BREAKING NEWS Tasmania announces snap election following no-confidence motion in Premier Jeremy Rockliff
Tasmanians will go to the polls on July 19 after the embattled Liberal premier's request for an early election was granted.
Jeremy Rockliff returned to Government House on Wednesday evening to meet with Governor Barbara Baker, six days after he lost the confidence of the parliament.
In a statement after the meeting, Ms Baker confirmed she would dissolve parliament and issue the writ for an election to be held on July 19.
It will be the fourth state election in seven years after early polls were also held in 2021 and 2024.
'Notwithstanding the recent 2024 election, the public interest in avoiding the cost of another election and the prevailing public mood against holding an election, I have granted Premier Rockliff a dissolution,' Ms Baker said in the statement.
'I make this grant because I am satisfied that there is no real possibility that an alternative government can be formed.'
Rockliff has resisted pressure to resign and insisted the backing of his partyroom remains solid, despite reports former senator Eric Abetz and ex-deputy premier Michael Ferguson were willing to be leader.
'I have a commitment from my team to support me as leader and I am not going anywhere,' he said earlier on Wednesday.
Rockliff denied he was 'driven by ego' in not standing aside from leading the minority government.
Liberal MP Jacquie Petrusma didn't directly answer when asked if the party was doing numbers to roll Mr Rockliff.
'The premier is a fantastic leader and he has 100 per cent support of the PLP (parliamentary Liberal Party),' she said.
Ms Baker also met Labor leader Dean Winter on Wednesday afternoon.
Labor, which has just 10 of 35 lower-house seats, had said it would not look to form a minority government with the Greens.
'In that meeting (with the governor) I reiterated my position that Labor will not be doing a deal with the Greens,' Winter said.
Labor, whose no-confidence motion against Rockliff was backed by the Greens and three crossbench independents, had called on the premier to step down.
'We've gotten to this point because of Jeremy Rockliff and his refusal to resign,' Labor MP Shane Broad said.
'I come from a farm and no matter how much you love that old sheep dog, if you can't round up sheep anymore it's time to get a new one.'
Rockliff claimed the no-confidence motion was a deceptive power grab, while Labor says it was because of the Liberals' poor budget and project mismanagement.
Winter, cited growing state debt, a intention to slash public sector jobs and a sell-off of state assets as the reasons for having no confidence in Rockliff's leadership.
The premier took a crack at Winter for failing to 'front up' and hold a press conference on Wednesday.
The Liberals had already appeared to be in fully fledged campaign mode, visiting a hospital to announce a four-year elective surgery plan.
They were returned to power in March 2024, winning 14 seats and cobbling together enough support from the crossbench to govern.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
YouTube should not be exempt from Australia's under-16s social media ban, eSafety commissioner says
YouTube should be included in the ban on under-16s accessing social media, the nation's online safety chief has said as she urges the Albanese government to rethink its decision to carve out the video sharing platform from new rules which apply to apps such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram. The eSafety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, also recommended the government update its under-16s social media ban to specifically address features like stories, streaks and AI chatbots which can disproportionately pose risk to young people. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The under-16s ban will come into effect in December 2025, despite questions over how designated online platforms would verify users' ages, and the government's own age assurance trial reporting last week that current technology is not 'guaranteed to be effective' and face-scanning tools have given incorrect results. Although then communications minister Michelle Rowland initially indicated YouTube would be part of the ban legislated in December 2024, the regulations specifically exempted the Google-owned video site. Guardian Australia revealed YouTube's global chief executive personally lobbied Rowland for an exemption shortly before she announced the carve out. But in new advice to the communications minister, Anika Wells, Inman Grant warned that large online platforms were weakening their policies designed to reduce harm, and said YouTube should be included in the social media ban. 'Given the known risks of harm on Youtube, the similarity of its functionality to other online services, and without sufficient evidence demonstrating that Youtube predominately provides beneficial experiences for children under 16, providing a specific carve out for Youtube appears to be inconsistent with the purpose of the Act,' Inman Grant wrote in advice to Wells. YouTube was exempted from the rules after Rowland said it was among online services that helped young people access 'education and health support they need' – a deal strongly opposed by other leading social platforms, which called it an 'irrational' and 'shortsighted' decision. In her advice to Wells, Inman Grant said an exemption was 'not consistent with the purpose of the [social media minimum age] obligation to reduce the risk of harm'. Wells announced last week she had asked Inman Grant for advice on the rules around the under-16s ban. Inman Grant's advice was released by Wells' office ahead of a speech by the eSafety commissioner to the National Press Club on Tuesday. Inman Grant said exempting any particular service could create issues around enforcement, noting 'rapidly evolving' technology was leading to a 'shifting risk profile' of certain platforms, and that naming any specific platform could quickly become outdated. She said YouTube features – such as infinite scroll, auto-play and algorithmically recommended feeds – which are also present on TikTok and Instagram, were among those meant to be captured by the social media ban. According to advance speech extracts released by the eSafety Commission, Inman Grant will raise concern about YouTube in her press club speech, referencing a survey of 2,600 children aged 10 to 15 conducted by her office. 'Alarmingly, around 7 in 10 kids said they had encountered harmful content, including exposure to misogynistic or hateful material, dangerous online challenges, violent fight videos, and content promoting disordered eating,' Inman Grant will say. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'Children told us that 75% of this harmful content was most recently encountered on social media. YouTube was the most frequently cited platform in our research, with almost 4 in 10 children reporting exposure to harmful content there.' 'This also comes as the New York Times reported earlier this month that YouTube surreptitiously rolled back its content moderation processes to keep more harmful content on its platform, even when the content violates the company's own policies.' Inman Grant will also voice alarm at 'platform after platform winding back their trust and safety teams and weakening policies designed to minimise harm, making these platforms ever-more perilous for our children'. Inman Grant's advice also recommended the government's rules be significantly amended to better address the harms they set out to curb, including editing the wording of the ban as well as specifically listing the design features – such as endless content feeds, notifications, stories and streaks – which can disproportionately affect children. Meta, TikTok and Snapchat were unhappy with the original decision to exempt YouTube from the legislation. 'It is illogical to restrict two platforms while exempting the third,' TikTok's director of public policy in Australia and New Zealand, Ella Woods-Joyce, wrote in a submission to a government consultation on the ban. 'It would be akin to banning the sale of soft drinks to minors but exempting Coca-Cola.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Queensland budget 2025: Crisafulli vows no austerity despite state facing $218bn debt
The Queensland premier, David Crisafulli, has promised no austerity in his first budget, despite the state facing a forecast $218bn in debt. Tuesday's state budget will be the Liberal National party's first since 2014. Then led by premier Campbell Newman, the LNP lost government in 2015 after slashing tens of thousands of public service positions and proposing the sell-off of public assets to balance the books. The 2025-26 budget is expected to run a deficit, despite what the government admits is a relatively poor financial position. Asked how his approach would differ to the last LNP government, Crisafulli said he had chosen not to impose austerity measures. 'My choice is respect for people's money, not austerity. And you can respect people's money, and you can still build things, and you can still grow the services that people need,' he said on Monday. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The premier said the budget would look to resolve 'structural changes' in service delivery 'so structurally in the years to come, this state can grow and grow well'. 'We are fixing the mess we've inherited,' Crisafulli said. The LNP government claims that debt would have peaked under Labor at $218bn in 2027-28. Labor claims it would have hit just $176bn. Last year's budget – Labor's last in government – was packed with cost-of-living relief, much of it funded by borrowing. That included now permanent measures like 50-cent public transport fares, but also a range of 'sugar hit' policies such as a $1,000 energy rebate and cheaper car registration. Queensland's state government is also midway through a $100bn infrastructure program, some of it a result of the 2032 Brisbane Olympics. In January the treasurer, David Janetzki, conceded a fiscal downgrade was virtually guaranteed for the state, 'with debt per capita tracking to be the worst in the country'. He said the fiscal trouble was due to an enormous increase in infrastructure costs – which he blamed on his Labor predecessors – and a decline in coal revenue, expected to drop by more than half. Janetzki said the budget would 'lay the foundation for that long-term budget repair'. 'As a government, we have been very calm and methodical about how we've undertaken the budget process,' Janetzki said on Monday. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion The 2025-26 budget will include $147.9m in funding for extra police equipment. It will also include a $33bn investment in the public health system, the ABC has reported. It comes as the government is locked in enterprise bargaining with the Queensland Nurses and Midwives' Union and is expected to face protests on Tuesday from the Queensland Teachers' Union. Both are furious at pay offers they say break a promise for nation-leading wages. The opposition leader, Steven Miles, has accused the government of halting Labor's hospital expansion program and cancelling projects. 'They promised this magic pudding where they could somehow lower taxes, increase spending but have lower debt. That was always based on a lie … [On Tuesday] we get to see which of their promises they've decided to break,' Miles said. Labor has long accused the government of planning to cut infrastructure projects and cost-of-living measures. On Monday Miles said the government had been worse than Campbell Newman's. S&P Global Ratings confirmed Queensland's AA+ credit rating last September. In February it revised its outlook after a midyear fiscal update by the new government, warning 'debt may rise rapidly'. It predicted that 'several projects may be cancelled, deferred or changed in scope to reduce the state's infrastructure spending over the next three years', which would lower overall infrastructure spending, pointing to a decision to slash a huge hydroelectric project, once billed as the world's largest. 'Queensland's debt levels will increase to fund spending pressures. We forecast total tax-supported debt will rise to more than 150% of operating revenue in fiscal 2027 from 100% in fiscal 2023,' it said. The agency reaffirmed its AA+ long-term credit rating, noting the state's 'exceptional liquidity and wealthy economy'.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Tasmanian leaders struggle with a basic fact: environment laws should protect the environment
Tasmania has a complicated relationship with its natural beauty. Australia's smallest state is marketed for its 'clean and green' environment and produce, and the government runs tourism campaigns with the tagline 'come down for air' that lean heavily on its stunning landscapes, coastlines and wildlife. But the state also has a hard-earned reputation for backing environmentally damaging industries that grab national, and sometimes international, attention: hydroelectric dam expansion, logging of old-growth forests and, most recently, salmon farming. The response to criticism of these industries often includes a reference to more than half of the state being protected in either public or private reserves. It's a good line, but one that doesn't survive much scrutiny. The Tasmanian world heritage wilderness covers about 20% of the state, but development, logging and mining are allowed in some areas counted as protected. Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton's Clear Air column as a free newsletter Where the line is deployed, it is mostly to suggest that nature already gets a pretty good run and environment protection should be reduced. The Liberal state government used it to defend a yet-to-be-delivered policy of opening up nearly 40,000 hectares of protected forests for logging – a step that would reduce the amount of the state that is in protected reserves to less than 50%, and that even some members of the timber industry say makes little sense. On Saturday, the Tasmanian Labor leader, Dean Winter, rolled out the line out as he launched an equally remarkable policy before the state election on 19 July: that the state's industries should not have to answer to Australia's environment laws. To be fair, that's not how he put it. Winter said he would make a case to the federal environment minister, Murray Watt, that industries including salmon farming, energy and mining should be granted a similar exemption from the national Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act that has been granted to native forestry. In his view, it would allow industries to be assessed through a 'streamlined single regulatory framework'. He said it would not mean that laws were bypassed, only that environmental assessments weren't duplicated. In an interview with The Australian, Winter said this approach 'works well' for forestry. He suggested it would have led to faster approvals on some long-running contentious proposals, including a windfarm planned for an environmentally sensitive island used by migratory birds, a tailings dam on the edge of the Tarkine wilderness, and salmon farming in Macquarie harbour. The Liberal government, led by premier Jeremy Rockliff, pumped out a press release saying it also wanted faster approvals, accusing Winter of stealing a policy it released earlier this year. Both parties have a point. It is widely acknowledged that the EPBC Act is not fit for purpose. Decisions on some developments have taken longer than necessary. On the other hand, some developments are problematic and shouldn't be approved quickly, or at all. It says something about the debate that this even needs saying, but: environment laws should protect the environment. A 2021 five-yearly state of the environment report found that wasn't happening – that nature was in poor and deteriorating health, in part because forest and other vegetation has continued to be knocked down without proper oversight. Where do Winter's claims about native forest logging fit into this? Awkwardly, at best. The exemption for logging in the EPBC Act is included in regional forest agreements signed between the Commonwealth and individual states. Small problem: the states have not always lived up to their commitments. In 2006, then Australian Greens leader Bob Brown won a federal court case against Forestry Tasmania over its failure to protect three endangered species. It didn't last - the wording of the agreement was changed to prevent further challenges, and the judgment overturned - but more cases followed. Most notably, a landmark judgment in 2020 found that a Victorian logger had breached the terms of a forestry agreement and should be subject to the EPBC Act. Sign up to Clear Air Australia Adam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisis after newsletter promotion The latter failure was recognised by former consumer watchdog chair Graeme Samuel in a once-a-decade statutory review of the EPBC Act in 2020. He concluded there were 'fundamental shortcomings' in how the system was working and significant change was needed. He called for the introduction of national environmental standards – benchmarks against which major operations, including logging, would be measured – and an accreditation system that included 'strong Commonwealth oversight'. In other words, Samuel found the current system wasn't actually 'working well'. The former federal environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, agreed that a revamp of the EPBC Act should include national environmental standards being applied to regional forest agreements. That revamp is still yet to happen. The work to re-write the laws was delayed in the last parliamentary term, and is now starting again under the new minister. It is too soon to know where Watt will land on the forestry exemption, and a range of other issues. For the moment he is sticking to federal Labor's mantra – that a deal can be reached to satisfy industry and conservation advocates. Quite how that will happen, given the evidence of environmental decline and the extent to which it is disregarded by those who wear being anti-green as a badge of honour, is difficult to imagine. Not impossible. But difficult. Speaking before he met interest groups last week, Watt says he thought environmental standards would be a necessary part of it, but he had an open mind. The Tasmanian debate is playing out in parallel to this, but an air of unreality hangs over what most people agree is an unnecessary early election. Neither major party has explained why they implicitly disagree with Samuel on regional forest agreements. Neither has levelled with the public about the economic decline of the native forestry industry, other than to promise they will support jobs in what Winter calls 'traditional industries'. Meanwhile, nearly 90% of Australian timber comes from plantations. Both parties say they won't deal with the Greens, who go into the election with five out of 35 MPs and a good chance of again being a key balance-of-power player. And a Tasmanian state of the environment report released last year gathers dust. It told a similar story to the national report – that, on a majority of indicators, nature in the state was in poor or declining health. The Liberals accepted only six of the report's 16 recommendations in full and announced no new policies to address the problems identified. Labor didn't respond at all.
