Step 6 – announcement of names and boundaries of federal electoral divisions in Victoria

Updated: 20 June 2018

Overview maps will be available on the website on Friday 13 July 2018. Detailed maps and a report outlining the augmented Electoral Commission's reasons for the formal determination will be tabled in the Federal Parliament and subsequently made publicly available.

The augmented Electoral Commission for Victoria's public announcement of final names and boundaries of federal electoral divisions in Victoria was made on 20 June 2018. Read the augmented Electoral Commission's public announcement.

The augmented Electoral Commission's reasoning behind the names and boundaries of electoral divisions will be contained in its report.

The numerical constraints of the redistribution process

The augmented Electoral Commission was required to consider all objections made to the Redistribution Committee's proposal in the context of the requirements of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 (the Electoral Act). For the augmented Electoral Commission, the primary requirements contained within sub-section 73(4) are:

  • the number of electors in each electoral division shall, as far as practicable, not deviate from the projected enrolment quota of 110,372 at the projection time of Sunday 25 August 2019 by more than plus or minus 3.5 per cent. As far as practicable, the number of electors enrolled in each electoral division in Victoria at the projection time of Sunday 25 August 2019 must therefore be between 106,509 and 114,235, and
  • the number of electors in each electoral division shall not deviate from the current enrolment quota of 106,954 by more than plus or minus 10 per cent. The number of electors enrolled in each electoral division in Victoria must be between 96,259 and 117,649.

Objections that resulted in the number of electors in an electoral division or divisions being outside either of these ranges could not be considered for implementation.

Augmented Electoral Commission's proposed electoral divisions

Name of proposed electoral division Boundaries of proposed electoral division
Aston

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the part of the locality of Upper Ferntree Gully in Knox City Council will be located in the proposed Division of Aston;
  • the locality of Rowville in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Aston; and
  • as a result of the above changes, the boundary of the proposed Division of Aston will be aligned with that of Knox City Council
Ballarat

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Bendigo

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Bruce

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the part of the locality of Springvale to the east of Springvale Road will be located in the proposed Division of Bruce;
  • the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Bruce and Isaacs will be altered to follow Eastlink north from Cheltenham Road, then south-east along the Pakenham Railway line to the point of intersection with the South Gippsland Highway; and
  • the locality of Rowville will be located in its entirety in the proposed Division of Aston
Calwell

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the localities of Wildwood and Bulla and that part of the locality of Oaklands Junction to the west of Deep Creek will be located in the proposed Division of McEwen, meaning that the boundary will follow the Bulla locality boundary and Deep Creek;
  • the locality of Gowanbrae will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong; and
  • those parts of the localities of Keilor Park and Tullamarine to the south of the Western Ring Road will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong
Casey

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Kilsyth in Yarra Ranges Shire Council will be located in the proposed Division of Casey;
  • the Knox City Council in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Aston with the transfer of part of the locality of Upper Ferntree Gully;
  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Indi to adhere to the locality boundary between Castella and Dixons Creek involving no elector movement; and
  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of La Trobe to adhere to the locality boundary between Gembrook and Yellingbo involving no elector movement
Chisholm

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Surrey Hills to the south of Canterbury Road and east of Warrigal Road will be located in the proposed Division of Chisholm; and
  • the locality of Vermont South in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Deakin
Cooper

The boundaries of this electoral division are those proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria for the previously proposed Division of Batman. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act.

Biographical information about William Cooper from the Australian Dictionary of Biography and the Victorian Aboriginal Honour Roll.

Corangamite

The boundaries of this electoral division are those proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria for the previously proposed Division of Cox, with the following changes:

  • the localities of Barunah Park, Barunah Plains and Wingeel will be located in the proposed Division of Corangamite; and
  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Corio to the Belmont locality boundary involving no elector movement
Corio

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Corangamite to the Belmont locality boundary involving no elector movement
Deakin

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the locality of Vermont South in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Deakin; and
  • that part of the locality of Kilsyth in Yarra Ranges Shire Council will be located in the proposed Division of Casey
Dunkley

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed as a consequence of ensuring that all electoral divisions in Victoria meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Flinders

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Fraser

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria

Gellibrand

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the locality of Williams Landing in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Gellibrand
Gippsland

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed as a consequence of ensuring that all electoral divisions in Victoria meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Goldstein

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria.

Gorton

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Diggers Rest east of the Calder Freeway will be located in the proposed Division of McEwen
Higgins

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed as a consequence of ensuring that all electoral divisions in Victoria meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Holt

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • a minor realignment of the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Holt and La Trobe to follow Lemongrove Way, Marija Crescent, and Clyde Road rather than the Narre Warren South locality boundary
Hotham

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Hotham and Isaacs be altered such that the Dingley Bypass and Westall Road Extension are adopted between Kingston and Springvale Roads; and
  • the part of the locality of Springvale to the east of Springvale Rd will be located in the proposed Division of Bruce
Indi

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Casey to adhere to the locality boundary between Castella and Dixons Creek involving no elector movement
Isaacs

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Hotham and Isaacs be altered such that the Dingley Bypass and Westall Road Extension are adopted between Kingston and Springvale Roads; and
  • the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Bruce and Isaacs be altered to follow Eastlink north from Cheltenham Road, then south-east along the Pakenham Railway line to the point of intersection with the South Gippsland Highway
Jagajaga

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Kooyong

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Surrey Hills to the south of Canterbury Road and east of Warrigal Road will be located in the proposed Division of Chisholm
Lalor

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the locality of Williams Landing in its entirety will be located in the proposed Division of Gellibrand
La Trobe

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the localities of Bunyip North, Garfield North, Maryknoll, Tonimbuk and Tynong North will be located in the proposed Division of Monash;
  • a minor realignment of the boundary between the proposed Divisions of Holt and La Trobe to follow Lemongrove Way, Marija Crescent and Clyde Road rather than the Berwick locality boundary; and
  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Casey to adhere to the locality boundary between Gembrook and Yellingbo involving no elector movement
Macnamara

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed as a consequence of ensuring that all electoral divisions in Victoria meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Mallee

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Wannon to adhere to the boundary of Southern Grampians Shire Council at the locality of Cherrypool, involving no elector movement
Maribyrnong

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the locality of Gowanbrae will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong;
  • those parts of the localities of Keilor Park and Tullamarine to the south of the Western Ring Road will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong; and
  • that part of the locality of Kensington located to the north of Smithfield Road will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong, meaning that the boundary will be Smithfield Road between Epsom Road and Racecourse Road
McEwen

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Diggers Rest east of the Calder Freeway will be located in the proposed Division of McEwen; and
  • the localities of Wildwood and Bulla and that part of the locality of Oaklands Junction to the west of Deep Creek will be located in the proposed Division of McEwen, meaning that the boundary will follow the Bulla locality boundary and Deep Creek
Melbourne

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • that part of the locality of Kensington located to the north of Smithfield Road will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong, meaning that the boundary will be Smithfield Road between Epsom Road and Racecourse Road
Menzies

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Monash

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the localities of Bunyip North, Garfield North, Maryknoll, Tonimbuk and Tynong North will be located in the proposed Division of Monash
Nicholls

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed as a consequence of ensuring that all electoral divisions in Victoria meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Scullin

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Wannon

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria with the following changes:

  • the localities of Barunah Park, Barunah Plains and Wingeel will be located in the proposed Division of Corangamite; and
  • a minor alignment with the proposed Division of Mallee to adhere to the boundary of Southern Grampians Shire Council at the locality of Cherrypool, involving no elector movement
Wills

As proposed by the Redistribution Committee for Victoria. The boundaries of this electoral division have been changed to meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act

Detailed information about the make-up of the Redistribution Committee’s proposed electoral divisions can be found in Chapter 2 and Appendix L of the Redistribution Committee’s report of 6 April 2018.

Maps of the Redistribution Committee’s proposed electoral divisions are also available.

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusion on objections

An overview of the augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions on the majority of issues raised in objections is presented on this page. A number of objections were unable to be accepted by the augmented Electoral Commission because of the requirement that the number of electors in the 38 electoral divisions in Victoria meet the two numerical requirements of the Electoral Act.

Objections which have not been discussed below will be discussed in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions on objections relating to the names of electoral divisions

The name of the proposed Division of Batman

Objections referring to this matter: OB2 – Remy Shergill, OB3 – Liezl Dungca, OB18 – Campbell Rhodes, OB53 – Karen Large, OB58 – Serena O’Meley, OB67 – Dr Patrick Stokes, OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB112 – Alex Weatherhead, OB119 – Darryl Young, OB125 – Ron & Anne Mason, OB179 – Cr Geoff Ellis, OB194 – Rick, Jeanette and Brian McKinley, OB253 – Marianne Sherry, OB256 – James Dawson, OB280 – Marcia Lewis, OB306 – Australian Greens Victoria, OB312 – Darebin City Council, OB313 – Tom Mullinar, OB316 – Leon Zembekis, OB326 – Boroondara Reconciliation Network, OB352 – Ged Kearney MP, OB356 – Reconciliation Victoria 2, OB362 – Anne Heath Mennell, OB412 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB2 – Get Up! Batman Action Group, COB87 – Blanche Horgan, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB39 – Jeff Waddell

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee received suggestions to the redistribution and comments on suggestions which argued that John Batman was not a worthy individual after whom to name an electoral division, based on an evaluation of his legacy and his historical dealings with Aboriginal communities. However, on the information provided at the suggestions and comments on suggestions stages, the Redistribution Committee did not consider that strong enough reasons to alter the name of the electoral division were provided, and proposed retaining the name of the Division of Batman.

A small number of objections to the proposed redistribution argued the name ‘Batman’ should be retained in line with the Redistribution Committee’s proposal.

A greater number of objections to the proposed redistribution opposed retaining the name ‘Batman’ with many questioning whether his historical legacy rendered him unworthy of having an electoral division named in his honour and providing further information to support their claims. Many objections and comments on objections argued that it would be more appropriate for the electoral division to be named to recognise an Aboriginal leader.

A number of objections to the proposed redistribution advocated for the recognition of William Cooper, an Aboriginal political activist and community leader who advocated strongly for Aboriginal rights and helped establish the Australian Aborigines League in the 1930s. His work led to the establishment of what is now known as the National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee (NAIDOC) week and he led the only private protest against Germany following Kristallnacht in 1938.

The augmented Electoral Commission considered the arguments advanced by those who argued for and against the name ‘Batman’. Based on the additional information provided, the augmented Electoral Commission concluded it would be appropriate to rename the electoral division to recognise an Aboriginal leader who had made a significant contribution to Aboriginal and human rights.

The augmented Electoral Commission proposes the electoral division will be known as the Division of Cooper.

The name of the proposed Division of Cox

Objections referring to this matter: More than 120 objections concerned with the name of this proposed electoral division were received. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB7 – Liza Vanspall, COB8 – Benjamin Middleton, COB12 – Guy Anderson, COB40 – Colin Benjamin OAM FAICD MAASW, COB48 – Neville Stanley, COB54 – Sarah Voogels, COB90 – Libby Mears

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the Division of Corangamite to ‘Cox’ to honour and recognise May Cox (1883–1953), for her lasting legacy in teaching swimming and lifesaving to Victorians. The Redistribution Committee formed the view it would be appropriate to rename the electoral division due to its changed nature as a result of proposed changes to the boundaries of the electoral division.

While some objections to the proposed redistribution and comments on objections supported the proposed name, a significant number did not support the rename. Those arguing against renaming the electoral division to ‘Cox’ advanced the following arguments:

  • May Cox did not make a significant enough contribution to Australia to merit having a federal electoral division named for her,
  • May Cox does not have a sufficient connection to the electoral division and is not known by the community,
  • ‘Cox’ is an unfortunate double-entendre and will open the electoral division and the local member to ridicule,
  • if the electoral division is to be renamed, it should be to an Aboriginal name, and/or
  • the name ‘Corangamite’ should be retained as it is a Federation name, an Aboriginal name and is still strongly connected to the area.

Twenty-eight names were offered as alternatives to the name ‘Cox’ should the augmented Electoral Commission decide against retaining the name ‘Corangamite’.

The augmented Electoral Commission considered the arguments opposing the use of the name ‘Cox’ for the electoral division presented by those making objections to the proposed redistribution, commenting on objections or making submissions to the inquiries and was not convinced by the argument that May Cox is not an individual who merits having a federal electoral division named for her. Women are under-represented in the names of federal electoral divisions, and frequently unrecognised for their achievements. This is equally so of educators. The augmented Electoral Commission does not accept that, as May Cox is currently unrecognised, she should not be recognised today, and notes its own role in addressing such imbalances and oversights. The augmented Electoral Commission commends May Cox as an individual who has rendered outstanding service to her country in education and the teaching of swimming and lifesaving, in her work supporting the Australian war effort during World War One and in her influential leadership in a time when there were far greater social barriers for women in the workplace.

The augmented Electoral Commission is also unconvinced by arguments regarding the suitability of the name ‘Cox’. It is unreasonable to suggest that worthy individuals who have names that a small section of the community may consider suggestive should not be recognised, and notes that objections which argue this are disrespectful to May Cox, her family and those whose surname is ‘Cox’. The augmented Electoral Commission considers Australia a sufficiently mature and open-minded society to recognise the achievements of a worthy individual over any subjective innuendo in name.

A strong theme observed throughout the objections to the proposed redistribution, comments on objections and submissions to the inquiry was the desire of those resident in the proposed electoral division to retain an Aboriginal name for their electoral division, whether this be ‘Corangamite’, another Aboriginal word or the name of an Aboriginal person. Some objections noted that the name ‘Corangamite’ now has a strong connection to the area covered by the electoral division itself, rather than simply the lake or the local government area. The augmented Electoral Commission therefore concluded it would be appropriate to retain the name of the electoral division, noting that the meaning of Corangamite as ‘bitter’ and relating to the saltiness of Lake Corangamite, is equally appropriate to a coastally focused electoral division. Doing so will also allow for the retention of a Federation name and an Aboriginal name.

The augmented Electoral Commission proposes the electoral division will be known as the Division of Corangamite.

The name of the proposed Division of Macnamara

Objections referring to this matter: OB5 – Ned O. Strange, OB6 – David Pittock, OB15 – Ian Radnell, OB17 – Ronald John Cocks, OB43 – Glen Cosham, OB55 – Anne Bray, OB62 – Maureen Grant, OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB73 – Peter Willcocks, OB64 ­ – Edmund Carew, OB69 – Gary, OB74 – Susan Shaab, OB75 – Joan McMeeken AM, OB82 – Dr Josephine Samuel-King, OB85 – Margaret Cooper PhD OAM, OB89 – Barbara Watson, OB92 – Jeff Waddell, OB98 – Polio Australia Inc, OB108 – Merran Samuel, OB110 – Frances Henke, OB123 – Malcolm Mackerras AO, OB134 – Post Polio Victoria, OB180 Timothy Knapp, OB220 – Polio Network Victoria, OB244 – Warren Grzic, OB258 – Port Melbourne Historical Society, OB286 – Michael Ritchie, OB298 – Colin McLaren, OB306 – Australian Greens Victoria, OB354 ­– Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division),OB362 – Anne Heath Mennell, OB412 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB30 – Merran Samuel, OB35 – James Bogle, COB39 – Jeff Waddell

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the Division of Melbourne Ports to ‘Macnamara’ in honour and recognition of Dame Annie Jean Macnamara DBE (1899–1968), for her contributions to medical science and improving the lives of patients suffering from paralysis. It considered that the boundaries of the electoral division had altered such that while once it covered the ports area, it now has a stronger residential and urban character.

A number of objections to the proposed redistribution and comments on objections observed that ‘Macnamara’ was an appropriate name for an electoral division as Dame Jean Macnamara was a worthy individual who made a significant contribution to Australian science and medicine, and also had a significant personal impact on the lives of many polio survivors.

A number of objections to the proposed redistribution and comments on objections argued that the electoral division should not be named ‘Macnamara’, with the following arguments advanced:

  • the electoral division still retains much of its connection to the ports of the City of Melbourne,
  • ‘Melbourne Ports’ is a Federation name, and/or
  • Dame Jean Macnamara did not have a strong connection to the area.

Six names were offered as alternatives to the name ‘Macnamara’ should the augmented Electoral Commission decide against retaining the name ‘Melbourne Ports’.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound and follows the naming guidelines for federal divisions, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The augmented Electoral Commission proposes the electoral division will be known as the Division of Macnamara.

The name of the proposed Division of Monash

Objections referring to this matter: More than 50 objections concerned with the name of this proposed electoral division were received. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: More than 35 comments on objections were concerned with the name of this proposed electoral division were received. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the Division of McMillan to ‘Monash’ to honour and recognise Sir John Monash CB(M) KCB(M) GCMG (1865–1931). As Monash’s work at the State Electricity Commission contributed significantly to the development of parts of Gippsland, the Redistribution Committee considered that ‘Monash’ was an appropriate name for an electoral division located in the wider Gippsland area.

While some objections to the proposed redistribution and comments on objections voiced the opinion that the name ‘McMillan’ should be retained, many welcomed the Redistribution Committee’s proposal to retire the name. However, not all agreed that ‘Monash’ was the most appropriate name, with arguments made that while Sir John Monash is a worthy individual, he has been sufficiently recognised elsewhere, or it may be better to name an electoral division in a different part of Victoria after him.

Seven alternative names were offered, with many arguing that it would be most appropriate for the proposed electoral division to be given an Aboriginal name.

The augmented Electoral Commission:

  • understands the importance of recognising indigenous heritage and hurt, and proposes recognising the names of three important leaders in Aboriginal rights with the proposed Divisions of Cooper and Nicholls,
  • recognises the importance of maintaining Aboriginal names for divisions where possible and proposes retaining the name of the Division of Corangamite,
  • notes objections that the Monash name is strongly linked to Monash City Council, Monash University and the Monash freeway in the Division of Hotham, but also notes separation between the electoral divisions and municipalities of Casey, Corangamite and Maribyrnong. Local Government boundaries in Victoria have effectively been static for many years, however federal electoral division boundaries change over time and the attribution of a name to a specific area, based on associations at other levels of government, was not seen as a compelling argument, and
  • notes Sir John Monash’s broad connection to the division through his role in the State Electricity Commission and the development of the Latrobe Valley.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound and follows the naming guidelines for federal divisions, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The augmented Electoral Commission proposes the electoral division will be known as the Division of Monash.

The name of the proposed Division of Nicholls

Objections referring to this matter: OB5 – Ned O. Strange, OB52 – Anne Shaw, OB55 – Anne Bray, OB64 – Edmund Carew, OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB78 – Andrew Bock, OB92 – Jeff Waddell, OB121 – M Dale, OB123 – Malcolm Mackerras AO, OB286 – Michael Ritchie, OB306 – Australian Greens Victoria, OB354 – Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division), OB362 – Anne Heath Mennell, OB369 – The Nationals - Victoria, OB412 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed renaming the Division of Murray to ‘Nicholls’ to honour Sir Douglas Ralph Nicholls MBD(C) OBE(C) KCVO and Lady Gladys Nicholls for their significant contribution in advocating for Aboriginal rights and welfare. As the Nicholls had a strong personal connection to this region of Victoria, the Redistribution Committee considered ‘Nicholls’ is an appropriate name for this electoral division.

While six objections opposed the renaming of the Division of Murray, arguing that ‘Murray’ was still a relevant name for an electoral division which borders the Murray River, there was general support for the recognition of the Nicholls and their work in Aboriginal advocacy.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound and follows the naming guidelines for federal divisions, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The augmented Electoral Commission proposes the electoral division will be known as the Division of Nicholls.

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions on objections relating to the placement of electoral divisions and divisional boundaries

The boundary between the proposed Divisions of Dunkley and Flinders

Objections referring to this matter: More than 30 objections received were concerned with the boundaries between the proposed Divisions of Dunkley and Flinders. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB25 – Sarah Lean-Jones, COB29 – Cr Colin Hampton, COB31 – Frankston & District Basketball Association, COB99 – Charles Richardson

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed moving the locality of Mornington and the balance of the locality of Baxter from the Division of Dunkley to the proposed Division of Flinders. This would unite the majority of Mornington Peninsula Shire Council, with the exception of Mount Eliza which could not be included for numerical reasons, in the proposed Division of Flinders, resulting in Flinders becoming an electoral division based entirely on the Mornington Peninsula.

Objections to the proposed redistribution which opposed the movement argued that the localities of Mornington and Baxter should be located in the proposed Division of Dunkley on the basis of community of interest as well as transport, trade, and sporting links. Some objections proposed amending the boundaries of the proposed Divisions of Dunkley, Flinders, Holt, Bruce, Isaacs and Hotham to achieve the retention of Mornington, or the majority of Mornington, in the proposed Division of Dunkley.

A number of objections to the proposed redistribution and comments on objections supported the proposed boundaries for the Division of Dunkley, arguing that objections which related to sporting and trade connections were not valid, as federal electoral division boundaries would not stop these communities working together. Objections also argued that having the proposed Division of Dunkley based on Frankston City Council and the proposed Division of Flinders based on Mornington Peninsula Shire Council improved communities of interest in both proposed electoral divisions.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • the benefits of uniting the majority of the Mornington Peninsula Shire Council in the proposed Division of Flinders and uniting all of Frankston City Council in the proposed Division of Dunkley outweigh concerns about the community of interest for Mornington and Baxter on their own,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time and would have significant consequential effects on the rest of the redistribution, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The locality of Mornington and the balance of the locality of Baxter will be located in the proposed Division of Flinders.

The boundary of the proposed Division of Corangamite (previously the proposed Division of Cox)

Objections referring to this matter: More than 110 objections received were concerned with the boundaries of the proposed Division of Corangamite (previously the proposed division of Cox). These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB8 – Benjamin Middleton, COB13 – Chris Harkin, COB40 – Colin Benjamin OAM FAICD MAASW, COB48 – Neville Stanley, COB80 – Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division), COB81 – Colac Otway Shire, COB84 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch), COB85 – Gavin Ryan, COB86 – Lloyd Fletcher, COB90 – Libby Mears, COB93 – Colac Football Netball Club, COB98 – Anne Egan

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed moving:

  • the town of Colac and surrounds to the proposed Division of Wannon, noting that the Division of Wannon needed to increase elector numbers and recognising agricultural, demographic and environmental connections between Colac and the proposed Division of Wannon,
  • the localities of Belmont and Highton to the proposed Division of Corio, putting more of urban Geelong into that electoral division, and
  • moving the balance of the Bellarine Peninsula to the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite).

Objections to the proposed redistribution relating specifically to the movement of Colac and the split of Colac Otway Shire Council are discussed separately below.

Other objections to the proposed redistribution regarding the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) argued that the removal of Colac and Belmont/Highton from the electoral division would reduce its diversity and sever strong community, sporting and trade links between Colac, Geelong and Belmont/Highton. Some objections suggested that the Bellarine Peninsula did not have sufficient links to the Surf Coast and other parts of the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) and should remain in the proposed Division of Corio.

A number of objections supportive of the boundaries of the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) noted links between Colac and the regions to its west, as well as similarities in terms of trade, agriculture and environment. Similar links were noted between the localities of Belmont and Highton and the rest of urban Geelong, arguing Colac was a natural fit for the rural Division of Wannon and Belmont and Highton for the Geelong-based Division of Corio. These objections noted that the proposed changes to the Division of Cox (Corangamite) made it a more homogenous coastal and tourism-focused division.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged bar a minor amendment discussed below under Golden Plains Shire, and a minor correction to the Belmont locality boundary as detailed in the table at the top of this page.

The electoral division(s) in which Colac Otway Shire Council is located

Objections referring to this matter: More than 100 objections received were concerned with the electoral division in which the Colac Otway shire was located. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB8 – Benjamin Middleton, COB13 – Chris Harkin, COB40 – Colin Benjamin OAM FAICD MAASW, COB48 – Neville Stanley, COB80 – Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division), COB81 – Colac Otway Shire, COB84 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch), COB85 – Gavin Ryan, COB86 – Lloyd Fletcher, COB90 – Libby Mears, COB93 – Colac Football Netball Club, COB98 – Anne Egan

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed moving the town of Colac and surrounds to the proposed Division of Wannon, noting that the Division of Wannon needed to increase its elector numbers and recognising agricultural, demographic and environmental connections between Colac and the proposed Division of Wannon. The Redistribution Committee considered a number of variations to shifting part of the Colac Otway Shire Council, but ultimately found alternative configurations resulted in compromised boundaries elsewhere in the state.

Objections to the proposed redistribution which opposed to the proposed boundaries argued that Colac Otway Shire Council should not be split as it would affect its advocacy with federal representatives, and that Colac had benefited from a strong relationship with the current Member for Corangamite. Objections raised concerns about access to, and the quality of, representation in a large electoral division such as Wannon. Objections noted the strong community, service and trade links between Colac and Geelong and suggested that Colac did not have strong connections to communities in the proposed Division of Wannon.

Some objections argued that Colac Otway Shire could be united in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) if Golden Plains Shire Council were moved in its entirety to the proposed Division of Wannon. Several objections and comments on objections opposed this change, suggesting that the arguments which supported Colac Otway Shire Council being in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) applied equally or more so to Golden Plains Shire Council.

A number of objections supported the proposed boundaries for the Division of Cox (Corangamite) and noted the links between Colac and the western regions and similarities in terms of trade, agriculture and environment. Some noted that the proposed changes to the Division of Cox (Corangamite) made it a more homogenous coastal and tourist-industry-focused division and suggested this would improve representation for those communities.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • concerns about the quality of representation, or any potential change in representation, fall outside of the scope of the augmented Electoral Commission’s considerations,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged, bar a minor amendment discussed below under Golden Plains Shire Council and a minor correction to the Belmont locality boundary as detailed in the table at the top of this page.

The town of Colac and surrounds will be located in the proposed Division of Wannon.

The electoral division(s) in which the locality of Craigieburn is located

Objections referring to this matter: OB107 – Spiro Pastras, OB185 – Avtar Singh, OB198 – Anwar Soma, OB208 – Kevin Cooper, OB251 – Craigieburn Residents’ Association, OB298 – Colin McLaren, OB322 – Brad Stewart, OB412 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB1 – Fez Riches, COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB23 – John Patsikatheodorou, COB24 – Ray Gorman, COB32 – Alan Strangwick, COB50 – Spiro Pastras, COB51 – Elly Bratasiuk, COB52 – Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division), COB84 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch), COB99 – Charles Richardson

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: At the start of the redistribution, the locality of Craigieburn was split between the Divisions of Calwell and McEwen. As the Division of McEwen has the highest projected enrolment in the state and must undergo a significant decrease in the number of electors, the Redistribution Committee proposed uniting the urban locality of Craigieburn in the proposed Division of Calwell. This meant that the proposed Division of McEwen lost some, but not all, of its urban fringes and remains an electoral division which serves as an interface between greater Melbourne and the provincial and rural electoral divisions to the north.

Objections to the proposed redistribution which opposed the proposed boundaries noted that Craigieburn is a hub for growth communities to its north along the Hume Freeway, with some also noting its strong connection to the growth area around Mernda to its east, arguing that these communities should be united in one electoral division. Some objections argued that, in exchange for Craigieburn, Sunbury should be located in the proposed Division of Calwell, as it has strong links to the airport and communities to its south.

A number of objections and comments on objections supported the proposed boundaries, advocating that Craigieburn is more demographically and geographically aligned with the rest of the proposed Division of Calwell and that Sunbury, as a satellite city and gateway to the Macedon Ranges, is a better fit with the proposed Division of McEwen.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The locality of Craigieburn will be located in the proposed Division of Calwell.

The electoral division(s) in which the localities of Flemington, Kensington and Travancore are located

Objections referring to this matter: More than 35 objections received were concerned with the electoral division(s) in which Flemington, Kensington and Travancore are located. These will be listed individually in the augmented Electoral Commission’s report when it is published.

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB10 – Barry Taylor, COB14 – Rose Iser, COB20 – Graeme Dobson, COB46 – Dr Mary Elizabeth Calwell, COB53 – Australian Greens Victoria

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: Prior to the commencement of this redistribution, Flemington, Kensington and Travancore were located in the Division of Melbourne. As this electoral division, on the boundaries in place at the start of the redistribution, exceeds the numerical requirements for projected electors and was therefore required to transfer electors to other electoral divisions, the Redistribution Committee proposed transferring Flemington and Travancore from the Division of Melbourne to the proposed Division of Maribyrnong. This allowed for further alterations between the Divisions of Batman (Cooper), Melbourne and Wills to both meet the numerical requirements of the Electoral Act and to adopt strong electoral division boundaries.

Objections to the proposed redistribution argued that the strong historical, demographic and community links between Flemington and Kensington meant that the two localities should remain together in the Division of Melbourne. Some objections argued Travancore should also be included. Objections suggested that Flemington would not be well represented in the more suburban Division of Maribyrnong and should be in the inner-city Division of Melbourne, and that although the proposed federal electoral division boundary would match state and local government area boundaries, that these boundaries were problematic in themselves.

Some objections supported the movement of Flemington and Travancore to the proposed Division of Maribyrnong, suggesting it was a logical move and returning the area to the Division of Melbourne would have undesirable outcomes elsewhere.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • a minor change to improve the boundary at Smithfield Road could be adopted, but otherwise the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • any other alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and would leave the high-growth inner-city Divisions of Batman (Cooper), Melbourne and Wills at the high end of the numerical tolerance, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged, bar the minor improvement at Smithfield Road as detailed in the table at the top of this page.

Flemington and Travancore will be located in the proposed Division of Maribyrnong and the majority of Kensington, south of Smithfield Road, will be located in the proposed Division of Melbourne.

The electoral division(s) in which Golden Plains Shire Council is located

Objections referring to this matter: OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB105 – Veronica Levay, OB109 – Kevin and Jenny Blake, OB111 – Golden Plains Rural Women’s Network, OB118 – Dr Mark Mulcair, OB129 – Brian Crook, OB184 – Marie James, OB349 – Golden Plains Shire Council, OB412 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB83 – Golden Plains Rural Women’s Network, COB89 – Golden Plains Shire Council, COB91 – Marie James

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: Prior to the commencement of this redistribution, Golden Plains Shire Council was located in the Divisions of Ballarat and Corangamite, however both of these electoral divisions exceed the numerical requirements for projected electors and were required to transfer electors to other electoral divisions. The Redistribution Committee therefore proposed retaining the south-eastern portion of the Shire Council in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) and transferring the remaining north-western part to the proposed Division of Wannon.

Objections to the proposed redistribution noted the strong community of interest between Golden Plains Shire Council and the Divisions of Ballarat and Corangamite, suggesting that the Shire Council was naturally split with the north-western part looking to Ballarat and the south-eastern to Geelong, and that no part of the Shire Council was connected to the Division of Wannon. Some objections suggested the proposed boundaries did not correctly reflect this division and that the Golden Plains and Colac Otway Shire Council localities of Barunah Park, Barunah Plains and Wingeel should be located in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite).

Some objections proposed that Colac Otway Shire could be united in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) if Golden Plains Shire Council were moved in its entirety to the proposed Division of Wannon. Several objections and comments on objections opposed this change, suggesting that the arguments which supported Colac Otway Shire Council being in the proposed Division of Cox (Corangamite) applied equally or more so to Golden Plains Shire Council.

The augmented Electoral Commission noted the portion of the Golden Plains Shire Council which encompasses Barunah Park and the portion of Colac Otway Shire Council that encompasses Barunah Plains and Wingeel could be located in the proposed Division of Corangamite. As these changes would better reflect communities of interest, the augmented Electoral Commission concluded the Redistribution Committee’s proposal could be improved.

The localities of Barunah Park, Barunah Plains and Wingeel will be located in the proposed Division of Corangamite.

The electoral division(s) in which Maryborough and Central Goldfields Shire Council are located

Objections referring to this matter: OB4 – David Broad, OB22 – Wayne & Judi McKail, OB29 – Brian Park, OB30 – John Tully, OB36 – John Jackson, OB50 – Shane W Harris, OB61 – The Maryborough District Advertiser, OB80 – Richard King, OB94 – Wendy Madden, OB116 – Ken Calder, OB167 – ML & EP Courtney, OB187 – Anne Doran, OB222 – Central Goldfields Shire Council, OB238 – Sue Caldwell, OB269 – Geraldene O’Connor, OB281 – Kenneth Maas, OB284 – M Creanor, OB314 – Alex Stoneman, OB318 – S Creanor, OB339 – Matthew Parmenter, OB344 – Committee for Maryborough, OB369 – The Nationals – Victoria, OB373 – Craig Wilson, OB398 – Helen Broad, Bob Henderson, Geoff Lovett, Chris Meddows-Taylor, Gerard Murphy, Paula Nixon

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB38 – Dr Mark Mulcair, COB39 – Jeff Waddell, COB99 – Charles Richardson

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: The Redistribution Committee proposed the transfer of Central Goldfields Shire Council from the Division of Wannon to the proposed Division of Mallee. The Redistribution Committee noted the community of interest between Central Goldfields Shire Council and the Bendigo region, but ultimately found that moving the Central Goldfields Shire Council into the Division of Bendigo would result in undesirable outcomes elsewhere in the state.

Objections to the redistribution opposing the location of Maryborough and Central Goldfields Shire in the proposed Division of Mallee argued that, as an area with strong connections to the Divisions of Bendigo and Ballarat, it would be better represented in either of those electoral divisions and would not be well represented in a large electoral division such as the Division of Mallee. Objections noted that the Redistribution Committee had considered placing the Shire in the proposed Division of Bendigo, but had not done so for numerical reasons. These objections argued that this was an unfair consequence on an area which is one of Victoria’s most disadvantaged.

Some objections and comments on objections observed that the consequential effects on the rest of the state of making these changes were undesirable, and noted that the representatives for large divisions such as Mallee and Wannon will have resources to enable them to service all parts of their electoral division.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • the inclusion of Central Goldfields Shire Council in the proposed Division of Bendigo would require a large compensating excision of an area likely to have similarly strong claims regarding communities of interest with the proposed Division of Bendigo,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

Maryborough and Central Goldfields Shire will be located in the proposed Division of Mallee.

The electoral division(s) in which the locality of Point Cook is located

Objections referring to this matter: OB35 – Kara Macleod, OB37 – Lauren Dickenson, OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB118 –  Dr Mark Mulcair, OB175 – Natalie Alchin, OB178 – John Frost, OB181 – Rishi Narayanan, OB183 – Becky, OB190 – Tony Hooper, OB204 – Parvathy Chandran, OB391 – Point Cook Action Group, OB392 – Miriam Spiess

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB45 – Colin McLaren, COB84 – Australian Labor Party (Victorian Branch)

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: Prior to the commencement of this redistribution, Point Cook was located in the Division of Lalor. As this electoral division, on the boundaries in place at the start of the redistribution, exceeded the numerical requirements for projected electors and was therefore required to transfer electors to other electoral divisions, the Redistribution Committee proposed transferring part of the locality of Point Cook to the proposed Division of Gellibrand in order to maintain an equitable balance of electors between the two electoral divisions, noting that Point Cook is a high growth and high population area.

Objections opposing the split of Point Cook between the proposed Divisions of Gellibrand and Lalor argued that, as a distinct and high-growth community with the challenges that growth brings, it was important for Point Cook to be united in one electoral division for more consistent federal representation. It was also noted that Point Cook has worked hard as a new community to build a strong sense of identity and splitting it between two federal electoral divisions works against this.

Some objections noted the location and large population of Point Cook made it difficult to unite the locality in one federal electoral division without having undesirable outcomes elsewhere, although some argued it was likely the locality would be united at a future redistribution.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

Point Cook will be located in the proposed Divisions of Gellibrand and Lalor.

The electoral division(s) in which the southern part of Casey City Council is located

Objections referring to this matter: OB68 – Martin Gordon, OB92 – Jeff Waddell, OB217 – Casey Coastal Villages, OB354 – Liberal Party of Australia (Victorian Division)

Comments on objections referring to this matter: COB5 – Martin Gordon, COB6 – Darren McSweeney, COB38 – Dr Mark Mulcair, COB99 – Charles Richardson

Augmented Electoral Commission's conclusions: Prior to the commencement of the redistribution, the communities in the southern part of Casey City Council around Western Port were located in the Division of Flinders. As this electoral division, on the boundaries in place at the start of the redistribution, exceeded the numerical requirements for projected electors and was therefore required to transfer electors to other electoral divisions, the Redistribution Committee proposed transferring the southern part of Casey City Council to the proposed Division of Holt, which allowed the proposed Division of Flinders to be located entirely within the Mornington Peninsula.

Objections opposing the transfer of these communities to the proposed Division of Holt argued that they were more strongly aligned with the coastal and green wedge communities in the proposed Division of Flinders than with the suburban growth areas of the proposed Division of Holt. Some objections argued that the small population and low expected growth of this area may allow for its transfer back to the proposed Division of Flinders in isolation. Other objections proposed further-reaching adjustments to the Divisions of Bruce, Dunkley, Flinders, Holt, Hotham and Isaacs to achieve this.

Some objections supported the proposed boundaries, noting objections to this part of Casey City Council being in the proposed Division of Holt, but suggesting that alternative boundaries to keep these communities in the proposed Division of Flinders would lead to undesirable outcomes elsewhere.

The augmented Electoral Commission concluded that:

  • the Redistribution Committee's proposal was sound,
  • it was not numerically feasible to transfer these communities back to the proposed Division of Flinders without further consequential changes elsewhere,
  • any alternatives proposed or other adjustments necessary to accommodate these changes within the requirements of the Electoral Act would not result in an improved outcome at this time, and
  • for these reasons, the Redistribution Committee's proposal should stand unchanged.

The southern part of Casey City Council will be located in the proposed Division of Holt.

Back to top