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
Times
an hour ago
- Times
US reneging on Aukus submarine deal ‘would cost UK billions'
Britain would have to spend billions more pounds building its own submarines if the Aukus deal collapses, sources have said. President Trump's administration has thrown into doubt the future of the pact, struck between Britain, the US and Australia to build nuclear-powered attack submarines. The Labour government announced last week that it planned to build up to 12 of the submarines, which will come into service in the late 2030s, as part of the deal agreed in 2021. However, two sources close to Aukus said UK costs would rise by 60 per cent if the pact crumbled and Australia pulled out of the deal too. Producing a dozen submarines could be unrealistic given financial pressures, they warned. 'You can see a route to the point where the UK ends up with half of what it wants at a higher price,' said one of the sources.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Proposed Macquarie University restructure will ‘hollow out' humanities, academics say
Academics have accused Macquarie University of 'hollowing out' the humanities after the institution announced a restructure that would halve some arts faculties and drastically reduce course offerings for some degrees. Under the proposed changes, seen by Guardian Australia, 42 full-time equivalent academic roles in the Faculty of Arts and 33 in the Faculty of Science and Engineering would be cut, making about $15m in net savings. Curriculum changes would be made in 2026 and 2027, with mergers and reductions largely attributed to low enrolment figures. The proposal, released to staff on 3 June, said the prospect of international student caps and 'uncertainty' in domestic student growth meant Australian universities could no longer rely on boosting enrolments to ensure financial sustainability. 'The objective of the changes … is to resize the workforce in areas where current staff profile and capacity is not aligned to student demand.' Staff have less than a month to provide feedback about the cuts. A final decision is expected to be made in early July. A spokesperson for Macquarie said the proposed curriculum changes were designed to ensure education remained 'transformative' for students. 'The needs of employers and students are evolving and universities, including Macquarie, need to adapt to modern demands,' they said. 'While we are preserving traditional humanities subjects such as history, philosophy, and English literature, we are at the same time offering majors and courses that are focused on employability and meeting areas of student interest and demand.' Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email President of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) and academic at Macquarie, Dr Alison Barnes, said she had been receiving 'constant calls' from academics worried about changes at their institutions. More than a dozen universities are undergoing restructuring, including ANU, UTS, Western Sydney University and the University of Wollongong. The NTEU estimated that more than 1,000 roles were on the line, less than five years after more than 17,000 job cuts during the pandemic – or 13% of the workforce. 'Another round of job cuts is extremely damaging to people's wellbeing, they're living with systemic uncertainty,' Barnes said. 'It's also having a corrosive impact on students. They need to be able to study things that they are inherently interested in.' At Macquarie, ancient history and archaeology, creative arts, politics and international relations and the school of sociology would all lose up to, or more than, half of their FTE staff, while media and communications – which jointly operates the 2SER radio station with the University of Technology, Sydney – would be reduced by about one quarter under the proposed changes. Majors would also be discontinued in a string of study areas including politics, gender studies and performing arts, while a number of bachelor degrees would be abolished, including music, ancient history and archeology – which would be incorporated into a new bachelor of history. The number of media majors would also be reduced from six to three. Ten new research positions would be created in science and engineering, and two in education. Barnes said it 'shocked' her that the humanities was being particularly targeted. 'It's this hollowing out of our institutions. You've got people who've worked their entire lives in these disciplines, and then that knowledge is lost, which is why I think these decisions are so incredibly damaging and shortsighted. 'It's a travesty, and it's heartbreaking.' Acting president of the Australian Historical Association (AHA), Prof Kate Fullagar, said the cuts were part of the 'ongoing devaluation' of humanities at Macquarie and most Australian universities. 'What we're most concerned about is the reduction in unit offerings and staff – ancient history has been massively depleted, and that sector was clearly the best in the country,' she said. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'It took Macquarie 40 or 50 years to build up … it's the university's own investment that they're undermining, and it just seems like recklessness. 'Inevitably, what will happen is that with less offerings and less choices for the students, numbers go down, and then you get into this horrible cycle where they cut you further.' In an email sent to Macquarie students on 3 June, the deputy vice-chancellor (academic), Prof Rorden Wilkinson, said students may notice a 'more focused structure' to their course, major or units from 2026. 'The units you choose from will be based on the best education offerings in each faculty,' he wrote. 'Your study choices will be clearer. The curriculum you study will be more purposeful. Your pathway to graduation will be easier.' Associate professor in the department of history and archaeology at Macquarie, Paul McKechnie, who has worked at the university for almost 20 years, said it would be challenging to adequately cover teaching with 'so few staff'. McKechnie said he was 'skeptical' about Macquarie's claims that the cuts were being made because of falling student numbers. A change paper seen by Guardian Australia, which was published by the university and distributed to staff, last year, showed the arts generated $133m in annual profit but cost $48.6m to run. The vice-chancellor of Macquarie, Prof Bruce Dowton, said universities in Western democracies were facing a 'range of external pressures' and Australia was no exception. Macquarie has run a deficit for five of the past six years, including a $4m loss in 2024. It cut its workforce in 2020 and 2021 around the time of the Covid-19 pandemic. 'We understand that changes of this nature can be unsettling, and we do not take them lightly,' Dowton said. 'Our community can be assured that we are proposing these changes because they are needed.' NTEU branch president for Macquarie, and senior lecturer in quantitative sociology, Nicholas Harrigan, said the cuts were a 'disgrace'. 'That is simply stealing from students,' he said. The spokesperson said the proposed changes were the result of 'careful planning and reflection'. They said teaching overall was 'generally financially sustainable' but that wasn't 'uniformly true'. 'Courses and units with low enrolments are generally more likely to be loss-making after all costs are fully allocated,' they said. 'Strategic realignment allows us to focus on areas of sustainable strength, invest in emerging disciplines, and make choices to safeguard our future.'
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Taxing actual rather than unrealised super gains would mean ‘significant' costs for millions of Australians, Treasury says
Treasury says taxing actual instead of unrealised gains would have meant millions of super fund members were hit with 'significant' compliance costs as part of a policy aimed at trimming concessions for just 80,000 of the country's wealthiest savers. Labor's proposal will put an extra 15% tax on earnings generated from super balances over $3m in an effort to make the super system more equitable and sustainable. The Coalition and interest groups have attacked the policy's method of taxing changes in the value of super assets (unrealised gains), rather than on cash profit (realised gains), saying it transgresses tax norms. Nationals senator Matt Canavan vowed earlier this month to 'fight to the death' against the proposed change, arguing that taxing unrealised gains was 'incredibly unfair'. In its impact analysis document released in 2023, Treasury concluded that taxing cash profits 'would be the most accurate method for determining taxable earnings'. However, the trade-off would be imposing an unacceptably high compliance and regulatory burden on the large super funds which manage the super accounts of millions of Australians with smaller benefits, and who would not be affected by the tax change. Super funds currently calculate and report taxable income at the fund level and not at the member level, Treasury noted. As such, taxing cash earnings would 'involve a substantial burden on the superannuation industry to implement as it would involve developing and maintaining a complex new accounting and reporting regime to calculate taxable income at a member level,' the policy document says. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'These significant compliance costs would be borne across all funds and all members, including the 99.5 per cent of account holders who are not impacted by this policy, despite this proposal impacting only approximately 30,000 high balance members with accounts in APRA [Australian Prudential Regulation Authority]-regulated funds.' David Knox, one of the country's leading actuaries and a former senior partner at Mercer, said it was more appropriate to think of the proposed additional levy as a tax on wealth, rather than income. Knox said the approach of taxing unrealised gains was not as radical as some have suggested, saying it was similar to the way council rates (a cash levy) increased with the market value of the land. He also pointed to the fact that pension payments were reduced when a pensioner's home value went up. In both cases, an individual paid in cash – either through higher rates or lower pension payments – for what is a change in notional wealth. The super industry is split into two 'subsystems': Apra-regulated funds – including the big industry and for-profit funds such as AustralianSuper and AMP, respectively – and self-managed super funds. The Apra-regulated funds account for about 94%, or 16m of the 17m Australians with super accounts – but only 76% of the more than $4tn in the super system. There are about 1.1 million people in SMSFs, but this 6% share accounts for 24% of total assets. The Self-Managed Super Fund Association has been among the loudest opponents of the bill. It has highlighted the risk that SMSFs with big holdings in illiquid assets could be forced to sell in order to raise the cash to pay for the notional change in the value of their balances. Treasury's policy document noted that 'some stakeholders have noted that as a result of the changes, there may be a greater focus on investing in income generating assets, such as shares and bonds, as opposed to property and other more illiquid assets'. 'This could represent a positive shift as it would better align with the intention of superannuation to provide income in retirement.' The Treasury documents show that this risk applies to a sliver of those likely to be caught up in the new tax. Fewer than 5% of the estimated 77,400 Australians who will be affected by the changes – or fewer than 4,000 people – have more than 80% of their retirement savings in non-residential retail property, such as farms. Bob Breunig, the director of the ANU's Tax and Transfer Policy Institute, had previously said: 'Running businesses and property portfolios inside super, they shouldn't be doing that, that's not what it's for.'
