Caloundra – Queensland 2024

@NP – Kuranda is in Barron River. Did you mean to say you wanted to move it into Cook?

Very interesting contributions and ideas so far. Here’s what I think:

Coomera only adjoins two other Gold Coast seats: Broadwater and Theodore. Any transfer of electors out of Coomera towards the other Gold Coast seats will require quite significant boundary changes, as adjacent seats are drawn further north. This may result in some seats being renamed if their namesake suburbs shift into neighbouring divisions. I expect, for example, that the suburb of Coomera itself will end up in Theodore.

I agree that Toohey will be abolished, with a new seat on the southside likely to be drawn from parts of Bundamba, Jordan, Logan, and Coomera.

Caloundra is likely to contract substantially due to significant new developments in the area. A new seat will almost certainly be created in this region, especially as the excess voters from the Moreton Bay area are transferred up the highway, as it were.

The areas outside of south-east Qld, currently home to 30 seats, currently have numbers for only 29 so there must be an abolition here to make up for the new Sunshine Coast seat. (The only other abolition – Toohey – allows for the new Ipswich-Logan-area seat)

Wide Bay will be particularly interesting. Hervey Bay must shed voters but only borders Maryborough, which is also expected to grow. Given Gympie has excess population and may soak up even more electors from Noosa, this may ultimately result in Burnett shifting further south to absorb numbers. This could then see Bargara join Bundaberg, eliminating the donut seat.

I’m not yet certain of how the numbers will balance overall, but the regional seat I’m abolishing is Callide. And I don’t think you can abolish Callide without also abolishing Mirani — let me explain.

Mirani would relinquish the Livingstone Shire to Keppel and the Rockhampton Regional Council area to Rockhampton. To compensate, it would swing west along the Peak Downs Highway to absorb the coalfield towns of Moranbah and Dysart from Burdekin. I imagine the seat might be renamed – Macmaster was proposed last time around.

Burdekin, in turn, could take the Charters Towers LGA from Traeger, which may bring it over 100,000 square kilometres — enough to qualify as a fifth large district. It could potentially give back areas west of Charters Towers itself to Traeger if the large district allowance is an issue.

Traeger would then compensate by expanding southward, taking all the councils west of Longreach from Gregory, more or less returning to the pre-2017 shape of the former Mount Isa. Gregory would complete the redistribution loop by taking Clermont from Mirani, and the Banana Shire and Monto area from the abolished Callide, gaining substantial enrolment and likely retaining its area allowance.

I’m not sure if the numbers will work out for Traeger in this scenario – they may have to gain Longreach LGA to make the numbers work with the large district allowance. This would be viable if Gregory ends up over quota, which I’m not completely ruling out giving what they are gaining and losing. I’ll have to work out the numbers.

The rest of Callide would be divided as follows:

1. Chinchilla and Miles to Warrego
2. Calliope to Gladstone
3. Gin Gin to Burnett
4. The remainder of the North Burnett LGA to Nanango, which in turn would lose the Somerset LGA to help address shortfalls in SEQ.

Beyond these changes, I would leave most seats unchanged. There’s no compelling reason to alter Cook, Barron River, Cairns, Hill, or Mulgrave. The three Townsville seats can be brought into quota with internal adjustments and small boundary swaps with Hinchinbrook and Burdekin. If Mundingburra loses its namesake suburb in the process, it may require a new name.

Whitsunday and Mackay should remain as they are. The inclusion of former Mirani electors into Rockhampton should comfortably bring that seat within quota, with only minor adjustments expected to accommodate a larger Keppel.

There might be a small exchange between Southern Downs and Condamine to even out the numbers.

Anyhow, this will be an interesting process and I’m looking forward to seeing others ideas.

But I ain’t spending any more time on it, not because an electorate in North Qld is being torn apart by a crocodile, but because Origin is about to kickoff.

@John thanks for your suggestions, I will add them to my proposal.

@Real Talk thanks for your suggestions as well. And up the Maroons!

My plan so far is:
– Move Boulia, Herberton and rest of Carpentaria into Traeger
– Move Isaacs (except Coastal areas) into Gregory
– Move Diamantina, Barcoo, Miles and Chinchilla into Warrego (but remove Dalby, presumably into Condamine)
– Merge Burdekin and Whitsunday into “Bowen” taking Burdekin and Whitsunday LGAs plus a bit more to get the numbers right
– Mirani shifts north significantly
– Keppel formed from Livingstone, Sarina and coastal Isaacs
The Carins/Townsville/in-betweens I will sort out later but it should work with my proposed “Bowen”.
Also still thinking how to deal with Gracemere.
Still thinking what to do with SEQ but I will try to avoid Gympie/Noosa crossing the LGA boundaries between due to heavily different demographics hence community interests.

There is a problem that was introduced in the last redistribution with the design of Waterford, particularly the northern part where the suburb of Underwood is. Instead of pushing Woodridge north the QRC pushed Waterford along Logan Road to the border with BCC. Originally it extended into Rochedale South, making a very odd seat.
It’s fairly easy to extend Springwood into that area and take it to the Logan/Brisbane boundary along Millers Road. That chunk on the western side of the Freeway is fairly permeable for road access and makes a lot more sense then the current boundary.

i tried to write an in depth analsis last night but it didnt post and im bummed because it was really good.
ive tried reposting but it says duplicate comment even though it hasnt posted… Raue?

@mark yore yes i intend to fix that Springwood will likely shed voters from redlands city to make up the defeciet there and springwood will move further into logan. and i agree with that analysis based on initial plans i wanted to move mount cotton and Sheldon (BAZINGA!) into redlands but will wait until i cant view the numbers. and maybe move underwood, slacks creek and aybe woodridge into sprinwood but il wait until i look at the official numbers.

@leon i dont think Bowen will get up due to a certain politician with the same name who wouldnt be very popular in those regions

@real talk i cant see Keppel fitting into Livingstone without shedding parts of Rockingham as its already over quota and Rockingham would not be able to accomodate the remainder of Rockingham from Mirani.

what i intend to do is one of two things, either way mirani is abolished.
1. move mundingburra to the river or closer to top up the other townsville seats and rename it Ross. Burdekin gains Miranis Mackay numbers afftr mackay top up its small defeceit in prjected numbers. Gregory gains Isaccs council from Burdekin and Mirani.Keppel takes in Lvingstone and sheds whatever numbers back to rockhampton to bring it back to quota and Rockhampton to quota. Callide gains Miranis Rockhampton numbers. I want to push Bundaberg back to south of the river then extend to the ocean as far as needed to make up the numbers. gladstone takes what it needs from Callide and the Burdekin gets what it needs from callide (if any). warrego takes Western Downs from Callide. harvey Bay -> MAryborough then they just push the numbers south to forma new sunshine caost seat.

coomera pushes its excess south into the other gold coast seats that are under quota.

Instead of a new logan seat as previously stated due to excess number sin ipswich (approx 60% prjected over quota across Scenic Rim, IW, Ipswich and Bundamba (not including the parts of Springfield in Jordan that i itend to move into Bundamba. to form a new seat in rural west and southern ipswich. Ipswich West to be renamed since its really no longer the further west. I was thinking bremer. Logan then pushes its excess north into the other logan seats. there is an excess south of the river of about 1.5 seats worthsin the logan -ipscwich area after topping up the other logan seats. and about a seats worth of defeciet in brisbane south of the river. so one of those seats has to go. and close to half a seats worht of defeciet in brisbane north of the river so some of that ipswich-logan excess is gonna have to cross the river and that will probaly be done in ipswich in the same way blair crosses the river there

my secnd idea for mirani is to put townsville from burderkin to the townsville seats and then transfer burdekin shire into traegar. this has flow affects pushing burdekin (name change required) in both mackay and issacs amd then similar after that

Interesting ideas John. I think your first idea for Mirani is the more feasible, although i think it would make more sense geographically and logistically for Burdekin to gain from Whitsunday, and Whitsunday then to take the rump of Mirani. This might see Whitsunday LGA leaving its namesake division, with a resulting name change.

Putting Burdekin LGA into Traeger is certainly something….almost like an electoral moat separating the north from the rest of the state.

I think the people of Queensland would be sophisticated enough to separate the concept of a Division of Bowen from any federal figures.

who is it named after?

either way namind a division after someone similar to a serving politician might cause problems

@ RT i did think about that with Whitsunday but i doubt the QEC will want to alter a seat thats already at quota and logistically its still touches the parts or mirani even with Isaacs and even if it did it would still be forced to take some parts of Mackay

I don’t speak for Leon, but clearly he intended for the division to named after the town of Bowen, which would have been the largest town in his proposed Burdekin/Whitsunday hybrid. I would have thought you would have realised that.

Bowen, incidentally was named after Queensland’s first governor. Not a present Labor minister, nor a former Labor deputy PM, nor a former Liberal attorney-general.

Personally, I think we shouldn’t be naming state seats after people, but I’m probably in the minority here.

ok didnt know that. doubtful thought bith Burdekin and Whitsunday are named after well known geographical locations and one of those would be the choice since both are in the seat. and the removal of the seats namesake is usually the only reason a rename would happen.

And, respectfully, your addition of the rump of Mirani – which I assume to be the Pioneer Valley towns of Mirani, Marian, Eungella Valley etc – onto the rest of Burdekin doesn’t make much sense. The transport links are virtually non-existent – I remember driving on a single laned dirt road from Collinsville to Eungella around twenty years ago. The road wouldn’t be any better today. Even Google Maps recommends driving through Bowen and Proserpine to get to the two towns.

I’m fairly sure it would get thrown out on community of interest criteria.

im of the same view when it comes to state seats. localities, geographic locations and suburbs the seats centre on are more appropriate. naming seats after people is better for federal seats in my opinion. as such im gonna suggest renaming at least 6 seats named after people
Theodore – due to major changes caused by Commeras excess shifting south. I am gonna suggest this seat be named Coomera.
Cook – due to an existing federal seat of the same name and namesake already in existence gonna suggest Cape york
Cooper – due to an existing federal seat of the same name existing. name pending
Jordan, Miller and OOdgeroo – due to significant changes in those seats. names pending

and will oppose any new seats named after people.

i hadnt had the chance to look into that sort of thing i was just outlining a basic plan tbh

so the only chocie would be plan B or what you said to do

No dramas, just pointing out that transport links matter, especially with the rural divisions.

@John – why would you oppose naming electorates after people?

i just dont think its necessary at a state level. location based names seem more suitable

@ RT i guees the whitsunday swap will have to do.

if i left the top part of isaacs in would that then be acceptable?

The Queensland process of naming electorates after people seems random and somewhat arbitrary – and with the exception of Nicklin and Theodore, the people are very unknown and in the case of Traeger a seat is named after someone who provided benefit to outback Queensland but never ever lived in the state. I had always imagined the seat of Cooper was named after former Labor Premier Frank Cooper but alas no, it is named after an early Queensland woman doctor who may have more prominence in Queensland than outside. I had thought that Toohey and Stretton were named after people but they are named after places (shows how much I know about outer Brisbane!). The advantage of naming electorates after people is that they can drift across the landscape as many have but that seems to be not such an issue at state level. If seats are to be named after people they need to be well known (which at federal level they generally are) rather than who? The latter being a problem with both proposals to rename Corangamite. Either go for all names (as is largely the case in South Australia) or all geographic as is the case in NSW, Victoria and Western Australia and is still largely the case in Queensland.

I put this on the Mundingburra thread yesterday and would be interested to get some feedback.

Can somebody please explain the projections for the Townsville area seats. All of the current seats are under quota and the combined projection is that Townsville should lose approximately half a seat. Were the projections last time over cooked? The current projection would suggest that Townsville population is flat or will even go backwards. Is there basis for this or has the ECQ made a mistake. The federal enrolments for Herbert always seem to be increasing roughly in line with Queensland as a whole.

While true the namesake of toohey is named after a person.

DV – So was Brisbane, Townsville and many others – but the place has become much more important than the people in these cases.

I’m watching from the sidelines here but am I correct in saying the general vibe/consensus(?) here is that a new seat will be created around the Sunshine Coast or Logan whilst a seat (most likely Toohey or maybe a rural seat) gets abolished?

@Lurking Westie, pretty much.