that they almost have to rip it up from scratch, but there’ll be a massive fight if they suggest an aggressive re-draw. Chances are unless the federal government decides to expand the size of the house NSW maps will become uglier and uglier….
Dunno if the numbers would work but from a bubble I’d get rid of North Sydney/Warringah, Grayndler (maybe rename Barton Grayndler and Banks Barton to appease angry citizens), Cunningham and Parkes/Calare and create seats around Camden, Cumberland and the North-West Growth Area/Hawkesbury. But getting rid of two non-Sydney seats and not technically creating a new one (even though Hughes, Macquarie, Hume and probably Macarthur/new Camden seat would become more rural) would be extremely controversial and cause an outrage.
@ chalsa banks and Barton would be retained over Grayndler
the first of many
Banks – https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-A5cnxs5buQirupqQcGyh2VUjyHdnaJp/view?usp=drive_link
Battling to get my submission – time is against me!! Might be 60% detailed and 40% summary
@redistributed ive submitted my written submission. wont have time for maps but il just submit them as comments on my suggestions
Barton – https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-HRUCwXfm99XPVq5vg1p-wWiOHgGAmAY/view?usp=drive_link
Bennelong – https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-gyiV0bRCzlLhCMm5o4kwKrf8FS0s2pj/view?usp=drive_link
Mine will be the obvious submission as it will cover only 34 seats!! My hole is in southern and western Sydney through brief descriptions of what was intended were included in the summary.
In the end I managed to resubmit something in my little remaining time but without most of the Western Sydney seats (bar moving Chifley’s western border to Eastern Creek) and none of the North Coast (though I calculated 10 collective quota for them). I kept Macquarie in its current form (unfortunately).
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TD4pkVWEqAFzAorvSsooH7CfxBUAUiyV/view?usp=drive_link
Could name a seat after Bradman unless all the catholics living there were ethnically cleaned out?
meant to add not
@leon il agree on warrigal mackellar betowra differ on others. Macquarie take emu Plains Oberon and rest of blue mountains south from hume
I’m against naming an electorate after Bradman. It’s too similar to Bradfield and Braddon. It’s also unlikely that an electorate south or west of Campbelltown will be created or renamed.
Like Darren McSweeney, I’m also against naming electorates after sport stars. I don’t think there are any electorates named after people known exclusively for their sporting careers. Many sport stars have competitions, trophies, roads, parks, stadiums and other sporting facilities named after them, plus they are generally household names that a lot of people will know.
I’m a fan of naming electorates after pioneers in science and technology (e.g. inventors, Nobel Prize laureates), medicine, academia, the arts and human rights as well as those heavily involved in charities. Many of them don’t get the recognition that they deserve and so naming an electorate after them partly rectifies this and gives them more of a profile. How many people know who David Unaipon or Mary Reibey were? Unless you’re a history buff or a serious banknote collector, you probably don’t. They’re both on our banknotes. Less people would know about them if they weren’t on our banknotes.
Looking forward to reading everyone’s suggestions tomorrow night.
@John @Redistributed I underestimated how long it would take to put a submission together so didn’t get mine completely finished either. I hope I can submit something for the next part.
@Leon Good to see that you found time to get a submission done. I like those maps.
I reckon there’s going to be a substantial amount of community submissions relating to the Northern Sydney area given the loss of one seat. Do we have any predictions for what the Independents are going to propose? Do you think they will they have agreed to a proposed arrangement together or will they be competing against each other for the best individual arrangements?
Looking at the booth maps at https://www.pollbludger.net/fed2022/Results/? , the Liberal-voting booths are around Hunters Hill/Lane Cove, the Forest District of the Northern Beaches, and most of the Ku-ring-gai Council area, particularly St Ives.
Sophie Scamps would appear to prefer a movement into Brookvale/Curl Curl instead of the obvious gain of Killarney Heights.
Kylea Tink would be happy to lose Hunters Hill to Bennelong, but whatever’s left of North Sydney will be half a quota short and the voters to the north aren’t as Teal-friendly.
Zali Steggall is probably safe no matter what happens, but will get to decide whose reelection campaign to ruin.
Allegra Spender is guaranteed a better situation no matter which way Wentworth grows. I know moving west towards the city is a popular suggestion, but I think a larger move to take all of Randwick and Coogee is a better arrangement.
What about Dai Le? I suppose northwards into Fairfield would be better for her.
And then there’s Andrew Gee… Is he going to retire after choosing to back the losing side on the Voice, opposition to how his electorate voted? If he does stay on, he’ll probably be most happy with no changes to Calare and that’s actually a reasonably strong chance. I was trying to unite Dubbo LGA in Parkes, but noticed it was quite difficult to do swaps of territory with Parkes and Riverina without putting one of them out of quota.
@Angas ( and possibly others I have missed due to scanning 320 comments at high speed.), I spent a lot of time living near Wagga when I was younger, and there is a rivalry between there and Albury almost as strong as that between Sydney and Melbourne. Both cities want to be seen as the commercial capital for the Riverina, and so they compete for both private investment and government largesse (in terms of the establishment of regional facilities like Defence bases, universities, hospitals etc).
I am no expert on these topics at all, and I’m very impressed by the effort that everyone here is putting into their maps and submissions. However, one thing I would say is that apart from the rivalry between the two cities, keep in mind that they are sponge cities. People commute to both Wagga and Albury from as far away as Adelong, Coolamon, Temora, Narrandera, and Lockhart for Wagga, and Corryong, Wangaratta, Beechworth and Yarrawonga for Albury.
As such, if you put both cities into one electorate, instead of having access to their MP 60-90 minute’s drive away, many of the small towns to the west of the road between Lockhart and Albury will then face being part of a larger Western NSW seat with the MP’s closest offices being in Griffith/Leeton/Broken Hill.
Local voters are very much aware of this, and, I suspect, so are the local branches of the political parties. Who wants to campaign for votes all the way out to Broken Hill if they don’t have to? By the same token, how do you keep party members happy if there is only one Federal seat to compete for instead of two?
I do appreciate that these last arguments can be made anywhere across the nation, and in fact, it is possible that both Wagga and Albury eventually end up big enough cities in their own right to become seats like Bendigo and Ballarat are down south.
@angas just keep doing it and submit the rest of your proposal as comments on your suggestions. that way they will still be taken into account. i did something similar when i noticed errors in my wa state redistribution
Do you think they will they have agreed to a proposed arrangement together or will they be competing against each other for the best individual arrangements? most ikely independant submission about whats best for them
Sophie Scamps would appear to prefer a movement into Brookvale/Curl Curl instead of the obvious gain of Killarney Heights. it will be Killarney Heights for sure i guarantee it 99% i think she and tink are at risk given they supported the vote condemning israel
Zali Steggall is probably safe no matter what happens, but will get to decide whose reelection campaign to ruin. agreed
Allegra Spender is guaranteed a better situation no matter which way Wentworth grows. I know moving west towards the city is a popular suggestion, but I think a larger move to take all of Randwick and Coogee is a better arrangement. allegra will retain her seat she will only gain more friendly voters
What about Dai Le? I suppose northwards into Fairfield would be better for her. i reckong the current iteration of fowler is gonna be abolished. i reckon we might see a chris bowen v dai le battle for the new cabramatta/fairfield based seat
And then there’s Andrew Gee… i think hes gone the nats will want that seat and i dont think he will have the personal vote to hold it
@Angas
One of the Teals is going to have to cop it, and Tink is the most likely. The likely changes will make it harder for her to be re-elected but I reckon she can still do it. Few people expected Bradfield to be so close in 2022.
I would actually disagree that Fowler moving further into Fairfield would necessarily be beneficial to. Her primary vote was way ahead of the Liberals, but she won because of the anti-Labor vote overall. It shows in that her best areas on the 2CP were in the west, which are more middle-class and Liberal-friendly. Had Fowler contained more of Fairfield proper in 2022, she might have missed out because of the strength of the Labor vote there.
If Macquarie becomes a seat stretching from the Blue Mountains to Bathurst, then I reckon, if Gee plays his cards right, he has a shot at winning. The Blue Mountains aren’t going to be voting for whoever the Nationals run against him.
@nicholas another option is for him to run for Macquarie as an independant. if it does it will be a liberal running there not a national. or they may run two candidates one of each
@john
Yep yep that’s what I’m suggesting he do.
The AEC has released suggestions. Seeing the Liberal Party’s Mitchell made me go, “No, no, no, no, no, no!”
That they’ve excised the northern end makes me wonder if they’re anticipating the retirement (or “removal”) of Alex Hawke at the next election.
@nicholas i dont think he will calare may not end up moving at all but even if it does hed have a better chance of winning a regional rural seat then the outer suburbs. no way would he win macquarie in fact this i beleive the libs will have the best chance coupled with the most likely addition of friendly booths from oberon/lithgow and emu plains pls the anti govt vote this could be a good chance for the libs to pick it up. no way will the nats run in macquarie they wouldnt win it
The Liberals have unsurprisingly proposed the effective abolition of North Sydney and the retention of Bradfield and Berrowa (both Liberal held) in roughly their current positions. But because they can’t get rid of her seat, to poke Zali Steggall in the eye they have proposed the expanded Warringah be named North Sydney. But they have also effectively given up on even winning Warringah – it will be almost a 65/35 IND seat and I reckon a Labor seat on 2PP.
Haven’t been able to look at the party or larger independent submissions yet, but the other submissions are as expected.
Mackellar: Sophie Scamps has made comments about a unified Northern Beaches community but hasn’t made an actual proposal.
Warringah: Zali Steggall has proposed the gain of Dee Why and some more of North Sydney LGA, either up to Cammeray and the Freeway, or by following the North Shore state district line past the North Sydney CBD.
North Sydney: Kylea Tink has proposed to retain the current seat by unifying Willoughy and North Sydney LGAs.
Wentworth: Allegra Spender (with a similar copy from Malcolm Turnbull) has proposed the gain of Darlinghurst and Surry Hills, plus Clovelly and Randwick north of Alison Rd.
Calare: Andrew Gee has proposed that no changes are made.
No submission made by Dai Le which is interesting.
Don’t think Dai Le really expects to hang on for too long, as long as Labor selects a decent local candidate of Vietnamese heritage she might decide to retire. The Libs made some really weird suggestions in Paramatta and Reid, both of which significantly benefit Labor and make them unwinnable suggesting they might be giving them up. Interesting they really tried their best to keep Banks as it is. What they did to Mitchell and Cook is horrendous, seems to be they are messing around with Alex Hawke or inviting an opportunity for Perrottet to contest Mitchell. The Libs really seem to think their future is in the outer suburbs with them proposing two seats in the outer suburbs, one of which will be safe Lib and the other will be winnable for them. The Libs are clearly trying to give Albo a scare in Grayndler.
Dan, but if that is the case how come she effectively formed her ‘own’ political party (albeit with Frank Carbone as the Carbone & Le Network), just like with Jacqui Lambie and Bob Katter. This suggests she may be in it for the long haul with ambitions to get others elected alongside her.
@high street agreed i think the name change is to preserve a federation name as well.
@angas SC wil probably be booted
@dan, yohan she wont retire she and frank carbone have vowed to put forward candidates
I’m interested in hearing thoughts on the Greens submission that Watson be abolished and spread between Grayndler, Reid and Barton to create a new seat for the Growth areas in Western Sydney. In theory it sounds plausible. I have no idea how it would affect the voting or even if its a serious consideration.
@cantward almost everything the greens say shouldn’t be seriously considered
I am a Greens member and I do not like this Greens proposal at all. Not that the Labor or the Libs one are much better. In fact I like the Nats one more than any of these (though I still raised a few eyebrows at that one too, that one is definitely salvageable)
Some unapologetically awful divisions proposed in the Liberal Party submission. They’ve somehow managed to draw the Sutherland and Southern NSW even worse than it currently is. Hughes/Cook/Whitlam/Eden-Monaro/Hume can all be massively improved but they haven’t even tried tp.
Hats off to them for a Riverina that wraps around Young and Cowra to contain both Wagga Wagga and Orange.
Did not go through them in detail but at a glance all of the four biggest parties’ submissions (but particularly the Liberals) seemed even more dreadful than usual. Very glad we have an independent and nonpartisan electoral commission here.
Agree Leon and Laine, it appears both the Labor and Liberal submissions are geared more towards ‘self-interest’. In other words, trying to make seats more favourable for their side and attempting to weaken seats held by their opponents.
It’s pretty obvious Labor designed their southwestern seats to give Dai Le as much of a headache as possible. They’ve basically said they want to see her face off Chris Bowen, who would be a more formidable opponent than KK, not the least of which that he is actually a local.
I am not entirely sure how much the parties redistribution proposal actually benefits their own parties. I haven’t looked at all in detail (though i looked enough to identify glaring issues) but I think the Liberals’ Sydney and Grayndler looks like a godsend to the Greens (and I can’t imagine the modern Federal Liberals wanting any more Greens in parl – ESPECIALLY UNDER DUTTON).
Nevertheless my opinion that at the end Labor Libs and Greens all had shit submissions would never change.
The Liberal’s seem to always take an approach that good formatting, pretty maps, and underlinig key points will get noticed yet the awfulness of the suggestiuons is not.
Good point Angas – I am sure the good people of the CENTRAL WEST town of Orange will be keen to know they are now better described as part of Orange (BTW – where does Andrew Gee live?? A quick search reveals his Principal office is in Orange….).
And to leave Snowy Valleys Council in E-M, separated from Wagga, yet have major towns a long way north of Wagga in the same seat, is bizarre.
The Liberal submission also elegantly hides the fact that it is Macquaire and North Sydney that are effectively abolished, along with Blaxland, but since they keep the names, they pretend they still exist – though in the case of North Sydney they are at least up front about it because in the detail they state North Sydney and Warringah are combined.
One the submissions I flicked through suggested a boundary between Warringah and a new North Sydney based seat, that runs down Warrane Street and Third Ave, North Willoughby – that’s the oddest urban boundary I have seen so far….
Meant Orange as a part of Riverina, above
Leon, if Sydney and Grayndler are more favourable for the Greens then that is sort of advantageous for the Liberals. I believe they would prefer to knock off/defeat more Labor MP’s (even if to a crossbencher) and force a hung parliament than have Labor continue in majority government.
This is based on the fact that once Labor is ‘forced’ to negotiate with the Greens, the Liberals/Coalition can easily attack them for being too left wing and thus are able to better target and win the marginal seat contests.
I think you are right Yoh An. Though apparently a theory is also that they want the Teals to be forced to support a minoritry Labor government so that they can attack them same as they did with Oakshott and Windsor, back in the day. Problem is most of the Teals are sitting in quite marginal LIB/ALP 2PP seats and will be even more ALP leaning after the next election.
The Liberals in their submissions have in essence sacrificed trying to win Reid, Parramatta and Werriwa. If their submissions succeeds Bennelong is guaranteed not to be won by Labor. It seems they will throw everything to win their proposed outer Western Sydney seat of Walton. Longer term their proposed Greenway will be a target with no working class suburbs. The Hunter/Paterson is an interesting dilemma if Kurri Kurri is moved into Hunter then Libs have the advanatage in Paterson but makes Hunter more difficult.
@dan m my McMahon does to
The National’s submission improves the situation in Chatswood. Now rather than being split in two, it’s split in three…..
https://www.aec.gov.au/Electorates/Redistributions/2023/nsw/index.htm
Is there a difference between making a comment (open currently) and making a suggestion/proposal (now closed)? Can I make a comment for new boundaries or is it only to rebutt or rebuke a suggestion from a party, MP or otherwise?
Comments are closed.