Seems like a dream now,
It was so long ago
Room burned so bright and
The town went so slow…
Eagles, ‘Whatever happened to Saturday night?’
Look, let’s start with the wilfully naive take. Tasmanian Labor’s announcement on Sunday that Labor would not seek to form a minority government is a betrayal of historical possibility and audacity that could yield real lasting change and make this a historic moment not only in the state but in the Westminster system.
That has been greeted with dismay. Two thirds of Tasmanians voted against the Liberal party, and it’s optional preferential, so there’s no absolute two-party-preferred result to come in. Labor got 10 seats and may go up to 11. The Greens have got four, and may go up to six. The two independents likely to get elected — Kristie Johnston and David O’Byrne — are progressives, and the third possibility, Craig Garland, campaigns against all the Libs have been doing in fishing, forestry and elsewhere.
So a de facto progressive majority is possible (though don’t overcount the above, all are competing against all). And on the general principle of politics — seize power seize power seize power — it would have seemed possible to leave it open. The failure to do so has dismayed people across Tasmanian Labor and the left.
True, Labor leader Rebecca White kept the gate open with her zen victory-concession speech in the beloved tally room on Saturday night (saved, in years past, by various pleas). But that was only so Tasmanian Labor could talk to the ALP administrative committee on Sunday morning, who would have reiterated what was put in place after the Labor-Greens coalition of the 2010s: no ministries given to non-Labor members.
Yes, okay, Tasmanian Labor is in an impossible position. Greens, independents etc are happy as muck with a complex result, obviously. Liberal voters got their plurality. Labor voters yearn for the time when such plurality of majority might have been theirs. Some of them are supporters of major party government more than they are of Labor. Some would walk across the aisle if Labor went into any immediate arrangement with the Greens.
Then there’s the internal divisions. Tasmanian Labor is dominated by the right now, and the right is the SDA right. Key members would much rather see the Liberals hold on for another term than let the Greens get anywhere near governing. They would also be reliant on the vote of David O’Byrne, ejected from the party while leader as part of a bitter struggle and thus a very loose unit, coalition-wise.
There’s two possible plays from there. One is to let the Liberals grind on and on. Their only hope in getting things through that are opposed by the progressive bloc lies with the Jacqui Lambie Experience, and there is absolutely zero knowledge about how that lot will work. There’s no clue which of the 12 of them — three candidates in each seat except Clark — will get up, since the Robson rotation has given each ticket member a third of the vote. The party has no policies, no stated preferences, its “members” are not bound, and Lambie, obviously, is not in the Assembly.
Chaos, ostensibly, which is why Jeremy Rockliff sounded, in his speech on Saturday night, like the English Patient asking for a lethal dose of morphine. That said, Lambie’s federal Senate runs rely on Liberal preferences to get up, so she may well trade support for the Liberals in the Tassie Assembly — under the guise of “common sense” — for preferences in 2025.
Realistically, I can’t see the Lambie team being stable in that way, unless Jacqui has fed them the zombie cucumber. The more likely result is that the Rockliff government will have to fight it vote by vote, and that Labor will have to decide whether to prop it up, let it fall, try and form government from existing members — without taking non-Labor members as ministers — or ask for another election.
The alternative would be for Labor to allow this to go on not so long, and at some point have the leader announce that due to the chaos created by the Rockliff or whomever government, things have changed and stability demands a coalition government of Labor, Green and independents. This is quickly and efficiently done, the Libs slink into opposition, and the coalition parties try to make it work, knowing they have been given a degree of legitimacy by Liberal failure.
The third road, the one not taken? That Rebecca White had gazumped her own party on Saturday night and said we won’t know the full result for weeks, but there will clearly be a larger number of clear progressives than Liberals, and we will try to form a Labor-Green-independent coalition at that time, with all groups taking ministries.
God, imagine the sudden release of energy and possibility from that! Imagine the sense of determination had White been seized with that audacity, and stared down her colleagues and her federal overlords. Imagine the sense of sudden clear purpose, the drafting of an initial minimum program, with a further process of collective policy development to come.
Suddenly Tasmania would be the place it sometimes is, that of possibility and fresh thinking. The progressive coalition would create something of a norm of cooperation and dialogue, and start to push against the other side of Tasmania, the slightly shonky Company aspect. White would be hailed as an audacious hero. Should the numbers not have got there in the final count, she could yield gracefully to the Libs. But had they hit 18, or even 17, she could have gone to the governor with a stable alternative.
Instead, the gray clouds of torpor roll back over. Jeremy Rockcliff doesn’t sound excited or at the beginning of anything, and why should he? Things are much worse in the Assembly, and dire in the partyroom, where the Christian right are stalking him, ready for the entrance of Premier Abetz — a coup which would itself prompt possible resignations of the whip. Politically, it will all be ceaselessly enervating, without providing any real sense of possibility.
One had hoped the first outing of the re-enlarged Hare-Clark might provide for some audacious announcements in the tally room. Instead it will emphasise to many the separation of political and social life. A well-earned boost for the Greens, who are nevertheless a professional outfit. But no new independents, and in the swing seats, the Jacqui Lambie Experience, four lists of ticket-fillers for a party with no policies, and whatever happened to Saturday night?
Should Tasmanian Labor try to form government with the Greens and independents? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
What a gutless response from the labor party. They appear to scared to even try to lead. Scared, or just hopelessly corrupted by their corporate donors…to the point they are not interested in what Tasmanians actually want. I see a leadership change coming.
It is part of the broader national malaise. The ALP is scared. Losing the 2019 election has scarred the ALP for ever. The inability to see that people are sick and tired of the political duopoly is mind boggling. What kind of idiots run the ALP?
The Hawke/Keating/Kelty triumvirate was a result of the Machine Right taking over Labor post 1975 and it has been downhill since.
Rudd came to office in 2007, when even liberal voters had grown disgusted by the Rodent & his Uglies and BECAUSE he was not to any faction and having as deputy the (then well regarded) Gillard as leader of what passed for the remnant Left in the party.
Nobody who paid even momentary attention over the last decade to the current government members would expect them to be anything other than what they are – utterly useless as “Labor” and beholden to the big end of the ethic free zone of corporatism.
As Grundle illustrates step-by-step above, the alternative to Premier EricA & Gilead South would be a joyous, exciting and perhaps even successful last gasp attempt to save what might yet prove to be a viable lifeboat when the northern island burns, desiccates and turns into a poisoned, depleted empty mine.
What a vision. The horror.
No. Winning the 2010 election by default has scarred Labor more. In 2019, all they had to do was renege on a few policies. In 2010, they actually had to negotiate. That is something anathema to the hard heads of Labor.
As time has passed from the last federal election it’s become increasingly obvious that it’s the latter and they’re doing their best to hide it.
This. However, it doesn’t seem to take much to hide the corruption from a great many folks…
Very likely, but a leadership change will have no significance without a change of direction. New boss, same as the old boss, etc.
It’s not gutless. It is realistic. The gutlessness came before. This is just fantasy stuff you are talking. How can you lead a 35 seat Parliament with 10 seats?
Bitterly disappointed with Rebecca’s premature capitulation, and so annoyed! I mean, anyone can see that Labor would have had a really good shot at putting together a minority progressive parliament, so I was really shocked when i read the next day she was conceding. Talk about a gut punch!
Why bother even taking part in the election when, if you get a chance to win, you walk away because it’s not “exactly” how what you wanted?
And most important of all – how’s the state going to fare? Lambie hates the Libs, the Greens hate the Libs, some of the indies hate the Libs, even some of the Libs hate the Libs…sheesh, unless Rockliff has a personality transplant, it’s going to be one long bun fight with no results. And I reckon Labor will have to carry the can for that, as well as the Libs.
So a massive own goal. Gaaah.
The only plus side, is that this is another nail in the coffin of two party dominance. Can’t end soon enough imo.
And while I like Rebecca, she’s done her dash in my eyes. Time to go, for real this time.
“how what you wanted” is quite a novel turn of phrase, but i think i meant “what you wanted”, without the how.
I’m blaming Labor for that typo too. 🙂
I agree with you. These people who want Labor to make a run for minority leadership are serial fantasists.
A couple of months of witnessing “chaos” under Rockliffe may clear the way for a Leftish coalition, and maybe Rebecca White wanted that kind of space to negotiate with the Greens and Independents? Rather than claiming the undeliverable like Rockliffe. Charitably, But if Lambie people opt to support that Libs in the weeks ahead, there never was a chance for a Left coalition without a year or so more “chaos.”
Sounds like Guy’s 2nd option. Sounds feasible
well it’s going to be interesting to watch what unfolds. my bet is that Lambie will forgive Rockliff for the dirty tactics, saying she has received assurances etc….which will then be broken in no time at all. But will she be prepared to be a wrecker if it all gets too much? If Rebecca White comes out of this triumphant somehow….it’ll be the biggest Bradbury move since…er…Steven Bradbury!
Rebecc White quite frankly couldn’t sell hot drinks to the Eskimos. She looks about as genuine as old Bill. Give me a break.
It’s not true there was no chance unless Lambie was being uncharacteristically subtle on ABC RN Breakfast this morning. Taken at face value, she was saying Labor’s surrender had slammed the door on even talking about forming a broad TAS coalition to replace the Liberals, which left Lambie with nobody except the Liberals to negotiate with. And Lambie did not sound pleased about it. In other words, the chance was there until Labor pre-emptively wrecked it.
Which is just more proof that Labor, at state and federal levels, in general prefers to support and work with the Liberals than concede an inch to the Greens or any other progressives.
Lambie is a supreme opportunist whose greatest political talent is finding excuses for turning out to be full of sh*t any time she might have to follow through on one of her relentlessly big-noting self-advertisements.
She relies on the Libs to keep her $200k plus endless taxpayer goodies job. That’s all you need to know about which way her political antenna will point, when the crunch comes. She’s a Coalition lackey and a featherbedding shonk. The rest – all the free-speaking no-nonsense up-by-the-bootstraps Rough Diamond Strine put-on – is pantomime bilge.
Utterly disagree. I would hope she is an opportunist. Her electorate should expect nothing less! She’s also ex ADF and passionate about their issues and good on her. I don’t always agree with her views, but so what, that’s democracy, unlike what we have going on in Canberra today. Libs in a majority was a disaster, labor is turning out little better (how many coal mines did we approve last year Tanya?). Our parliament is overdue for a healthy dose of fresh views and some for a better life altering policies. We won’t get them if we keep voting for the status quo as in either lib or lab. So next year, everyone, for dog sake vote for something different.
Yes. And yet Labor can only manage 10 seats and will struggle to get to 11. If everyone hates the Liberals that much why didn’t they vote Labor? Truth is there is too much diversity of opinion and too much lack of confidence in Labor as a party with viable alternative policy strategy. This leads to more votes leaching to minor parties and independents. Labor is on the nose as much as the Liberals. This situation is unique and you do not give the situation much credit or shed light on it by expressions of anger and disappointment stomping your feet like a little child.
There’s hardly the whiff of anything progressive with Labor anymore. Hasn’t been for decades, just empty promises which are reneged on once they get into power.
Before the election the Liberal Government announced cutting down forests, wrecking harbours, building a stadium instead of hospitals and schools and promoting gambling. This should have provided Labor’s path to victory instead of which they proudly announced “Me too”. What has gone wrong with Labor?? They have become scared of their own shadow and have dropped all their beliefs.
a number of key Labor and union figures in Tas are much closer to the Libs on policy, hence their veto-ing of Labor trying to form a progressive coalition.
$$$ from gambling contributed massively to their electoral obliteration previously and they are too scared to push back. Their union masters want the extractive industries to be free to trash the place. It is like the Labor feds who have been too scared to do anything effective about the housing catastrophe affecting much of their potential support base because of 2019.
A pox on both their houses. Let’s have a majority Green government and get sh1t done.
IKR – be nice if the bloody electorate WTFU
Again, more serial fantasy worthy of Marvel Comics. You want to know why there is not majority Green government have a look at NSW. The Greens have a stubborn anti-airport policy which they have as a bespoke item on what shouldn’t be a bespoke document – their policy platform. They want to close down Sydney Airport yet can’t say where they want to put a new airport and they don’t want it to be Badgerys Creek. This is the only party with a bespoke policy on a policy platform. This is why i NSW they can’t be taken seriously. I know I trot this out every time but I just like reminding people here on this forum about the things which make the NSW Greens unelectable even at State level. In a Greens majority Government, at least in NSW, this would be the first order of business. Chaos and confusion would ensue and if the Greens got into power in NSW it would be like the Kymer Rouge entering Phnom Penh in April 1975 and emptying out the city in hours.
Couldn’t give a fck how terrible the Greens are – the main thing is they aren’t corrupt, which puts them infinitely far in front of the majors.
But of course they’re not going to be a chance tomorrow, or the day after that; it’ll be a long time, in which they’ll get their sht together somewhat, get a bit slicker, and probably get at least a bit corrupt… but it’ll be at least a couple of generations before they can be as corrupt as Labor.
There is a Labor-Green government here in the ACT, which also has Hare-Clark. I’m not fond of them – far too close to developers, far too encouraging of clear-fell to promote urban density – but they do exist. They have implemented some progressive policies. Why not in Tasmania?
I’m not fond of them – far too close to developers, far too encouraging of clear-fell to promote urban density – but they do exist.
I agree entirely. But a look at the LP is scary – although Elizabeth Lee is an improvement on her predecessors (which include Zed so that is a very back-handed compliment). But the ALP-Greens handled Covid very well, they are articulate and we do have some progressive policies.
We are also blessed by having only three parties in the electoral contests, though some independents would be welcome. But no PUPs, PHONs or Nats (though there is BJ at fed level) makes local politics quite straightforward and saves a lot of time and energy.
Lee was a fresh coat of paint over the same old Tony Abbott wannabe rotten wood, but even that is wearing off already.
the difference is that ACT has no ‘natural resources’ eg mining, woodchipping, salmon farm pollution receptacles/bays and estuaries…so there is less for Labor and Greens to fight over….that’s the sticking point in Tassie, principally regional resource extraction/pollution opportunities, which both Libs and Labor are on a unity ticket on. It’s not impossible, but more difficult. As for ACT, the Libs seem to hold out the every present promise of poleaxing govt services and public servant jobs, and people aren’t stupid.