Tasmania could go to an election just 16 months after its last one. What’s going on?
- Written by: Robert Hortle, Deputy Director, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania
Tasmania’s Liberal government and its premier, Jeremy Rockliff, have come under huge pressure since the state budget was handed down last week.
It’s culminated in the Tasmanian House of Assembly voting to pass a motion of no confidence in the premier – but only after the speaker, Labor’s Michelle O'Byrne, cast a tie-breaking vote in favour.
Rockliff has since confirmed[1] he’ll recall parliament to sit early next week and debate some emergency bills, then ask the governor for permission to call an early election.
It’s been a wild few days in Tasmanian politics, with huge amounts of conjecture and confusion. Here’s how it all unfolded.
What is a no confidence motion?
First, we need a short lesson in our system of government, called the Westminster system. The Tasmanian situation right now all started with a motion of no confidence in the premier, Rockliff.
This type of parliamentary motion is used to declare the parliament no longer has confidence in the target of the motion.
No confidence motions can be directed at a specific minister or a government as a whole.
If a no confidence motion in a minister is passed, they usually resign from their ministry and sometimes from parliament as well.
If a no confidence motion in a government is passed, the leader of the government usually recommends one of two options to the governor. They can ask the governor to dissolve parliament and call an election, or they can advise the governor to ask someone else (usually the leader of the opposition) to have a go at forming government.
What is happening in Tasmania?
Strap in, it’s complex.
On May 29, the Liberal government presented the state budget[2]. The outlook is grim, with the state forecast[3] to be over $10 billion in debt by 2029.
To address this, the government proposed big cuts to the public service in the coming years.
On June 2, the leader of the opposition, Labor’s Dean Winter, tabled[4] a motion of no confidence in the premier at the end of his budget reply speech.
“Tabling” a motion means putting it on the agenda for discussion at some point in future. To be debated, it has to be “moved”.
Winter stated[5] he wouldn’t move the motion until he had enough support to guarantee it would pass. The motion focused on three things:
alleged poor financial management
the ongoing Spirit of Tasmania ferry fiasco[6]
and the government’s plan to potentially privatise some state-owned businesses.
Support was fast in coming. By Monday evening, three of the six cross-benchers had said they would vote for the motion, meaning Labor only needed the five Greens MPs to jump onboard.
At a party meeting early on Wednesday morning, the Greens decided they would do just that.
So, instead of debating the budget, Wednesday and Thursday were spent debating the no confidence motion.
There was a lot of confusion in Tasmanian political circles at this point. There is very little formal procedure that describes how no confidence motions work in Tasmania’s parliament.
Instead, what happens is defined by convention, which means there are lots of grey areas. There have only been a few successful no confidence motions in Tasmania’s history (the most recent ones were in 1989[7] and 1982[8]).
So how did it play out?
This time around, there were a few complications.
The motion referred to the premier, not the government. There was speculation[9], therefore, that if the motion passed, the Liberal Party could replace Rockliff as leader, and Labor would then pass the budget.
However, during parliamentary debate, several Liberal MPs argued they saw the motion as indicating lack of confidence in the whole government – not just the premier. Under this view, Rockliff would have to go to the governor, Barbara Baker, and ask her to call an election, or advise her to ask Winter to try to rally the numbers to govern.
Although the convention is that the governor follows the premier’s advice, there is precedent[11] for them making their own decision.
Just to spice things up further, Baker is currently on leave. The decision would need to be made by the lieutenant-governor, Chief Justice Chris Shanahan, who is new to his role – and the state[12].
An election quickly shaped up as the most likely outcome. On Thursday morning, Rockliff announced that if the motion passed, he would ask the governor to dissolve parliament and call an election.
Shortly after that, Winter ruled out[13] governing in coalition – or doing a deal – with the Greens. This made it very unlikely any alternative government would have the numbers to pass legislation through the lower house, leaving the lieutenant-governor with few options.
Late on Thursday, parliament voted on the motion. With the numbers tied at 17-17, the speaker cast her vote with the “ayes” alongside the other nine Labor MPs, all five Greens MPs, independents Craig Garland and Kristie Johnston, and the Jacqui Lambie Network’s last remaining MP, Andrew Jenner.
Following an emotionally charged speech, Rockliff met with the lieutenant-governor. Speaking to the media afterwards, he said[14] he’ll recall parliament on Tuesday with the aim of passing an emergency supply bill to ensure public servants continue to be paid despite the delay in the budget process.
Rockliff said he would then ask Baker – who returns from leave next week – for permission to call an election. It will be interesting to see if she takes his advice or not.
What happens now?
All this means Tasmania could head back to the polls in mid-July, just 16 months after the last state election.
The Liberals will seek to pin the blame for the snap election on Labor and the crossbench, and hope that a grumpy electorate punishes them for this.
They will also try to convince Tasmanians they are the only party that can get the controversial stadium in Hobart is built, thereby delivering the state its long-desired AFL team.
Labor will campaign on the three things it cited in the no confidence motion, while arguing it will also guarantee that Tasmania gets an AFL team.
They’ll also be hoping to ride the wave of the recent strong result for federal Labor at the national election. However, on past evidence, they can’t bank on this.
Labor’s challenge will be differentiating themselves from the current government, because their positions are pretty closely aligned on key issues, including the stadium, salmon farming, and the proposed development assistance panels[16].
The Greens will set out their stall as the only party firmly against the current stadium proposal and in favour of removing salmon farming in Tasmanian waters[17].
For the independents, an early election is bad news. Campaigns are expensive, and without extensive party resources to draw on, some independents may be forced to decide whether they can afford to run again so soon.
All of this does not point to a more stable parliament. The vote share of the two major parties has been steadily decreasing in Tasmania[18]. A new election is not likely to reverse this trend.
In the meantime, Tasmanians are left to wonder when their political leaders will get serious about tackling the state’s complex health, housing, education, sustainability, and productivity challenges.
References
- ^ since confirmed (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ the state budget (www.treasury.tas.gov.au)
- ^ forecast (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ tabled (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ stated (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ ferry fiasco (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ 1989 (www.afr.com)
- ^ 1982 (www.smh.com.au)
- ^ There was speculation (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ Ben McKay/AAP (photos.aap.com.au)
- ^ there is precedent (www.afr.com)
- ^ new to his role – and the state (www.premier.tas.gov.au)
- ^ ruled out (x.com)
- ^ he said (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ Ben McKay/AAP (photos.aap.com.au)
- ^ development assistance panels (www.abc.net.au)
- ^ removing salmon farming in Tasmanian waters (greens.org.au)
- ^ steadily decreasing in Tasmania (www.utas.edu.au)
Authors: Robert Hortle, Deputy Director, Tasmanian Policy Exchange, University of Tasmania
