Tasmania is headed for an early election for the second term in a row, with Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff announcing yesterday that he will visit the Governor today to seek an election anticipated for March 23. This follows a breakdown in relations with former Liberal MPs John Tucker and Lara Alexander, who reduced the government to minority status when they quit to sit as independents last May. Rockliff has spent the last week attempting to extract from them a commitment only to vote for government-backed motions and amendments in parliament, which would have rendered them independents in name only.
This unexpected development will leave parties scrambling over the coming weeks to get slates of candidate in place for an election that will enlarge parliament from 25 seats to 35. Each of the five electoral divisions (the same ones that apply in the state at federal elections) will now elect seven rather than five members under the state’s Hare-Clark variant of proportional representation, returning to the situation which prevailed before 1998.
The change lowers the quota for election from 16.7% to 12.5%, making life substantially easier for minor parties. A desire to reduce the footprint of the Greens was the principal motivation for the cut in parliamentary numbers in 1998, but the minor party environment has grown more complex since that time. Tucker and Alexander joined a cross bench which, together with two Greens members, included Clark MP Kristie Johnston, who in 2021 became the first independent to win election since 1986.
There is also the question of the Jacqui Lambie Network, which at last report planned to field candidates in every division except Clark, and which was credited with 20% support by a YouGov poll conducted over New Year. However, it must reckon with the disappointing precedent of its attempt to establish itself in state politics in 2018, when promising early polling evaporated during the campaign period and it emerged empty-handed.
I hope to have a preliminary version of an election guide up later today or tomorrow, to which further detail will be added as more candidates are confirmed. On that front, local observer Kevin Bonham is keeping a running tally of all confirmed starters on his site.
Sportsbet has liberals as clear leaders/favourites in this election.
Dr Doolittle: “Didn’t the earlier polling on the stadium show a clear majority of people around Hobart opposed? Why would people in Lyons, Bass and Braddon support such a white elephant?”
Good questions. So why would Albo pledge $240 million of Federal funds towards its construction?
“Note that Dr Bonham said the timing of the election doesn’t suit Rockliff. ”
Where did he say that? I must have missed it. If it’s correct, then that’s a rather strange thing, given that Rockliff was largely in control of the timing for Alexander and Tucker being presented with the ultimatum that led to the calling of the election.
Pied Piper: “Sportsbet has liberals as clear leaders/favourites in this election.”
Well that makes perfect sense to me. It seems to me that a probable result is Labor 11, Greens 2, Liberals 14-15, Kristie Johnston and O’Byrne (who are antagonistic towards each other but would probably be united in being reluctant to do a deal with the Libs) and then 5-6 JLN/other independents who would most likely be prepared to help the Libs to form a minority government.
Should note re Glade-Wright: Tasmanian deputy mayors are popularly elected across the whole council, it’s a fair bit more of a mandate than winning some ward and getting the position voted round the table. But still would have not much previous profile outside Kingborough.
meher baba at 6.36 pm
See the last section of this post:
https://kevinbonham.blogspot.com/2024/02/election-alert-time-as-rockliff-demands.html
Possible election dates were canvassed and only one was really feasible, that being March 23.
Note also under 8 Feb update:
“A possible factor affecting the date choice is that the Tasmanian AFL team name will be announced on March 18.”
In other words, at the start of the last week of the campaign the stadium issue will be central again.
Rockliff set the date vis-a-vis the defectors but he is not fighting the election against them. He is going early because he had to, but is fighting against others, who have had some time to get ready.
+ Re Albo, he is not up for re-election now. The stadium is an “albatross” but it is Rockliff wearing it.
Dr Doolittle: I don’t think I am interpreting Kevin B’s post the same way as you seem to be doing. I think he’s talking about suitable election dates in a March-April window.
My point is that it’s Rockliff who instigated the whole thing in the first place by issuing his ultimatum to the two independents. My interpretation is that he’s done this because he thinks holding an election now will be better for the Libs than holding on until later in the year or early next year. If, as you suggest, he’s now stuck with an election date that doesn’t suit him, then he’s got nobody to blame but himself IMO.
But I doubt he’d agree that the date doesn’t suit him.
meher baba at 7.52 pm
The date suited Rockliff in one sense only, that it is the only feasible date without Parliament resuming. In other words, it suited his situation, namely re wanted to avoid Parliament resuming.
However, he now faces substantial challenges with his campaign, particularly if it becomes centred on the unpopular stadium. His main strength is Labor’s recent dis-organisation and apparent weakness.
Remember that Gutwein went to an early election during Covid (i.e. when if was officially recognised as a threat to public health; it remains so, but the recognition has been dropped – another story) and while he won, his win was nothing like as convincing as other state governments (e.g. Qld Labor).
Gutwein was much more popular than Rockliff is. There may be an issue for some voters, which is: why is there another early election? The only answer is because Rockliff could not control his party. Now the reasons for that may have more to do with others than with him, but he is responsible for it.
Perhaps the most important comment made by Dr Bonham is this:
“On the Labor side there is nothing in pre-campaign polling to suggest the party will get more than three anywhere, and it would seem to be doing well to even get five threes. However, voting intention can change quickly in Tasmania.”
In other words, given that the situation in terms of government stability has changed fairly quickly, can we assume that the older polls before You Gov have any relevance?
Sometimes a government can go to an early election arguing it is the source of stability and win. The conservatives in Greece did that last year. But it looks a much harder task for Rockliff and the Libs.
Look at the dozen campaign issues listed by Dr Bonham before his bus-tracking favourite. Do any of those favour the Libs? Perhaps only one, the so-called “stability” issue. But does it really? How many voters will believe that in an expanded lower house the Libs would be able to guarantee stability?
Some voters might ask this question: given the likelihood of an increased cross-bench, which leader out of Rockliff and White would be the better negotiator? Asking that question does not help Rockliff, given his difficulties in managing people who were previously Lib MPs.
This is my current main guide comment about the timing:
————————–
Unlike the 2021 election which rode on the back of the government’s success with the pandemic, this early election is not at a favourable time for the government, although it does enable it to avoid further immediate scrutiny over the Commission of Inquiry process. (There is a theory that the election was called now for that reason, but if the Premier was going to go to an election without Parliament resuming, there was no other sensible date.)
—————————
The date was pretty much forced if they were going to avoid going back to Parliament but there is no way we’d be having an election now if they were still in majority. Whereas the last one they might well have called it anyway.
I agree the issue mix is not good for the government though there are other issues I will add later, that is an off the top of my head starting list. What is good for the government: federal drag and the problems of Tasmanian Labor.
Dr Bonham at 9.57 pm
Of those two Labor factors helping the Libs, the recent disorder of the state Labor party must be the big one. The federal ALP is a few months past its honeymoon ending date, but not clearly on the nose.
Are there any significant examples of federal drag being a big factor inside two years of a federal government?
Thank you for your extensive seat guides, and the other data. I once, in February 2017, recommended you to a Fremantle Magistrate as a very persuasive source for the imminent end of Barnett’s regime.
Pied Piper on Fri at 6.33 pm
Indulge your complacency well.
See Dr Bonham’s Tassie election guide, where he points out that betting odds on Tassie elections are as reliable as a fickle wind on the Derwent.
My view on the stadium vote impact is a minor net negative for the Libs, a minor net positive for the JLN, and a wash for Labor. And not consistent across the state.
If we’re looking for examples of federal drag early in the federal government’s term, it’s hard to go past the 2014 election in Victoria.
But the circumstances were exceptional, with Tony Abbott proving that being as popular as toxic waste does not disbar a person from becoming Prime Minister.
Queensland 2015 is a very spectacular example of federal drag in the first two years of a federal government, and it was only the first term for the state government too! And if anyone’s thinking yes but that was an unpopular federal government, then WA 2008 is a good example of how it can operate even when the feds are polling well.
“I once, in February 2017, recommended you to a Fremantle Magistrate as a very persuasive source for the imminent end of Barnett’s regime.”
Thanks, that cycle was one of my good ones, I started saying Barnett was probably toast in December 2013 and never shifted from that position, and I reacted with total disbelief at the supposed move to dispense with McGowan as Opposition Leader.
I wish I had as much idea about what will happen in my own state in five weeks time!
Kevin B: Surely Campbell Newman and his insane policies were sufficient explanation for Annnstacia’s 2015 triumph without bringing Abbott into the equation. I have never encountered such hatred for a government among ordinary people than I did in Queensland pubs I visited during that period. It was insane.
Yes, of course, the 2014 Federal budget would have reinforced the sense that the Libs were a bunch of a__eholes. But Campbell was a big show all on his own. As with oysters and salmon, Tassie exports its worst and hangs on to its best.
I was living in Brisbane at the time of the Newman government. Perhaps firing 20,000 state public servants who had swung against Labor in the election that brought him to power wasn’t the most insightful policy he could have implemented.
I was living in Brisbane at the time of the Newman government. Perhaps firing 20,000 state public servants who had swung against Labor in the election that brought him to power wasn’t the most insightful policy he could have implemented.
From PB guide:
“Kristy Johnston’s win in Clark marked the first time an independent or non-Greens minor party candidate had won a seat since 1986.”
That should be 1996 (Bruce Goodluck)
Thanks Kevin — that has been corrected, among other things, in my newly upgraded version:
https://pollbludger.net/tas2024
With such a complicated post-election scenario for government formation looming, if a hung parliament with multiple cross bench units does come to pass, will this be the election that “breaks” Hare-Clark in Tasmania?
If both Liberal and Labor consider their minority government options as unpalatable and can’t see it changing for the forseeable future would they agree to a switch to 35 single member electorates for the House of Assembly?
For example, if the Libs fall short of a majority and their crossbench options are unpalatable, do they go to Labor and offer;
– an immediate redistribution to 35 single member electorates (with +/- 10% tolerance) for the House of Assembly.
– A fresh election when the redistribution is complete in 12-18 months.
In return Labor;
– supports amending the Electoral Act for 35 single member HoA electorates, and
– pledges to not bring down the Liberal Government until the redistribution is complete in 12-18 months.
The rationale offered by both Liberal and Labor is the change back to 35 seats under Hare-Clark has not delivered “stability”.
Is this at all possible?
Isle of Rocks @ #70 Sunday, February 18th, 2024 – 7:59 am
AFAIK nobody has advocated for a 35 seat single member electorate system. That’d be 15,000 voters per seat and member. At the moment it is 108,000 per seat, but still 15,000 per member. The upper house is about 36,0000 voters per member and it already gets hyper local.
The boogey man of a hung parliament is over blown. We’ve had minority government in Tasmania before and we will have it again.
Round up of mercury stories.
https://archive.md/t8aBr
The constant recycle of old candidates rolls on with ex-Lib Sue Hickey throwing her hat in as an independent. I am assuming to funnel votes to the4 Liberals and tap into the rich vein of anti party sentiment because she has zero chance of picking up a seat. +
https://archive.md/eVsi1
Liberal party announces a tax that is not a tax, ie it’s a levy on people using short stay. Absolutely not on the owners of the properties, because its not a tax ok.
https://archive.md/mwOse
The JLN states the obvious and says they will negotiate with anyone to get into power. They cant win majority but they do need to change the narrative that minority government is bad.
I wouldn’t entirely count Hickey out. She nearly won last time as an independent – and probably would have won if she hadn’t had to compete against Kristie Johnston – and on similar numbers would be in good standing given the increase in the size of the House. I suspect she probably missed her moment given that not a lot’s been heard from her since, but she’s still one of the more high-profile centrist independents running.
I do think it’d be interesting to see what would happen in the fallout if a repeat of the 2010 situation happened again and neither Labor or Liberal buckled and both refused to govern with the makeup of the parliament. It’s been a consistent possibility ever since, but the majors have dodged it every time.
Mostly Interested: had the last election been for 35 seats Hickey would definitely have won, I have simulated this (Clark result is 2 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 2 IND). Not sure about now though, the vote split between her and Johnston could be much less even. For Hickey’s preferences to even be distributed she would have to finish 9th or worse, and even if that occurs they’ll spray a lot. Running candidates as preference harvesters just doesn’t work in Hare-Clark at all, indeed the more likeminded candidates run the worse the result because of exhaust.
Re proposals to switch to single-member electorates: we do hear proposals to this effect now and then, usually from some branch or other of the Liberals as a state conference motion. It would have to pass the Legislative Council and on current numbers every independent would vote against it forcing the President to cast a precedent-breaking vote in favour for it to get up. However there are some very consequential LegCo elections for the future of reform of all kinds coming up in May. The major parties will be defending two seats and there is only one IND vacancy which neither major is that likely to win (though Labor might have some show in it).
Kevin Bonham @ #74 Sunday, February 18th, 2024 – 8:06 pm
Thanks Kevin.
Does the average Tasmanian (i.e. not in the political class or bubble) like Hare-Clark?
If any Government tried to get rid of it, would they face majority popular opposition?
New thread.