The Australian Electoral Commission yesterday published the official statistics that will be used for federal redistributions in South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT. This gives us a bit more insight into what is likely to happen in those redistributions.
Electorates must be drawn so each seat is within 10% of average enrolment at the start of the process (in this case, August 2025), but also so that seats are within 3.5% of the average for a projected enrolment three-and-a-half years after the end of the process (in this case, April 2030). That second rule is much stricter, and thus ends up being more important in the drawing of new seats.
In a previous post, I looked at the population patterns based on June enrolment data. But we didn’t have projected data until yesterday afternoon. So for this post I will look at that second set of datapoints.
Not one seat deviates from the first quota by more than 10%. Nine seats deviate from the projected quota by more than 3.5%: Barker, Bass, Bean, Canberra, Clark, Lyons, Makin, Mayo and Spence.
Firstly, South Australia.
The biggest deviations are in the northern suburbs of Adelaide. Spence is projected to be 12% over quota, while the neighbouring seat of Makin is almost 8% under quota. Mayo is also about 8% over, while Barker is almost 4% under quota. Pretty much every other seat is slightly under quota.
It seems most likely that Spence will shrink, and the surplus voters will mostly go into Makin. Mayo will also need to shrink, likely giving some of those surplus voters to Barker.
In Tasmania, the Hobart-area seat of Clark is projected to be 10% under quota. So Clark will need to grow. Franklin is 3.2% over quota, so can absorb some of that growth, but it will be necessary for Clark to expand north into parts of northern Hobart that are currently contained in Lyons. That central seat is almost 10% over the projected quota. Bass is also 4.4% under quota, so will also need to take more voters from Lyons.
Right now Lyons includes outer suburban areas in both the Hobart and Launceston areas, and they will be the first to be cut, making Lyons more of a rural seat. It’s hard to see any scenario that doesn’t make Lyons more favourable for the Liberal Party.
There just aren’t that many different ways to shift populations in these small jurisdictions with a small number of electorates, and that is particularly true of the ACT. The growth in the ACT has been fastest in the south, with the southern electorate of Bean 7.6% over quota. While the northern seat of Fenner is slightly under quota, it’s the central seat of Canberra which is most under. So I expect we’ll see Canberra expand south, probably taking in parts of Woden or Weston Creek. Fenner can be mostly left alone, but it could gain some more of the Belconnen area to produce more equal numbers.
@Angas @JWood
I’d like to also add my appreciation to these amazing tools.
I used Angas’s last night to play around with Tasmania and ACT.
It really helps not having to flip between a spreadsheet and a map and remember which random SA1 number I forget to include in my calculations.
I’ve been in Europe on a career break for most of this year and just got back. It’s amazing to see how the tools have taken off in the time I’ve been away. Hopefully it’ll mean more voices get an opportunity to make submissions in the redistribution process.
I played around with jWoods qld federal page. Based on those numbers blai would lose Somerset. Making it much safer for labor. On the other note the deficits in the north would coalesce with surpluses on the Sunshine Coast. Resulting in massive changes to wide Bay. Fairfax and fisher. This would probably warrant a rename of bother Fairfax and wide Bay. Fisher would survive purely because its named after a pm. Although a case could be made to preserve wide Bay through renaming Flynn which takes in the wide Bay area. Since wide Bay is a federation name. In this case Flynn -> Wide Bay. Wide Bay -> Irwin. And Fairfax i would suggest naming after another woman hopefully Oodgeroo if the state redistribution releases that name.
Using @Angus’s tool (again, thanks), you can get a valid division with Hobart, Kingborough and Huon Valley and a valid division with Glenorchy and Clarence (including the parts currently in Lyons, alternatively parts of Brighton can be used). Lyons and Bass can be sorted by transferring Blackstone Heights and Prospect Vale to Bass.
If the commission is willing to remove the non-contiguity, they can do so cleanly
But they wont
If they were willing to do it they’d have done it already
Also great work Angus on the tool. I will probably make a submissions at the comments stage once i have had a look at the comments stage.
They go for minimal change and short of increasing the number of seats they won’t do it. I went for a partial removal of the non contiguous seat. If it’s done over time it would get done by doing minimal changes but moving those parts out. Hence why I moved Huon Valley into lyons(mostly) and then put everything west of the river north west into clark. I then moved Richmond tasman and Torrens into franklin.
For those enquiring there is a road that connects the Huon Valley to lyons with out going through clark.
Lonnavale road meets the Huon roads lonnavale thne connects to the Plenty Link which runs north’s to Plent Valley Road.
I think that if they are going to do it at all, they will do it all at once, rather than piecemeal
They dont seem to have the will to do radical change anymore except when seat numbers change. Case in point the nsw redistribution they should have abolished 2 seats and created another in the growth corridor in Western Sydney but went for piecemeal.
Probably not the right thread for it, but I too had another go at Queensland’s 2026 redistribution.
* Wright contracts to become a Scenic Rim and Logan seat, giving all its GC hinterland territory to the nearest GC electorate.
* Forde becomes basically the fourth Gold Coast seat, but still takes in a lot of Logan. It extends from the Logan River to the Coomera River, and out to Yarrabilba.
* Moreton pushes Oxley south and west, taking in Springfield and Ripley. If I were preparing a serious submission, I’d be renaming this seat to Hayden.
* Blair keeps Somerset, but Groom takes in Lockyer after giving virtually all of the Toowoomba regional area to Maranoa.
* Ryan expands into Brisbane, which expands into Lilley, which pushes Petrie over the Pine River.
* Longman pulls Fisher south, which pulls Fairfax south in turn.
* Wide Bay loses its namesake geographical feature as it now takes in Noosa, Nambour and Coolum. The old Wide Bay is split with a third going to Hinkler and another third to Flynn.
* Hinkler loses Bundaberg City to Flynn, but keeps Bargara and gains Maryborough, Tin Can Bay and K’Gari. This electorate would probably be renamed Wide Bay to preserve the Federation name. Flynn might become Hinkler in this scenario.
* Capricornia gains the Central Highlands and gives Collinsville and the Pioneer Valley to Dawson.
* By the time we finish north the changes are relatively minor. Leichhardt gains a block from Kennedy, Herbert gains Annandale from Dawson.
One in six voters has a new federal electorate.
It will be interesting to see what actually happens.
Ive done the following
Leichardt gains Tablelands from Kennedy.
Kennedy gains Winton and Diamantina from Maranoa. Northern Beaches from Herbert. Oonoonba Townsville South and Toseneath from Dawson.
Herbert gains Bohle Plains, Douglas and Condon from Kennedy and Anna dale from Dawson.
Dawson gains Clarmon, Collinsville walkerton and parts of broadsound plus all things north obviously inc Mackay from Capricornia.
Capricornia gains Central Highlands, Banana and Rockhampton from Flynn.
Hinkler remains unchanged. Since it can be worked around and is at quota.
Maranoa gains most of Toowoomba regional fromGroom along with most of Kingaroy from Flynn.
Groom takes in Lockyer Valley from Wright.
Mocrieff and McPherson do a territory swap. Everything south of mermaid Waters inclusive for everything north of Cottlesoe and Cheltenham Drive.
Fadden gains everything north of Smith Street from Moncrieff.
Wright gains everything west of the Pacific motorway thats south of the Coomera River from Fadden.
Forde gains Alberton and Ormeau from Fadden moving it to the Pimpana River. Gains Logan Village, Yarrabilla and parts of Jimboomba from Wright
Bowman gains Carbrook from zforde to top it up as Redlands City is not enough.
Rankin gains everything north of the Logan River down to schools road along with part of Boronia Heights from Forde. And Hillcrest from Wright.
Bonner takes everything south of Boundary road and old cleveland road from Griffith
Griffith takes everything north of Waterton Street, the railway line and Yeronga Street from Moreton.
Moreton gains the city of Brisbane from Rankin. Also everything east of Blunder Road and Blunder Creek from Oxley.
Oxley gains the rest of Sprinfield from Blair.
Blair gains the parts of Collingwood West of Goodna Creek up to Duncan Street. And west of Collingwood drive.
Ryan gains everything north of the Brisbane River from Blair. Gains everything west of Stewart road, waterworks road Musgrave road and hale street from Brisbane.
Brisbane gains the airport Everton park and parts of Stafford west of shandy Street from lilley
Lillley gains everything south of Roghan road from Petrie along with the City of Brisbane from Dickson.
Petrie gains a tiny bit of Kallngur to top it up from Longman.
Dickson gains the rest of Kallnagur and Narangba east of Burpengary road from Longman.
Longman gains Somerset from Blair and parts of Fisher west of the Bruce Highway.
Fisher gains everything east of the Bruce highway from Longman.
Fairfax gains everything west of the Bruce Highway and north of the Mooloolah River from Fisher
Flynn gains everything north of Gympie and some of the surrounds from Wide Bay. Given the namesake and a very large portion of WideBay are put into Flyyn you could justify preserving wide Bay as a federation name. Flynn name would be abolished.
I moved 17.60% of voters so about 1/6 as well
Isn’t that interesting. Two different ways, two different approaches. I appreciate the effort you went to explaining that.
Does your Flynn encircle your Hinkler? I assume it’s kept Gladstone, but you’ve said it gains territory north of Gympie, and that Hinkler is unchanged.
Methinks that some people here have too much time on their hands ……
Yes it does
Just as Kennedy encircles Herbert
— Another approach I’ve found: abolish the seat of Hinkler, moving Bundaberg into Flynn and Hervey Bay into Wide Bay which then sheds the shire of Noosa, mostly to Fairfax
We then draw a new seat which contains the Somerset region and the Sunshine Coast and Noosa west of the Bruce hwy as well as enough rural bits of nearby regions to make up the numbers. A small chunk of Fairfax will need to move to Fisher.
I’m attracted by the idea of moving the Burnett region into Maranoa but I think I need to include Banana as well and the north is much like @Real Talks idea
The Lockyear valley is somewhat awkwardly split between Groom and Blair; nothing else is terribly shocking. We can tidy up the frontier between Blair and Ryan and Oxley and the council boundary works well as the northern boundary of Rankin.
In my sketch something like 20% of voters are moved; I suspect there are a lot of ways to do it but you kind of have to do something dramatic here.
I found a way to make Bass more Launceston-centric. Will show photos tomorrow if I remember as I’ll be overseas in New Caledonia and Vanuatu this week.
Does anyone have a state Vic redistribution tool?
John
I googled your ‘road’ connecting the Huon Valley with Lyons. Apparently it is a forestry track with locked gates so – no – there is not a possible contiguous link.
H well it’s not better then then the current situation its just a short drive through clark. Besides a road is a road locked or not
@Up the dragons
I’ve added in the state Vic redistribution now – https://auredistribution.com/
John, your ongoing refusal to adhere to the Law of Holes is a blessing to this community.
Thanks @Jwood well done!
The Vic redistribution is 3 years away data here would be unreliable. You’d be better off realising them in order of the next upcoming election. Nt act wa sa then Vic then nsw. Vic hasnt even had an election yet
I finished my SA one (and will not bother with TAS and ACT), but I am not sure if Coromandel Valley should be united into Boothby or split between Boothby and Kingston at LGA boundaries. Note that all of Mitcham LGA is in my Boothby. I split it at LGA boundaries but left it open for affected residents to make their case to keep the suburb in one piece in the comments/objections phase. Both arrangements work within the numerical requirements if all my other suggestions are upheld.
If anyone can give me insights as to which is preferable, I would appreciate it.
Leon, it depends on where the LGA boundary is. If it cuts across a major road (like some Sydney examples such as Hornsby-Hills Shire at Cherrybrook and Ryde-Hunters Hill in Gladesville), then it is preferrable to unite the whole suburb in one electoral district.
@Ben Raue and everyone else. A serious question here – what happens if the projected growth for a Federal electorate is greater than 13.5%, making it impossible to satisfy both the inside -10% actual and the under +3.5% projected? In that case do the mathematical considerations outrank the community of interest concerns? For example, Longman is currently +14.71% over and projected to be +29.27% over. I am aware that reducing it to -10% under will also probably reduce the rate of projected growth, but we have other areas in Queensland which show the same pattern.
@Real Talk I have no problem naming an Ipswich seat after Bill Hayden… but in his role as Governor-General. Once we start the precedent of naming seats after Opposition Leaders we end up on a very slippery slope.
@John Wide Bay is ripe to be renamed and the AEC has already indicated that Federation seats aren’t immune, following their initial response to Corangamite.
And finally, for everyone starting to think about the Queensland Federal redistribution can we at least look at using Local Government boundaries as a guide. Dawson, for example, starts in Mackay, covers most of the Whitsundays (except for Collinsville, which is in Capricornia), a chunk of the Burdekin and finishes off in the suburbs of Townsville.
Starting at Noosa every community is broken and reassembled into shapes that bear no relation to how those communities work.
@yoh an
Thanks for the initial advice.
The LGA boundaries is at Sturt River which appears to be a narrow river.
I now had a check of state boundaries and have found that all of Coromandel Valley seems to be in one seat (Waite) despite the rest of the seat being in Mitcham LGA.
I expected LGA boundaries matter even more at State level
@Mark Yore
We’ve debated the merits of Hayden as a division name elsewhere. If we are naming divisions after Hasluck and Casey, then I believe Hayden is appropriate. Others will disagree.
And if we are concerned about naming divisions after opposition leaders, then Calwell should go the way of Charlton.
@Mark Yore
What you have happened upon is a demonstration of the stupidity of the dual quota system.
Nicholas/Mark, in that situation it is better for the projected quota to be the dominant factor and have a district drawn to be temporarily under the 10% current enrolment quota.
I believe this is what has happened for many NSW state electorates such as Riverstone and Leppington, they were drawn as close to the 10% minimum threshold as possible and yet reached almost 5% above average just after the election.
No it’s is by law they must be with 10% on current and 3.5% on projected numbers. They would have to completely rearranged the seat if that were the case.
Mark
I am sure other posters here will have had the same problem with projections that you have identified. It gets very difficult if you have an electorate that is over quota and has strong growth projections. From experience of making submissions for recent NSW and Victorian federal redistributions it gets really hard when you have contiguous electorates with high projections. In recent cases, outer Northern Melbourne, South East Melbourne and South
West Sydney were really hard to solve. I recall one submission where I was under a 100 electors at each end. The AEC has more grunt than amateurs like ourselves but not 100% sure that they achieve it. Longman is a good example as Fisher will have high projections too. Wright / Blair / Fadden may present issues also. Best to wait for actual projections. The other outcome is convoluted boundaries so the projections work.
@Yoh An
Please someone correct me if I’m wrong, but to my knowledge, at the NSW state level, only one of the quotas (I forget whether it’s current or projected) is strictly required to met, and the other is treated as highly desirable but not absolutely required; whereas at the federal level, both are absolutely required.
Does anybody ever assess the projections? A lot of time and effort is spent matching outcomes with projections – and they could be wrong. As an example, the AEC projections for Robertson were very bullish but there is no indications that they will come to pass. By the next redistribution, Robertson coukd be way under quota.
Nicholas, from the NSW electoral commission website they do require all districts to satisfy both current and projected quotas, but the projected quota is more relaxed at 10% instead of 3.5% for federal seats.
Anthony Green in one old blog post (I believe it was after the 2011 NSW election) mentioned that the O’Farrell government changed that projected quota rule from 3% to 10% due to it being too restrictive when drawing electoral boundaries.
If there is a hard requirement for both quotas to be met at the Queensland federal redistribution, and the projections currently in tool are correct or close to what the AEC’s projections will be, this could be a problem. The outcome of the redistribution will in large part be dictated by the dual quotas, as some obvious configurations, especially for Longman, will be precluded. (And I might add, if the House is expanded and thus electorates are required to be smaller, this will be an even bigger problem in the subsequent redistributions.)
As for NSW, I emailed the NSWEC about this in 2020. Their response almost sounded like they didn’t want to give a direct answer:
“””
The wording on the website is intended to explain to an interested layperson how the redistribution will be conducted. Having given consideration to the question you raised, the relevant page has been amended to read as follows:
> At the time of the redistribution, the number of enrolled voters in each district must not vary by more than 10 per cent (up or down) from the quota or average number. The Redistribution Panel also endeavours to ensure that, as far as practicable, the number of enrolled voters in each district does not vary by more than 10 per cent (up or down) from the quota at the relevant future time:
“””
It is true that in the end, they draw all districts to be within both quotas. That they intended this would explain how they conjured up Leppington district.
The 3.5% is there too ensure seats don’t become too over or under quota in such a short period and ideally last until the next redistribution otherwise you will get seats ending up like Coomera.
@Real Talk I’d be happy if there was some structure around naming seats. Obviously deceased Prime Ministers are granted a seat and length of service isn’t a factor or else we wouldn’t have Forde or Page. I’m okay with naming the CBD seats after the capital city – but that isn’t consistently applied for Tasmania or the Northern Territory. However I don’t think Federation seats should be immune from change. If that means having a discussion about what names should be locked and what seats should be open for change I think that’s a conversation worth having.
@Redistributed In Queensland 5 of the electorates are currently out of quota. But if you look at the ones that have reached the +-3.5% out of quota from the last redistribution, there’s actually 19 seats that ended up outside the projection. Three of those may have been within the quota if the redistribution hadn’t been postponed, but that doesn’t make up for Longman, Blair, Moreton or Wright.
@Yoh An, @Redistributed and @Nicholas It’s a particular problem with Queensland and the use of Priority Development Areas (PDAs) in Southeast Queensland. Dropping 20,000 houses in a small area over a relatively short period of time creates immense population crunches. Years ago the same thing happened in North Lakes, but in a much smaller way. There’s a substantial UK and Southern African contingent there, so the crunch didn’t come when they moved there. Instead it came when they were granted Australian citizenship and went onto the roll so it had an outsize effect.
Real Talk I have previously advocated for the renaming of Calwell. However this should be done when some significant changes occur to justify it to the aec.
Mark Yore the electoral act requires both so the aec has no choice.
In regards to wolf wa state redistribution the numbers justify my solution of moving wiluna and Ngaanyatjarraku solely into Kalgoorlie. Then all of east Pilbara and Port Hedland into Kimberly. This does put it 12% over quota but lda rules allow it to a greater 20% tolerance.
Given geraldton is at quota the deficits in mid west and Pilbara then they would probably merge into a single seat maintaining the mid west name due to the geography. Extending as far south as darwillinu and Coorow. Although geraldton could take in the Abrolhos Islands.
With the rest being absorbed by central wheatbelt given this area is in fact part of that region.
Roe would absorb the parts of Albany outside the city making Albany solely the city of Albany again. Leave WB since its at quota. And remove Capel from Vasse into collie alon wist west Arthur and Williams from roe.
Bunbury leave as is. MW takes the remainder of australind/ Harvey shire from collie reuniting the suburb and lga into one seat after years of being split.
Leave Mandurah and dawesville due to being at quota. Use the excess from MW and CW to create a new regional seat taking in parts of Murray north of the Murray River, Boddington, wandering pingelly brookton york Beverley and Northam from central wheatbelt. These changes would once agin put CW into the LDA category its currently just under. This would leave it just over.
Then everything outside Byford from serpentine Jarrahdale from darling Ranges. This seat could appropriately take on the darling Ranges namesake.
Moving into Perth.
Secret harbour takes in the unpopulated part of karnup from darling Ranges
Baldavis gains parts of Port Kennedy north of Chelmsford and Bayeax Avenues along with theparts of baldavis/Rockingham from darling range
Rockingham gains coolongulp and Rockingham lakes north of safety Bay road from baldavis
Kwinana unchanged.
Oakford takes in the city of Kwinana from darling Ranges
Despite fremantle and Barbara Lake being at quarto Cockburn is over quota and its eastern boundary seems like one that should be kept so it loses parts of Yangebup east of
Dotterel way and ospley drive to bibra Lake. Fremantle remains unchanged
Bicton gains the parts of Fremantle from Bibra Lake.
Bateman gains the remainder of Kardinya from Bicton
Riverton gains the suburb of Bateman from Bsteman prompting a name change il suggest after
Jandakot remains unchanged
Thornlie gains everything east of cornfield Street from southern river
Cannington gains Packwood from Riverton
South Perth gains the rest of south Perth from Victoria park
Victoria park gains the rest of Wilson from cannington
Forrestfield Armadale Midland and Belmont remain unchanged
The former darling ranges takes in parts of oakford between wungong creek and wollaston Avenue along with southern parts of kalmunda
. Despite Byford being the population centre it’s in the far corner and doesn’t represent he seat. Roleystone would be more appropriate
Swan Hills loses parts of Averley west of Waverley Avenue but gains parts of ellenbrook north of the pronenade to/from west swan
Morley gains parts of Ballarat west of tonkin freewat and south of cassowary drive and Illawarra crescent south from west swan as well as parts of beechboro
West of beechboro road north from bassandean
Maryland’s mount Lawley and Perth unchanged
Churchlands gains city Beach from cottesloe and Florentine from nedlands
Despite being at quota Scarborough gains the remainder of Scarborough double view innaloo Osborne’s park and everything north of rosewood Avenue from churchlands
Carine gains everything north of karrinyup road from Scarborough
Balcatta gains everythingg west of zflinders Street from Morley
Girrawheen gains parts of Westminster north of Ravenswood drive and Amelia Street upfront balcatta and the remainder of marangaroo from landscape
Landscape gains all of Alexander heifpghts from girrawheen
Kingsley remains unchanged to maintain the current tight boundaries
Hillarys gains everything north of Warwick road and st heller and Seacrest drives from carine
Wanneroo gains everything north of east road from landsdale renamed due to loss of namesake. Suggestions banksia Grove tapping or carramar
Joondalup gains everything north of cragie drive and whitfordds Avenue from hillays renamed Heathridge due to loss of namesake
Mindarie gains jindalee and ridgewood despite being at quota.
There is now enough quota to form a 60th seat which is probably the result of all the lda going on in regional and rural wa.
So the parliament would need to fix this at the next opportunity. Beforehand
It consists of everything between Wanneroo road and the Mitchell freeway currambine Kinross burns Beach up to neerabup road from Mindarie.ive called it Yellagonga the park that separates joondalup and Wanneroo
Given the Pilbara and Kimberley are now at single seat i would suggest it be renamed to something that is includpsuve of both. I was thinking the great sandy desert but sandy is hardly a name for a seat. And the aboriginals of the area are split on its name. So I’d say Sandy. Or Wolfe Creek. No not what your think Wolfe Creek is the name of a well preserved meteorite impact crater. In the same region.i suppose it would be funny is Joh. JARRATT ran as a candidate though
Bateman would be Mount Pleasant
Just following up that “new seat” would technically probably be Joondalup still since its 72.5% of the old joondalup.
Also Murray Wellington would become Harvey
@ John
Can we discuss the WA state redistrbution on the state thread please and use this to focus on the Federal redistribution.
@Angas @JWood Just a couple of suggestions on the redistribution tool.
I’d like to be able to select the colour of the maps for each electorate as well as a “spotlight” tool that changes the colours of all other seats except the highlighted seat to a neutral colour. This would make it a lot easier to distinguish the electorate.
I’m not sure whether its a Leaflet issue, but I’d also like a finer shift for zooming in and out.
And finally the ability to save the map as an image would be easier than screenshotting it.
And that’s my Christmas wishlist sorted… 🙂
How long are the submissions open for? I don’t have that much time this week since I’m overseas.