Labor's no-confidence motion to oust Tasmanian premier Jeremy Rockliff set to succeed
Jeremy Rockliff has been under increasing pressure over his handling of the state's budget, Bass Strait ferry delays, a plan to sell assets and a new stadium.
The Labor opposition on Wednesday moved a no-confidence motion in the Liberal premier, after a day earlier threatening to if it could find the numbers.
The motion will be debated on Wednesday.
The independents Craig Garland and Kristie Johnston and Jacqui Lambie Network MP Andrew Jenner have indicated they will support the motion.
The Greens, who have five MPs, voiced their support for the no-confidence motion on Wednesday morning, meaning it has the numbers to pass.
'The deals the premier struck for minority government after the last election have collapsed,' the Labor leader, Dean Winter, told parliament.
'Three independent members of the crossbench have lost confidence in the premier.
'(This is) due to his financial mismanagement, his appalling handling of the Spirit of Tasmania project, and his plan to privatise Tasmania's most precious assets.'
If a no-confidence motion against Rockliff is successful, convention dictates he resign.
In a social media post, Rockliff said a successful no-confidence motion would force Tasmania back to the polls.
'An election just over 12 months since the last one,' he said.
'That's the last thing Tasmania needs. That's the last thing Tasmanians want.'
The Liberals, who have been in power since 2014, are governing in minority with just 14 of 35 seats in the lower house.
Last week's 2025-26 budget predicted debt would more than double to $10.8bn in four years' time, with deficits each year.
The Greens leader, Rosalie Woodruff, said the premier had brought the no-confidence motion on himself.
'Poll after poll have made it abundantly clear that Tasmanians do not, will not, support a new stadium at Macquarie Point in Hobart,' she said.
The stadium, which is supported by Labor, is a condition of the Tasmania Devils entering the AFL in 2028.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Australians lost $1bn through collapsed investment funds. What happened and how can workers keep their super safe?
Thousands of Australians recently lost more than $1bn in retirement savings after the collapse of funds linked to their superannuation platforms, sparking warnings from the corporate regulator about risky investment schemes. While only a small share of the population has been affected, some investors have seen their entire super balances wiped. Here is how the collapses happened, and what Australian workers can do to avoid a similar situation. Over the past year or so, more than 12,000 Australians have been exposed to three major collapsed or frozen investment schemes: First Guardian, Shield Master Fund and Australian Fiduciaries. The failures have so far led to collective losses of up to $1.2bn. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (Asic) blocked investment in Shield in February 2024 and froze the assets of First Guardian in February 2025 after its managers blocked most investors from accessing their funds in May the previous year. The corporate regulator is also investigating concerns about Australian Fiduciaries including alleged inadequate management of conflicts of interest. First Guardian, which held $505m for about 6,000 investors, described its investments as focused on shares, property, private equity and fixed income, according to federal court-appointed liquidators. The liquidators found the company had put nearly $70m into businesses connected to its directors while more than $240m was invested offshore. One director also allegedly bought a Lamborghini with nearly $550,000 of company money. Investors have been warned they will probably only get a portion of an outstanding $446m back, and not until 2027 at the earliest, after liquidators said they expected to conclude directors breached their duties, the value of investments may have been overstated and funds may not have been properly recorded. The fund's May 2024 balance sheet indicated it had grown that to $525m but more than half of that was in question and investors were not likely to recover their entire investment, receivers for Shield reported in November 2024. They found managers had overstated the value of investments in a real estate fund and nearly $7m had been spent on a former director's personal expenses. Some investments would not be recovered for more than two years, the receivers said in December. In these cases, investors switched to superannuation products that would let them invest in First Guardian or in Shield with financial advisers' help, after being cold-called by salespeople, Asic says. The corporate regulator has put the spotlight on salespeople pressuring customers to invest in specific products. Red flags for consumers include cold calling and high-pressure sales tactics, or offers of prizes, free superannuation health checks, or free consolidation of lost super, according to Asic's deputy chair, Sarah Court. 'These calls don't have the hallmarks of a typical scam. The caller will seemingly have your best interests at heart, and they say they want to help you find a better super product or locate lost super for free,' she says. 'If you are unsure or are feeling pressured, just hang up.' Customers and financial advisers reached the products through superannuation platforms, including one operated by an arm of Macquarie Group, that temporarily chose to offer one or both products, Asic says. Super funds are highly regulated and they are discouraged from investing in schemes that are risky or opaque, according to Xavier O'Halloran, the chief executive of advocacy group Super Consumers Australia. Nearly 15 million among the 18 million accounts in Australia are in MySuper products, default super funds that employers offer workers, which did not invest in the collapsed schemes, he says. While all investment carries risk, MySuper products are diversified, and so not reliant on a single investment or asset class. Some Australians invest in less scrutinised schemes, especially through self-managed super funds. Asic recently warned it had growing concerns that peoplewere being encouraged by salespeople and cold-callers to switch from safe investments into complex and risky schemes. Phil Anderson, the general manager of policy, advocacy and standards at the Financial Advice Association Australia, encourages people to research their investments and check details with their financial advisers if they're worried they might be in an inappropriate investment. 'It is quite evident that there's failings in the system,' Anderson says. 'Don't be rushed into doing something. Challenge the adviser: Why is this the right thing for me? … What track record do these investment options have?' Investors can also spread their superannuation between different investment options within or across funds to limit the chance of a single collapse knocking out their entire savings, Anderson says. Customers can check what assets their super is invested in and how it is performing when superannuation funds release their annual statements for 2024-25 in coming months. People who have been told to swap from a MySuper product can also ask their adviser if their prospective fund has been checked by the regulator, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority. Asic has encouraged those who have lost money in a collapse to make a complaint about their adviser to the sector's independent ombudsman, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. If a customer has lost money but their advice firm has gone into liquidation or insolvency, they may be able to appeal to the sector's compensation scheme of last resort. However, not all of the losses may be recompensed. Last resort compensation payouts are capped at $150,000 per individual and would only cover any clients who accessed the products under the guidance of an adviser, meaning any customer who made the decision without advice would not be eligible. The compensator is expecting claims against advisers linked to the funds but has received no claims for Shield and only one for First Guardian, according to the scheme's chief executive, David Berry. That has made it impossible to determine how many investors will be eligible, how much they might be paid or when they might be compensated, he said. This shortfall has led to calls for increased regulation of the products responsible for the losses, known as managed investment schemes, but also for reform of the compensation scheme of last resort so it covers those who invested without advice. Guardian Australia attempted to reach representatives of the funds Shield, First Guardian and Australian Fiduciaries, including through the firms' liquidators or administrators where applicable. Financial advice firm Interprac and superannuation platform trustees Macquarie, Equity Trustees, Diversa and Netwealth each declined to comment.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
BP abandons green hydrogen project in Australia in shift towards oil and gas
July 24 (Reuters) - BP (BP.L), opens new tab will exit its planned green hydrogen production facility in Australia as the British energy major pivots back to oil and gas, a spokesperson said on Thursday. The company has informed its partners in the Australian Renewable Energy Hub (AREH) that it intends to exit the project as operator and equity holder, the spokesperson told Reuters in an emailed statement. The oil major has slashed planned renewables spending and refocused investments to oil and gas after underperformance in recent months led to criticism from investors. The AREH aims to develop up to 26 gigawatts (GW) of solar and wind capacity to produce as much as 1.6 million tonnes of green hydrogen per year, making it one of the world's largest renewable energy projects. BP currently has a 63.57% stake in the project, according to the company's website. The other joint venture partners include privately owned InterContinental Energy and CWP Global.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Aussie woman is fired from her FIFO job after major mistake that cost bosses more than $200k: Wait till you find out what happened
A hairdresser-turned FIFO worker has been awarded $30,000 in compensation after she was unfairly sacked from a mine site over a costly gold-dumping debacle. Jamie-Lee Corless-Crane was employed as a pit technician at Aurenne's open cut Mt Ida mine site near Menzies, Western Australia, in January. The former hairdresser was involved in a dig site mix-up that cost her employer about $200,000, after 54 ounces of gold were accidentally dumped. The Fair Work Commission ruled in favour of the former hairdresser and DJ, ordering Aurenne Management Services to compensate her for four months' wages. A key role of a pit technician is to guide the excavator operators to ensure the correct location is mined and that the mined product is taken to the correct stockpile. Aurenne claimed Ms Corless-Crane's failure to check a dig site against a map she had been given led to 54 ounces of gold being wasted, with the gold taken to a dump instead of a processing plant. Although the employer accepted more experienced colleagues gave her incorrect paperwork, it contended she failed to exercise 'due diligence' to ensure an excavator operator worked in the correct area. But FWC deputy president Melanie Binet found the inexperienced pit technician was treated harshly and unfairly dismissed. She ordered the company to pay her four months' wages. 'Ms Corless-Crane was not responsible for the loss of 54 ounces of gold,' she said. 'Ore had already been lost before she was called to the mining location. 'The loss of ore occurred due to an error in the markup by people far more qualified than Ms Corless-Crane. 'The opportunity to identify the error earlier was missed by the excavator operators and geology team members operating during daylight hours with far better visibility and more experience than Ms Corless-Crane.' The employee who was ultimately responsible for the loss of the ore was given a written warning only. Ms Binet said the company did not appear to have extended the same level of empathy to Ms Corless-Crane. 'She was a junior, inexperienced employee working in the early hours of the morning on her first night shift of swing, is a single mother, the income earner for herself and her young child, with caring responsibilities for her elderly grandparents,' she said. 'In determining to impose a different disciplinary outcome on the surveyor, Aurenne appear to have failed to give weight to the fact that Ms Corless-Crane has significantly less qualifications and experience in the industry. 'The surveyor, whose error on the evidence tendered, was far more fundamental and was the root cause of the ore loss.' At the time of her dismissal, Ms Corless-Crane's annual salary was $100,000. Since her dismissal, the former hairdresser said she has applied for similar positions but has not been successful. Ms Corless-Crane told the FWC that while she was a trained hairdresser and a DJ she hadn't explored employment in these fields again because she would not earn as much and would lose her home.
