Campaign to Stop Redistribution Described as “Frivolous”

Kylea Tink’s campaign to stop the abolishment of North Sydney has been met with heavy criticism.

Fresh off the Australian Electoral Commission’s (AEC) draft Federal Redistribution announcement, which saw the Division of North Sydney abolished, Kylea Tink held a webinar. Tink’s supporters have accused the AEC of trying to undermine their democratic representations by abolishing seats. This is apparent from the numerous mentions from submissions made using the ‘Kylea Tink Cheat Sheet’ promoted where supporters filled in objections.

As a result, objections have flooded in for the NSW Federal Redistribution. More than 1048 objections have been posted, with 505 objections (or 48%) make a clear reference to what has been described as the ‘Kylea Tink Cheat Sheet’ – claims that the AEC and ABS refused to consider the expected growth of small business and new dwellings in the North Sydney Council region, the quoted projected numbers being brought under scrutiny.

The ’Save North Sydney’ Campaign has come under heavy criticism online, ranging from the diplomatic critique that the objections are ‘fundamentally mistaking’ how federal redistribution decisions are made, to the objections being considered laughable and without argument apart from ‘Kylea Tink is doing a great job’ or that the abolishment of North Sydney is a gerrymandering attempt by the NSW Government.

The popular election analysis blog Tallyroom offered the question ‘what sort of redistribution objection can actually work’ this followed with over 100 comments some describing the ‘Save North Sydney’ Campaign as frivolous. This is not only in terms of the objection points, but also the blatant copy-pasting of talking points throughout almost every objection that was posted.

For her part, Kylea Tink has suggested abolishing Berowra and shifting Bradfield north along the Pacific Highway, with St Ives to be redistributed into Mackellar. This suggestion has been panned as being unworkable, especially given the distance between St Ives and Belrose and the fact that St Ives identifies more with the North Shore than the Northern Beaches.

While Zali Steggall had offered some support in her objection to protect North Sydney, the two most conspicuously absent voices for this project have been Dr Sophie Scamps and Nicolette Boele. Whilst the current Member for Mackellar pretty much got what she wanted from the draft Redistribution, the self-appointed “Shadow Member for Bradfield” continued her strategy of playing Switzerland with the entire process, not engaging in any of the submissions or objections.

With the entire process set to be finalised and published in October 2024, it does place March-April 2025 as the most likely date for the next Federal Election, which will also be the first Federal Election with the new boundaries.