SHALLOW VICTORY

Labor and the Greens may be pleased with themselves after their victory on transgender law reform but most voters care about bigger issues, says Brad Stansfield

LABOR’S decision to unite with the Greens to push through gender law reforms with the backing of Speaker Sue Hickey this week is a short-lived victory, says Brad Stansfield.

In his column today, the former chief of staff to Premier Will Hodgman argues that most voters will be unimpressed.

“For most Tasmanian voters, their lasting memory of this week will be Labor … siding with the Greens, on an issue they don’t see as a pressing priority,” he writes.

ASK any Tasmanian the most pressing issues that the state faces and you’ll likely receive a combination of answers topped by health, then jobs for young people, education, traffic congestion (in southern Tasmania) and increasingly, concerns about the tensions between economic growth and the “Tasmanian way of life”.

It might surprise Labor and the Greens, but it’s almost guaranteed that prior to the events of the past week, hardly a soul would have raised the issue of gender identity as being an area which required urgent legislative intervention.

After six months, I can well understand why Labor jumped at the chance to finally get Speaker Sue Hickey to cross the floor on the issue of gender identity and birth certificates, and embarrass the Government.

But the political consequences of this decision for them are likely to be much greater than the short-term political gain achieved.

According to Plutarch’s account of the battle of Asculum in 269BC, as he surveyed the damage to his own ranks, victorious Greek King Pyrrhus is alleged to have said: “If we are victorious in one more battle with the Romans, we shall be utterly ruined.”

So arose the term “Pyrrhic victory”, which could well be applied to Labor’s parliamentary victory of the past week.

One of the number one rules of politics is: do not try to govern from Opposition.

The Opposition’s job is to hold the Government to account and inflict as much political damage as possible, via a drip, drip, drip approach which slowly eats away the Government’s support.

It is not the Opposition’s job to pretend to be the Government.

In Opposition you can be all care, no responsibility. When you govern, you bear the responsibility — and often, political pain — for the decisions you make.

It seems Labor has forgotten the lessons of the four disastrous years when they were in coalition with the Greens from 2010-2014.

Lessons so strong that former deputy premier Bryan Green tore up a Greens poster at Labor’s 2014 election campaign launch, and Labor subsequently wrote into their constitution that they would never again go into government with the Greens (well, not without the approval of members).

Yet this week we saw Labor openly not just joining with the Greens, but being led by the nose by them on this issue.

For most Tasmanian voters, their lasting memory of this week will be Labor again siding with the Greens, on an issue that they don’t see as a pressing priority, and that many see as just another example of political correctness.

It is hard to see how the blue-collar former Labor voters that Labor need to win over are going to be won back when they are so openly dancing with the Greens on Green issues.

As for Speaker Hickey, she is smart enough to know that while anger at her decision within Government ranks, the Liberal membership, and Liberal voters in her electorate of Clark (Denison) is white-hot, real-politic means there is little immediate consequence for her.

It is possible a local Liberal Party branch might move a motion against Ms Hickey, but there is little chance the party would act upon it, since to do so would not only put the Hodgman Government into minority, it would imperil the Government’s very survival.

Ms Hickey would also be well aware there is a proud tradition of floor-crossing within the Liberal Party. Unlike the Labor Party, Parliamentary Liberal members are permitted to cross the floor without fear of automatic expulsion. In fact, theoretically, every non-Cabinet member of the PLP is able to cross the floor on any Bill, should they so choose.

Ultimately, Ms Hickey will answer to the Liberal preselectors in three years’ time, and to her broader electorate, where it’s difficult to see any real support for her actions except in the Green enclaves of Fern Tree and Taroona.

Having said that, it would be foolish to suggest that the events of the past week haven’t dealt a hit to the Government.

Disunity always plays badly with the electorate, and the Government’s agenda for the past two weeks of parliament have been badly derailed.

And, this latest attack by Ms Hickey on what she terms “the religious Right” is messy to say the least.

Although it is incorrect to say this is some sort of factional battle — the Liberal Party in Tasmania doesn’t so much have factions as it has personality-based divides.

But, that hit is not as damaging as some have suggested.

Certainly, claims that the Government is somehow now in minority and that it faces some sort of existential crisis are overblown.

Sure, Ms Hickey did cross the floor (11 times), but she has

since publicly indicated she continues to support the Government on issues of confidence and supply.

Equally importantly, Ms Hickey has reiterated her support for the Government’s agenda, and pointedly noted that she had “voted with the Government on every piece of legislation in its plan to deliver on its agenda”.

So as long as the Government sticks to its plan and avoids bringing forward potentially contentious legislation that wasn’t taken to the people, then the Premier can continue to govern with confidence.

As for the amended Bill it- self, the Government needs to carefully consider the way forward. Given the composition of the Legislative Council, if the Bill is simply brought on for debate without a carefully considered plan, the Government risks again losing control.

There are a number of options, including not bringing the Bill on for debate next week while some sort of in- quiry is conducted into the amendments; introducing a new Bill in the Legislative Council which address the original policy intent and meets the December 9 deadline; or trusting the Legislative Council to find a workable way forward through the mire.

There are no easy answers, and whatever course the Government decides, the last thing it wants is the final week of the parliamentary year being dominated by ongoing debate about this issue.

The Liberal Party in Tasmania doesn’t so much have factions as it has personality-based divides