Tasmania faces its second state election in 15 months after Governor Barbara Baker today granted the dissolution and July 19 election requested by Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff after his defeat last week in a parliamentary no-confidence motion. Rockliff made his request yesterday, but was told by Baker she would spend the next few days considering all options. However, it appears she heard enough when Labor leader Dean Winter ruled out trying to form a new government, the announcement of the fresh election being made late this afternoon. I will now set to work on getting a guide to the election place as quick as humanly possible, and will as usual be publishing live results and projections on election night and beyond.
The election held in March last year, which was likewise held early in a vain bid by Rockliff to strengthen his position in parliament, returned 14 Liberal, ten Labor, five Greens, three Jacqui Lambie Network and three independent members, with the Liberals forming a minority government after obtaining guarantees from the JLN members (two of whom quit the party in very short order) and more qualified support from two of the independents. The most contentious issue in Tasmanian politics of recent times has been a plan to contribute $615 million to construction of a stadium presently budgeted at $945 million that will house a new AFL team to enter the competition in 2028. As dearly as Tasmanians would love their own team in the competition, there is a distinctive sense that the state is being fleeced by a rapacious AFL and that the imposition is more than the state can afford. However, the plan has the support of both major parties, prompting a sense within Labor that cross-benchers were stealing their thunder in leading the charge against the government on the issue.
When Treasurer Guy Barnett foreshadowed privatisations in bringing down a budget last week that forecast deficit and debt blowouts, Labor leader Dean Winter saw an opportunity to deal the party back in the game by moving a no confidence motion against Rockliff and challenging the cross-benchers to support it. As well as the state of the budget, Labor was also able to invoke the government’s disastrous failure to provide adequate berthing facilities for new Bass Strait ferries operating out of Devonport, prompting the resignation of Treasurer Michael Ferguson last October. Ignoring Rockliff’s threats of a fresh election, the Greens and two independents lent the motion their support, and it duly carried by a single vote last Thursday.
There were suggestions that Winter aimed to do no more than claim the scalp of Rockliff as Premier, but the Liberals have been resolute in their determination to maintain him as leader, in the teeth of criticism from the business community and conservative Liberal Senator Jonathan Duniam. Matthew Denholm of The Australian reports a view that the party would do better at a prompt election with Rockliff than by “waiting for the next crisis and facing voters with a less popular alternative, such as Michael Ferguson”. For his part, Winter has rejected the notion of Labor taking over without an election in a government that would rely on the support of the Greens.
Tasmania’s Hare-Clark system involves five electoral divisions (the same ones that apply at federal level) electing seven members each (increased from five at the 2024 election), making it difficult for either major party to score a majority. The Greens won five seats last year, balancing a failure in the Braddon division by winning two seats in Clark. Jacqui Lambie says her party will not contest the election, and unless the members have done a better job ingratiating themselves locally than I am crediting them with, their seats in Bass, Braddon and Lyons (the latter being the only one remaining with the party) presumably represent low-hanging fruit for other parties. Presumably better placed are Kristie Johnston (Clark), David O’Byrne (Franklin) and Craig Garland (Braddon), who were elected as independents in 2024.
The most recent poll from the state, conducted by EMRS from May 13 to 17, had Labor in its strongest position since it last held office in 2010, albeit that this amounted to only 31% of the vote, compared with 29.0% last March. The Liberals were down from 36.7% to 29%, with the Greens holding steady on 14% compared with 13.9%. The poll continued to gauge support for the Jacqui Lambie Network, who were on 6%. Labor presumably has high hopes of improving off its low base of two seats in each of the five divisions, particularly after its 9.0% swing in the state at the federal election. However, it faces a major challenge in winning enough seats to meet its own pre-condition of governing without the support of the Greens, and with the Liberals also on the downswing after 11 years in government, there is a strong possibility that the election will fail in its presumed goal of breaking the parliamentary deadlock.
Ven – It would not have been possible for PHON to contest as a party as they are not registered as one in Tasmania.
Mostly Interested at 8.26 am
Look at where Lambie “Notwork” got most votes in 2024: in Devonport and other towns along the NW coast.
Look at the swings to Labor in those booths on 3 May: around 15% after preferences.
Nats in Tassie have few members and little profile. Chances of them beating Labor for ex-Lambie voters are slim.
Dr Doolittle, yeah possibly. Think of my post more as risk management alert.
We’re feeling our way in the dark as the wildness of the situation on the ground is pretty much unprecedented.
I agree with you Dr D that the Nats are unlikely to be a major factor, unless Gavin Pearce runs under their banner in Braddon (but Kevin B is suggesting ATM that he’ll be running as a Liberal).
I would assume that the three current Indies will all retain their seats (wirh Garland perhaps the least likely, but surely more likely than not). Peter George must be a chance in Franklin, although it should be remembered that his vote was artificially boosted in the Federal election because the Green candidate was ineligible. Another independent in Clark is a possibility, which would be bad news for Labor who will be hoping to pick up a seat there.
Labor will also be desperately keen to pick up all three seats held by the former JLN, who all will surely fail to be re-elected. And they’ll be after an additional seat in Franklin, where George will be an impediment.
The magnitude of Labor’s task is illustrated by the fact that they will need to win an additional seat in each electorate to be in a position to govern with the support of three non-Green crossbenchers, if there are still three or more of them.
I don’t really understand Winter’s endgame here: unless he can spectacularly overperform his pre-election polling, he’s going to wind up in a similar position to where he started, and refusing to take office both before and after causing an election wouldn’t be a great look.
I’m also not sure where it ultimately leads – if Labor keeps refusing to govern in minority but can’t win the seats for majority, it basically makes the Liberals the only possible party of government for the longer-term unless some sort of viable non-Green third party forms on the basis of being an alternative government.
Winter doesn’t seem to have much sense at handling even the non-Green crossbench, to boot – it’s hard to see a path to government that doesn’t run through David O’Byrne (if he holds his seat, as he presumably will), so Winter just…not talking to him for years was not wise.
I don’t see the Nats as being a factor – JLN had a fairly wide appeal to voters of both major parties, but running again for the Nats just limits your voters to those on the political right. The ex-JLNers would be better off running as indies.
For the Liberals and for Labor, once burned, twice shy.
I can’t see what the Greens end game is here unless is is a sort of political ‘Waiting for Godot’ does always the bridesmaid and never the bride.
It appears that there are only a few possible outcomes, viz, the following:
(1) Labor forms a government with the Greens. They plunge to Gillard-era levels of polling results within three months and are turfed out within one term, leading to another decade plus of Liberal majority government
(2) The Liberal Party somehow cobble together a minority government, and get a fifth term in office, which may or may not survive a no-confidence motion in the medium term. Another snap election occurs in months.
It is almost impossible for the Labor Party to form government without the Greens. They could try to work out some kind of arrangement where they govern in minority with the Greens having an agreement to abstain on votes or guaranteeing supply, but even then that is likely to go pear-shaped VERY quickly. There is, in summary, no pathway to a sustainable non-conservative government.
It’s not impossible for labor to form government without the Greens.
mundo, have you ever heard Winter speak on this matter up close and personal?
I think Timmy is correct.
I’d say Winter will crawl over broken glass to make a minority government with all the independents before he approaches the Greens. He is betting the farm on getting more seats through the election then opening up negotiations with the crossbench sans the Greens.
mundo: “It’s not impossible for labor to form government without the Greens.”
——————————————————————————–
Correct. As I posted earlier, they could do it with 15 seats and 3 independents. But the challenge there is that they will really struggle to get to 3 seats in Clark, and there isn’t an obvious electorate in which they can win 4 seats to compensate for that, given that they didn’t win more than 2 seats anywhere last time.
Of course, if they can replicate the Federal party’s performance in the recent election across Braddon, Bass and Lyons., then we’re talking a whole new ball game. But can they?
MI: “I’d say Winter will crawl over broken glass to make a minority government with all the independents before he approaches the Greens. ”
—————————————————————————–
I’d replace the word “Winter” in that sentence with “Labor.” Of course Winter would prefer to do deals with independents, but I reckon he’d be more amenable to doing a deal with the Greens than are his masters in the ALP hierarchy (including Albo). I mean, he’s only human and he must be ambitious to become Premier. He conceivably could have been Premier this week. Do you believe the thought would never have crossed his mind, even for an instant?
5 seats each electing 7 members.
You would expect, on average Libs and Labor to win 5 between them, and then 1 Indie and 1 Green per electorate.
Labor and Liberal will win about 25 combined – somewhere between 10 and 15 each unless something extraordinary happens. Which it might, but both major parties have tied themselves to unity ticket on the (apparently) biggest issue in town, the stadium.
I suspect – with no expertise, granted, we will be in the same position after the election. ALP able to take power if they can gain bring themselves to work with Greens or tie down enough Indies.
At some stage they will actually have to look at what the people have voted for……
or form a grand coalition with the Libs! Wouldn’t that just cement the same/same argument!
So, Did Winter expect to succeed on the no confidence motion? And if so, why did he have no game plan thereafter? It’s a bit like the Federal LNP who after demanding an early election for 3 years were surprised when the election was finally called – so surprised they forgot to develop any policies or run a campaign.
I suspect the electorate may have something to say about all this.
(I have deleted the perfect campaign for the Libs which I put in here, ‘cos I’d hate to win the election for the proto Fascist Abetz harborers.)
Green hating Laborites – be careful what you wish for.
Labor-hating Greens need to be careful what they wish for.
Stands to reason, really.
Labor doesn’t hate the Greens. Labor are the annoyed parents watching their hyperactive child come home from doing something stupid that causes trouble for everyone.
Going to be up to the Tasmanian people. Do they want a mish mash of Parties and Independents helping a major for Govt or get wise and vote one in in their own right. People say don’t vote for the major Parties but if you don’t then we see the potential with so many different ideologies contributing to power. Can’t complain about going to elections so often if they keep voting in a mish mash of licorice all-sorts.
There is no mono block Tasmanian people. There’s a multitude of factions like any complex society. And we have an electoral system that allows representation of those factions. So I fully expect that to be the outcome
Tasmanians only political podcasts posts its take today:
https://youtu.be/Ha6Ai-QcEsQ?feature=shared
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2025/06/2025-tasmanian-state-election-guide-bass.html
2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: #Bass
Is it so hard for the cross bench just to provide supply and confidence to one of the majors? Then vote as they do on any other bill shooting down what they don’t like but there’s still a functional government.
Mad House at 8.39 am
No, that is usually what happens. But there has been a recent history of Rockliff losing support from those inclined towards the Tories, going back a couple of years. The stadium proposal has made this worse, because of its budget implications.
The irony with the no confidence vote is that Rockliff was not supported by two members, Jenner and Garland, who are either very unlikely in the first case or far from certain in the second to be re-elected. In other words they both concluded that the government was dysfunctional, and gave that perception more priority than their narrow self-interest.
Joe from Morning Joe pointed out this morning on the June 13 episode how Tasmania’s political shake‑up isn’t just local drama…
full episoed : https://thuyance.com/2025/06/13/morning-joe-6-13-25-6am-latest-mnsbc-news/
Dr D: “The irony with the no confidence vote is that Rockliff was not supported by two members, Jenner and Garland, who are either very unlikely in the first case or far from certain in the second to be re-elected. In other words they both concluded that the government was dysfunctional, and gave that perception more priority than their narrow self-interest.”
——————————————————————————-
You’re braver than I am in attempting to read the minds of any of the 3 members originally elected as members of the JLN. Or Jacqui’s mind for that matter. At least these days: the one time I encountered her a few years back, she seemed to be reasonably sensible – rather more than I had expected – so I don’t really know what’s going on with her these days.
I have heard suggestions that Rockliff and his office staff were a little high-handed towards the former JLN members, but it’s still a dumb move on their part. Apart from presumably preferencing them ahead of the Libs, they can’t expect any other assistance from Labor. And with Jacqui’s support now withdrawn, I would expect the three of them to sink without trace.
thuyance: “Joe from Morning Joe pointed out this morning on the June 13 episode how Tasmania’s political shake‑up isn’t just local drama…
full episoed : https://thuyance.com/2025/06/13/morning-joe-6-13-25-6am-latest-mnsbc-news/
——————————————————————————
What did he say? For me, your link just went to a replay of live streaming, and it was all stuff about Israel vs Iran.
meher baba at 9.54 pm
Yes, deciphering motives is difficult, but done by historians and lawyers.
Lambie has had problems relating to those elected under her banner. Dr Bonham was quoted in the Sat Paper of 31 August saying her inconsistency was behind her network dysfunction.
Having got another 6 year term that, without a very unlikely DD, would see her senate job last until 2031, she has worked out that she no longer needs a pretend party. Just as well, because she could not manage one.
The two non-Lambie MPs, Pentland and Beswick, stuck with Rockliff and Ferguson even while saying that the ferries fiasco is a total disaster. They are incoherent populists. Pentland is campaigning against the stadium while supporting the government that had intended to sell assets to build it.
Jenner is lining up for the Nationals in Lyons. He has political experience as a Tory Mayor in the UK. His chances of re-election are small but his vote may not be as poor as the other two. The overall field in Lyons will be weaker.
Dr Bonham is quoted in an ABC news story this morning saying that most erstwhile Lambie voters will go Labor.
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2025/06/2025-tasmanian-state-election-guide.html 2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: #Braddon #politas
Dr Doolittle at 12pm
I agree that Jenner probably has the best chance of all the former JLNs, but it’s only a very slight chance.
I also agree that it is likely that more JLN votes will go to Labor than to the Libs: if they don’t, Labor isn’t going to get near the minimum of 15 seats that I think they will need to have any chance of forming the next government without the Greens.
As for Pentland and Beswick, I don’t view their behaviour as dimly as you do. They, along with Jenner, committed to vote for supply bills and for the government in no-confidence motions. Pentland and Beswick stuck to that commitment. The ferry procurement was a major stuff-up, but it didn’t happen last week, and the minister responsible resigned. And a commitment by crossbenchers to support a government should be expected to survive the odd controversy. And, while I agree with Pentland about the stadium, I think anybody expecting a Winter-led government to do anything other than go ahead with it at Macqurie Point (perhaps with a few minor tweaks in the proposal to enable Labor to save face) is having themselves on.
@Ghost: So you’re saying that Labor “doesn’t hate the Greens, they’re just disappointed”?
Jokes aside, that’s rather ridiculous if they’re refusing to form a coalition. That’s literally saying they’d rather reject the other party than hold power.
I’m starting to think after talking to a few people in the know that even the independents who voted for the motion of no confidence in the premier didn’t think they’d be going back to an election. They thought he’d follow precedence and resign.
The self interest was for them not to go to the polls as they’d be most at risk of losing their seats. I also know no one has any money left for this campaign. It’s going to be grim.
Not thought through fully.
They’re heeerrrreeeeee.
https://youtu.be/3XUn-EsThcE?feature=shared
Mostly Interested at 6.04 pm
Can you be more specific about who was being referred to: Jenner, Johnston and/or Garland?
Johnston and Garland seem not so afraid of a new election result, the latter because of the lack of other well-known anti-stadium candidates in Braddon, apart from the Greens.
Rockliff’s management of this crisis has not been lacking, in contrast to his prior handling of Lib malcontents.
Initially the Libs seem better prepared for the campaign than Labor, judging by having candidates ready to stand.
Boerwar: You don’t see what the endgame is in the Greens supporting Labor’s no-confidence motion in a Liberal government? Or was that just another bit of barely-literate, incoherent rage about how evil the Greens are for existing (since that’s often what passes for insight here)? If you have to stick to a topic thread, you just stop being able to coherently respond entirely.
‘Rebecca says:
Sunday, June 15, 2025 at 11:54 am
Boerwar: You don’t see what the endgame is in the Greens supporting Labor’s no-confidence motion in a Liberal government? Or was that just another bit of barely-literate, incoherent rage about how evil the Greens are for existing (since that’s often what passes for insight here)? If you have to stick to a topic thread, you just stop being able to coherently respond entirely.’
=====================
I simply applied your ‘concern’ about Labor’s end game to the Greens instead of to Labor. Apparently you did not enjoy looking in the mirror.
I guess you missed the point while you were hissing steam out of your nostrils and ears.
So I will spell it out for you. The Greens have foregone the possibility of forming government in their own right through their mixture of unpopular policies, abject failure at moral suasion, personalities with variable appeal and not forgetting insufferable condescending attitudes such as you display above.
The end point with policies seems generally to fail at delivery until one or both majors decides that it is time to pass a policy. In other words, while it is up to just the Greens to deliver, the policies don’t get up. (I will not bother with anything at the margins in this part of the discussion.) What is the substantive end point for the Greens here? Permanent failure.
This tried and proven Greens policy brew now gets the Greens 12% nationally and 14% in Tasmania. The growth in Greens percentage of the gross vote may be flatlining now that voters feel that they have more real alternatives than the Greens from which to choose once they ditch their majors vote. So. What is the Greens end point with respect to their share of the vote? After 35 years it is starting to look like permanent failure.
Further, the Greens have so far pissed off both the majors that most of the MPs in both of the majors would rather chew their arms off than to form government with the Greens support. That is not a joke. They regard the Greens with almost total distrust and as being utterly toxic. What is the Greens end game vis-a-vis working with the majors? A permanent state of failure enlivened by Greens criticisms of parties that don’t want to have anything at all with the Greens?
What is the end point here on all fronts for the Greens? Permanent failure. Permanent marginalization. Permanent hope that one of the majors will one day put up with them in government. Permanent criticism of anyone or any party that does not meet the lofty standards required to generate failure on all fronts.
Your attempt at making it out as Labor having a problem with an end game is, IMO, projecting the Greens problem with THEIR end game.
Fancy that. Political duds trying to teach their grandmothers to suck eggs!
Rebecca, genuine question.
I can’t figure out anyone’s end game!
Libs – would surely have been better off installing an alternative leader and soldiering on. Why force an election which will most likely favour ‘others’ and not them?
Labor – There is no ‘Dutton’ in this election so it may be wishful thinking that they pick up enough seats – in circumstances where they will refuse to take power if they have to share anything with the greens – Who get 1/8 of the vote.
Why did they move the no-confidence vote now, when they could have supported it a couple of months ago and ‘blamed’ the Greens?
The Greens – What was their game plan?
I have theories of my own but I’d like to hear yours, and those of Meher Baba, Victoria, Mostly Interested, et al, and of course Mr PB himself and Dr Bonham.
Boerwar, I’ve got yours pegged cobber…. Greens …. Evil…. Tourism bad….
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2025/06/2025-tasmanian-state-election-guide_15.html
2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: #Clark
Labor went with the no-confidence motion now firstly because the federal election was out of the way so they couldn’t cause blowback to the federal campaign, secondly because the federal election together with the recent LegCo elections emboldened them concerning how they might do in a state election, and thirdly because if you think a Budget is seriously terrible then letting it pass without bringing down the government when you can is a bit weak.
The Liberals could have put a different leader in but the loyalty to Rockliff among several was such that it would have been very messy unless he unilaterally resigned. It could have even split the party on the floor of parliament as with Labor’s rolling of Doug Lowe in 1981. Even if it didn’t the party would have had to make massive concessions to regain the confidence of enough crossbenchers (especially given David O’Byrne’s arrangement was with Rockliff specifically) and of course once you do that the crossbench will just come back a few months later and say “that was nice, give us more”.
If the Greens had voted against the motion they would have been keeping the Liberals in power which most Greens voters wouldn’t support.
Thank you Dr Bonham!
I’m keen nonetheless to hear the theories of everyone else too.
I wonder if 4 state elections in 7 years and 2 Federal elections in that time may have exhausted the political appetite of the Tasmanian people.
Dr Doolittle, i replied but the internet ate my homework
ABC: Tasmanian Labor consulting on ‘right process’ for Macquarie Point stadium approval
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-06-15/labor-macquarie-point-stadium-enabling-legislation/105419090
“Tasmanian Labor says it is trying to understand what the “right approval process” is for the planned Macquarie Point stadium, suggesting it may walk back its support for the enabling legislation proposed by the government to fast-track it into existence.”
“Leader Dean Winter, who is a strong supporter of the stadium, says Labor has “looked at the legislation” and has been told of “real challenges there”, which he says may hamper the project from continuing.”
THE 4D CHESS!!!
MABWM: I agree with all that Dr B said.
I would add that I think the Greens are genuinely opposed to the stadium. Which, while I don’t like the Greens very much, I totally understand.
Albo has come out this morning and given it the big thumbs up, which doesn’t please me too much.
PS: pretty much any alternative to Rockliff would have had a toxic effect on the Lib’s prospects. Ogilvie was. Perhaps the least worst, but Rockliff is much better.
Bizzcan: so in the same day as Albo has attacked the Libs for not having moved fast enough on the stadium, Winter is insinuating that they might be trying to move too fast?
Must be art of the deal.
@Rebecca – please don’t waste your time feeding the troll. His usual tripe about the Greens is even more irrelevant in the Tasmania context. Everyone else is way more interested in your opinions and questions about the mysterious motivations and endgames of the Boy Wonder leading the Labor party.
As a recent addition to the Tasmanian population, I have to say this is the most politically confused place I have lived. Based on my conversations with people, the outcome of the election could be anything from status quo to a Liberal or Labor outright majority. What is certain though is despite the election outcome, Labor will be too frightened to govern and the Libs will be to pigheaded to change the way they operate.
TW
It is a notable feature of the Greens that when confronted with unpalatable truths about the Greens they attack the poster. Rebecca started with the personal attacks and like a jackal you yip and you yap.
The unpalatable truth about the Greens that you find so difficult to address have been itemized above.
You finish your post with the traditional Greens’ first option when in doubt or not: slag Labor.
You may be wondering why Labor MPs won’t have a bar of governing with the Greens. Re-read your own post and you might just glean some insights as to why that is the case.
‘meher baba says:
Sunday, June 15, 2025 at 7:00 pm
Bizzcan: so in the same day as Albo has attacked the Libs for not having moved fast enough on the stadium, Winter is insinuating that they might be trying to move too fast?
Must be art of the deal.’
================
Unco.
TropicalWonderland @ #93 Sunday, June 15th, 2025 – 7:43 pm
Welcome to Tasmania (which bit?).
The HC system makes it pretty impossible to predict the outcomes so everyone thinks their party is doing better than it really is. The polling goes in blocks of 14.3% but often the last seat a party picks up is so totally random no one can say how things turn out. Garland winning on just 5.1% primaries with just 0.41 of a quota is a classic example. Same electorate Greens 6.6% and 0.53 of a quota, didnt win a seat because their top candidate only polled 3.5% and 0.28 quota.
Its voodoo science.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/tas/2024/results
Thanks @MostlyInterested.
I get to live on the Tasmanian Riviera. In the first 12 months of living here I will get to vote 3 times as a Tasmanian. However, despite being a lover of the arcane details of the mechanics and tactics of elections, I’m still not absolutely clear on the many wonderous implications of the HC system. So I reckon there is probably more accuracy in voodoo predictions than Tassie election outcomes!!
(I confess to having read and reread Kevin Bonham’s posts and am intrigued that going from 25 to 35 seats doesn’t appear to change the substantial outcomes of previous and current elections)
One other curiosity in Tasmanian elections is that every candidate appears to be a relation of a former member of parliament, or one themselves. (The posters for Brian Mitchell have already been put (back) up in Lyons, despite him not contesting his seat in the Federal election 8 weeks ago!!)
BW – thanks for the advice but it’s a bit rich coming from a guy that supports a party that can’t get over 35 percent of voters to put them first.
Rather than repeating the same old tired arguments about us right everyone else wrong, why don’t you spend some time reading about successful coalition governments in other places in the world?
You could learn a thing or two about how sharing power can lead to much better outcomes.
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2025/06/2025-tasmanian-state-election-guide_7.html 2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide #Franklin #politas
TropicalWonderland says:
Sunday, June 15, 2025 at 8:56 pm
BW – thanks for the advice…
===================
You are welcome.
I see no near- or medium- term resolution for Tasmania in terms of stable government. This is, IMO, due to a combination of factors.
One is the HC system.
The second has been the propensity for Tasmanian governments over time to make bad economic decisions. The thing about bad economic decisions is that they tend to create a situation where the ONLY rational economic decisions left are decidedly unpopular with electorates.
The third is a nationally-low education base to begin with and then the additional curse of the cream of the crop mostly heading to the mainland shortly after graduation.
The fourth is that the electorate has suffered from decades of extremism on both the left and the right.
The centre has been hollowed out and consensus building is in practical terms extremely difficult.
The fifth related to the fourth, is a sad lack of anything like a shared vision; ditto shared values.
The sixth is a common Tasmanian resort to small-town personality politics rather than to organizational or policy politics. This might be emotionally satisfying but it hardly leads to consistent or stable policy implementation over time.
The seventh is a natural resource base that is close to being maxed out with respect to most minerals extraction, forestry, wild-caught fisheries and agricultural soils.
The eighth is that the dead hand of NIMBYism seems to be particularly strong in Tasmania.
The 9th is that the median age of Tasmania is around five years older than the rest of Australia.
I could well be wrong about all nine points, of course. If I am right, they generally reinforce each other.
My general view is that Tasmanian Labor would be smart to stay out of government until it cobbles together a vision for Tasmania that is integrated, progressive, far-sighted, visionary, laced with common sense and above all practicable. IMO, the Tasmanian Labor Party does not have that ATM and, truth to tell, I see little prospect of the Tasmanian Labor Party developing that any time soon.
The Liberals don’t have it either.
As for the Greens, my view is that 86% of Tasmanian voters have enough reservations to ensure that it does not really matter all that much what the Greens think despite what the Greens think.
Many years ago, faced with the terrible choice between Rudd and Abbott both of whom I knew to be totally unfit to be PM, I objected to the party systems trying to foist such a choice on us voters. An informal vote seemed to be a valid choice in the circumstances. I can’t recall the de facto Earthian candidate for prime minister at that time. Nuff said.
Were I, doG forbid, forced to vote in Tasmania in the coming elections, I would be seriously contemplating the same sort of option.