What is a
redistribution?
The process of drawing and adjusting electoral boundaries in
Australia is called a ‘redistribution’, and at the federal level is governed by
Part IV of the Commonwealth
Electoral Act 1918 (CEA). Redistributions also occur within the
states and territories using separate processes, but these are outside the
scope of this paper.
The process of a federal redistribution is complex and
involves multiple steps. Importantly, the process is undertaken independently
of the Government and the Parliament. However, redistribution decisions are
often erroneously attributed to the Government or the Australian Electoral
Commission (AEC). While the AEC administers the redistribution process, a
population-based formula determines the number of seats each state and
territory is entitled to and a Redistribution Committee decides on the name and
shape of the boundaries. The Committee consists of the relevant state or territory’s
Australian Electoral Officer (a statutory appointment), Surveyor-General and
Auditor-General (also typically statutory officers).
Any objections to the Redistribution Committee’s proposals
are considered by the augmented Electoral Commission, which is made up of the
Redistribution Committee and the two members of the Electoral Commission other
than the Electoral Commissioner.[1] The augmented Electoral Commission makes the final determination of the
redistribution in either accepting or modifying the Redistribution Committee’s
proposals.
As elections
expert Dr Jenni Newton-Farrelly has noted, ‘Australia’s current
redistribution process is widely recognised as independent and fair’:
The [electoral] commissions’ structures keep them independent
of the parties and their authority to order maps into effect keeps them
independent of the parliament. Their process is transparent and accountable,
and redistributions are triggered frequently and automatically…. The criteria
generate relatively meaningful districts and the outcomes are regularly
accepted by the parties and the public.
Redistribution triggers
There are three
triggers for initiating a federal-level redistribution, set out in Section
59 of the CEA:
- where the representation entitlement of a state changes (see next
section)
- where the divisions of a state are malapportioned, or
- where a redistribution has not been held for seven years because
neither of the other two triggers have been met.
The operations of the triggers are based on either time or published
population numbers, and so are largely objective and transparent.
The representation entitlement trigger
Each state and territory is divided into electoral divisions
(or seats) for the House of Representatives. The total number of divisions
across the country is determined by population and the Australian
Constitution, and is required to be as close as practical to twice the
number of senators (that is, twice 76). Currently there are 151 divisions,
although this may change depending on population distribution.
The representation entitlement for all states and
territories is determined by applying the total populations of the states and
territories to
a particular formula specified in the CEA (section 48). This
determines each state and territory’s electoral divisions entitlement.
Under section 46 of the CEA, the Electoral
Commissioner ascertains the populations of the states and territories from the
Australian Statistician the day after the first anniversary of the opening of a
new Parliament, provided that the ‘House of Representatives has continued for a
period of 12 months’. As the current Parliament first met on 26 July 2022, on
27 July 2023 the Electoral Commissioner will take the latest
population numbers published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS)
and apply the entitlement determination formula.
The Northern Territory’s two seats
The Northern Territory (NT)—Australia’s least populous state
or territory—gained its second seat in 2001, but due to relative population
decline was due to lose that second seat in both 2003 and 2020. On both
occasions the Parliament passed legislation to allow the NT to retain its
second seat.
In 2004 the CEA was amended to
set aside the 2003 determination and to require the entitlement determination
take into account the difficulty of accurately determining the population of
the NT due to its large remote Indigenous population. The amendment required the
entitlement calculation add twice the standard error of the population estimate
to the population count for the purposes of determining territory
representation.
By 2020 the two standard error additions was no longer
sufficient to give the NT a second seat. In response the Parliament set aside
to the 2020 determination and again amended the CEA,
removing the two standard errors provision and changing the threshold to use
the harmonic mean. In effect, this means that a territory will be entitled to
two seats if it gets at
least 1.33 quotas. While the provisions also apply to the Australian
Capital Territory (ACT), the ACT is sufficiently over quota to not be affected
presently.
The malapportionment trigger
The AEC publishes monthly
enrolment statistics for all divisions, including the average enrolment for
each state and territory. If more than a third of a state or territory’s
divisions are more than 10% over/under the average enrolment for two
consecutive months, the malapportionment trigger is enacted. The
malapportionment trigger has existed since 1984 but has never been used.
Redistributions: the process
The requirements for a redistribution are set out in section
66 of the CEA, which states that the provision for preserving existing
boundaries is subordinate to other matters. Accordingly, the Redistribution
Committee can disregard the current electoral boundaries if doing so better
accommodates population change and reflects community of interests, travel and
communication or physical features.
Notably, the CEA does not include political outcomes
or electoral fairness considerations in federal redistributions.[2] The CEA (section 67) provides that a Redistribution Committee must
provide written reasoning for its redistribution proposal and of any issues of
disagreement. Typically, however, the decision is unanimous.
When a redistribution adds or removes a division, the
effects are usually significant and far-reaching. For example, when one
division (of approximately 110,000 electors) in NSW was removed in the 2016
redistribution, it resulted in 919,914 electors (18.91 per cent of all NSW
electors) moving divisions.
Where an entitlement determination abolishes an existing
division, the Committee must still abide by section 66 of the CEA, in considering
the current and projected populations first, and other factors such as
community of interests after that. The decision about which division to abolish
is usually influenced by other boundary changes necessitated in accommodating
changing populations (see Appendix A).
Requirements for determining
boundaries
The primary requirement for a division boundary redistribution
is to ensure that:
- no division differs from the average enrolment per division for
the state or territory by more than ten percent[3] and
- the new boundaries have projected enrolments that differ by no
more than 3.5 per cent from the state or territory average.
The enrolment projections are prepared by the ABS and are based largely on the calculated projections of Australian residents
aged 18 or over.[4] Typically, the projected enrolments are forecasts three and a half years after
the finalised redistribution. However, in the case of the 2017 Victorian
redistribution the AEC determined that the projection time for enrolments was to
be only two years.
Subsection 63A(3) of the CEA allows the AEC to use a shorter enrolment
projection time if it believes that a redistribution will be required before
seven years. This turned out to be the case, as Victoria’s entitlement grew
following the 2019 election and was subject to a redistribution in 2020 (using the
standard 3 and a half year projection).
While the whole Australian resident population is used for
the determination of entitlement (the number of electoral divisions in each
state and territory), only the enrolled population (and projected
enrolled population) is used for determining the number of electors within each
division. Average enrolments are determined at the beginning of the
redistribution process based on current enrolments, and the enrolment
projections are published by the AEC as part of the redistribution process.
Public consultation
A redistribution follows
a set process that includes the following opportunities for public input:
- Once a redistribution commences there is a public call for
written suggestions (in accordance with AEC guidelines).
These suggestions are then made available for public comment.
- Following the Redistribution Committee’s production of boundary
proposals, members of the public can submit written objections and comments on
such objections.
Many suggestions come from sitting members or political
parties, but they have no special role in the process above any other
interested person. In cases where the proposed changes are particularly
contentious, the augmented Electoral Commission may hold public
hearings before making its determination. Most recent redistributions have
featured an inquiry into objections (see Appendix B).
Interested parties’ interpretation of the secondary criteria
listed in section 66 (community of interests, means of communication and
travel, and physical features) is often largely subjective. The community of
interest criterion is particularly open to interpretation and has been
discussed in terms of rural versus urban, dominant industries, socioeconomic
class and ethnic backgrounds, however because redistributions are for entire
states or territories, Redistribution Committees tend to take a state-wide view
of these issues.
Political considerations?
As noted above, there is no provision in the CEA to
consider political outcomes or electoral fairness in federal redistributions. Dr
Newton-Farrelly has noted that shortly after the AEC was created in 1984 a
federal redistribution for WA was subject to an appeal due to perceived
‘political effects’. The Electoral Commissioner at the time sought legal advice
as to whether the augmented Electoral Commission had the power to decline to
hear arguments on the ‘political effects’ of a redistribution in an objection
to a redistribution.
The Commonwealth Attorney-General’s Department advised that
the augmented Electoral Commission had discretion to either include or exclude
objections due to political effects, with the Commission deciding on the latter.
This precedent of excluding political effects considerations has continued for
all federal redistributions since, and has also been adopted by most state and
territory redistribution processes (as noted previously, South Australia was an
exception to this).
Timeframes
Redistributions in the last decade have taken between 10 and
15 months to complete (see Appendix D). The Electoral Commissioner must direct
that a redistribution commences ‘forthwith after making the determination’ (CEA,
paragraph 59(2)(a)).
Naming divisions
When naming new divisions or renaming old divisions, the
Redistribution Committee and augmented Electoral Commission generally follow a
set of non-mandatory guidelines originating from a
1987 Electoral Reform committee inquiry report.
In brief, the guidelines state that:
- Divisions should be named after deceased Australians who have
rendered outstanding service to their country, and deceased former Prime
Ministers should be considered when naming new divisions.
- Divisions names that date from the time of Federation should be
retained (a list of Federation divisions is in Appendix E).
- Place names should be avoided.
- Aboriginal names should be used where appropriate, and existing
Aboriginal division names should be retained.
- Names should not duplicate existing state electoral district
names.
- Names of divisions should not be changed or moved to new areas
without very good reasons.
- When multiple divisions are combined the new division should be
the name of the old division with the greatest number of electors in the new
boundaries.
As an example of the practical application of the
guidelines, in the 2016
NSW redistribution the division of Hunter was abolished. Around half of the
electors from the division of Hunter went into the neighbouring division of
Charlton. However, as Hunter was a Federation electorate, it was decided to
rename Charlton to Hunter to preserve the Federation name.
At the 2016 redistribution for the ACT, the division of
Fraser (named after John Fraser, a member of the House of Representatives for
the ACT from 1951 to 1970) was renamed to Fenner (after scientist Frank Fenner)
to free-up the name of Fraser for a future division in Victoria to be named
after former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser. The Victorian division of Fraser
was created as a new division at the subsequent (2017) Victorian
redistribution.
What happens if an election is
called when a redistribution in is progress?
If a federal election is called during an incomplete
redistribution process where the state or territory has not changed its
entitlement, the election will be conducted under the existing boundaries.
However, if the incomplete redistribution requires a change in entitlement, the
state or territory must undergo a ‘mini-redistribution’.[5] This is triggered when the writs for an election are issued.
Where a state or territory is to lose a seat, the two
adjacent divisions with the combined lowest number of electors are combined
into a single electorate.[6] When a seat is to be gained, the two adjacent divisions with the combined
largest number of electors are split as equally as possible into three divisions.
These changes must happen in the 10–27 days between the issue of the writs and
the declaration of nominations.
The mini-redistribution provisions have never been used, and
would likely leave very little time to decide pre-selection for the newly
created seats.
Further reading
Appendix A: the fate of abolished divisions
The abolition of electoral divisions is particularly
disruptive for politics, requiring sitting members to find new seats or to
retire. The following briefly describe the fate of each of the seats abolished,
and the members who were elected into those seats, since the House of
Representatives increased to its current size in 1984.
2021—WA
In the 2021 WA redistribution the division of Stirling
(fairly safe LIB) was abolished. The sitting member, Vince Connelly (LIB), contested the neighbouring division of Cowan (marginal ALP) in the 2022
federal election but was defeated by the incumbent Anne Aly (ALP), having
served only one term in the Parliament.
2018—SA
In the 2018 SA redistribution the division of Port Adelaide
(safe ALP) was abolished. Its member Mark Butler (ALP) contested
and won the neighbouring seat of Hindmarsh at the 2019 federal election. The previous
member for Hindmarsh, Steve
Georganas (ALP) successfully ran in the
seat of Adelaide in 2019 following Kate Ellis’ (ALP) retirement from parliament.
2016—NSW
The most recent NSW redistribution saw the division of
Hunter abolished. However, the neighbouring division of Charlton was renamed to
Hunter, as an original division at Federation. The member for the abolished
division of Hunter (Joel
Fitzgibbon, ALP) ran for and won the new division of Hunter (notionally
marginal ALP), while the sitting Member for Charlton (Pat Conroy, ALP)
ran for and won the division of Shortland (notional fairly safe ALP) at the
2016 federal election. The previous Member for Shortland (Jill Hall, ALP)
retired before the 2016 federal election.
2009—NSW
In the 2009 redistribution of NSW the division of Reid (safe
ALP) was abolished. The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the existing
division of Lowe to McMahon which the augmented Electoral Commission then
renamed to Reid. The new division of Reid (notionally safe ALP) had about one
third of its population from the previous division of Reid, and two thirds from
the existing division of Lowe (marginal ALP). The Member for Lowe (John Murphy, ALP)
ran and won the new seat of Reid, and the Member for Reid (Laurie Ferguson,
ALP) ran for and won the division of Werriwa (notionally safe ALP). The
previous Member for Werriwa (Chris Hayes, ALP)
ran for and won the division of Fowler (notionally safe ALP).
2005—NSW
The division of Gwydir (safe NAT) was abolished, with most
of the population transferred to the division of Parkes (safe NAT), and a
smaller proportion to Hunter (notionally safe ALP in 2007) and other
electorates. In 2007 Mark
Coulton was elected as the Member for Parkes, with the sitting Member for
Gwydir (John Anderson,
NAT) having retired prior to the election, and the sitting Member for Parkes (John Cobb, NAT)
moving to the seat of Calare (notionally safe NAT).
2003—SA
In the 2003 redistribution of SA the division of Bonython
(safe ALP) was abolished, with most of the population going into the division
of Wakefield (safe Liberal). The member for the abolished Bonython division (Martyn Evans, ALP) contested
Wakefield (notionally marginal ALP) in the 2004 election and narrowly lost to David Fawcett (LIB).
The previous Member for Wakefield (Neil Andrew, LIB)
retired prior to the 2004 election.
1994—Victoria
The seat of Corinella was abolished. The former Member for
Corinella (Alan
Griffin, ALP) went on to contest the seat of Bruce (notional marginal ALP)
in the 1996 election and won against the incumbent Member (Julian Beale, LIB)
in what had previously been a fairly safe Liberal seat.
1992—NSW
This redistribution abolished the divisions of Phillip and
Dundas and created the division of Paterson (notionally marginal LIB). The
Member for Phillip (Jeannette
McHugh, ALP) contested and won the division of Grayndler (notional safe
ALP), and the Member for Dundas (Philip Ruddock, LIB)
contested and won the existing division of Berowra (safe LIB). The previous
Member for Grayndler (Leo
McLeay, ALP) contested and won the division of Watson (fairly safe ALP).
The previous Member for Berowra (Harry Edwards, LIB)
retired before the election. The winner of the division of Paterson (Bob Horne, ALP) was
new to Parliament.
1992—SA
The division of Hawker was abolished, and its population
mainly went to the divisions of Boothby and Hindmarsh. The Member for Hawker (Christine Gallus,
LIB) went on to contest and win Hindmarsh, which was notionally marginal
Liberal, at the 1993 election. The previous Member for Hindmarsh (John Scott, ALP),
which was previously a marginal ALP electorate, retired before the election.
1989—Victoria
The divisions of Henty and Streeton were abolished, and the
new division of Corinella was created (which did not include any of the
electors of Henty or Streeton). The Member for Henty (Joan Child, ALP), a
fairly safe ALP electorate, retired in 1990. The Member for Streeton (Tony Lamb, ALP) went
on to contest the division of Deakin (which was notionally marginal ALP) and
lost at the 1990 federal election.
Appendix B: recent redistributions
This appendix provides a summary of recent distributions and
links to key milestones in each redistribution process.
Victoria (15 July 2020 – 26 July
2021)
The redistribution resulted from an increase in Victoria’s
entitlement from 38 to 39 electoral divisions following the 2019 federal
election. A new division named Hawke, in honour of prime minister Bob Hawke was
created. The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the division of
Corangamite to Tucker, however the augmented Electoral Commission rejected that
recommendation and decided to keep the name Corangamite. The boundaries of 19
divisions were changed.
WA (15 July 2020 – 2 August 2021)
The redistribution resulted from a reduction in Western
Australia’s entitlement from 16 to 15 federal electoral divisions following the
2019 federal election. The division of Stirling was abolished, and the name
retired. The boundaries of 11 divisions were altered.
Queensland (6 January 2017 – 27
March 2018)
The redistribution was triggered as it had been more than
seven years since the last redistribution of the state. The names of all the
divisions were retained, and the boundaries of 18 of Queensland’s 30 divisions
were changed.
Victoria (4 September 2017 – 13
July 2018)
The redistribution was required as the entitlement
determination following the 2016 federal election increased Victoria’s
entitlement to seats from 37 to 38. A new division of Fraser was created, in
honour of prime minister Malcolm Fraser. The division of McMillan was renamed
to Monash, the division of Melbourne Ports was renamed to Macnamara and the
division of Murray was renamed to Nicholls. The augmented Electoral Commission
rejected the proposal of the Redistribution Committee to rename the division of
Corangamite to Cox. The boundaries of 27 divisions were altered.
ACT (4 September 2017 – 13 July
2018)
The redistribution was required because the entitlement to
seats of the ACT had increased from 2 to 3 following the 2016 federal election.
A new division was created, and the augmented Electoral Commission voted four
to two in favour of the recommendation of the Redistribution Committee that the
new division be named Bean. The boundaries of both existing ACT divisions were
changed to accommodate the new division.
SA (4 September 2017 – 20 July
2018)
The redistribution was required because the entitlement
determination following the 2016 federal election had reduced the number of
seats that SA was entitled to from 11 to 10. The division of Port Adelaide was
abolished, and the division of Wakefield was renamed to Spence. The boundaries
of all remaining divisions were altered.
Tasmania (1 September 2016 – 14
November 2017)
The redistribution was required because it had been more
than 7 years since the last redistribution of the state. The division of
Denison was renamed to Clark and the boundaries of two divisions were altered.
NT (15 October 2015 – 7 February
2017)
The redistribution was required as it had been more than 7
years since the previous redistribution of the territory. The boundaries of the
2 divisions were altered.
NSW (1 December 2014 – 25 February
2016)
The redistribution was required because the entitlement of
the state had been reduced from 48 to 47 divisions following the 2013 federal
election. The division of Hunter was abolished, and the division of Charlton
was renamed to Hunter to retain a Federation division name. The division of
Throsby was renamed to Whitlam in honour of the former prime minister Gough
Whitlam. The boundaries of all but one of the divisions were altered.
WA (1 December 2014 – 19 January 2016)
The redistribution was required because the entitlement of
Western Australia to seats had increased from 15 to 16 following the 2014
federal election. A new division of Burt was created, and the boundaries of all
the divisions in the state were altered.
ACT (1 December 2014 – 28 January 2016)
The redistribution was required because it was more than 7
years since the previous redistribution of the territory. The division of
Fraser was renamed to Fenner, and the boundaries of the two divisions were
altered.
Appendix C: number of House of Representatives seats by state for each
federal election
Election
year |
NSW |
Vic |
Qld |
SA |
WA |
Tas |
NT |
ACT |
Total |
Total with full
voting rights(a) |
| 1901 |
26 |
23 |
9 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1903 |
26 |
23 |
9 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1906 |
27 |
22 |
9 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1910 |
27 |
22 |
9 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1913 |
27 |
21 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1914 |
27 |
21 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1917 |
27 |
21 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1919 |
27 |
21 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
|
|
75 |
75 |
| 1922 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
76 |
75 |
| 1925 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
76 |
75 |
| 1928 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
76 |
75 |
| 1929 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
76 |
75 |
| 1931 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
76 |
75 |
| 1934 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
75 |
74 |
| 1937 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
75 |
74 |
| 1940 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
75 |
74 |
| 1943 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
75 |
74 |
| 1946 |
28 |
20 |
10 |
6 |
5 |
5 |
1 |
|
75 |
74 |
| 1949 |
47 |
33 |
18 |
10 |
8 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
123 |
121 |
| 1951 |
47 |
33 |
18 |
10 |
8 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
123 |
121 |
| 1954 |
47 |
33 |
18 |
10 |
8 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
123 |
121 |
| 1955 |
46 |
33 |
18 |
11 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
124 |
122 |
| 1958 |
46 |
33 |
18 |
11 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
124 |
122 |
| 1961 |
46 |
33 |
18 |
11 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
124 |
122 |
| 1963 |
46 |
33 |
18 |
11 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
124 |
122 |
| 1966 |
46 |
33 |
18 |
11 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
124 |
123 |
| 1969 |
45 |
34 |
18 |
12 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
125 |
125 |
| 1972 |
45 |
34 |
18 |
12 |
9 |
5 |
1 |
1 |
125 |
125 |
| 1974 |
45 |
34 |
18 |
12 |
10 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
127 |
127 |
| 1975 |
45 |
34 |
18 |
12 |
10 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
127 |
127 |
| 1977 |
43 |
33 |
19 |
11 |
10 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
124 |
124 |
| 1980 |
43 |
33 |
19 |
11 |
11 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
125 |
125 |
| 1983 |
43 |
33 |
19 |
11 |
11 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
125 |
125 |
| 1984 |
51 |
39 |
24 |
13 |
13 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
148 |
148 |
| 1987 |
51 |
39 |
24 |
13 |
13 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
148 |
148 |
| 1990 |
51 |
38 |
24 |
13 |
14 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
148 |
148 |
| 1993 |
50 |
38 |
25 |
12 |
14 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
147 |
147 |
| 1996 |
50 |
37 |
26 |
12 |
14 |
5 |
1 |
3 |
148 |
148 |
| 1998 |
50 |
37 |
27 |
12 |
14 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
148 |
148 |
| 2001 |
50 |
37 |
27 |
12 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2004 |
50 |
37 |
28 |
11 |
15 |
5 |
2(b) |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2007 |
49 |
37 |
29 |
11 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2010 |
48 |
37 |
30 |
11 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2013 |
48 |
37 |
30 |
11 |
15 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2016 |
47 |
37 |
30 |
11 |
16 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
150 |
150 |
| 2019 |
47 |
38 |
30 |
10 |
16 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
151 |
151 |
| 2022 |
47 |
39 |
30 |
10 |
15 |
5 |
2(c) |
3 |
151 |
151 |
(a) The member for the NT had limited
voting rights between 1922 and 1968. The member for the ACT had limited
voting rights between 1949 and 1966.
(b) The NT was reduced to 1 seat after the entitlement
determination of 19 February 2003 but reverted to two divisions after the
passage of the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Representation in the House of
Representatives) Act 2004 and did not undergo a redistribution.
(c) The NT was reduced to 1 seat after the entitlement
determination of 3 July 2020 but reverted to two divisions after the passage of
the Electoral
Amendment (Territory Representation) Act 2020 and did not undergo a
redistribution.
Key: numbers in green
indicate a seat gained since the last election, and numbers in red indicate a seat lost. Shaded cells indicate
that the seat has undergone a
redistribution prior to the election.
Source: Compiled by the Parliamentary Library from various
sources.
Appendix D: start dates and selected milestones of recent redistributions
| State |
Date redistribution commenced |
Days until submissions closed |
Days from submissions closed to proposal released |
Date Finalised |
Days from proposals released until redistribution
finalised |
Total time |
| Days |
Months |
| Vic |
15/07/2020 |
93 |
154 |
26/07/2021 |
129 |
376 |
12 |
| WA |
15/07/2020 |
100 |
147 |
2/08/2021 |
136 |
383 |
12 |
| SA |
4/09/2017 |
88 |
133 |
20/07/2018 |
98 |
319 |
10 |
| ACT |
4/09/2017 |
81 |
133 |
13/07/2018 |
98 |
312 |
10 |
| Vic |
4/09/2017 |
74 |
140 |
13/07/2018 |
98 |
312 |
10 |
| Qld |
6/01/2017 |
133 |
133 |
27/03/2018 |
179 |
445 |
14 |
| Tas |
1/09/2016 |
92 |
154 |
14/11/2017 |
193 |
439 |
14 |
| NT |
15/10/2015 |
141 |
189 |
7/02/2017 |
151 |
481 |
15 |
| NSW |
1/12/2014 |
172 |
147 |
25/02/2016 |
132 |
451 |
14 |
| WA |
1/12/2014 |
130 |
133 |
19/01/2016 |
151 |
414 |
13 |
| ACT |
1/12/2014 |
179 |
105 |
28/01/2016 |
139 |
423 |
13 |
| SA |
12/01/2011 |
114 |
98 |
16/12/2011 |
126 |
338 |
11 |
| Vic |
1/02/2010 |
67 |
112 |
24/12/2010 |
147 |
326 |
10 |
| Qld |
19/02/2009 |
78 |
77 |
15/12/2009 |
144 |
299 |
9 |
| NSW |
19/02/2009 |
71 |
98 |
22/12/2009 |
137 |
306 |
10 |
| Tas |
13/02/2008 |
86 |
105 |
16/02/2009 |
178 |
369 |
12 |
| NT |
16/01/2008 |
72 |
84 |
19/08/2008 |
60 |
216 |
7 |
| WA |
14/12/2007 |
105 |
126 |
10/12/2008 |
131 |
362 |
11 |
| NSW |
2/12/2005 |
112 |
98 |
22/11/2006 |
145 |
355 |
11 |
| Qld |
2/12/2005 |
91 |
112 |
22/11/2006 |
152 |
355 |
11 |
| ACT |
30/11/2004 |
108 |
98 |
9/12/2005 |
168 |
374 |
12 |
| Qld |
12/03/2003 |
100 |
63 |
25/11/2003 |
95 |
258 |
8 |
| SA |
12/03/2003 |
114 |
32 |
17/12/2003 |
134 |
280 |
9 |
| Vic |
18/01/2002 |
91 |
133 |
29/01/2003 |
152 |
376 |
12 |
| WA |
23/12/1999 |
92 |
63 |
20/11/2000 |
178 |
333 |
10 |
| NT |
23/12/1999 |
71 |
56 |
21/12/2000 |
237 |
364 |
11 |
| Tas |
14/04/1999 |
44 |
84 |
22/11/1999 |
94 |
222 |
7 |
| NSW |
26/02/1999 |
49 |
91 |
11/02/2000 |
210 |
350 |
11 |
| SA |
10/02/1999 |
37 |
63 |
13/08/1999 |
84 |
184 |
6 |
Source: AEC and
Parliamentary Library calculations.
Appendix E: the Federation divisions and their fate
| State |
Divisions |
Time in use |
History |
| NSW |
Barrier |
1901–22 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1922 |
| |
Bland |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
Canobolas |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
Cowper |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Dalley |
1901–69 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1968 |
| |
Darling |
1901–77 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1977 |
| |
East Sydney |
1901–69 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1968 |
| |
Eden-Monaro |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Gwydir |
1901–2007 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 2006 |
| |
Hume |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Hunter |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Illawarra |
1901–22 |
Abolished die to redistribution, 1922 |
| |
Lang |
1901–77 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1977 |
| |
Macquarie |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Newcastle |
|
Still in existence |
| |
New England |
|
Still in existence |
| |
North Sydney |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Parkes |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Parramatta |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Richmond |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Riverina |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Robertson |
|
Still in existence |
| |
South Sydney |
1901–34 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1934 |
| |
Wentworth |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Werriwa |
|
Still in existence |
| |
West Sydney |
1901–69 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1968 |
| Vic |
Balaclava |
1901–84 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1984 |
| |
Ballaarat |
|
Still in existence; renamed Ballarat 1977 |
| |
Bendigo |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Bourke |
1901–49 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1948 |
| |
Corangamite |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Corinella |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
|
1990–96 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1994 |
| |
Corio |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Echuca |
1901–37 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1936 |
| |
Flinders |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Gippsland |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Grampians |
1901–22 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1922 |
| |
Indi |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Kooyong |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Laanecoorie |
1901–13 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1912 |
| |
Melbourne |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Melbourne Ports |
1901–2018 |
Renamed to Macnamara in 2018 |
| |
Mernda |
1901–13 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1912 |
| |
Moira |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
Northern Melbourne |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
Southern Melbourne |
1901–06 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1906 |
| |
Wannon |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Wimmera |
1901–77 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1977 |
| |
Yarra |
1901–69 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1968 |
| Qld |
Brisbane |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Capricornia |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Darling Downs |
1901–84 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1984 |
| |
Herbert |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Kennedy |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Maranoa |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Moreton |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Oxley |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Wide Bay |
|
Still in existence |
| WA |
Coolgardie |
1901–13 |
Abolished due to redistribution, 1912 |
| |
Fremantle |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Kalgoorlie |
1901–2008 |
Renamed to O’Connor in 2008 |
| |
Perth |
|
Still in existence |
| |
Swan |
|
Still in existence |
Note: Corinella was abolished twice, once in 1906 and for the
second time in 1994. Only 63 of the first Parliament’s 75 divisions were
Federation divisions because in 1901 Tasmanian and South Australian MPs were
elected ‘at large’. These two colonial parliaments failed to distribute divisions
in time for the 1901 election and so each of these MPs was known as the ‘Member
for Tasmania’ and the ‘Member for South Australia’. The first named divisions
for Tasmania and South Australia were established for the 1903 election.