Dean Winter, Jeremy Rockliff both start talks with crossbenchers as they look to form government
The Liberals are predicted to win at least 14 seats, Labor a maximum of 10. To reach a majority the parties would have needed to win 18 seats.
Both are now hoping to form government with the support of members of the crossbench.
At eight seats short, that is a pretty big task for Labor, but their advantage is that the crossbench will lean heavily progressive.
Addressing the media on Sunday morning, Labor Leader Dean Winter said he would give Liberal Premier Jeremy Rockliff the first opportunity to demonstrate he had the support of the crossbench.
"We need to see, wait and get the final results, but over the course of the next few days, we'll be speaking to crossbenchers and making sure they understand where Labor stands," Mr Winter said.
"But what I … do want to reiterate is that Tasmanian Labor will not do deals with the Greens. I repeated that hundreds of times during the election campaign and I will not change."
Mr Winter said Labor was not going to go back on its principles, but he would collaborate with crossbenchers and treat them with respect.
"Tasmanian Labor believes in jobs — safe, secure, well paid jobs — and we support traditional industries that have been supporting Tasmanian regional communities," he said.
"I've already been speaking to the business community this morning to reassure them that Tasmanian Labor won't be changing from our support for those things, but we will seek to collaborate better with the crossbench where we can find common interests.
Mr Winter said he had spoken to a number of crossbenchers, but had not reached out to Greens leader Rosalie Woodruff. The Greens are expected to hold five seats in the new parliament.
At best there will be six other members of the crossbench who Mr Winter could work with.
When pushed on how he would govern without securing support from the Greens, Mr Winter continued to repeat that he would not do a deal with them, however when asked if he would accept their support with nothing conceded he was less clear.
"The Greens make their own choices," he said.
"They've made their choice to vote no-confidence in Jeremy Rockcliff and that's a matter for them."
Premier Jeremy Rockliff has also been making his own calls to the crossbench.
"I've reached out to potential crossbench members today, including conversations and my view is that the crossbench in the cold, hard light of day will recognise the party being the Liberal Party with the most number of seats are able to form a cabinet," he said on Sunday.
"They recognise that over the course of the last 16 months since that March 2024 election that I have reached across the chamber, I have listened.
"Yes, I've learnt a lot as well, of course, and my resolve to working collaboratively with crossbenchers has only been enhanced and strengthened by my experience over the course of the last 12 months."
Mr Rockliff said while he wanted to work with the crossbench, he would not be compromising any key commitments or principles.
"Not every single member of parliament can have 100 per cent of what they want 100 per cent of the time, and Tasmanians would look very poorly on any individual member of parliament, whether they be in a political party or not, that held the parliament to ransom," he said.
Mr Rockliff said he told crossbenchers he wanted to make this parliament work and that Tasmanians wanted an end to the political games.
He argued crossbenchers should support his party.
"We all want a stable parliament and a stable parliament with a government that has been re-elected with at least the same number of seats is the way forward."
Mr Rockliff did not concede that he failed to manage the crossbench in the last parliament.
He said he would wait until all the votes are counted before going to the Governor to ask for his government to be recommissioned.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
29 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
‘I have had enough': One Nation leader fiercely defends party's protest of Welcome to Country in Senate
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has doubled down on a bold move during the opening of Parliament to protest the Acknowledgement of Country, unloading a fiery response to the suggestion that her party's protest was 'impolite'. The party leader and all three other One Nation senators turned their backs during the ceremony on Tuesday at the opening of parliament. Ms Hanson, who has been vocal about her opposition to the ceremonies, has turned her back to the acknowledgment previously - but the rest of the party joining in made the incident one of the most significant protests of its kind to be staged in the chamber. It also marked a dramatic start for newly elected One Nation Senators Warwick Stacey and Tyron Whittens, turning their backs in their first parliamentary session since being voted in. Speaking from Canberra on Wednesday evening, Ms Hanson was pressed by Sky News host Chris Kenny on the incident, with his question 'why be so impolite?' triggering a strongly worded tirade from the senator. 'I haven't just done it recently, and it wasn't the first time yesterday, I've been doing it for the past three years," Ms Hanson stated. She said the two new One Nation Senators to join her in the upper house shared her opinion, in that they had 'had a gutful' of acknowledgements regularly being done. 'I have had enough, and I do not want a Welcome to Country and to be disenfranchised from my own country that I was born here,' she told Chris Kenny. Kenny said he agreed the ceremony was 'overdone' but pushed back saying he thought it was a good initiative in certain circumstances, such as the opening of Parliament, adding 'it's just polite'. 'Sorry, Chris ... I'm past being polite,' she hit back. The party leader claimed the rituals were 'causing division' and said she was 'not turning my back on the Australian people'. Kenny then pressed further, questioning the Senator about recognising traditional owners of the land at the opening of Parliament, asking her 'how is that not just polite and inclusive and a general recognition of our country's shared history?' 'Chris, this is not about the opening of Parliament. This happens every morning that Parliament is sitting,' she replied. 'I'm turning my back on these policies and ideologies that are dividing our nation and the tokenism that's going on. 'I've been speaking about this for the last 30 years and look at the state of this country. It's in one hell of a bloody mess. I'm not pulling a stunt, I'm sticking to my values and my principles and what I believe in.' Meanwhile, One Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts has claimed the party's constituents around the country have 'had a gutful' of the rituals, which he labelled 'token ceremonies'. 'They've had enough of being welcomed to their own country,' Mr Roberts told 2GB Sydney radio host Ben Fordham on Wednesday morning after being asked why the party turned their backs. 'And secondly, and very importantly, we care for Aboriginals. And what's happening with these token ceremonies is that they're ignoring the real plight of Aboriginals, which is real, and we care about that.' Mr Roberts also suggested One Nation would continue to stage a protest to the acknowledgement 'every day' in the Senate. Welcome to and Acknowledgements of Countries came under the microscope in the run-up to this year's federal election after former Opposition Leader Peter Dutton declared the ceremonies as being 'overdone'. The comment was made during a Sky News debate in April, held just two days after the controversial disruption of the Melbourne Anzac Day dawn service when attendees booed a Welcome to Country.
ABC News
29 minutes ago
- ABC News
Labor seeks to legislate to protect penalty rates for award workers
Workers employed under the award system could not have penalty or overtime rates bargained away under new government legislation to be introduced in the House of Representatives today. The bill is a response to a proposal from the retail employer lobby to allow some low-paid retail managers to opt out of those entitlements in exchange for a 35 per cent pay rise, a matter currently before the Fair Work umpire. The Albanese government took the unusual step of making a submission to Fair Work, arguing that pay loadings in awards were a safety net for low-paid workers and should be protected, and had foreshadowed legislation to override the matter. The bill would prevent Fair Work from varying any award to reduce or substitute either overtime or penalty rates, which Workplace Relations Minister Amanda Rishworth said would protect the "safety net" for Australia's 2.6 million award workers, roughly one in every five of the total number employed. "Hard-working Australians rely on penalty rates and overtime rates to keep their heads above water, which is why this bill is so critical," she said. The award system, which sets out minimum pay and conditions for all workers in certain sectors, has declined in usage over time as the alternative approach of bargaining has grown, but it remains common for staff in retail, hospitality, and the care sector. The proposal to vary the retail award applied to store managers earning between roughly $54,000 and $62,000, and was backed by Coles, Woolworths, Kmart, and Costco. The legislation is likely to draw frustration from industry groups and support from unions and the Greens, although a party spokeswoman told the ABC it had not made a decision yet. Shadow Industrial Relations Minister Tim Wilson said the Coalition had been briefed on the bill, and is not yet guaranteeing his party's support either. "When it comes down to it, we have concerns about making sure it doesn't hurt small businesses. "When the Minister was asked whether it was going to have impact on small business, she gave a very explicit firm commitment that it wouldn't. "But we are not going to know that until we have a clear consultation with small business." The issue also dovetails with ongoing discussions about how workplace contracts should accommodate working-from-home rights. Fair Work is considering that question in the context of the award for clerical and administrative workers, and business groups have argued that those given the right to work flexibly should not be entitled to overtime or weekend pay loading, since they can choose when they want to do their work. Unions have instead suggested the right to work from home should be presumed unless an employer can offer a compelling justification for refusing it. Depending on the details, a bill protecting penalty rates and overtime rates in all circumstances for award workers could prevent Fair Work from adopting the business groups' suggestions. The government has given some indication that it may consider legislating work-from-home rights, but has not suggested it favours any particular model for doing so.
ABC News
29 minutes ago
- ABC News
Albanese wants childcare to be his legacy but the problem is bigger than access
It was during the election campaign, at the ABC's leaders' debate, that Anthony Albanese declared the political achievement he'd most like to be remembered for: "the universal provision of affordable childcare." For parents facing the frustration of trying to find a childcare place and the money to pay for it, elevating this issue to the stuff of prime ministerial legacy-building was no doubt welcome. A sign of Labor's seriousness. Albanese described his vision for a world in which "it is as natural to have your child have access to childcare as it is to have access to a public school". But this was also a limited goal. The focus on improving access is only one part of the problem when it comes to childcare, as the government has discovered. Improving safety and quality standards has now become an even bigger immediate concern. The ABC's Adele Ferguson has been exposing systemic failures in childcare standards for months, but it was the case revealed three weeks ago involving shocking allegations of abuse by a childcare worker in Victoria that finally spurred state and federal governments into urgent action. In the first Question Time of the new parliament yesterday, there was a concerted show of bipartisanship to lift standards. One of the first bills introduced aims to strengthen powers to carry out spot checks and strip funding if centres aren't meeting minimum standards. Further steps will be taken next month when the Commonwealth, states and territories meet to discuss a national register of childcare workers, mandatory child safety training, and the roll-out of CCTV cameras. Details are still to be thrashed out, but there's now widespread acceptance the system is broken, regulation has been too loose, and a range of steps must be taken. Spot checks, funding threats, and greater transparency around the work history of staff will all help. But will it be enough to fix a sector that's evolved (or devolved) into a confusing mess of not-for-profit and stock-exchange-listed operators, regulated by different state and federal bodies, and largely funded by taxpayer-funded subsidies? "They will likely have a positive short-term impact on safety and quality, but they won't address the deeper, systemic problems that got us to this point," says Andrew Hudson, CEO of public policy think tank the Centre for Policy Development, which was chaired by Sam Mostyn until her appointment as governor-general last year. Hudson gives the government credit for its efforts to guarantee families three days of subsidised care, improve the pay of childcare workers, and provide $1 billion to expand services where they're needed. But ultimately, he says, the government must "stop treating early learning as a market — and start building it as a universal public service". That means "directly funding providers" rather than relying on subsidies to parents that "inflate costs without improving outcomes". It means "stepping in to establish public or not-for-profit options in communities where access is limited". The idea is not to completely ban on private operators. Rather, it's about the government playing a much more direct role in funding low-fee, high-quality providers. But the think tank isn't the only one identifying the profit motive as a problem in childcare. The government's own newly appointed Minister for Early Education Jess Walsh agrees, at least in part. "There are some repeat offenders who continue to put profit ahead of child safety," the minister said yesterday. Indeed, Walsh has repeatedly made this point since taking the portfolio. She is acknowledging the profit motive is, in some cases, putting child safety at risk. Education Minister Jason Clare, who's responsible for childcare at the cabinet level, says "overwhelmingly higher levels" of quality are found in the not-for-profit sector. But he's not yet flagged any move to push profit makers out of the industry. More than 90 per cent of the centres opened over the past decade are run by providers trying to make a profit, chasing taxpayer funds now worth $16 billion every year. This is what makes the childcare sector nothing like the public school system. The prime minister wants improving access to childcare to be his legacy. Andrew Hudson from the Centre for Policy Development reckons he could be far more ambitious. "This is the moment to transform early learning from a patchy, profit-driven market into a universal system — one that delivers affordable, high-quality care for every child, in every community". David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iview.
