2025 Australian federal election

1. @redistributed they were never gonna win them anyway. i think thats why dutton has reversed the policy. hes not gonna spend good money chasing unwinnable seats. I think he can get 8 to 12 this time around not including the teals. and then just wait for 2028 and come in and swoop the rest plus the teals after a labor minority govt falls apart like time. Hasluck will be a tough ask after redistribution but i think they can get all those seats back in wa plus cowan and the new seat. atm hunter would be up for grabs but its gonna depend on the redistribution. if it loses parts of LM it should be an easy gain but that would rule out Shortland. but if it loses Muswellbrook then Shortland might just be in play. i dont think albo is weak enough to lose enough seats to enable to coalition to be in a stronger position then labor without the teal seats

2. @John I agree that Albo fails to read the room, but this policy is far more unpopular than any of Albos unpopular policies, and would be unpopular across almost the entire country (and I say that as someone who leans right). This is more unpopular than the Voice and the mis-info bill. The only policy of Albos that would be comparably unpopular to this is his mass immigration policy, and most people unfortunately aren’t aware of that.

3. @Scart. doubtful their not saying their not gonna cut emissions theyre just saying theyre not gonna be bound to the previous short term targets and i dont see how thats gonna lose them votes in places where CoL is more important

4. When the redistribution draft is completed in NSW I’ll try and make a third instalment in my federal target seats map series. The redistribution will really define what happens especially in NSW where it will see the most changes. Paterson will almost certainly be a very high-priority target regardless of the redistribution given that it will likely lose Kurri Kurri and western Maitland to Hunter.

   One theory as to why Port Stephens booths swung to the Liberals in 2022 would be that not only was the economy doing well in NSW with a popular NSW state government in power (who at the time could’ve certainly gained the marginal state Labor seat of Port Stephens) but also the Coalition government announced its support of the domestic and international terminal upgrades for Newcastle Airport in Williamtown which is in the seat of Paterson. In Medowie which is near Williamtown the swing to the Liberals on TPP was 3.89% which resulted in a 55.89% Liberal TPP in Medowie.

   The swing against One Nation also mostly went to the Liberals across Paterson.

5. @NP paterson will be a coalition gain in 2025

6. i think of all the seats that changed hands in 2022 only Wentworth, Mackellar, Reid, Griffith and Goldstein are the only ones that dont have a chance of flipping back

7. @John yeah unlike Kate Washington who has built up a big profile as the state Labor MP for Port Stephens and has a personal vote it doesn’t seem like Meryl Swanson has much of a personal vote at all. But in saying that she does live in a town called Buchanan which is in the City of Cessnock and City of Maitland LGAs so she might have a personal vote in Maitland or Kurri Kurri but not in Newcastle.

8. @NP its on a slim margin and the redistribution is gonna push either cessnock or kurri kurri out shortening the margin even further, add in a swing to the coalition and shes gonski.

9. @John if the election was tomorrow (using current boundaries) and the NT general election and the Queensland state election were both held yesterday and won by the CLP and the LNP, respectively, then I would predict Deakin, Menzies and Sturt to be Labor gains; Blair, Gilmore, Hunter, Lingiari, Paterson and Pearce to be Coalition gains; Bradfield to be a teal gain; and Aston, Bennelong, Eden-Monaro, Hawke, Kooyong, Leichhardt, Lindsay, McEwen, Robertson and Tangney to be tossups.

   Before Dutton announced to scrap the 2030 targets (which, by the way, are backed by federal Labor, NSW Labor and the NSW Coalition plus every other Labor branch and most other Coalition branches including the state LNP in Queensland) then I would have Bradfield, Curtin, Goldstein, North Sydney and Sturt as tossups. The only teal seat that could still be a tossup is Kooyong simply because Amelia Hamer is an excellent candidate with moderate views and I see her as a future Cabinet Minister while Monique Ryan has had a disastrous term and hasn’t proven herself to be even somewhat worthy of another term.

10. Portal, why Lindsay? But I hope you are right.

11. @NP on current boundaries labor wouldnt gain Deakin or Menzies. maybe sturt but after the lackluster performance in the state by election im starting to doubt that. agree on Balir, Gilmore, Hunter, Lingiari, Paterson, Pearce. in my opinion they would and will gain Aston, Bennelong, Tangey, McEwen. Lyons, Higgins, Boothby, Werriwa, Hasluck, Dunkley.

    tossups for me would be Eden-monaro, corangamite, macquarie, swan, cowan. ryan, brisbane, leichardt, robertson and dobell

    the lis would never win mackellar goldstein north sydney wentworth warringah and thats why i think hes announced the policy.

    bradfield is the one that will one to watch as it could either way

    i reckon the libs will get curtin back and an outside chance at Kooyong

    i cant see any labor gains outside of menzies, deakin and sturt and possibly leichardt even after redistribution perhaps fowler but in my opinion thats gonna get gutted

    i think labor are pretty much at their limit as remember they are already on 84 notional seats on 2pp

12. @Daniel t if they couldnt win lindsay coming into government they wont win it from government

13. @Daniel T that was a wildcard one but mostly based on the fact that Labor gained the state seat of Penrith in 2023 but it was quite close. Lindsay definitely leans Liberal though plus the Liberals retained the state seat of Badgerys Creek in 2023 with an increased margin (Badgerys Creek is mostly a renamed version of Mulgoa and it covers many outer Western Sydney suburbs in the federal seats of Lindsay, McMahon and Werriwa). Badgerys Creek has trended conservative in recent years as it used to be a major target seat but it isn’t as much of a target seat anymore despite it being working-class and in the outer suburbs of Sydney.

14. i think greenway might be a target if not in 2025 defeintely 2028 as it will probly shed its heavier labor parts in the south.

15. dutton is getting dangerously close to toppling albo as a one term government. if he starts leading in newspoll in both the 2pp and preferred pm i will change my prediction of labor minority to a liberal one

16. the coalition has just announced its nuclear policy

17. What seats are the seven proposed reactors in?

18. @Ann Flynn, Maranoa, New England, Calare, Gippsland, Grey and O”Connor

19. They won’t go ahead. I doubt the senate would approve or the crossbench in the house. And I think mass protests and community opposition will be enough for Dutton to abandon the policy.

    Dutton is trying to write a conservative version of British Labour’s “Longest Suicide Note In History” by announcing daft policies like this and won’t win back city seats, and I dare say they will go backwards in seats (Bradfield, Menzies, Deakin, Bonner) could be at risk.

    Labor could hold its majority.

20. So doing something that according to polls, is more popular with young people, inner-city voters and uni educated voters won’t win them back?

21. Source where it is “Popular”? It is not popular among lefties or even moderates.

22. @Daniel T it’s not popular among lefties but moderates do support it.

    @SCart while younger people are more pro-nuclear (because the older people witnessed stuff like the Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine (which was then the Ukrainian SSR of the Soviet Union) when technology wasn’t as advanced), it’s not true that inner-city people are the most supportive. Rural areas are more supportive because rural people want to tackle climate change but also want affordable and reliable power sources and more jobs so replacing old coal mines will create new jobs.

    Overall I think nuclear in addition to renewables is achievable and a good target, but I believe that Dutton (I specify Dutton not the Liberals more generally because this isn’t the case on the state level in any jurisdiction) scrapping the 2030 targets was not a good idea; I say this as someone who has only ever supported the Coalition.

23. Many people like nuclear until you want to build it near them, or they look at the cost. People will not back nuclear if it means their power bills go up as a result. As for Dutton, it’s very mysterious how he had nine years in government to propose a nuclear plant but failed to do so, and only bothered once his no longer has the power to pass lower house bills.

24. Nuclear is more popular amongst the working-class in provincial and rural areas as it seen as an economic guarantee for coal for the next decade or two and is seen as a boost for mining and manufacturing. Ironically, to manufacture renewable energy sources, mining of various critical minerals is also needed as are manufacturing and mining skillsets, albeit different types.

    Polling I’ve seen from Redbridge shows far greater support amongst over 65s than under 35s, though under 35s are quite undecided. I think the general support in rural areas or amongst older voters may have to do with their support for the Coalition. What the polling also shows is that there’s more support for solar and wind.

    I doubt the typical young, inner-city, progressive will be swayed by nuclear as they are seeking a move to renewables or low-emissions energy sources sooner than 2040.

25. Here’s a 2023 survey by Nationals MP for Cowper Pat Conaghan: https://patconaghan.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Pats_Big_Survey_2023_Results.pdf

    The survey, titled Pat’s Biggest Survey, was conducted in 2023 for residents of the seat of Cowper on the NSW Mid North Coast: Many questions are asked in the survey, one of which is about nuclear power. 64.07% of respondents said they supported nuclear energy (combined total of “very likely to support nuclear energy” and “somewhat likely to support nuclear energy”).

26. @Votante if there wasn’t such a massive dichotomy then it would be better

27. There was one from Newspoll which had support from under 35s at 65%, and support from urban voters at 57%.

28. In 2007, nuclear was raised in the run up to the election. Labor raised a scare campaign – in Deakin there were psmphlets in the mail headed with things like “the liberals want to build a nuclear power station in the City of Whitehorse” – it was insulting to the voters intelligence and Labor lost my vote. Actually naming locations is in my opinion a master stroke – there can be no general scare campaigns. It puts investment into regional areas and the existing grid is being used. Where does the ETU stand? Seemingly silent so far.

29. @Redistributed – wait till it is pointed out that most of the sites aren’t actually suited to Nuclear power plants – they have only been picked because they have (or would have had by many years in to the future) a coal plant there.

    Many of the sites aren’t even available now, let alone in the future when their owners have put them to other energy and industrial uses.

    As the sites start to fall away, it will become obvious that further sites will have to be selected, otherwise the whole thing is a house of cards – which it is already.

    I will be interested to see the Government approach next week. I actually think the best line of attack will be that the Coalition actually has no intention of delivering this “idea”. If they did, they would have more, any, detail to provide about it. And if you think we are getting further information on this idea before the election, your are dream’in.

    So in the end, as many media types have said today, it’s nothing more than a plan to defer renewable energy roll out for say, another 5 years. Again, the Liberals have NO energy policy. Because the more sticks they throw in the spokes of the transition, the more they can blame renewables for the problem in the first place.

30. If Dutton was smart, he would’ve promoted nuclear WITH renewables, NOT against them. I’m pro nuclear, but I’m willing to see if renewables can provide 100% of Australia’s electricity needs as it were with coal and gas. But anyway, cost of living will be the factor that will decide this election, not some anti-nuclear scare campaign.

31. @Ian THIS.

32. @daniel t tour deluded a bit i think if he has a majority in the house he dowsnt need the crossbench and im pretty sure they are setting themselves up for 2028 as i dont think they can win enough seats to even get minority as the teals will side with labor. As for mass community protests you mean labo is facing with their renewable agenda.

33. @daniel t they have done polling that sugeests their is majority support in those areas. Unlike labor they have said they will losten to any opposition. and it’s likely they may lose three of those four anyway. Dutton is banking on winning back outer surburban labor seats where cost of living is more important on climate action

    @np the polling suggests people want reliability and affordability over net zero and I think that’s where he’s got it right peter Dutton read the room on the voice and got it right against the will of the govt and the woke corporations. People want climate action but aren’t willing to pay for it. Especially during a cost of living crisis.

    @wilson because back then they were committed to coal and gas and dutton wasn’t the leader so it wasn’t up to him.

    @ian they aren’t proposing no renewables they want both but not at the spped labor is rolling it out. It is highly unlikely you could power a country like Australia on 100% renewables and even if you could it would be expensive a nuclear site takes about 5 acres for the same power generation as 10,000 acres of renewables if I remember correctly. The only difference is albo and bowen are dumping the stuff on places that never vote labor. Dutton has the guts to propose to put the reactors on 6 of 7 of his own seats (all 7) if muswellbrook becomes part of new england. And look at the backlash in whitlam and shortland from off shore wind in normally safe labor seats that could now we’ll be in play

34. I don’t know whether Dutton is on a winner with nuclear, but I do think scrapping the emissions targets for 2030 will be a positive electorally. I tend to think Morrison’s ‘net zero by 20250’ goal was a prime reason for the coalitions loss last time around and getting rid of the short term target will be a benefit to them. I also think the nuclear policy is an attempt to thread a very thin needle, trying to signal to their old tealish base they are concerned about emmissions while signalling to the broad middle to lower Australia they are concerned about reliable power.
    Might not work and they need a lot to go right for it to work, but it is a gamble worth taking.

35. Nah. I agree that nuclear is a good idea but scrapping the 2030 targets is dumb.

36. Ed Davey, the UK Liberal Democrat leader, was originally opposed to nuclear power but approved the construction of a new nuclear plant as Energy Secretary because he believed it was the only way to get emissions down.

37. I really hate that our politicians advocate the nuclear vs renewables false dichotomy. Yes SCart, scrapping the 2030 targets will further turn certain seats from the Libs, such as teal-held ones, new Chisholm, Boothby, Sturt, Ryan, and Brisbane. They will at least need some of those seats to regain power.

38. Tony Abbott could have left a great legacy if he began rolling out nuclear power while he was Prime Minister.

39. John Howard should’ve implemented the Switkowski report.

40. It’s pretty obvious none of the above comments since last night actually get what is going on. The ENTIRE point of this announcement this week (not a plan, not a policy) was to delay renewables, and hopefully stop them all together at grid scale not to complement them. You can See Joyce and Canavan’s finger prints all over this announcement. They want to disrupt the transition so that by late this decade, as major and numerous Coal fired plants are within 5 years of closing, a LNP government will have the cover to come out and build new government funded coal fired plants – because their won;t be any option left.

    So Abbott or Howard weren’t going to start down the road to nuclear (and they didn’t) because they were quite happy with new coal fired plants being built one day too.

    NO party when in Government would ever and has never proposed what Dutton proposed this week, because they would never intend for it to happen.

41. @High Street Well said. This is nothing but a smokescreen to appease the coal-infatuated folks like Joyce, Canavan, Littleproud etc who are doing everything they can to stop renewables as if they’re allergic to it. Sadly they’ll get rewarded in their electorates for their stances when if they were anywhere else they’d likely be booted.

    As for the ‘detail’, they’ll just keep pushing it out, hoping to win and then shelve it if they do. This is what lost Labor and the Yes side on the voice. So a ‘good’ strategy if they want to pursue the exact same strategy which will probably produce the same outcome.

    Those Teal/Green seats have just turned teal/green for the foreseeable future. If this is the line that Amelia Hamer, Tim Wilson and Tom White have to carry with them to the election, Monique Ryan, Zoe Daniel and Kate Chaney will just walk all over them. The majority of the population, most of which live in inner-city seats, don’t want a bar of it despite the coalition telling us that their ‘polling’ says the contrary. This also gives Labor a chance to pinch the last few remaining inner-city seats from the Liberals. Deakin, Menzies, Sturt, Bonner etc meanwhile sandbagging Bennelong just became a whole lot easier.

42. I agree High Street and my comments don’t contradict yours. I think Dutton is trying to make nuclear look bad to promote coal, because coal and nuclear advocates like myself see each other as huge enemies. One contributes to climate change, the other doesn’t. As you mentioned, he chose bad sites e.g. no water source, rather than previously proposed sites such as Jervis Bay and Portland, Victoria.

43. Cool Ian, I misinterpreted what you said.

    Dutton already has a few people (SHaC and the AFR) happy with the sites, but I think this will start collapsing soon. If you tell the local communities with closing coal fired stations that the only reason they were selected for nuclear was for the transmission lines (which will already be in use and will have to be duplicated!) and that there is risk around a nuclear plant being position on their site, then local support will fall away.

    If he was serious about nuclear, Jervis bay would be back on the table – 55 years after it was dropped. But he is not serious.

    @Tommo9 – don’t discount Bradfield.

44. I see that Dutton’s nuclear plan is more of a thought bubble than really genuine as:
    1) Claims 7 plants can be completed between 2035-2037 which is very questionable as Australia lack of experience in planning and constructing Nuclear Power. Even similarily advanced Economies that already have nuclear couldn’t be built at that pace.
    2) Small modular reactors are not well used in the masses. He even posted a Rolls-Royce SMR which isn’t even close to becoming a reality
    3) No mention of cost and funding which links back to 1) plus a high risk of cost overruns

45. It will be cheap compared to the cost of solar and wind though. Costing will come closer to election. It’s not like labor has provided costongs on renewables

46. Hey John,

    The Labor government is not proposing to build any renewable energy generation – they don’t need to. THE MARKET WILL AS THERE IS PROFIT TO BE MADE.

    So what exactly do you want them to provide a costing of? and on what do you base a comment like nuclear will be cheap compared to renewables??

47. @High Street most of the trusted and reliable science agencies (e.g. CSIRO) and energy market operators have flagged renewables as the cleaner, cheaper and more sustainable alternative. Even if nuclear was any of that, why do Australians have to wait until 2035 for one to come alive and lower power prices (and even that might just be a fantasy for Dutton to keep coal and gas running)? Why not now with power prices being higher than usual and our technology in renewables being completely capable of expanding at a lower cost?

    I don’t think Dutton’s idea of nuclear (coming to you whenever, if ever) is going to win him many votes, even cost-of-living/power bills when there’s no way nuclear energy will lower them here and now, which is what most of the electorates want, not some 10 years away.

48. New target seat maps with the proposed boundaries:

    NSW: https://jmp.sh/br5PXjWs
    VIC: https://jmp.sh/BBN5kZMD
    WA: https://jmp.sh/D3CsOzLI

    Purple seats are major party targets, yellow is for rural independents, teal is for teals, dark pink is Greens targets, light pink is Dai Le’s seat (DLFCN/Labor target), darker shades are higher priority targets, yeah I think you all get it by now. Feel free to make any comments/suggestions.

49. @high street actually they are see with coal fired plants cloing down and nuclear banned its basically like saying coles is closing down and your banning aldi. o your forcing people to shop at woolies. then wooliess has a monopoly and can charge whatever they want because people will have no choice but to shop there so prices go up. they are rolling out mass taxayer subuidised solar and wind power and building 28,000 km of new poll and wires to connect them. we cant know which is cheaper becuase the market says you can only renewables becaue theyv banned the other. there is no “market” becaue the govt is saying its renewables or nothing. the only way to know for sure is to repeal the ban and remove the subsidies then “the market” can decide

50. @NP id put bruce, shortland, kooyong and curtin on the liberal list and hughes and canning on labors

Comments are closed.