Higgins – Australia 2022

I’m certain Katie Allen would run again.

@ Agree Dan M, Dutton will be more less popular than Morrision. However, i am thinking Frydenberg can run here instead of Kooyong. I feel this seat would be easier as he is not running against a Teal rather it will be Labor. There is a larger Jewish community in areas such like Armdale, Malvern etc than Balwyn/Surrey Hills. It is possible for some people to vote for him as there is a chance he take the leadership if he wins and move back to centre. Also a lot of people voted for Ananda-Rajah holding their noses and in terms of PV it is actually one of the weakest seats for Labor, you can say Aston is more pro-Labor than Higgins.

If Frydenburg was to run here, and confirmed early enough that he would do so, there may be less objection from the Jewish community to swapping Caulfield for Prahran/South Yarra in sn inevitable redistribution prior to 2025.

Especially since the Greens are now within a whisker of winning Macnamara and will probably do so with an incumbent Labor government.

Given the choice of what would be a safe Liberal seat with a very high profile (probably party leader) Jewish MP, or a likely Greens seat, I think most of the Caulfield community who in the past have opposed that territory swap would prefer the former.

@Nimalan Kooyong is pretty similar to the affluent core of Higgins so he shouldn’t face too much opposition if he decides to move to Higgins. Agreed that for Frydenberg defeating Labor in Higgins would be easier than defeating a Teal in Kooyong especially if Dutton is still leader.
In terms of actually representing the cultural demographics of the two seats, Frydenberg would fit better in Higgins than in Kooyong due to it having a much larger Jewish population. For Kooyong, the Libs could ideally preselect an ethnic Chinese candidate due to it’s large Chinese population (1 in 5 of the population in the seat have Chinese heritage). It would help the Libs improve their standing among Chinese voters by showing that ethnic Chinese candidates can be preselected in traditionally safe seats not just unwinnable or marginal seats and give the Libs an edge against Labor on the issue of diversity of candidates and MPs given Labor also has problems in preselecting ethnically diverse candidates.

@Trent I agree if Frydenberg decides to contest Higgins, it would help finally resolve the Higgins/Macnamara boundary issue. The Jewish community would have less opposition if they can get someone like Frydenberg as their MP and potentially PM rather than a Labor backbencher in Macnamara who’s likely to lose his seat to the Greens. Uniting Caulfield into Higgins is a much better solution and unites the Jewish community better than the current Macnamara. On that note, it’s very possible that in the next redistribution, Hotham gets abolished which means Chisholm gets pushed south to be contiguous to Monash LGA, Deakin absorbs most of Whitehorse LGA from Chisholm while Menzies sheds it’s Whitehorse portion and gains much of Maroondah LGA from Deakin. Higgins would then have to expand north to take in parts of Camberwell while Kooyong would expand eastwards into Box Hill which further increases the significance of the Chinese community in that seat.

Be careful about making assumptions that the Chinese community will vote for someone just because they’re Chinese. Didn’t help Gladys Liu.

This will be Labor for a long time if the Libs don’t move towards the centre. The only party I see picking this up if Labor lose are the Greens.

@ Dan M,
Agreed, the affluent core of Higgins shares a community of interest with Kooyong. Residents often send their children to private schools on both sides of the Monash Freeway and the Monash is not a social divide in this part of Melbourne contrary to the situation east of Warrigal Road.
@ Trent. i think it will be the Labor party that would vehemently oppose the swap as they stand to loose both seats if the swap went ahead one to the Greens and the other one the Liberals. Even if the swap does not go ahead at the next redistribution, i think with the population growth of the Fishermen Bend Urban Renewal zone it will be increasingly untenable for Caulfield to remain in Macnamara especially as the Jewish community will continue to be diluted which is not the case if Caulfield is move to Higgins.

I agree Nimalan. Labor will absolutely oppose it, but next time would probably not have all the objections from the Jewish community to strengthen their own objection.

I for one will definitely be making a submission recommending the Macnamara/Higgins swap again next time.

I can actually see Higgins potentially being abolished if Victoria needs to lose a seat.

The Booroondara part would fit neatly with Kooyong, the western part could go into Macnamara, and the south-eastern tail could be joined with Oakleigh (probably in Chisholm).

Probably agree Mark, Higgins covers 3 LGA’s so abolishing it and distributing the suburbs as you indicated may be a decent outcome.

One could argue that Melbourne could move into both Southbank and Fishermans Bend. There is definite community of interest between Southbank and the City – possibly more so than with South Melbourne, and then Fishermans Bend could be seen as a south of the river extension of Docklands.

I don’t think Higgins should be abolished, the swap like what Trent said is a better idea. I know others on here suggested that Hotham be axed and I agree with that.
https://www.aec.gov.au/Electorates/Redistributions/2021/vic/proposed-redistribution/maps/a4/2021-AEC-Victoria-A4-Higgins-Proposed.pdf

Higgins is cohesive as a mostly Stonnington seat and Hotham is less anchored and in a similar position to Henty, the seat abolished in the 1989 redistribution last time Victoria dropped from 39 to 38 seats (although a significant chunk that was in Henty, is now in Higgins).

Tom the first and Best, i often find that Hotham is a left over seat. i have always found the idea of having East Bentleigh and Noble Park in the same seat ridiculous. Hopefully, the next redistribution can help separate the sandbelt/bayside suburbs from the SE Manufacturing belt and finally fix Issacs etc. Btw do you know where i can find historical electorate maps from the 1980s i would like to see a map of Streeton/Outer East from that time to see how much voting patterns have changed.

I was thinking that if Higgins was abolished, you might end up pulling Goldstein into St Kilda (so all of the St Kilda/Elsternwick/Caulfield area was united instead of being split) and then the southern coastal parts of Goldstein would go into Isaacs. This could allow Isaacs to shed all of its inland territory can become a purely coastal seat.

Hotham could absorb the inland parts of Isaacs and become more clearly focussed on the Springvale/Noble Park/Keysborough area.

No idea if it would ‘work’, but it’s something I thought about.

My thoughts on abolishing Higgins would be for Kooyong to extend from Barkers Road/ Mont Albert Road south to Dandenong Road. Get rid of the Caulfield tail so South Yarra/ Prahran go into Macnamara and all of Caulfield be united in Goldstein. Menzies to take in Balwyn and Kew and lose the area south of the Eastern Freeway. Move Hotham west into Carnegie and Moorabbin – make Chisholm a Monash seat. Have Deakin go from Box Hill westwards as a Monash / Maroondah seat. Aston would also need to start climbing the Dandenongs up the train line or go into Endeavour Hills. Isaacs to take at least Beaumaris, parts of Cheltenham and possibly Black Rock. Haven’t thought too much beyond that.

Even with the retributions that are due to occur I think the Labor’s swing here was dulled due to Katie Allen popularity, I would say now with incumbency of Michelle Ananda-Rajah and the absence of Katie Allen as it appears she will not be re-contesting here it is likely Labor will receive an above average swing towards them. There is talk of Josh Frydenberg running here but even with a name like his here I don’t think parachuting him in to this electorate will work. There are many differences Higgins having a lot more friendly Green/Labor suburbs compared to Kooyong.

@bob the redistion will most likely push labor/greens windsor and south yarra into macnamamra and draw caufield into higgins. couple that with the labor policy on israel palestine and the jewish population in the area and it will most likely push higgins back to the liberals. a frydenburg run here would almost guarantee a liberal victory. it may also see people vote against the governemetn if the cost of living crisis continues and a anti govt swing more genrally

@ Bob
Lets leave aside the redistribution and JF potentially contesting for a moment. Firstly, i agree there are more friendly Green/Labor suburbs compared to Kooyong which is why i dont think a Teal would win. However, a large part of Higgins (covered by the state seat of Malvern) is Liberal Heartland and is just like Kooyong with a shared community of interest. The current Higgins comes in 3 parts there is Inner city green-friendly area in the west. an affluent Liberal heartland core in the middle and a more middle class Labor friendly area in the Eastern Fringe (Ashburton, area around Chadstone S.C and Murrumbeena/Carnegie. IMHO the swing in Higgins (less loss of primary votes since 2016 compared to Kooyong/Goldstein) was dulled as voting Labor/Green was a bridge too far for those residents in the affluent core compared to voting Teal many of these residents will voted for Ananda-Rajah holding their noses but some could not even do that. Anada-Rajah could get a sophomore surge to her in the middle class Eastern Fringe but i doubt that in the affluent core unless the Libs choose someone like Katherine Deves. Remember in 2022 Labor actually did better on primaries in Aston/Menzies two seats that they did not campaign in than in Higgins. If Katie Allen was seen as a future leader of the party she would have likely survived and if there was a Teal option these residents would leave Anada-Rajah for a Teal (Affluent core)

If it sheds Windsor and south yarra I’d imagine Higgins would become better prospect for the libs

Katie Allen has won preselection here as of earlier today. will be an interesting contest with labor, liberal, the greens (and potentially even a teal independent) all in the running for this seat.

I’m amazed how the Liberals are preselecting this early in the term, up to 18 months ahead and even before redistributions. The redistribution will determine their competitiveness. If it expands south or east, the Labor margin will go up. Labor risks losing South Yarra and Windsor or expanding north and this would slice Labor’s margin.

A teal candidate won’t run or won’t be successful as it would potentially create a three or even four way contest.

Selecting candidates that served in the Morrison-Era will only hurt them. Labor hold unless the coalition gets close to forming government which will not happen, or if the redistribution adds more conservative areas which I’m doubtful.

A Teal independent will not be successful but can create a 3 or 4 way contest and a messy preference flow. It may the case the Teal will not make the 2CP but preference leakage could help elect Katie Allan. This happened at a Victorian state election in Brighton/Caulfield where the Teals scooped up small l liberals and then some of those preferenced Libs after Labor after expressing their protest by voting 1 Teal. There is also a chance Greens will outpolled Labor in Higgins. I actually think it is easier for Libs to defeat Labor than a Teal.

Hypothetical question – What happens if a candidate is preselected for a seat whose name is transferred to another part of the state in a redistribution?

The name can only be transferred to an adjoing divions

@votante there is speculation that albo wants to go early due to have already take so much flak

John, if the Government goes now, Higgins and Goldstein have the lowest enrollments, wouldn’t they be merged to get Victoria to the correct number of seats

If a redistribution occurs where the Chapel St corridor is moved to Macnamara and Booroondara is moved to Kooyong, and Higgins in turn gains the Caulfield & Elsternwick areas from Macnamara & Goldstein and Hughesdale from Hotham, I’d be really interested to see what the notional margin becomes.

It’s easy to think that swapping the Chapel St corridor (with Prahran & Windsor easily being the most left-wing part of the seat) for Caulfield would favour the Liberals, but I don’t think it’s that simple.

Caulfield North is really the only reliably Liberal suburb it would gain. A lot of the other territory ranges from 50/50 (Caulfield, Caulfield South) to pretty strongly Labor/left leaning (Glen Huntly, Elsternwick, Hughesdale etc). Definitely not as left as Prahran/Windsor, but probably comparable to South Yarra, and to offset losing Prahran/Windsor it would also be losing some strong Liberal territory in Glen Iris.

So I don’t think it would probably move the needle all that much to be honest and would still be a marginal/winnable seat for both major parties, it would just take the Greens out of the race.

@captain he can’t go until august unless there is a double dissolution

And it would be Higgins and chisholm

Could see a redistributed Higgins being like Hawthorn at the state election – a teal runs saying that Labor can’t hold but a teal might be able to prevent the Libs from winning it back. Of course the result there was the teal came 3rd and Labor lost, and I’m not sure the teal running helped Labor’s bid to retain the seat.

Of course they could simply campaign to Labor’s right economically and their left environmentally rather than making an appeal to tactical voting.

Greens will indeed probably pull out – if the Greens publicly target a seat and the result is Liberal gain from ALP, it will be milked for all its worth.

But still seeing Labor as the favourites even on the new boundaries.

@ John

A redistributed Higgins will still have more left-leaning areas than Hawthorn. Carnegie/Murrumbeena and possible Hughesdale added are more middle class areas where people are happy to vote Labor unlike in the affluent core (State electorate of Malvern) where they have to hold their noses to vote Labor and will vote Teal if they have a chance instead. Other thing is a redistributed Higgins could be very Jewish more than current Macnaamra so the Libs may campaign on the Israel conflict here. i would say a Teal running will hurt Labor if even 25% of Teal preferences go back to Libs. I think Greens will pull out and may infact preference Teals ahead of Labor.

I agree Nimalan. All the area around Hughesdale, Glen Huntly, Ormond, Murrumbeena and Carnegie is pretty middle class in a way that leans pretty reliably Labor in Melbourne these days (but would probably be less so in other cities). I’d include Caulfield East around the university in that group too.

Also a notional result might be misleading because currently, the Jewish population around Caulfield (particularly the Macnamara part, not so much Caulfield South) might actually be voting more Labor than they otherwise would because of the seat’s history of being held by Michael Danby followed by Josh Burns for the last 30 years. If you move those voters into a Michelle Ananda-Rajah vs Katie Allen contest where neither is Jewish, it might move some of those voters into the Liberal column.

On another note, let’s remember that the ‘Teal’ who run in the state seat of Caulfield completely flopped so I don’t think moving Caulfield into the electorate – even if it is replacing the Green heartland around Chapel St – will necessarily improve a ‘Teal’ vote either.

@ Trent
I agree, i dont think Ananda-Rajah will perform as well in the Caulfield area (excluding Caulfield East) based on the Hawthorn Road corridor which is where the Jewish community is centred while Cauflield East is high density and has very few Jews and is more students a bit like Glenferrie/Swinburne Uni area as Josh Burns or Danby before that did. The Libs would campaign hard in these areas on the Middle East Conflict.
Regarding a Teal run, i dont think a Teal will make the 2CP. However, it will still have a significant impact while the Teal in Caulfield may have flopped she ended up pulling the Labor PV vote back to 2014 levels and in essence the Teal plus Liberal primary is now over 50% and the leakage of Teal preferences may have benefited Southwick. So a Teal running in Higgins may pull the Labor PV to quite a low level and reverse the gains in PV since 2016.

I wonder if the results of the Voice Referendum (Higgins voted 61% Yes) would directly or indirectly have an affect on the Liberal Vote in future elections? Given if the LNP continues to become more anti-intellectual and right-wing populist, it may mean the chance of the Liberal winning back Higgins may become slimmer (maybe except when there is a federal LNP landslide).

The Libs are increasingly a regional and white working class party. I dont think the Libs will win a seat like Brand, Spence etc because they voted No as they are strongly unionized. Also i dont feel the voice referendum will have the same impact as Brexit as people really just voted for the status quo rather than take a plunge. I think a lot of people just want the rest of this term of parliment to be focused on bread and butter issues than culture wars.

I say seats like Brand and Spence are just more economically left-wing but apathetic or even a bit conservative on other social issues but I don’t think the no vote is directly determined by income as Toorak and Valcause voted No which are old money with fiscal conservatism and responsibility.
The Outer suburb and regional No vote tends be linked Australia’s tradition of political apathy and social change as a result of Australia’s tall poppy syndrome explaining the weaker political movements in Australia and no massive protest like you see in America, France and Hong Kong.

I tried a few weeks ago trying to work out what Higgins would be with Caulfield + Hughesdale instead of Sth Yarra, Prahran, Windsor and Boroondarra and got around 51% ALP. If you factor in that postals would be even worse for Labor under these boundaries than it’d probably be too close to call.

If you think of those boundaries basically being the state seats of Caulfield (Lib) + Malvern (Safe Lib) + a small bit of Oakleigh (Safe ALP) this would be a seat the Libs should be able to win on most occasions.

Based on current boundaries, Labor would most likely hold this. Higgins has both strong Greens and strong Liberal areas, even just a stone’s throw from each other. The Liberals are orienting towards working-class, regional and outer-suburban voters.

I do agree with sentiments that voters in Jewish Caulfield, Caulfield North and Elsternwick may not be as supportive of Michelle Ananda-Rajah as they are of Josh Burns. There may be calls to have the entire Jewish community in the one electorate with one representative, similar to Wentworth.

@John, “there is speculation that albo wants to go early due to have already take so much flak”. Calling a double dissolution will complicate the redistributions. The second half of 2024 is full of elections – NT, ACT, QLD. I do agree that he’s getting a post-referendum hammering but he will want to stretch it out as long as possible to buy himself some time.

@votabte he can’t call a double dissolution without a trigger. We will se

@Drake – Thanks for the numbers about Higgins. That’s actually pretty close to what I was thinking it might be too, possibly only 1-2% wiped off the current ALP 2PP margin.

But I agree that in most elections, those boundaries would certainly favour the Liberal Party. 2022 was really a case of urban (and especially Liberal heartland) voters taking a baseball bat to Morrison & the Libs to an extent we haven’t really seen before.

Trent, And they will do it again as long as Allan is the candidate. Voters aren’t forgetting her association with Morrison, 3 long years of asking Dorothy Dixers in parliament, voters aren’t forgiving the defeated MPs in 2022 and I am happy to be proven wrong here.

Higgins demographics are definitely at odds with the base the coalition is trying to create among working class, white, outer suburban and rural voters. i think if you look at similar areas in metropolitan areas of US cities locations like higgins are definitely trending more progressive and are shoring up their support for the democratic party. obviously australian politics differs from US politics but i wouldn’t be surprised if the coalition vote share on current boundaries declines at a much more stable rate than elsewhere in the country.

Why isn’t this Liberal vs Greens anymore if the area has such a high conservative base (the Liberals; as it’s an upper-middle class seat) and then a growing progressive base (the Greens)? Instead it’s Labor vs Liberal with the Liberals normally holding the seat but for the first time ever Labor has won the seat.

Notably, however, the Liberals actually got 40.69% (-5.84) of the primary vote while Labor got 28.46% (+2.39), but the Greens vote was at 22.65% (-0.06) was enough to push Labor ahead with 52.06% of the TPP vote compared to the Liberal Party’s 47.94% (a swing of +4.67 to Labor). This means Labor’s TPP in Higgins was just 0.07% lower than Labor’s TPP nationally (52.13%) and 2.77% lower than Labor’s TPP in Victoria (54.83%). And although the Greens primary vote was substantially higher in Higgins than it was both nationwide and in Victoria, the Liberal primary vote was 4.99% higher than the national average of 35.70% (and 7.61% higher than the state average of 33.08%) while Labor’s primary vote was 4.12% lower than the national average of 32.58% (and 4.39% higher than the state average; remember that although Labor got a decently higher TPP in Victoria than the national average, Labor’s primary vote in Victoria was only slightly higher than the national average due to a big swing away from both major parties on primaries and then a small swing to Labor on TPP).

Wikipedia tells me that Higgins currently overlaps with state seats that are held by both major parties as well as one by the Greens. These seats are Ashwood (Labor), Hawthorn (Liberal), Kew (Liberal), Malvern (Liberal) and Oakleigh (Labor).

Looking forward to the 2025 election guide. It’s hard to construct a narrative of how the seat flipped in 2022 – there are booths where the Greens picked up the votes Liberals lost and areas where Labor picked them up, even within the same suburb. Areas like Hughesdale seem like more classic Lab vs Lib territory, but The Greens won the Hughesdale (Higgins) booth (not many votes in it though).

Seems like both parties did well but the Greens simply weren’t able had a deficit in 2019 and Labor were better positioned to win as a result, which may have attracted a small Green to ALP swing. The challenge for Greens will be convincing those same Labor voters worried about a Liberal return to vote against an ALP incumbent in such a marginal seat. They could run an outrage campaign about Ananda-Rajah’s 7 houses but if the net result of that is a Liberal win it will look very bad.

Thinking Greens won’t target the seat but run a senate focused campaign aiming to hang on to the 2022 votes, with a strong enough candidate to contest in 2028 or in case there really is an opportunity. Teals and redistributions can complicate all that.

@ Nether portal
You have asked a really interesting question the seat is winnable for the Greens/Labor and Libs on current boundaries. The Question is why did Labor out poll the Greens. I agree the Western Part of Higgins (South Yarra, Prahran, Windsor) is very strong for greens. However, the eastern Fringe (Ashburton, area around Chadstone SC, Murrumbeena and Carnegie) are just classical middle class ALP/LIB battlegrounds so there is a greater focus on bread and butter issues such as childcare, education, health etc rather than environment or social justice. However, i dont have any explanation why Labor outpolled the Greens in the affluent core (Toorak, Malvern, Glen Iris etc). I would expect the Greens to outpoll Labor there like what occured in the 3 Brisbane seats.

Because Labor did better in richer areas than the Greens. This is true even in the Brisbane seats. Labor outpolled the greens in basically all of the booths in Brisbane that fall in the state seat of Clayfield. The Bulimba part of Griffith was their best area. Greens outpolled Labor in every booth in Higgins west of Williams Rd, and only 3 booths east of it (2 very small booths: Glen Iris East & Hughesdale and a big one Armidale Central).

If the boundaries for this stay pretty similar, the Greens will 100% target this

Could it be that as there was no teal candidate, the moderate liberal vote went to Labor rather than the Greens in Malvern etc or the ALP candidate was better known in that area?

Normally I would think moderate libs will go green rather than red in absence for a teal
It may also be a higher median age in the area so older voters may have chosen Labor instead of greens