ALP 5.2%
Incumbent MP
Shayne Neumann, since 2007.
Geography
Blair covers most of the City of Ipswich as well as Somerset Regional Council. The seat covers the urban area of Ipswich and rural areas to the west, and towns such as Esk and Kilcoy.
History
Blair was created at the 1998 election, one of a number of seats created in Queensland over the last few decades. The seat was held by the Liberal Party until 2007, when the ALP won.
Blair took over territory in Ipswich in 1998 from the seat of Oxley. Oxley had a long history of being held by the Labor Party but was lost to disendorsed Liberal candidate Pauline Hanson in 1996. Hanson formed One Nation in her term in the House of Representatives, and contested Blair in 1998. Hanson came first on primary votes, but lost on preferences. Liberal candidate Cameron Thompson came third on primary votes, but overtook the ALP on Nationals preferences and then overtook Hanson on Labor preferences.
Thompson held Blair at the 2001 and 2004 elections, but lost in 2007 to Labor candidate Shayne Neumann. Neumann was assisted by a redistribution which saw Blair take in more of pro-Labor Ipswich, losing rural conservatives areas to the northwest.
Neumann has been re-elected five times.
Assessment
Blair is a marginal Labor seat, although this is based on a relatively poor Labor performance in Queensland in 2022. It seems unlikely that Labor would go further backwards in Queensland unless there was a major change to the national polling environment.
| Candidate | Party | Votes | % | Swing |
| Shayne Neumann | Labor | 36,494 | 35.0 | +3.8 |
| Sam Biggins | Liberal National | 30,122 | 28.9 | -0.1 |
| Danielle Mutton | Greens | 13,113 | 12.6 | +3.9 |
| Liz Suduk | One Nation | 10,419 | 10.0 | -6.8 |
| Quinton Stewart Cunningham | United Australia | 6,353 | 6.1 | +2.7 |
| Michelle Jaques | Liberal Democrats | 3,080 | 3.0 | +3.0 |
| Angela Lowery | Animal Justice | 2,563 | 2.5 | +2.5 |
| Maria Pitman | Values Party | 2,103 | 2.0 | +2.0 |
| Informal | 5,832 | 5.3 | -2.2 |
2022 two-party-preferred result
| Candidate | Party | Votes | % | Swing |
| Shayne Neumann | Labor | 57,575 | 55.2 | +4.0 |
| Sam Biggins | Liberal National | 46,672 | 44.8 | -4.0 |
Booths have been divided into five areas. Booths in Somerset local government area have been grouped together. Those booths in the City of Ipswich have been divided into four parts. Those in the rural west of the council area have been grouped together. Most of Blair’s population lives in the urban area around the centre of Ipswich, and these have been divided into Central, North and East.
Labor won a majority of the two-party-preferred vote in three areas, ranging from 54.9% in North Ipswich to 64.4% in East Ipswich. The LNP won 52.6% in rural Ipswich and 55.6% in Somerset.
The Greens came third, with a primary vote ranging from 7.6% in Somerset to 16% in East Ipswich. One Nation came fourth, with a primary vote ranging from 8.5% in North Ipswich to 15% in Somerset.
| Voter group | GRN prim | ON prim | ALP 2PP | Total votes | % of votes |
| Central Ipswich | 15.1 | 10.2 | 60.1 | 16,035 | 15.4 |
| East Ipswich | 16.0 | 9.0 | 64.4 | 9,805 | 9.4 |
| North Ipswich | 15.6 | 8.5 | 54.9 | 9,776 | 9.4 |
| Somerset | 7.6 | 15.0 | 44.4 | 8,869 | 8.5 |
| Rural Ipswich | 8.5 | 14.5 | 47.4 | 4,791 | 4.6 |
| Pre-poll | 12.0 | 8.6 | 55.5 | 31,854 | 30.6 |
| Other votes | 11.7 | 10.0 | 53.5 | 23,117 | 22.2 |
Election results in Blair at the 2022 federal election
Toggle between two-party-preferred votes and primary votes for Labor, the Liberal National Party, the Greens and One Nation.
@ Bumbalo
This is a white working class seat so it is favourable demographically for Dutton. The only seat in QLD that was at risk so it was Dutton’s to loose. However, longer term trends are not actually good for the Coalition due to the growth of Greater Springfield.
The big question mark around this electorate is what will become of it after the upcoming redistribution. I would say there’s a strong possibility that the entirety of Greater Springfield is transferred out of Blair.
But then Nimalan’s point may still largely stand if Ripley remains in Blair. I like to call Ripley “Greater Springfield V2.0”. It’s another masterplanned community, but it’s newer, it’s further out, and it has one-upped Springfield’s population ambition – 120,000 compared to 105,000.
Blair overall had almost no swing, with a Labor 2PP of just under 56%.
But Springfield and Ripley tell a different story:
– Springfield Central: Labor 66.02% (+3.53)
– Springfield Central North: 66.72% (+4.96)
– Springfield Lakes: 68.40% (+8.19)
– Ripley Valley: 65.68% (+9.69)
What could spell game over for Labor is if Blair gains the Lockyer Valley while holding onto Somerset – which would presumably coincide with transfers out from the (south-)eastern end of the electorate. I tend to think this is highly plausible if Queensland gains a seat.
@nimalan, Nicholas based on the defrceit south of the river Blair will shed parts of greater Springfield to Oxley in the upcoming redistribution. I’m also going to suggest moving the part of Brisbane back into Ryan to where it was before. Nicolas I think Lockyer should go to groom and then move maranoa further into Toowoomba.and then have Blair take in crows nest from Marianna. Moving the Lockyer valley into Blair would create a weird looking seat and would then require groom to go into maranoa and then make maranoa even bigger and weirder. If qld were to gain a seat the Blair would shed Somerset to the new seat thereby solidifying Blair for labor.
@ Darth Vader
Agree the Somerset region is critical for the LNP to win the seat. When the Somerset region was in Dickson in 2007 it saved Dutton then and the fact that it was in Blair this year gave hope that Dutton to win this and it was the only Labor held seat at risk in QLD. Labor would like the Somerset region removed from Blair and the LNP would like Greater Springfield removed.
I agree that in any case Blair is very likely to lose the balance of Greater Springfield.
My thinking with Blair gaining the Lockyer Valley is as follows:
– I think we can all agree that there will be appetite to remove the Lockyer Valley from Wright, and the committee’s hand will be forced this time given the explosive population growth on the outskirts of Logan.
– The Lockyer Valley was part of Blair until Wright was established ahead of the 2010 election.
– Queensland gaining a seat will somewhat offset the need for Maranoa to expand.
– I had assumed that Toowoomba is growing in population – admittedly I might be wrong on this.
– But if it is, then Maranoa may be able to move closer to Toowoomba without Groom having to expand.
On reflection, I can see that this is less likely than I had previously thought.
Depending on how the numbers work out, there could be a case to be made for the old Gatton Shire to go to Groom and the old Laidley Shire to go to Blair.
Probably Blair’s margin narrows post-redistribution, but demographic changes will still work in Labor’s favour long-term.
@n8malan it will depend on if qld gets another seat if it gets another seat it loses Somerset if it doesn’t it loses part of greater Springfield. Either way the LNP get another seat.
@Nicholas while true it would be better for groom to gain the Lockyer valley because it will help reduce the size of maranoa rather then have it expand up further into Somerset because if Blair were to gain the Lockyer valley it would need to shed Somerset and maranoa is already awkward as it is. This way Blair can gain kingaroy/crows nest and help reduce the size of maranoa and the long term defrceit. So by my math Blair will need to shed 27000 voters from Ipswich and gain 10000 voters elsewhere. So assuming a 60/40 Labor vote loss and a 60/40 lnp gain. The overall benefit to the lnp should be a loss 16200/10800 and 6000/4000 gain. So loss off 4400 labor voters and and 2000 LNP voter gain that should reduce the labor margin to around 2.5% or thereabouts
Blair is already far over quota and will lose territory as opposed to gaining it. Gaining the Lockyer valley will only mean it needs to shed more territory. If it gains a seat it won’t need any more either. But either way Wright needs to shed the Lockyer valley and the only other logical choice is groom.
Also to fix up Ryan I want to push it either back to the Brisbane city council boundary it was at before Wright was created or to the Brisbane river. Personally I prefer the latter at rivers make for good natural boundaries.
I’m curious as to why virtually everyone wants to put Crows Nest into Blair instead of Groom. I get that its a numbers thing, but the transport and economic links are stronger to Groom, while Ipswich is three times the distance from Crows Nest and the road linking Crows Nest to Esk is a poor connection.
It would also see Blair take on a truly gerrymandered shape that sees it climb the great dividing range. Yet that’s not as bad as ol’ Darthy V using electoral math to justify the move. Any application to the AEC using political outcomes as a justification to change an electorate would be tossed on the pile without being read.
Because Blair will ultimately lose parts of Ipswich to fix up the Brisbane seats south of the river and it makes no sense to move parts of the locker Valley into one and part into another. And then Somerset into another to make another bits and pieces seat. Blair is basically the leftover seat. After it sheds parts of Ipswich it will be short so needs to make up the numbers somewhere. Eventually yes I’d like to move that bit in to groom but there’s simply no way to fix Blair otherwise
The other options available is to put cut crows nest in to groom and south Burnett into Blair. Or put locker Valley into Blair and Somerset into groom.
The other option is to increase the size of Parliament: from 12 to 14 senators per state would increase the House to 173-175 MPs (84 senators from the states and 168-170 MPs from the states), and Queensland would be allocated 34-35 House seats.
@andrew that wont be happening before queenslands redistribution scheduled to start one month after parliament first sits
John
– Presumably they will wait until the reapportionment which is 12 months after an election
– They could delay presumably if the government gave notice of an increase in size of the parliament.
This parliament is the time to do it.
@redistributed agreed, this is the parliament in which to do it: it helps to save the careers of more of the now-bloated backbench in 2028, giving Labor an ongoing larger pool-of-competence post-2028 (and incidentally helping the Liberals in that regard as well, and boy do they need it). The House of Representatives would still be barely more than half the size of Canada’s House of Commons (343 MPs).
Legislatively, the AEC can hold off commencing a redistribution if (a) the entitlement of the relevant state is expected to change at the 12-months-post-election mark, or (b) there’s a proposal for an increase in the size of the House (which would affect all the mainland states’ entitlements; Tas would stay at 5 unless the House size were massively increased).
theres no current proposal to increase the parliament and i doubt one will be introduced in time be fore the month is up. tasmania is also slated to start within one month and sa and act are slated to begin in july/august so id imagine that given the parliament probably wont be back until at least june atll 4 will begin at the same time
based on the population data as of 30 Sept 24′
the folowing entitlements
NSW 46.124 quotas = 46 seats entitlement in 2023 46.42957110
VIC 38.005 quotas = 38 seats entitlement in 2023 37.78181939
QLD 30.395 quotas = 30 seats entitlement in 2023 30.30915474
SA = 10.203 quotas = 10 seats entitlement in 2023 10.33701403
WA = 16.159 quotas = 16 seats entitlement in 2023 15.92122480
TAS = 3.121 quotas = 3 seats but 5 by constitutional entitlement entitlement in 2023 3.221215942
based on these numbers qld will not be getting an extra seat next year, nsw and sa have slipped further back along with tasmania and both vic and wa have increased more then qld. wa could possibly gain another seat next year though
correction wa probably won gain another seat this electoral cycle but i imagine it would next parliamant along with vic and qld.
the aec also has qld listed as “The redistribution has been deferred and will commence within 30 days of the first meeting day of the House of Representatives in the 48th Parliament.”
@john, section 59(5) of the CEA allows the AEC to order deferral of a state redistribution that would be due to occur under the 7-year rule if the AEC “is of the opinion” that the entitlement of that state in the House “will or may” change at the regular determination the following year. The AEC forming that opinion would be reasonable if (for example) the Minister responsible for administering the CEA tabled legislation to increase (or reduce) the size of parliament, or even just foreshadowed it.
https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s59.html