ALP 3.9%
Incumbent MP
Mark Dreyfus, since 2007.
Geography
Outer south-eastern Melbourne. Isaacs covers suburbs along the coast of Port Phillip Bay on the south-eastern fringe of Melbourne. It covers the southern parts of Kingston and Greater Dandenong council areas, and a small northern part of Frankston council area.
History
Isaacs was created at a redistribution before the 1969 federal election. The seat was long a marginal seat, but has become safer for the ALP over the last decade.
The seat was first won in 1969 by the Liberal Party’s David Hamer. Hamer held the seat until 1974, when he lost to the ALP’s Gareth Clayton, but Hamer won back the seat in 1975.
Hamer retired in 1977, and was succeeded by Liberal candidate William Burns. Burns failed to win re-election in 1980, when Isaacs was won by the ALP’s David Charles.
Charles held the seat for a decade, retiring in 1990. The Liberal Party’s Rod Atkinson won back the seat in 1990.
Atkinson was re-elected in 1993, but a redistribution before the 1996 election changed Isaacs’ margin from a 3% Liberal margin to a 3.9% Labor margin, and Atkinson lost to the ALP’s Greg Wilton.
Wilton was re-elected in 1998. His marriage broke down in 2000, and he faced strong media attack in 2000 after being found by police in a situation that some interpreted as an attempted murder-suicide. This ended with Wilton committing suicide in June 2000. He remains the only member of federal Parliament to ever die by suicide.
The ALP’s Ann Corcoran easily won re-election at the ensuing by-election, with the Liberal Party not standing a candidate. Corcoran’s margin was cut to around 1-2% at the 2001 and 2004 elections, and retired in 2007.
The seat was won in 2007 by the ALP’s candidate, prominent lawyer Mark Dreyfus, with a swing of over 6%, which gave him a 7.7% margin. Dreyfus was re-elected in 2010 and promoted to serve as a Parliamentary Secretary, and in 2013 he became Attorney-General. Dreyfus won a third term in 2013, and continues to serve on the Labor frontbench.
Candidates
- Alex Breskin (Greens)
- Mark Dreyfus (Labor)
- Garry Spencer (Liberal)
- Elizabeth Johnston (Animal Justice)
Assessment
Isaacs is a marginal Labor seat, but should stay in Labor hands in 2016.
2013 result
| Candidate | Party | Votes | % | Swing |
| Mark Dreyfus | Labor | 35,837 | 41.3 | -7.6 |
| Garry Spencer | Liberal | 34,864 | 40.2 | +5.1 |
| Sandra Miles | Greens | 6,120 | 7.1 | -3.8 |
| Avtar Singh Gill | Palmer United Party | 2,846 | 3.3 | +3.3 |
| John Elliott | Family First | 2,503 | 2.9 | -0.8 |
| Laith Graham | Sex Party | 2,093 | 2.4 | +2.4 |
| James Leach | Democratic Labour Party | 1,144 | 1.3 | +1.3 |
| Karen Dobby | Australian Christians | 743 | 0.9 | +0.9 |
| Nadia Seaman | Rise Up Australia | 558 | 0.6 | +0.6 |
| Informal | 4,375 | 5.1 |
2013 two-party-preferred result
| Candidate | Party | Votes | % | Swing |
| Mark Dreyfus | Labor | 46,704 | 53.9 | -6.6 |
| Garry Spencer | Liberal | 40,004 | 46.1 | +6.6 |
Booth breakdown
Booths have been divided into four areas. Polling places in the City of Greater Dandenong have been grouped as ‘North-East’, and those in the City of Frankston have been grouped as ‘South-East’. Polling places in the City of Kingston make a majority of the electorate, and these have been split into north-west and south-west.
The ALP won a majority of the two-party-preferred vote in three out of four areas, ranging from 51.1% in the south-west to 68.2% in the north-east. The Liberal Party won 51% in the north-west.
The Greens vote ranged from 3.3% in the north-east to 10% in the north-west.
| Voter group | GRN % | ALP 2PP % | Total votes | % of votes |
| North-West | 10.0 | 48.9 | 18,291 | 21.1 |
| South-West | 7.9 | 51.1 | 15,378 | 17.7 |
| North-East | 3.3 | 68.2 | 11,797 | 13.6 |
| South-East | 4.9 | 56.5 | 10,610 | 12.2 |
| Other votes | 7.1 | 51.8 | 30,632 | 35.3 |
Like a few seats in this part of Melbourne, Isaacs is basically 50-50 except for the small cluster of heavily Labor voting booths around Dandenong. The north-west is very middle class, and areas like Edithvale and Carrum have become more affluent as people are priced out of the expensive coastal suburbs closer to the city. As we have seen in the past, redistributions can also make a big difference here. It will be interesting to see what happens to this seat in the medium term.
If Labor see Dreyfuss as a long-term frontbencher, they should consider moving him to neighbouring Holt.
MM
Another classic example of the AEC failing to follow Section 66(3) of the Electoral Act when determining electoral boundaries.
Electorally marginal bayside suburbs in the City of Kingston mixed with the ethnically diverse and Welfare Class suburbs like Noble Park, Keysborough and Dandenong.
Not sure how that works with Section 66(3)(a)(i) of the electoral act: “community of interests within the proposed Electoral Division, including economic, social and regional interests”
Hmmm!
Safe Labor seat and will remain so, though it – like most other Divisions in Melbourne’s metropolitan SE – will be significantly affected by the next Redistribution.
I agree with the notion that these boundaries are messy, although that being said it is hard to put certain areas together and separate others. Ideally the parts of Dandenong in Isaacs would be transferred to Bruce, so that all of Dandenong could be the centre of one electorate, whilst seeing Isaacs gain Seaford in the south to keep its Bayside orientation.
I have a particular dislike of the AEC’s use of the Frankston and Dandenong rail line as boundaries, including Isaac’s.
First, not only does it split activity centers and isolate them on the rim of the electorate Melbourne is now moving to build over the railway lines and on the electoral boundaries themselves. The latest is on Moorabbin on the Hotham/Goldstein boundary.
But second, but not having activity center boundary’s not complete within the boundary makes the electoral enrollment projections unreliable. No where is this more obvious than the Issacs/Bruce boundary which divides Dandenong. The Dandenong activity centers overall population growth is on track, however due to development nearly all of has occurred in part of Dandenong falling in Isaacs, and exacerbating the voter shortfall in Bruce. This demonstrates the folly of dividing urban activity centers ear marked for growth.
Victoria is an Australian trend setter in urban planning. AEC shouldn’t be ignoring urban trend in increase urban density around activity centers, as this where population growth is being focused. The AEC needs to work with and not against urban planning or it will continues to get wildly variant enrollments, it should not be so conceited as to presume it knows better. .
JW, & L 96 & Sandbelter
With you all the way on all of this.
Sandbelter
i am curious as to your experience of Dreyfuss as an MP ??
WM- Unlike the state MP’s on the Frankston line (Lib and ALP) who are very active at building their profile, the federal MP’s could at the best described as absentee landlords.
Sandbelter
That is what i would have imagined. Dreyfus is far, far too self- important to be much concerned with his constituents.
I am sure he believes that because he is a SC , & so could earn 4 times his parliamentary salary, that we should all be grateful for his invaluable service !!!.
He may have a point in this. However that is not what true (public) service is about.
i find what i observe to be a lack of humility, to be quite repulsive. I’d like someone to tell me i’m wrong, & that he really is a good bloke.
In an ideal world, I would draw Isaacs by removing as much of Dandenong as possible, and add in Dingley to the north and Seaford to the south. Exactly where the balance of Dandenong would go is an interesting puzzle to solve…..
I agree with Sandbelter that the use of the railway lines as boundaries is quite strange, and some significant local centres are split completely in half. The coming redistribution is likely to be quite major, so hopefully alot of these little problems can be fixed.
This is my seat. Contrary to the above, I’ve seen Dreyfus work very hard here, possibly the hardest of any of the MPs I’ve had over the years (or perhaps I’m just more engaged in this community than others in the past). When I had a chat to him at the station the other day he was actually hugely approachable and down to earth (and said good things about saving the local CSIRO research centre).
So far I’ve seen a lot of Dreyfus at my local shops and station, saw, bizarrely, the Derryn Hinch caravan at my station once and am yet to hear from the Lib. The Libs threw a lot of money here last time but frankly seemed to have preselected and funded the seat as one they’ll lose (a 65 year old unknown and thus far no door knocking or advertising that I’ve seen).
That big 63 is Patterson Lakes, an odd suburb (an environmental and planning disaster really) that has somehow become a super conservative hotspot. Can’t explain it for the life of me.
I reckon Dreyfus to hold with an average to slightly above average swing.
The north-west includes Mentone, which likes to pretend it’s actually Beaumaris, including the private schools and large houses on the beach, so they tend to vote more conservative. The huge blue 63 is Patterson Lakes as PJ says, a man made canal estate with mansions, private jetties and waterfront properties. I think in recent times they have become more conservative, and the former state member Donna Bauer was a local and seemed to be very popular there.
I agree that these areas don’t mesh well with the immigrant populations of Noble Park, but that whole area doesn’t really fit into Bruce either. Maybe a total realignment of these Divisions is required in the future. I agree that the Dandenong rail line is actually a very poor boundary, dividing every community including Carnegie, Murrumbeena, Oakleigh, Clayton, Springvale, Noble Park and Dandenong.
Still it’s better than the 1990s configuration that stretched as far as Cranbourne and the South Gippsland Highway in the south.
My former local seat (but I’ve moved since the last election). Dreyfus (and Corcoran before him) seem to base their operations in Keysborough, and are seen in person only rarely in bayside. Not nearly as visible as any of the previous or current state reps along the Frankston line. I thought the late Greg Wilton, however was a genuine and strong local candidate. Dreyfus still lives outside the division in Malvern. It will be interesting to see how it plays out this time, with more of bayside becoming affluent along with Patterson Lakes and Mentone/Parkdale in the north.
Saw Dreyfus again today talking to punters on the shopping strip. Also caught the Green candidate at a station earlier this week and saw this weird Derryn Hinch caravan, also at a station. Six weeks out and am yet to see or get a flyer from the Lib – didn’t even get the Turnbull letter that other seats got – further suggesting they aren’t taking a real shot. (A letter and two flyers from Dreyfus this month by comparison).
Really, the margin is only 4%, surely the Libs could preselect someone who’ll at least make an effort.
@PJ not in Victoria. They need all the candidates they can get – they simply cannot afford to waste resources and human capital on winning seats in their weakest state and in an election where they are expected to go backwards.
Trying to capitalise on a state issue, the Liberals are sending anti-Skyrail ‘Put Labor’ last postcards to households near the Frankston line.
I got one too Baysider. Pathetic misinformation, but all they’ve got right now I guess.
PJ, or Baysider
What could be wrong with a new (sky?) rail ??. Is this a Victorian thingy !!!???.
In order to remove a bunch of level crossings they’re going to turn some lines into elevated railways, which makes people who live near them worry about noise.
kme
correct me if i’m wrong, but doesn’t noise travel/ go up ??
I don’t think this whole skyrail thing will make much of a difference, The anger isn’t widespread and frankly they don’t seem to have a coherent message against it.
The issue is that some level crossings are earmarked for removal along the existing rail line. Other level crossings being removed are done by tunnelling the rail under the road. The problem with that idea here is about 20km of the rail is only 200m (if that) from the beach, and the ground water is far too high to tunnel. That leaves the only option is to go up. As there are multiple crossings they are considering raising the entire rail line, at least between Mordialloc and Seaford.
Vocal, but possibly very small numbers of residents are opposed to what has been dubbed “skyrail”. It’s about the noise, but also about the ugly appearance of a rail viaduct nearby. Of course, being so close to the beach some of the multi storeys are also concerned an elevated viaduct will ruin their sea views. Oh, and think how much the property values will drop, well that’s their argument anyway.
The state gov ruled out a sky rail on the weekend and slammed the Lib candidate for his lies in a flyer saying that a ‘four story (sic) sky rail will be built near you’.
The Lib here has really run a very low profile campaign, spreading misinformation on entirely state issues. It’s pretty pathetic. I wish they’d choose someone decent.
Wine diamond – going back a bit but yes, elevating rail actually reduces noise, but there’s been a pretty determined misinformation campaign run here by State Upper House MP Inga Peulich (known at least at Kingston Council as Lady Voldermort because you never see her but she’s always in the background), and a couple of her more ardent followers. It’s actually been pretty sad – she’s scaring a whole lot of people near the train line by saying that there will be a four storey train line destroying their property value, none of which is true.
Interesting Shorten is campaigning here today.
I also note 11% were on palmer and right wing minor parties last time. None of them running candidates this time. Is an upset on the cards?
Depending on where he is, perhaps it’s more about targeting Dunkley, Bruce, or Chisholm (?)
Labor would be at Gillard levels in the national polls if Isaacs was at risk, not 50-50.
Shorten was in Dandenong South. Though in Isaacs, I’d imagine it was about getting the Bruce candidate on the Teev.
The Libs here are continued with a frankly very dishonest campaign about level crossing removals (entirely a state issue), but I can’t see there being enough people who 1. Care and 2. Can’t distinguish better state and federal matters for this to be anything but a Labor hold.
PJ – there’s quite a vicious backlash against the ALP along the Franktson line against the Skyrail. The ALP can’t walk the streets from Frankston to Cheltenham without coping a verbal bashing – which is why he can only walk the streets of Dandenong South if the visit is Isaacs specific.
BTW the design of Skyrail will cost residents $’000’s off there house values,…It’s the ALP that’s deluding itself here that there’s no backlash.
Funny, I thought state Labor won the sandbelt – at least partly – on its promise to remove the level crossings.
Yup, fully agree – but Skyrail wasn’t part of the picture.
IIRC the original plan was to build underpasses/trenches etc along both here and the Dandenong line, and that was how it was sold to locals. Then suddenly Skyrail appeared with very little apparent public consultation.
Like East-West Link was for the state Liberals, whether the project is “good” or not is kind of a moot point. It’s the messy way they tried to sell and implement it that has got people off-side.
The federal Liberals have all this EWL money pledged that’s just sitting around to make a partisan point. If they were smarter, they could have pledged to use that money to trench the railways so Skyrail was not needed.
MM – Correct.
In addition to offering to Skyrail If the Libs were astute the following would make powerful statement (some of which even the Greens would support)
Paying for the Melbourne Metro to connect with South Yarra station (strongly supported by the Greens),
NE Corridor – partially fund the link between the Ring Road in Greensborough and the Eastern Freeway….all of these would be in either Liberal or winnable seats for the libs.
The economics of Skyrail are questionable they are roughly 20% more expensive than burying under the road, it also doubles the cost of growth capex further down the track.
But this state government won’t listen to reason – but that’s another topic.
I could be proven wrong, but I’m now hearing of people in casual conversation talking (and also from campaign workers) about drifting to the Libs and the Greens as they get more concerned about the state government. Which is why I asked about Melbourne Ports.
I personally think Skyrail is “good”, if it means you can eliminate a whole bunch of level crossings in one hit. Labor has just handled the politics of it really badly.
I think both sides are too keen to play politics over East-West Link for anything to be done about the NE Corridor, tbh…
Surprisingly little electoral material received so far in the letter box despite the trend to early voting. Following the anti-Skyrail postcard was a letter of rebuttal from Dreyfus. Labor has also taken over the former cinema and vacated op shop in Edithvale – presumably as a campaign office. Not many signs in the shops or on peoples houses – though they’d be noticed less as the cold keeps people in.
The train stations in the morning have been surprisingly free of campaigners. This week is the last chance for big numbers. From next week due to a 5 week grade sep shutdown of part of the Frankston line more will drive making them harder to reach.
I got the Dreyfus sky rail letter too. Made sense to me. There won’t be a sky rail on the line, just the removal of individual crossings.
There are a few No Sky Rail groups here, at least one run by Liberal Members. I trust that people can read through the misinformation and discern the difference between state and federal issues.
I’ve actually got a lot of flyers Sandbelter (I’m in Mentone).
I also have no doubt that once te scare campaign has passed and the level crossings removed everyone will wonder what the fuss was about.
Turns out you were right, Sandbelter.
Turnbull has indeed put some money for the North-East Link. It’s a paltry sum for what seems to be “investigations” and not much else, but I guess it’s something.
My prediction: Labor hold, although the bayside suburbs are trending Liberal.
I finally got a flyer from the Lib yesterday and it is truly the weirdest flyer I’ve ever seen. So it’s DL size but instead of being one flyer, it’s a mash of four other Lib flyers at quarter size. So youve got the fake trade flyer, the stick to the plan flyer, the dodgy-IPA figures flyer and another one all rolled into one but in teenie tiny letters and quarter size. Super weird!
I discovered this website by chance when i was googling where to vote early in Isaacs which I did yesterday..thought I would give my 2 cents worth..
From my point I think many voters will be influenced by the so called State issues of SKY Rail and the CFA.
I myself voted Liberal even though I have been a Union member (MEAA) albeit a smaller Union simply becuase of the above issues.
I live in a townhouse complex near the Rail line and even though M Dreyfus cant change the State issue simple fact is I like many in this complex dont want the Rail Line put up in the sky..at a body corporate meeting last month I can tell you about 40 people attending all stated they wanted to send a message to Vic Labour by voting against Fed labour , now those 40 will have partners wifes husbands etc etc so that snowballs into quite a few votes away from M Dreyfus.
I havent seen town hall or rsl meetings for super’ or other so called issues but for Sky Rail yes…
The other aspect is the CFA my son will vote for the first time this year and he told me he was voting for Liberal because a teamates dad was in Edithvale CFA and he too wanted to send a message etc
I am involved at his Footy Club Aspendale and every week we play teams in the area and I can tell you everyone seems to be saying they will vote against Labour to send a message. My sone wouldnt even know where the CSIRO is even though its 400 m from the footy ground
My point is CFA and Sky Rail are State issues but plenty of people will be using them to send a message i Think.
I am intrigued as to why M Dreyfus sent out flyers on Sky Rail but nothing on CFA if they are each State Issues.
I play golf with a chap that works with a Labour Members media team from another electorate and he says his ” boss’ is furious with Sate labour for the CFA.
Anyway I think M Dreyfus will hold his seat but I would I think it will be swing against him especially in the booths down beachside
We will find out on Sat night anyway and i look forward to checking this website in another 4 years ?? as it makes interesting discussion
Dreyfus is a complete liar, and I can’t believe more than half of you fools again voted for him. I think it is time you looked in your own backyard before just voting based on a popularity contest.
Labor is a bad, BAD thing for this country, and you fools just escalated that.
Good work idiots.
I’ll take him over the Lib and ther lies about the CFA and level crossings any day.
Let’s face it, the Lib candidate here was a nothing candidate that ran his entire campaign on fabricated BS about a state issue.
I voted at the Chelsea Activity Hub located bayside of the highway. There were reps from Labor, Green and a Lib (?) wearing CFA garb.
AEC says that booth went against the general swing, with -2.4%. In contrast Chelsea Central (the primary school) swung 0.33% towards Dreyfus. Both of these were below the seat’s average of 2% towards Dreyfus/Labor.
The general pattern of this seat was that higher priced areas (Mentone, Aspendale Gardens) swung to the Libs while areas with lower property prices (Carrum Downs, Chelsea Heights) swung towards Labor. Keysborough West on first glance bucked the trend but the location would be convenient for both Waterways and Dingley – both affluent Liberal voting areas very different from multicultural Springvale South nearby.
The Chelsea results tally with this – with the near-waterfront Activity Hub swinging to Liberal whereas inland Chelsea (the primary school) did not. Inland Chelsea has heaps of older people but arguably some gentrification as well so maybe that’s why the Labor swing was weaker than the seat generally.
The big stand-out was Patterson Lakes. This is a affluent car-driving boat owning McMansion Liberal heartland which one would expect would hold for them. But it didn’t – there was a massive 5% swing to Labor. Possibly older people concerned about Medicare? This may also be true to a lesser extent for Edithvale which swung much stronger to Labor than did Chelsea.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDivisionPage-20499-219.htm
The same pattern of swings to the libs seen in Mentone and Aspendale Gardens continued right the way up the Frankston line to Caulfield. The swing to teh Libs was strongest around Bentleigh and Bentleigh East.