Remarkable times in parliament

IF a poll were taken tomorrow, would Tasmanians vote Sue Hickey in as premier?

This week the Speaker of the House made two extraordinary claims about her own government. First, that it does not care about people experiencing homelessness and, second, that the health minister should consider his position. If anyone can remember this happening in any other Australian parliament, please share it, because I certainly cannot. This situation is even more extraordinary given that the Premier and Liberal Government view themselves as united and strong. The Premier was fond of saying in the lead-up to the last election that Tasmanians needed to vote in a strong and stable government and only his team could deliver that. The louder the Speaker becomes, the less we hear this line from the Premier.

Sue Hickey is a member for Clark and a member of the Liberal team, on paper at least. When Sue Hickey went against the wishes of the Government and took the role of Speaker at the behest of the Opposition parties, the Premier faced an existential crisis — his legitimacy so heavily depended on majority and stability, he needed to pivot quickly to another frame. He needed to provide leadership that creates stability based on consultation not entitlement.

I do not sit in Cabinet, but from the outside it looks shambolic. The Premier’s inability to guide the Speaker’s housing plan through Cabinet borders on unbelievable. If it is true, it is an absence of leadership that would see any other worker lose their job.

The substandard housing and health services that Tasmanians have been coping with are not new. The creation of these problems cannot be laid at the feet of the current government alone.

I worked for the state government during the ALP/ Green power-sharing term. That was almost a decade ago now and even then there were too many Tasmanians without homes, too many on hospital waiting lists and too little funding for the public service. However, the commitment of ALP and Greens ministers to work together for the good of Tasmanians outstripped the current majority government. Despite coming from different parties, there was nowhere near the public infighting between government members. Then-premier Lara Giddings did not have to talk about how well the parties worked together because the public spats were minimal. Everyone at the table respected the fact the public had voted in a minority government and it was their duty to get on with each other and get on with the job. This is all history and while the creation of the problems cannot be attributed solely to the current government, it has been its job for five years to fix them. Unlike the previous government, it has enjoyed much better economic times. The past five years have seen a boom in tourism, an increase in stamp duty from a booming real estate market, increased demand for Tasmanian produce and of course the Mona effect. In layman’s terms, Tassie became cool and it has been cashing in on its newfound status. However, more money can be almost as dangerous as not having enough. It becomes easy to brush over problems and keep pointing to better economic conditions. But if we cannot afford to tackle problems like homelessness when economic times are good, when can we?

If the Government cannot govern itself, how can we have faith it can govern all the institutions and services that we have entrusted to it?

It is likely that by the next election Sue Hickey will be running as an independent. If the poll was held today, she would likely be premier.