After moving a motion of no-confidence in a Rockliff government, has Labor orchestrated one in itself?

Australia Broadcast Center

3 hours ago

Did Labor just successfully orchestrate a no-confidence motion in itself?
That's probably the question the party should be asking rather than doubling down on its every decision.
Labor leader Dean Winter's much-anticipated motion of no confidence in Premier Jeremy Rockliff and confidence in himself finally came to a head on Tuesday evening — and it spectacularly backfired.
How bad do you have to play it that, when compared with an 11-year-old government that has driven the state into debt, bungled berth infrastructure for the new Spirit of Tasmania ships and toyed with the idea of privatising government businesses, you're the worse option?
Not only did the opposition fail to gain the support of the Greens, who until recently appeared almost desperate to work with Labor, it could not convince a single other member of the crossbench that it was worthy of government.
Not to mention, two of those members of the crossbench voted for the last no-confidence motion in the Liberals. Turns out the alternative was even less appealing.
And yet it seems Labor's reaction is that the crossbench got it wrong. Compromise is not the way. The Liberals have sold out.
Some will say Labor is right, that it needs to stick to its values and its word.
But how good does "right" feel when you have just locked yourself into four more years of opposition (theoretically)?
It seems, though, that Labor is not seeing this as a total loss.
In a statement after the motion failed, Mr Winter wrote "the Liberals' decade-old Labor-Green scare campaign" had been put to bed and it was now the Liberals in bed with the Greens.
"Unlike Jeremy Rockliff, Labor won't abandon workers or make deals behind closed doors," Mr Winter said.
"While Jeremy Rockliff caved in to the Greens and compromised his values for power, I stood by workers and did not.
"Tasmanians have just witnessed the coronation of a Liberal-Green government, and Tasmanian workers will never forget Jeremy Rockliff's betrayal."
Apparently, distancing themselves from the Greens is worth more than not having the power to affect real change.
That statement likely says a lot about why Labor pushed ahead with its doomed, no-confidence motion.
If it could not grab power then at least it could force the Liberals and the Greens to stand side by side.
Because while the crossbenchers made it very clear the vote was not an endorsement of the Liberal government, it was a choice.
By choosing not to support the motion, the crossbench has chosen to stick with the status quo, aka the Liberals.
And Labor is going to make them pay for that every step of the way.
Last year it was the "Liberal-Lambie coalition", this year it's the "coronation of a Liberal-Green government".
Labor will no doubt have fun with that. From the opposition benches.
But while the Liberals might be rejoicing now, nothing about the next four years (if it gets to that) is going to be easy.
It would be a stretch to say Mr Rockliff has the crossbench onside.
If anything, he is going to need to work out how to get them onside.
They are wary and rightfully so.
The Liberals have a track record of promising reviews and then ignoring the findings.
They have shown, at times, to be so far from transparent they are bordering on opaque and not to mention that "floating billboard of failure" Spirit of Tasmania IV, which will be sailing into Devonport at the end of the week just to remind everyone it can't be used until the end of next year.
Plus the Liberals have broken promises before.
They promised taxpayers would spend "$375 million and not a red cent more" on a new AFL stadium, then later said they would use borrowings to cover any shortfall.
More recently, they vowed to protect the greyhound racing and salmon industries but then leveraged them to make policy concessions to the crossbench.
Not that the crossbench is particularly sad about those last two.
But what does it say about Mr Rockliff's word?
Labor would argue that it says a lot. That he can vow to support these industries one week and abandon them the next.
But do you get to keep all your promises if you fail to win a majority?
If 18 is the magic number, the Liberals have three-quarters of a mandate.
Labor has just over half.
It could stand to reason that if you need to lean on others to govern, you're also going to need to give a little ground.
In his speech on the motion, Mr Rockliff said the Liberals' decision to move on certain policy areas was an "acknowledgement that people have spoken".
"And this acknowledgement that we are in minority government, and we must respect the views of others."
He might have won the day, but there's no denying Mr Rockliff has his work cut out for him.
He has to deal with a largely progressive crossbench that would like him to go much further than he has when it comes to his promises on the salmon industry and native forest logging. (They'd end both).
On a side note, given the crossbench has been willing so far to accept what Mr Rockliff is offering, it seems they at least know how to compromise. Though Labor might argue otherwise.
On the other hand, Mr Rockliff has some very conservative voices in his party who are probably hoping that now they have survived the no-confidence motion, the hard asks are over.
Bad news: That work is just beginning.
If it wants to survive, the Liberals will need to continue to negotiate, to be up-front, transparent and, yes, compromise.
On the face of things, the Liberals — at least some of them — seem aware of this.
Members of the crossbench, including the Greens, say Mr Rockliff's language and concessions suggest he has an understanding of how minority parliament needs to work.
And the Liberals have made moves that go beyond policy and speak to the way they are hoping to approach this new parliament.
They have set up a multi-partisan budget panel that had its first meeting last week.
The premier has chosen to forgo any extra portfolios so he can focus on dealing with the crossbench.
And they have employed former Liberal MP Nic Street, who is well-liked across the parliament, as a crossbench liaison officer. A position that was desperately needed last time.
If they stay on this trajectory, maybe, just maybe, things could work out.
After all, they cannot afford to be complacent.
They would be remiss to think the crossbench won't throw them out again.
Sure, Labor's current tack appears to be doubling down, but they could change course.
And Labor is right: Values-wise, they do have far more in common with the crossbench. Look at the legislation they teamed up to pass in the last parliament.
If the Liberals forget who is allowing them to stay in power and Labor discovers the ability to compromise, Tasmania could see another change in government.
For now, though, Labor is busy licking its wounds and maybe considering a new leader.
And there appears to be enough "goodwill" across most of the parliament to try to find a way to make it work for the people they are representing.
So hopefully, now, the drama is over (a solid two months after parliament blew up).
To borrow a Liberal phrase, they can all just "get on with the job".