Electoral division rankings: 2006 Census (2009 electoral boundaries)

Research Paper no. 18 2009–10

Paul Nelson
Statistics and Mapping Section
28 May 2010

Contents

Introduction
Main features

List of tables

Population

Table 1a: Total population
Table 1b: Electoral divisions ranked by total population
Table 2a: Population density
Table 2b: Electoral divisions ranked by population density
Table 3a: Persons who lived at a different address 5 years ago
Table 3b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons who lived at a different address 5 years ago
Table 4a: Persons aged under 5 years
Table 4b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons aged under 5 years
Table 5a: Persons aged 5 to 14 years
Table 5b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons aged 5 to 14 years
Table 6a: Persons aged 15 to 24 years
Table 6b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons aged 15 to 24 years
Table 7a: Persons aged 25 to 64 years
Table 7b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons aged 25 to 64 years
Table 8a: Persons aged 65 years and over
Table 8b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons aged 65 years and over
Table 9a: Median age
Table 9b: Electoral divisions ranked by median age
Table 10a: Total dependency ratio
Table 10b: Electoral divisions ranked by the total dependency ratio
Table 11a: Elderly dependency ratio
Table 11b: Electoral divisions ranked by the elderly dependency ratio

Religion

Table 12a: Persons of Christian religion
Table 12b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons of Christian religion
Table 13a: Persons of Catholic religion
Table 13b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons of Catholic religion
Table 14a: Persons of Islamic religion
Table 14b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons of Islamic religion
Table 15a: Persons of no religion
Table 15b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons of no religion

Ethnicity

Table 16a: Persons of Indigenous origin
Table 16b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons of Indigenous origin
Table 17a: Persons born overseas
Table 17b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons born overseas
Table 18a: Persons born overseas and resident in Australia since 2000
Table 18b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons born overseas and resident in Australia since 2000
Table 19a: Persons born in non-English speaking countries
Table 19b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons born in non-English speaking countries
Table 20a: Persons born in the United Kingdom or Ireland
Table 20b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons born in the United Kingdom or Ireland
Table 21a: Persons who speak English not well or not at all
Table 21b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons who speak English not well or not at all
Table 22a: Persons speaking a language other than English at home
Table 22b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons speaking a language other than English at home

Families

Table 23a: Couple families with dependent children
Table 23b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of couple families with dependent children
Table 24a: Couple families with no children
Table 24b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of couple families with no children
Table 25a: One parent families with dependent children
Table 25b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of one parent families with dependent children
Table 26a: Lone person households
Table 26b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of lone person households
Table 27a: Persons engaged in unpaid child care
Table 27b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons engaged in unpaid child care

Income

Table 28a: Families with weekly income below $650
Table 28b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of families with weekly income below $650
Table 29a: Families with weekly income $2000 and above
Table 29b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of families with weekly income $2000 and above
Table 30a: Median weekly family income
Table 30b: Electoral divisions ranked by median weekly family income
Table 31a: Individuals with weekly income below $1000
Table 31b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of individuals with weekly income below $1000

Education

Table 32a: Persons attending infant/primary or secondary school
Table 32b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons attending infant/primary or secondary school
Table 33a: Persons attending non-government infant/primary or secondary school
Table 33b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons attending a non-government infant/primary or secondary school
Table 34a: Persons attending a tertiary education institution
Table 34b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons attending a tertiary education institution
Table 35a: Persons whose highest level of schooling completed is Year 10 or below
Table 35b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons whose highest level of schooling completed is Year 10 or below
Table 36a: Persons with university qualifications
Table 36b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons with university qualifications
Table 37a: Households with an internet connection
Table 37b: Electoral divisions ranked by the proportion of households with an internet connection
Table 38a: Households with a broadband internet connection
Table 38b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of households with a boadband internet connection

Dwellings

Table 39a: Occupied private dwellings
Table 39b: Electoral divisions ranked by number of occupied private dwellings
Table 40a: Rented dwellings
Table 40b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of rented dwellings
Table 41a: Fully owned dwellings
Table 41b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of fully owned dwellings
Table 42a: Dwellings being purchased
Table 42b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of dwellings being purchased
Table 43a: Median monthly housing loan repayment
Table 43b: Electoral divisions ranked by median monthly housing loan repayment
Table 44a: Median weekly rent
Table 44b: Electoral divisions ranked by median weekly rent
Table 45a: Flat, unit or apartment dwellings
Table 45b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of flat, unit or apartment dwellings
Table 46a: Persons in non-private dwellings
Table 46b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons in non-private dwellings
Table 47a: Dwellings with two or more motor vehicles
Table 47b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of dwellings with two or more motor vehicles

Labour force

Table 48a: Employed persons
Table 48b: Electoral divisions ranked by employment ratio
Table 49a: Unemployed persons
Table 49b: Electoral divisions ranked by unemployment rate
Table 50a: Unemployed persons aged 15 to 19 years
Table 50b: Electoral divisions ranked by unemployment rate for persons aged 15 to 19 years
Table 51a: Unemployed persons aged 45 years and over
Table 51b: Electoral divisions ranked by unemployment rate for persons aged 45 years and over
Table 52a: Labour force
Table 52b: Electoral divisions ranked by labour force participation rate
Table 53a: Labour force aged 45 years and over
Table 53b: Electoral divisions ranked by labour force participation rate for persons aged 45 years and over
Table 54a: Women in the labour force
Table 54b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of women in the labour force
Table 55a: Persons employed in agriculture
Table 55b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of employed persons in agricultural industries
Table 56a: Persons employed in mining
Table 56b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of employed persons in the mining industry
Table 57a: Persons employed in manufacturing
Table 57b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of employed persons in the manufacturing industry
Table 58a: Persons employed in accommodation and food services
Table 58b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of employed persons in the accommodation and food services industry
Table 59a: Persons employed in professional or managerial occupations
Table 59b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of employed persons in professional or managerial occupations 
Table 60a: Persons using public transport to travel to work 
Table 60b: Electoral divisions ranked by proportion of persons using public transport to travel to work 

Appendices

Appendix 1: Characteristics for states, territories and Australia 
Appendix 2: Geographic characteristics for each electoral division 

 


Executive Summary

This research paper provides an analysis by Commonwealth electoral division of socio-demographic data from the 2006 Census of Population and Housing.  The electoral boundaries used in this paper are the boundaries that will be used in the upcoming federal election expected later this year. These boundaries incorporate the recent redistributions in New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania.

Introduction

This research paper provides an analysis by Commonwealth electoral division of socio-demographic data from the 2006 Census of Population and Housing. The electoral boundaries used in this paper incorporate the recent redistributions that have occurred in New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania. These boundaries will be used at the upcoming federal election expected to be held in 2010.[1]

This paper is an updated version of an earlier paper that was based on the 2006 electoral division boundaries. The 60 separate tables in this research paper cover a broad range of census topics and broadly reflect the items frequently requested from the Parliamentary Library.

Electoral division data used in this paper are derived from 2006 Census Collection District (CCD) data that have been allocated to the 2009 electoral division of best fit and then summed to create the new electoral divisions. The concordance between CCDs and 2009 division is based on Australian Electoral Commission data as at November 2009. The census data at the CCD level are subject to confidentiality adjustments. This means there are small differences in the electoral level data in this paper when compared with the earlier paper because census data for the 2006 electoral divisions were directly available at the electoral division level and were not subject to small area confidentiality adjustments.

The main features section of the paper describes how to interpret the tables and contains an overview of some interesting points from some of the tables.

Data for each characteristic are presented in two separate tables.  The first table lists each electoral division alphabetically and shows the simple value of the characteristic.  The second table ranks each electoral division on the relative value of the characteristic and in most cases the characteristic has been standardised (usually as a percentage of some total measure) to provide a more meaningful measure.  The ranking is in ascending order, i.e. lowest value to highest value. A footnote is included with some tables where it is not obvious how a characteristic has been defined. The political party that holds each division is also shown in each table. For the states/territories where there has been a redistribution, the Coalition (denoted LP/NP) is shown as the political party whereas in the other states/territories the individual party is shown.

Appendix 1 contains the value and relative value of each characteristic for Australia and each state and territory.  This allows an individual electorate to be compared against the Australian or state/territory average. However it should be noted that electorate level data do not sum to the state/territory total because some 2006 census data cannot be coded to a specific electorate of usual residence but can be coded to a state/territory of usual residence.

Appendix 2 contains the demographic classification of each electorate as defined by the Australian Electoral Commission. Each division is classified as being in one of four possible socio-demographic categories:

  • inner metropolitan divisions comprise well established built-up suburbs located in capital cities;
  • outer metropolitan divisions comprise areas of more recent suburban expansion;
  • provincial divisions comprise areas with a majority of enrolments in major provincial cities, or in non-metropolitan urban conglomerates; and
  • rural divisions comprise areas without a majority of enrolments in major provincial cities.

Main features

This section provides an overview of some of the more interesting features of selected tables.

Table 1 – Total population

The seven divisions with the lowest population comprise all the divisions in Tasmania and the Northern Territory.

Tasmania retains five electoral divisions due to the constitutional provision that guarantees a minimum of five seats in the House of Representatives for each ‘Original State’.

The calculation of representation entitlement that last occurred in February 2009 resulted in the Northern Territory having a quota of just over 1.5, resulting in an entitlement of two seats. Consequently the two divisions in the Northern Territory have relatively small populations.

Table 4 – Persons aged under 5 years

Of the 20 divisions with the lowest proportion of persons under 5 years of age, ten are held by the ALP and nine are held by the Coalition; 15 of the 20 are inner metropolitan areas.

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of persons under 5 years of age, 18 are held by the ALP while two are held by the Coalition; 14 of the 20 are outer metropolitan areas.

The division with the highest proportion is Lingiari (8.8 per cent) followed by Greenway (8.2 per cent) and Chifley (8.2 per cent) while the division with the lowest proportion is Sydney (4.1 per cent) followed by Melbourne (4.4 per cent). The Australian average figure is 6.3 per cent.

Table 8 – Persons aged 65 years and over

Of the 20 divisions with the lowest proportion of persons aged 65 years and over, 17 are held by the ALP while three are held by the Coalition; 13 of the 20 are outer metropolitan areas.

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of persons aged 65 years and over, ten are held by the ALP, nine are held by the Coalition while ten of the 20 are rural electorates with another four located in provincial areas.

The division with the highest proportion is Lyne (21.2 per cent) followed by Hindmarsh (20.6 per cent) while the two Northern Territory seats have the lowest proportions—Lingiari (4.4 per cent) and Solomon (5.1 per cent). The Australian average figure is 13.3 per cent.

Table 12 – Persons of Christian religion

Of the ten divisions with the highest proportion of persons of Christian religion, eight are in New South Wales and seven of the ten are rural areas while seven are held by the Coalition.

The three divisions with the highest proportion of persons of Christian religion are the rural divisions of Riverina (80.3 per cent), Parkes (80.3 per cent) and Calare (79.5 per cent).

The divisions with the lowest proportion are Sydney (40.5 per cent), Melbourne Ports (41.3 per cent) and Melbourne (41.9 per cent). Nine of the ten divisions with the lowest proportion are held by the ALP while the seven divisions with the lowest proportion are all located in the Sydney or Melbourne region and six of the seven are inner metropolitan seats. The Australian average is 63.9 per cent.

Table 14 – Persons of Islamic religion

The 20 divisions with the highest proportion of persons of Islamic religion are all ALP held seats in metropolitan areas of Sydney and Melbourne.  Divisions with a very high proportion of overseas born persons also tend to have high proportions of persons of the various non-Christian religions.

The division with the highest proportion of persons of Islamic religion is Blaxland (17.4 per cent) followed by Watson (16.7 per cent) and Calwell (13.3 per cent).

There are 22 divisions that share having the lowest proportion of persons of Islamic religion (0.1 per cent) with 18 of the 22 being in rural areas. The Australian average figure is 1.7 per cent. 

Table 16 – Persons of Indigenous origin

This table covers persons who self identify as being Aboriginal, Torres Strait Islander or both Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander on the census form.

Of the ten divisions with the highest proportion of persons of Indigenous origin, eight are rural while four are held by the ALP, four are held by the Coalition and two are held by Independents. Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of Indigenous persons, only two are in metropolitan areas (Solomon with 10.3 per cent and Franklin with 3.7 per cent).

The division with the highest proportion is Lingiari (43.5 per cent) which has more than twice the concentration of the next highest division (Durack with 16.8 per cent). The Australian average figure is 2.3 per cent. 

Table 17 – Persons born overseas

Of the 30 divisions with the highest proportion of persons born overseas, only four are held by the Coalition. The 50 divisions with the highest proportion are all metropolitan divisions while only two of the 50 divisions with the lowest proportion are metropolitan.

Of the ten divisions with the highest proportion of persons born overseas, eight are in Sydney with the other two in Melbourne.

The division with the highest proportion is Fowler (48.9 per cent) followed by Watson (47.4 per cent) while the division with the lowest proportion is Parkes (4.9 per cent) followed by New England (5.8 per cent). The Australian average figure is 22.2 per cent.

Table 20 – Persons born in the United Kingdom or Ireland

Electorates ranked by the proportion of persons born in the United Kingdom (UK) or Ireland exhibit a very different pattern to the ranking based on the more general measure of the proportion of persons born overseas. 

The three divisions with the lowest proportion of persons born in the UK and Ireland are the Sydney metropolitan divisions of Fowler (1.2 per cent), Watson (1.3 per cent) and Blaxland (1.4 per cent). However, these divisions are ranked in the top five divisions in terms of the highest proportion of persons born overseas. 

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of persons born in the UK or Ireland, 11 are in Western Australia and five are in South Australia. The division with the highest proportion is Moore (21.1 per cent) followed by Brand (17.2 per cent). The Australian average is 5.5 per cent.

Table 23 – Couple families with dependent children

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of couple families with dependent children, 14 are located in outer metropolitan areas and 11 of the top 20 are held by the Coalition.

The divisions with the highest proportion are Mitchell (48.1 per cent), Berowra (47.7 per cent) and Bradfield (46.3 per cent).

The divisions with the lowest proportion are the inner city divisions of Sydney (22.3 per cent) and Melbourne (24.8 per cent). The Australian average is 37.0 per cent.     

Table 26 – Lone person households

Inner metropolitan divisions feature prominently at the higher end of the rankings while outer metropolitan divisions dominate the lower end of the rankings.

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of lone person households, 17 are inner metropolitan areas while 18 of the 20 divisions with the lowest proportion are outer metropolitan divisions.

The division with the highest proportion is Melbourne Ports (37.9 per cent), followed by Wentworth (37.2 per cent) and Sydney (36.4 per cent).

The divisions with the lowest proportion are Mitchell (13.0 per cent), Berowra (13.3 per cent) and McMahon (13.3 per cent). The Australian average is 24.4 per cent.

Table 28 – Families with weekly income below $650

Of the 20 divisions with the highest proportion of families with a weekly income of under $650, 16 are rural divisions.

Of the 20 divisions with the lowest proportion, 14 are inner metropolitan divisions while the other six are outer metropolitan divisions.

The eight divisions with the lowest proportion comprise six divisions around Sydney (all held by the Coalition) and the two divisions of the ACT (held by the ALP).

The division with the highest proportion is Cowper (36.9 per cent), followed by Hinkler (36.7 per cent) and Lyne (35.6 per cent). These three seats were held by the Nationals at the 2007 election although Lyne is now held by an Independent following a 2008 by-election.

The divisions with the lowest proportion are Warringah (9.1 per cent), Wentworth (9.1 per cent) and Bradfield (9.6 per cent). The Australian average figure is 22.1 per cent.

Table 29 – Families with weekly income $2000 and above

Of the 20 divisions that have the highest proportion of families with a weekly income of $2000 and above, 13 are held by the Coalition and the other seven by the ALP while 16 of the 20 are inner metropolitan areas and the other four are outer metropolitan areas. 

Of the 20 divisions with the lowest proportion, ten are held by the Coalition, eight are held by the ALP, and two are held by Independents; while 16 of the 20 are rural divisions.

The four divisions with the highest proportion are located in Sydney. The division with the highest proportion is North Sydney (48.8 per cent), followed by Wentworth (48.3 per cent), Warringah (46.6 per cent) and Bradfield (46.6 per cent).

The division with the lowest proportion is Cowper (7.0 per cent), followed by Lyons (7.2 per cent) and Hinkler (7.4 per cent). The Australian average figure is 19.8 per cent.

Table 40 – Rented dwellings

Of the ten divisions with the lowest proportion of rented dwellings, nine are held by the Coalition while eight of the ten are outer metropolitan divisions and the other two are rural divisions.

The division with the lowest proportion is Aston (13.4 per cent) followed by Berowra (13.5 per cent) and Menzies (13.7 per cent).

Of the ten divisions with the highest proportion of rented dwellings, eight are held by the ALP while seven of the ten highest ranking divisions are inner metropolitan areas.

The division with the highest proportion is Sydney (57.3 per cent) followed by Melbourne (56.7 per cent) and Lingiari (53.0 per cent). The Australian average is 28.1 per cent.

Table 42 – Dwellings being purchased

Of the ten divisions with the highest proportion of dwellings being purchased, six are held by the Coalition and four by the ALP.  Five of the ten are in Victoria and only one is in NSW. Outer metropolitan divisions dominate the higher end of the rankings (highest proportion being purchased) with 17 of the 20 highest proportions. 

Inner metropolitan and rural divisions dominate the other end of the rankings. Of the ten divisions with the lowest proportion of dwellings being purchased, eight are inner metropolitan divisions and seven of the ten divisions are held by the ALP.

The division with the lowest proportion is Melbourne (21.3 per cent), followed by Wentworth (22.1 per cent) and Kingsford Smith (22.5 per cent).

The division with the highest proportion is Holt (55.0 per cent), followed by Cowan (51.4 per cent) and Lalor (50.7 per cent). The Australian average is 34.1 per cent.

Table 49 – Unemployed persons

Of the ten divisions ranked lowest on the basis of the unemployment rate, five are located in inner metropolitan areas of Sydney and three are located in metropolitan areas of Perth. These eight seats are held by the Coalition.

The divisions with the lowest unemployment rate are Mackellar (2.6 per cent), Warringah (2.6 per cent) and Tangney (3.0 per cent).

Of the ten divisions ranked highest on the basis of the unemployment rate, eight are in New South Wales while seven are held by the ALP.

The division with the highest unemployment rate is Fowler (10.6 per cent), followed by Cowper (10.5 per cent) and Lyne (9.4 per cent). The Australian average figure is 5.2 per cent.

Table 50 – Unemployed persons 15 to 19 years     

Of the ten divisions ranked lowest on the basis of the youth unemployment rate, six are in Western Australia. Six of the ten divisions are held by the Coalition and four by the ALP. Of these ten seats, four are in outer metropolitan areas, four are inner metropolitan areas and two are rural areas.

The division with the lowest youth unemployment rate is Cowan (7.3 per cent), followed by Forrest (7.6 per cent) and Moore (7.7 per cent), each of which is in Western Australia.

Of the ten divisions ranked highest on the basis of the youth unemployment rate, nine are in New South Wales and nine are held by the ALP.

The divisions with the highest youth unemployment rate are Melbourne (22.5 per cent), followed by Fowler (21.7 per cent) and Chifley (21.2 per cent). The Australian average figure is 13.1 per cent.


[1].  The election must be held no later than 16 April 2011. See R Lundie, ‘Australian elections timetable’, Background note, Parliamentary Library, Canberra, 2009, viewed 20 May 2010, http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/pubs/BN/2008-09/Aust_elections.pdf.

For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.


Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Add | Email Print