The 150 ways Australia's electorates are wildly different
In Lyne, Hinkler and Gilmore, fewer than a third of voters are aged under 45.
The number of electorates with a high share of older voters is on the rise. At the 2019 federal poll. only one electorate in Australia had more than 30,000 voters aged 70-plus; by 2022 that had risen to four seats and this year, there will be nine.
Rodney Smith, professor of Australian politics at Sydney University, says the contrasting age profiles of some electorates poses a growing political challenge for major parties as they seek to balance differing political priorities.
'To get a majority in the House of Representatives, the major parties have always had to deal with the issue of representing electorates with very different interests,' he said.
'In the past, the disjunction between younger voters and older voters was not so pronounced, but now that age factor raises a new dimension of difficulty in electoral contests for those major parties.'
Nick Parr, honorary professor of demography at Macquarie University, expects age differences between federal electorates to become more pronounced.
'You would expect the range of age profiles to grow over time with newly developed urban areas remaining relatively young,' he said.
Just over 18 million people are enrolled to vote on May 3 – about 870,000 more than at the last election.
Loading
An Australian Electoral Commission spokesman says new migrants made up about 30 per cent of new enrolments in Australia, the vast majority of enrolment growth being younger voters turning 18 and enrolling to vote for the first time.
The number of teens on the electoral roll (those aged 18 and 19 years) has jumped from 417,000 at the last election to 493,000 this year.
The AEC said one reason for this increase was a change in 2023 that allowed Medicare cards to be used as proof of ID to enrol.
'This removed a significant barrier to entry for younger voters who might previously have had problems enrolling due to not having a driver's licence or passport,' an AEC spokesman said.
Another factor was a boost in enrolments around the time of the Voice referendum in October 2023.
Cultural diversity
In many urban seats, voters come from an array of cultural backgrounds while those outside the major cities, especially in sprawling regional electorates, tend to be less multicultural.
Parr says this reflects the settlement of overseas migrants, which has been concentrated in capital cities.
Comparing the seat of Fowler in south-west Sydney with the giant electorate of Maranoa in western Queensland illustrates this trend. Census data shows that in Fowler, which takes in the suburbs of Liverpool and Cabramatta, three in every four households speak a language other than English. In Maranoa, that share is only one in every 20 households.
For 77 per cent of Fowler's population both parents were born overseas but in Maranoa that share is just 10 per cent.
But in many regional areas the population from a non-English-speaking background is on the rise.
'The last census showed an increasing cultural diversity across regional Australia with the spread of migrants into various regional areas,' Parr says. 'So, there may be new or growing ethnic communities that could influence voting patterns.'
Gender
Women outnumber men in Australia – the latest Bureau of Statistics estimates show that for every 100 females there are 98.6 males. That gap reflects the longer life expectancy of women.
Even so, men are a majority in 12 of Australia's 150 electorates. Most of them are in regions where a significant share of the population is employed in male-dominated industries, especially mining and agriculture.
In the Queensland electorate of Flynn, which spans inland from Gladstone, there are 2380 (or 4 per cent) more males than females, which is the largest gender gap in favour of men of any electorate. In the giant West Australian electorate of Durak, which includes the iron ore mining hub of Pilbara, there are about 2 per cent more men than women.
But seats with male majorities are also found in the heart of our biggest cities. In the electorate of Sydney, men outnumber women by nearly 6000, while there are 1436 more males enrolled than females in the seat of Melbourne.
The largest gender gap favouring women is in the seat of Fisher, north of Brisbane, where there are 7365 more female voters than males.
Loading
The past two federal elections have been marked by the success of female 'teal' independents in affluent electorates previously considered Liberal Party heartland.
Election role data shows most the seats where teal candidates prevailed have a significant female majority, especially Goldstein in Melbourne, held by Zoe Daniel (6489 more women than men), Warringah in Sydney, held by Zali Steggall (4290 more women than men) and Mackellar, held by Sophie Scamps (4130 more women than men).
Number of voters per electorate
The average number of voters per federal electorate has reached 120,650 – an all-time high. But there are marked variations in the number of voters in seats across the nation.
That's because the Australian Constitution, adopted in 1901, stipulates that each 'original state' must have at least five seats in the House of Representatives. Patterns of population growth since federation mean that electorates in the smallest state, Tasmania, have far fewer voters than the national average. (In 1901, Tasmania accounted for nearly 5 per cent of the national population, but that share has shrunk to about 2 per cent). The two electorates in the sparsely populated Northern Territory also have fewer voters than the rest of the country.
Election roll data shows the seat of Clark in Hobart has the lowest number of voters at 74,315, while the electorate of Lingiari in the Northern Territory has the second lowest at 76,836.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
4 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Dan Tehan flags gas is crucial moving forward as Coalition's net zero review could take up to a year to settle on final outcome
Shadow energy minister Dan Tehan has flagged gas as a crucial element in the Coalition's energy policy moving forward and confirmed the ongoing review into net zero could take up to a year. Net zero has become a critical issue for the Coalition, with former Nationals leaders Barnaby Joyce and Michael McCormack tabling a Private Member's Bill last week aimed at overhauling all climate related policies. Numerous Nationals and Liberal backbenchers have publicly spoken out against the controversial policy despite Liberal leader Sussan Ley touting reducing emissions as a top priority for the Coalition. Ms Ley told Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell on Thursday she wanted to develop an energy policy focussed on manufacturing while making power more affordable and also reducing emissions. As the Coalition's working group continues its review on the polarising issue, Mr Tehan, who is leading the policy review, told Sky News' Sunday Agenda that the process could take 'nine to 12 months". 'We've got to work out: okay, what will our nuclear policy be? What will our gas policy be? What will we do with state governments that continue to provide subsidies to keep coal-fired power stations going?' Mr Tehan said. The Nationals are also conducting a review to determine its position on net zero, with the process being led by vocal climate critic Senator Matt Canavan. When asked by Sky News Political Editor Andrew Clennell what the Coalition's approach on coal would be, Mr Tehan said the working group had a lot to consider and that gas would be an important factor moving forwards. 'We've said the first focus is going to be on gas,' Mr Tehan said. Mr Tehan reiterated he wanted the review to result in a sustainable and coherent policy position and said the Liberal and National parties needed to find common ground on the issue. He said it was vital that the two political camps 'agree on a policy moving forward" and added that another Coalition split would 'not do the cause on the centre-right of Australian politics any good whatsoever'. 'I think all of us, as individuals – all members of both the Liberal Party and the National Party – have to think very seriously about that over the next 12 to 24 months," he said.
The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
'Not right': Australia urged to wind back tax breaks
Australian workers could be locked out of home ownership unless property concessions are reined in, but any reform would require careful manoeuvring from the government. As the federal government seeks ways to reinvigorate the nation's languishing productivity, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has urged it to reform the tax system and make housing affordable. Tax concessions like negative gearing, which allows investors to claim deductions on losses, and the capital gains tax discount, which halves the amount of tax paid by those who sell assets owned for a year or more, have incentivised property investment and tied up capital that could otherwise be invested more productively, according to the union. "Working people can no longer afford to live near where they work and young people are locked out of the housing market and locked into high rents," ACTU secretary Sally McManus said. "It's just not right and has to change." The union has proposed limiting negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts to a single investment property, though those tax breaks would be grandfathered for five years on properties that already benefit, giving investors time to adjust. Independent economist Saul Eslake, who has spent decades advocating for the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount, said the ACTU's proposal was "good policy". "One of the things about our tax system is it provides enormous incentives for people to invest in residential property - not so much in building more of it but in speculating that its price will go up," he told AAP. But reforms to property tax concessions have historically been political kryptonite for Labor. A previous proposal to limit negative gearing contributed to the party's narrow defeat at the 2019 election, which may not come as a surprise given about one in five taxpayers have at least one investment property and about half of them are negatively geared, Australian Taxation Office statistics have found. While Labor won the May election in a landslide victory, Australian political orthodoxy would suggest the government may not do much with its margin and instead seek to argue for an expansive mandate at the 2028 contest when it will be prepared to take some flack. "There's a lot of votes at risk," Mr Eslake said. "But what's the point of having political capital, if you're not prepared to spend it?" Treasurer Jim Chalmers appears keen to break from the political orthodoxy in pursuit of major tax reforms. However, this will come at a cost, Mr Eslake said. Australia's last big tax reform - the introduction of the GST - came during a time when the Howard government had maintained a significant surplus that could be drawn down on to ensure everyone was better off. The current government is staring down a decade of deficit, which means some people will have to be worse off. "(But) the government can afford to alienate people who would never vote for it in the first place," Mr Eslake said. He says this is the implicit attitude behind such Labor policies as its proposal to lift taxes on super balances above $3 million from 15 per cent to 30 per cent, which will impact about 0.5 per cent of savers. Dr Chalmers will convene a roundtable later in August that will focus on lifting living standards by improving productivity, building resilience and strengthening the budget. The union has also urged the government to implement a minimum 25 per cent tax rate for individuals who earn more than $1 million and a cap on the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme for big business to ensure companies cannot claim more than $20 million in those credits. But the Business Council of Australia has hit back, calling the proposals "ad hoc tax grabs". "You don't fix Australia's lagging productivity and investment by taxing businesses more and making Australia less competitive," chief executive Bran Black said. Australian workers could be locked out of home ownership unless property concessions are reined in, but any reform would require careful manoeuvring from the government. As the federal government seeks ways to reinvigorate the nation's languishing productivity, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has urged it to reform the tax system and make housing affordable. Tax concessions like negative gearing, which allows investors to claim deductions on losses, and the capital gains tax discount, which halves the amount of tax paid by those who sell assets owned for a year or more, have incentivised property investment and tied up capital that could otherwise be invested more productively, according to the union. "Working people can no longer afford to live near where they work and young people are locked out of the housing market and locked into high rents," ACTU secretary Sally McManus said. "It's just not right and has to change." The union has proposed limiting negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts to a single investment property, though those tax breaks would be grandfathered for five years on properties that already benefit, giving investors time to adjust. Independent economist Saul Eslake, who has spent decades advocating for the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount, said the ACTU's proposal was "good policy". "One of the things about our tax system is it provides enormous incentives for people to invest in residential property - not so much in building more of it but in speculating that its price will go up," he told AAP. But reforms to property tax concessions have historically been political kryptonite for Labor. A previous proposal to limit negative gearing contributed to the party's narrow defeat at the 2019 election, which may not come as a surprise given about one in five taxpayers have at least one investment property and about half of them are negatively geared, Australian Taxation Office statistics have found. While Labor won the May election in a landslide victory, Australian political orthodoxy would suggest the government may not do much with its margin and instead seek to argue for an expansive mandate at the 2028 contest when it will be prepared to take some flack. "There's a lot of votes at risk," Mr Eslake said. "But what's the point of having political capital, if you're not prepared to spend it?" Treasurer Jim Chalmers appears keen to break from the political orthodoxy in pursuit of major tax reforms. However, this will come at a cost, Mr Eslake said. Australia's last big tax reform - the introduction of the GST - came during a time when the Howard government had maintained a significant surplus that could be drawn down on to ensure everyone was better off. The current government is staring down a decade of deficit, which means some people will have to be worse off. "(But) the government can afford to alienate people who would never vote for it in the first place," Mr Eslake said. He says this is the implicit attitude behind such Labor policies as its proposal to lift taxes on super balances above $3 million from 15 per cent to 30 per cent, which will impact about 0.5 per cent of savers. Dr Chalmers will convene a roundtable later in August that will focus on lifting living standards by improving productivity, building resilience and strengthening the budget. The union has also urged the government to implement a minimum 25 per cent tax rate for individuals who earn more than $1 million and a cap on the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme for big business to ensure companies cannot claim more than $20 million in those credits. But the Business Council of Australia has hit back, calling the proposals "ad hoc tax grabs". "You don't fix Australia's lagging productivity and investment by taxing businesses more and making Australia less competitive," chief executive Bran Black said. Australian workers could be locked out of home ownership unless property concessions are reined in, but any reform would require careful manoeuvring from the government. As the federal government seeks ways to reinvigorate the nation's languishing productivity, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has urged it to reform the tax system and make housing affordable. Tax concessions like negative gearing, which allows investors to claim deductions on losses, and the capital gains tax discount, which halves the amount of tax paid by those who sell assets owned for a year or more, have incentivised property investment and tied up capital that could otherwise be invested more productively, according to the union. "Working people can no longer afford to live near where they work and young people are locked out of the housing market and locked into high rents," ACTU secretary Sally McManus said. "It's just not right and has to change." The union has proposed limiting negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts to a single investment property, though those tax breaks would be grandfathered for five years on properties that already benefit, giving investors time to adjust. Independent economist Saul Eslake, who has spent decades advocating for the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount, said the ACTU's proposal was "good policy". "One of the things about our tax system is it provides enormous incentives for people to invest in residential property - not so much in building more of it but in speculating that its price will go up," he told AAP. But reforms to property tax concessions have historically been political kryptonite for Labor. A previous proposal to limit negative gearing contributed to the party's narrow defeat at the 2019 election, which may not come as a surprise given about one in five taxpayers have at least one investment property and about half of them are negatively geared, Australian Taxation Office statistics have found. While Labor won the May election in a landslide victory, Australian political orthodoxy would suggest the government may not do much with its margin and instead seek to argue for an expansive mandate at the 2028 contest when it will be prepared to take some flack. "There's a lot of votes at risk," Mr Eslake said. "But what's the point of having political capital, if you're not prepared to spend it?" Treasurer Jim Chalmers appears keen to break from the political orthodoxy in pursuit of major tax reforms. However, this will come at a cost, Mr Eslake said. Australia's last big tax reform - the introduction of the GST - came during a time when the Howard government had maintained a significant surplus that could be drawn down on to ensure everyone was better off. The current government is staring down a decade of deficit, which means some people will have to be worse off. "(But) the government can afford to alienate people who would never vote for it in the first place," Mr Eslake said. He says this is the implicit attitude behind such Labor policies as its proposal to lift taxes on super balances above $3 million from 15 per cent to 30 per cent, which will impact about 0.5 per cent of savers. Dr Chalmers will convene a roundtable later in August that will focus on lifting living standards by improving productivity, building resilience and strengthening the budget. The union has also urged the government to implement a minimum 25 per cent tax rate for individuals who earn more than $1 million and a cap on the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme for big business to ensure companies cannot claim more than $20 million in those credits. But the Business Council of Australia has hit back, calling the proposals "ad hoc tax grabs". "You don't fix Australia's lagging productivity and investment by taxing businesses more and making Australia less competitive," chief executive Bran Black said. Australian workers could be locked out of home ownership unless property concessions are reined in, but any reform would require careful manoeuvring from the government. As the federal government seeks ways to reinvigorate the nation's languishing productivity, the Australian Council of Trade Unions has urged it to reform the tax system and make housing affordable. Tax concessions like negative gearing, which allows investors to claim deductions on losses, and the capital gains tax discount, which halves the amount of tax paid by those who sell assets owned for a year or more, have incentivised property investment and tied up capital that could otherwise be invested more productively, according to the union. "Working people can no longer afford to live near where they work and young people are locked out of the housing market and locked into high rents," ACTU secretary Sally McManus said. "It's just not right and has to change." The union has proposed limiting negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts to a single investment property, though those tax breaks would be grandfathered for five years on properties that already benefit, giving investors time to adjust. Independent economist Saul Eslake, who has spent decades advocating for the abolition of negative gearing and the capital gains discount, said the ACTU's proposal was "good policy". "One of the things about our tax system is it provides enormous incentives for people to invest in residential property - not so much in building more of it but in speculating that its price will go up," he told AAP. But reforms to property tax concessions have historically been political kryptonite for Labor. A previous proposal to limit negative gearing contributed to the party's narrow defeat at the 2019 election, which may not come as a surprise given about one in five taxpayers have at least one investment property and about half of them are negatively geared, Australian Taxation Office statistics have found. While Labor won the May election in a landslide victory, Australian political orthodoxy would suggest the government may not do much with its margin and instead seek to argue for an expansive mandate at the 2028 contest when it will be prepared to take some flack. "There's a lot of votes at risk," Mr Eslake said. "But what's the point of having political capital, if you're not prepared to spend it?" Treasurer Jim Chalmers appears keen to break from the political orthodoxy in pursuit of major tax reforms. However, this will come at a cost, Mr Eslake said. Australia's last big tax reform - the introduction of the GST - came during a time when the Howard government had maintained a significant surplus that could be drawn down on to ensure everyone was better off. The current government is staring down a decade of deficit, which means some people will have to be worse off. "(But) the government can afford to alienate people who would never vote for it in the first place," Mr Eslake said. He says this is the implicit attitude behind such Labor policies as its proposal to lift taxes on super balances above $3 million from 15 per cent to 30 per cent, which will impact about 0.5 per cent of savers. Dr Chalmers will convene a roundtable later in August that will focus on lifting living standards by improving productivity, building resilience and strengthening the budget. The union has also urged the government to implement a minimum 25 per cent tax rate for individuals who earn more than $1 million and a cap on the Fuel Tax Credit Scheme for big business to ensure companies cannot claim more than $20 million in those credits. But the Business Council of Australia has hit back, calling the proposals "ad hoc tax grabs". "You don't fix Australia's lagging productivity and investment by taxing businesses more and making Australia less competitive," chief executive Bran Black said.
Perth Now
5 hours ago
- Perth Now
PM weighs up Palestinian statehood call
Anthony Albanese is seeking a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as the government weighs up whether it will join international allies to recognise Palestinian statehood at the United Nations General Assembly. The Prime Minister is yet to confirm the move, despite the UK, France, and Canada all indicating they will make such a call. Mr Albanese has sought a phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – something praised by Senior Coalition frontbencher Dan Tehan, who says current Australian-Israel relations have 'clearly been lacking' since the October 7 attacks in relation to communications at a 'prime ministerial level and a senior ministerial level'. 'Any dialogue which will enable both governments to put their case, and my hope is that the Prime Minister will be open to listening to Benjamin Netanyahu, so that he can get an Israeli view of what is happening on the ground and what they're trying to do to bring peace to Gaza,' he told Sky. Anthony Albanese has requested a call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. X Credit: Supplied Earlier, Sussan Ley told the ABC that the Coalition would only support the formal recognition of Palestinian statehood once 'peace' had been achieved, meaning Hamas would need to surrender and release the hostages. 'Everyone wants to see this war end … Everyone wants to say the bloodshed stop. Everyone wants to see critical food aid get to Gazans who desperately need it, and I'm pleased to see that that's happening,' she said. 'But this is critical – the war could end tomorrow if Hamas surrenders and releases the hostages.' The Prime Minister's potential call with Mr Netanyahu comes as Mr Albanese faces growing international pressure to recognising Palestinian statehood, with the UK and Canada joining France this week. This follows global condemnation of Israel for the starvation and the withholding of aid from Gazan civilians, something Mr Netanyahu has rejected and labelled a 'bold-faced lie'. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who Mr Albanese has been in contact with since the announcement, said the UK would support the motion unless Israel 'takes substantive steps to ed the appalling situation in Gaza and agrees to a ceasefire'. Canadian Prime Minister while Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said his position was incumbent on While Australia supports a two-state solution, acknowledging Palestine's statehood could not be 'just a gesture,' but done to forward the peaceful existence of Israel and Palestine. Mr Albanese has said the formal recognition of statehood cannot be 'just a gesture'. NewsWire / Martin Ollman Credit: News Corp Australia Speaking to the ABC on Thursday, he said Australia would only be able to make that statement 'once,' adding that 'once you make that declaration, you lose your capacity to negotiate and to influence outcomes to some extent'. 'We won't be driven by a time frame. What we'll be driven by is when the recognition of Palestine can make a contribution to the creation of two states,' he said. 'We think that arising out of what is a crisis, the world needs to look at the opportunity that there is not just to solve the current crisis, but how do we create security for both the state of Israel and the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians for their own state to be realised.'
