Comments on: Where next for Tasmania?

By: Peterc

Peterc — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:43:18 +0000

Interesting outcome in Tassie. Bartlett has been asked by the Governor to pick up his dummy that he spat out and put it back in and has done so. He remains Premier.

Hodgson has just spat his out in a major hissy fit. I have two words of advice to them both – grow up.

Nick McKim is the only political leader in Tasmania displaying good leadership right now.

By: myriad74

myriad74 — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 11:00:06 +0000

Paul O’Halloran has taken the last seat in Braddon, giving the Greens 5 and the old parties 10 each.

And in other wonderful news, David Llewellyn has lost his seat – so long to the Minister for Threatening Species, he will not be missed.

By: Paul Norton

Paul Norton — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 06:17:23 +0000

Josh #62, the Legislative Council is elected separately and on a different basis, as explained here.

As I write, the preferences are being distributed in Braddon following the elimination of Labor’s Shane Broad. His preferences will get the second Labor member Brenton Best elected. After that, unless the distribution of Best’s surplus allows the Liberal’s Brett Whitely to catch up 600 votes on the Greens’ Paul O’Halloran (which is highly unlikely,Whitely will be eliminated leaving O’Halloran and Liberal Adam Brooks as the final two members elected and a 10/10/5 split in the Lower House.

By: josh

josh — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:06:41 +0000

Tasmania has an upper house? Haven’t seen that mentioned in any of the coverage. Was it part of the election?

By: Ag

Ag — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 22:53:57 +0000

John D, that would be a ministry comprising 11 members, assuming they get 10 in the lower house. They have their current shadow AG, Vanessa Goodwin, in the upper house. That said, that’s a shallow pool in places. One long term solution to this problem is to expand the seats back to 35. In the short term, I’m hoping for some compromise, but the counting of preferences doesn’t begin until next Tuesday, so there’s bound to be some posturing, like Hodgman’s this morning, in the meantime.

By: Peterc

Peterc — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:32:16 +0000

Down & Out @57, this doesn’t rule out a deal between the Liberals and the Greens.

With Labor spitting the dummy and ruling out any negotiations, it simply means that the Liberals don’t have to include giving the Greens ministries as part of any power sharing deal.

For those who think Labor and the Greens are aligned, remember that Senator Kim Carr and his merry men cut the preference deal with Family First the elected fielding rather than the Greens David Risstrom in Victoria. And the pro logging factions (ready CFMEU) in Labor hate the Greens too.

Also, the Greens are not currently threatening any Liberal seats, but they are threatening 3 to 5 Labor low house seats (State and Federal) across Australia, so its game on. Expect more Labor dirt campaigns like the one just done in Tasmania. And the Liberals have used similar tactics too, when it suits them.

By: John D

John D — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 12:28:22 +0000

If the Libs have really ruled out having greens in their ministry the whole ministry has to come from their 10 whole members. Not sure of their quality but there are going to be some very third rate ministers.

It might be better for the state if the premier was someone who was good at building up a consensus and the ministry came from all parties and/or included some outsiders. So perhaps the parliament should elect the premier directly (with the candidates not restricted to party leaders – ideally, what is needed is someone who is acceptable to all parties) with the cabinet elected using Hare Clarke or similar so that all the parties end up with at least some cabinet ministers.

By: Lefty E

Lefty E — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:47:50 +0000

“I believe the incumbent Premier is perfectly entitled to test their government on the floor of Parliament where the situation is unclear.”

Well, leaving aside the fact he’s said he wont – that may be true in theory, but 5 minutes later we’d be reverting to the largest party or largest vote share – unless a deal was cut for majority on confidence issues.

Put it this way: if you don’t have more seats, a larger vote share, or a deal guaranteeing confidence: next!

In this situation it would certainly help a leader if they could advise the governor that as the Tas people didn’t create a majority, or even a larger plurality, the next best thing is their larger vote share.

By: Down and Out of Sài Gòn

Down and Out of Sài Gòn — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:33:04 +0000

From the ABC: Tas Liberals rule out Green ministers. So if there's going to be a coalition, it's going to be either Labor-Green, or Razor's dream combo of Labor-Liberal. Of course, the latter partnership will make the Greens the official party of opposition, as well as seriously pissing off the base of the other two parties. Go for it, I say.

By: Chad C Mulligan

Chad C Mulligan — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 05:15:07 +0000

It’s been said that if one of the new Liberals, Matthew Groom, had walked in to a Greens office offering himself as a candidate they would fallen over themselves to sign him up. Can’t say the same about any of the new Labor MPs.

The CFMEU will never allow any deals with the Greens and the Hodgeman is too weak to stand up to Abetz so I guess it’s back to business as usual for us… http://tinyurl.com/yaresed

See you in the bush.