Elise Archer Resignation And Recount

Recounts (Nov 13)

I somehow didn't update at the time with the news that Simon Behrakis had comfortably won the Archer recount (defeating Coats 55.2-44.7).  Behrakis resigned his council seat immediately, which has been won by Coats in a very lopsided countback.  Coats polled nearly 30% of recount primaries to Briscoe's 12.6% and went on to win with an absolute majority against three remaining opponents; at this stage Coats led Briscoe by just over 500 votes.  

Archer Resigns (Oct 4)

As you were ... after the Premier issued a 9 am Monday deadline for Elise Archer to make a decision the news has come out that Archer is quitting after all - I expect this means at least a week of Parliament will be prorogued unless the government is past caring whether it falls.  A number of Labor predictions that the Parliament would not sit again appear to be false barring further twists.  

Update: The Government is indeed past caring, there's no prorogue! In theory the Opposition could now renege on the pair and cause chaos (this has been known to happen in such situations) but even if it did it would not be able to form a workable government on the floor, especially as the Speaker can always cause a deadlock by resigning.  So even if a no confidence motion was to be passed the Premier would simply advise the Governor either to call an election (where we could have been anyway) or to wait a week when confidence would be restored.    I am still a bit surprised by this because of the potential risks of an Opposition party floor majority on other votes, though this is somewhat limited by the two-thirds majority rule for suspending standing orders.  

The recount is expected to happen on Oct 23.  

Alexander Noises:  The Australian now reports that Lara Alexander both says that her promise of confidence and supply stands but also that she would "evaluate it and see" if a no-confidence motion was passed - thereby in effect saying both that she guarantees confidence and doesn't guarantee confidence.  

Rockliff Issues Ultimatum (Oct 3)

Jeremy Rockliff has today said Parliament is not resuming unless Elise Archer either resigns her seat or provides a written statement of confidence and supply.  A further Rockliff tweet strongly suggests he will call an election if Archer does not provide either.  The Governor would have a decision to make.  If there was a live leadership challenge against Rockliff the Governor would have strong grounds to refuse.  The Governor might in theory refuse anyway on the grounds that Rockliff does not clearly have the confidence of the Parliament.  He could be sent back to the House to test his support.  However if all roads would lead to an election anyway (eg there is no alternative Premier who appears to have the numbers) then such an action would create a farce (Rockliff could just respond by resigning and then what does the Governor do?)  

Of interest here is the Carroll Bramich defection in 1956 - numbers in the Parliament were tied 15-15 (with the Liberal Opposition providing the Speaker) when Labor Government MP Carroll Bramich defected to the Liberal Party.  In minority 14-16 in the House and 14-15 on the floor Labor was nonetheless able to secure an election.  However a possibly important difference is that Labor had been able to adjourn the Parliament without incident after Bramich's defection.  This is not the case here, but also the fact that any Liberal majority would be formed by defection was a significant argument in that case.

It seems to me that provided there is no leadership challenge, the Governor will ultimately accept a request from the Premier if there is no alternative government (eg one led by Rebecca White) available.  But even if there is an alternative government available because one or more ex-Liberals announces that they will support a White government, there are still strong arguments for granting the dissolution.   

Tucker Joins The Fun: John Tucker has called for Michael Ferguson to launch a challenge, with an absolute zinger about Ferguson being at risk of becoming "the Peter Costello of the Liberal Party in Tasmania".  Tucker's problem is that the cozy situation in which he and Alexander propped up the government while torturing it, and steadily built their profiles for re-election, is at danger of being torn apart by the Archer situation forcing the Premier to call an election.  So a challenge and a change of Premier is his best prospect to keep the game going.

Ferguson has rebuffed the call: "I'm not a wrecker, I'm a team player and my Liberal colleagues know that".  Of course he cannot win because whatever he says will be interpreted as confirming he is challenging (Gillard flying to Mars, Morrison being ambitious for Turnbull, etc).  

Weirdly, Alexander has called for an election!

Archer Reconsiders Quitting (Oct 1)

The title of this article may have become inaccurate, but I'm leaving it as is for analytics reasons.

Elise Archer has announced that she is reconsidering quitting, would sit on the crossbenches if she decided to continue and would NOT guarantee confidence and supply to the government.  "[I would be] no longer part of the government. They have themselves to blame."  She has said she will take "some time" to consider her decision following an outpouring of support.  (The outpouring is real enough, over 150 mostly supportive comments on Facebook.)  

In The Australian, Archer has now said she would back no-confidence against Jeremy Rockliff and might support an alternative but it "depends who".  (She appears to be ruling out Michael Ferguson.)

Some comments re this:

1. Archer is under no obligation to resign from Parliament, she remains as an independent until such time as she formally resigns by letter.  Nothing she has said commits her to resign.

2. This is potentially a very unstable situation.  If Archer continues to think about whether to resign the Premier does not know at what point Archer might resign and cannot know when he should request to prorogue the Parliament to.  A reminder that prorogation is discretional and the Governor might not necessarily accept 'oh just prorogue it til <date X> because there is someone who might quit'.  Especially not if the Governor thought the prorogation was an attempt to avoid the scrutiny of the House and a no-confidence motion.  

3. At any time if Archer resigns it will take at least two weeks to hold the recount, so if Archer were to think about it for two weeks then resign, that could severely affect this year's remaining sittings, which are already overcrowded. 

4.  An accidental Premier is a possible outcome (it is unclear who Archer would be satisfied with as yet.)  However if Jeremy Rockliff is removed Rockliff himself could go to the crossbench or quit the parliament (if Rockliff quits the parliament that would elect another Liberal).  

5. Jeremy Rockliff putatively lacks the confidence of the House at present, but until that is demonstrated by a vote the Governor has no grounds to dismiss him.  If he were to try to call an election tomorrow it is possible the Governor would refuse.  (A similar situation involved Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen in 1987 but in that case there was a live leadership challenge.)

6. An alternative Premier would have to be acceptable not just to Archer but also to the existing defectors John Tucker and Lara Alexander.  They've already had clashes with or criticised Guy Barnett, Felix Ellis and Madeleine Ogilvie, and might also feel Nic Street or Roger Jaensch would be too moderate.  There aren't many plausible options.

7. Concerning prorogation, if Archer decides to stay the Premier might still seek a prorogation but would need to have a better reason than being scared to face the Parliament.  An example might be need to consider the implementation of findings of the Commission of Inquiry report, but even that would be controversial.  In 1981-2 Harry Holgate obtained a three and a half month break (mostly over a period in which Parliament would not have been sitting anyway) citing the need to analyse results of the Dams referendum and clarify dam funding.  It's reported that he requested a longer break that was refused.  

There may now be a further bombardment of dirt against the former Attorney-General to attempt to blast her out.  

In case it comes to that, the earliest date for an election is November 4 and the election will be 35 seats.

Cabinet Update (Oct 2)

The government may bear an awkward resemblance to  Schrödinger's cat at the moment but it has nonetheless been reshuffled - Guy Barnett becomes Attorney-General, Nick Duigan moves into Cabinet as minister for energy.

Party Asks Archer To Resign (Oct 2)

A Liberal source advises me that tonight at a well attended Clark electorate meeting it was unanimously resolved that the Chair write to Elise Archer and ask her to resign from Parliament.  (Clark is Archer's electorate.)  (Update: The Fontcast has suggested the wording was slightly different and that the message was to ask her to reconsider her no-confidence threats.)  

--------------------------------------------------------

ORIGINAL ARTICLE BELOW

Expected recount for Clark  - expected resignation of Elise Archer (Lib)
Recount will elect a Liberal, likely to be Simon Behrakis
Parliament may be prorogued briefly

In another setback for a third-term Tasmanian government that was just starting to recover from the loss of two members to the crossbench, Attorney-General Elise Archer today announced that she had resigned from the ministry and from the Liberal Party and intended to shortly resign her seat as member for Clark.  It appears Premier Jeremy Rockliff had asked Archer to resign from Cabinet.  This followed the release in The Australian yesterday of text messages said to be from Archer that criticised the current and previous (now two previous) Premiers, a staffer and former Minister Sarah Courtney, as well as news of an investigation of accusations of bullying and a toxic work environment amid high staff turnover.  Like The Australian, this outlet does not suggest the accusations are true, only that they have been made and are being investigated.   I do note though that the documented high staff turnover, irrespective of its cause, at least helps to explain this.  

Since being elected in 2010 Archer has been a consistent strong electoral performer for the party, easily topping the Liberal ticket in 2018 and 2021, in the first case with nearly a quota in her own right.  Her absence will not make it easier for the Liberals to gain any seats in Clark at the next election when they will try to move up from two out of five to three out of seven; as the current two was a scraped two this was not looking likely anyway.  Archer served as Speaker (during which time she famously kicked out then Premier Will Hodgman for an hour) and has been a generally successful and hardworking Attorney-General in terms of getting legislation through the Parliament.  Controversies about her personal style were there even before she got elected, with the saga known in some circles as groan-gate one example. (But see update at the bottom.)

In a Facebook statement the departing A-G has said that the Party "continues to fail to support ambitious women."  Whether the context of this statement is the party's response to the current claims, past cases where Archer has been overlooked for leadership positions, or both, I am not sure.  

It will be interesting to see what becomes of one of Archer's major projects, electoral donations and funding reform, which is now in the Legislative Council awaiting detailed debate and possibly heavy amendments.  

This loss is also yet more chaos for a government that has already seen the resignations of Peter Gutwein, Sarah Courtney, Adam Brooks (within hours of election) and Jacqui Petrusma from the parliament and John Tucker and Lara Alexander from the party, meaning only 7 of the 13 Liberals who were elected in 2021 are still there! Jane Howlett also resigned from the ministry.  On a proportional basis this is the equal most resignations from parliament for a government in history, tying the 7/35 for Labor in the 1972-6 term.  For the parliament as a whole 6/25 mid-term resignations is a new proportional record ... and we still notionally have a year and a half to go!

Deputy Premier Michael Ferguson will be acting Attorney-General pending a reshuffle.  The position customarily but not always goes to someone with legal training - the two options with that training being Guy Barnett and Madeleine Ogilvie.  

Archer Recount

A recount process can only commence once Archer has formally resigned her seat, and even then it takes a few weeks to happen.  A Hare-Clark recount is determined by the votes that the departing member had with them at the time of their election.  Elise Archer's votes were:

88.6% votes that were 1 Archer

6.5% votes transferred from Will Coats (Lib) - these are not necessarily 1 Coats but many would be

2.8% votes transferred from Harvey Lennon (Lib) - ditto

2.1% votes transferred from excluded non-Liberal candidates

The fact that Sue Hickey (IND) was close to election in the 2021 election is irrelevant because the recount is only of Archer's votes as above and enough of them will stay within the Liberal ticket that there is absolutely no chance of anyone else winning, provided at least one Liberal contests.  There will be some sort of leak to Hickey but not near enough for her to be a contender.  In 2021 one scrutineering sample had 87% of Archer's preferences going to another Liberal at 2 to 3% going to Hickey; some small number would go Archer-Ogilvie-Hickey and leave the ticket but it won't be many.  

Hobart Councillor Simon Behrakis was the third unelected Liberal but he was excluded after Archer was elected, therefore he does not get any of his primary votes back (I refer to this as the Hare-Clark recount bug).  This means that Lennon and Coats will get a small advantage in the recount by getting votes they passed to Archer back (slightly more than the 2.8% mentioned above for Lennon, and somewhat less than the 6.5% for Coats).  But so much of the recount consists of primary votes that are able to flow to any of the three, and Behrakis was so much more prominent a candidate than Lennon and Coats, that I would expect Behrakis to win if he contests.  (I am not claiming this is definite, but I would think it is very likely.)

Simon Behrakis is a relatively young second-term Hobart Councillor whose ambitions for higher office have been no secret - he recently put his hand up for possible Senate preselection.  Behrakis is also from the right of the party (but in the Senate context only the Jonno Duniam hard right and not the Eric Abetz ultra right) so there will be little change to the party's factional balance if he is elected.  Behrakis is a combative political figure whose fondness for a culture-war scrap has created dismay on the left at the thought that he might be elected. That said, in a recent straw poll of my Twitter followers, Behrakis was the candidate the fewest voters wanted left off the Liberal Senate ticket!

Timing Of Archer Recount

The Electoral Act allows 14 days for candidate consents to be included in a recount to be received.  This means that even if a notice is published on Monday (which seems unlikely), the recount could not occur until Monday 16th October, the day before Parliament is scheduled to resume, which is cutting it fine.  On past experience I suspect we will see a prorogation of parliament which may wipe out that sitting week, or at least part thereof.  Prorogation has been used in other cases to avoid the in-theory risk of the government falling or of the Opposition making other mischief of the temporary numbers.  The Opposition will probably make noises about being willing to offer a pair but pairs are only a convention that are not binding.  The Government is also losing enough votes on the floor as it is and could do without losing any more courtesy of being a seat down.  Parliament was also prorogued for the same reason in 2019 (Hidding vacancy) and 2022 (Gutwein and Petrusma vacancies).  

Potential Behrakis HCC Recount

If Behrakis is elected he will have to resign his Hobart City Council spot within the next year and would most likely do it sooner rather than later.  This triggers a much messier recount because Behrakis polled .61 of a quota for Council so is carrying a lot more in preferences from other candidates.  Others might have some chance but the most obvious contenders for the recount if interested are Jeff Briscoe and fellow Liberal Will Coats, both of whom lost their seats at the election.  (Briscoe's Twitter profile nonetheless describes him as a "happily retired alderman").  In a hypothetical contest between the two about 10% of the votes would pool with Coats because of the advantage created by the bug, and in the absence of party cues and with a significant exhaust rate I suspect that would be enough, especially as Coats and Behrakis ran linked campaigns and both are Liberals of a fairly similar age bracket.   But I still wouldn't write off Briscoe given his many years on council and hence profile.  

If for some reason Coats isn't interested, it's not clear who else might beat Briscoe (if running).  Some other possible contenders in terms of having given some votes to Behrakis that they would get back are Damon Thomas, Debra Thurley and Marcus Bai (though Bai's different position on the Utas move would count against him).  It's one where it will be hard to predict the winner without seeing the field.  

I will add more notes to this article later as things develop.  

Update Sep 30: The Plot Thickens 

I mentioned above the episode in which Elise Archer and Michael Ferguson groaned in response to a Labor question about abuse issues, as an example of a case where Archer's personal style had been controversial.  Little was I to realise that it has turned out to play a major role in her demise.  A direction to staff to turn off comments on social media in which Archer said "Sick of victim survivors." has turned out to be the matter mentioned by Premier Rockliff that was not in the Matthew Denholm articles and that was his reason for asking her to resign from the ministry.  

As ABC notes Archer was receiving abuse on social media and had been criticised by her brother around the time of the message.  A question then is who had this message and held on to it for so long before using it, and why did they choose to use it now and not earlier.  Was whoever informed the Premier of this message the same person or persons who provided information to The Australian and what was their motive for doing so now?  

Victim survivors, whistleblowers and allies have had a difficult week with the release of the Commission of Inquiry report being swamped out of the news cycle immediately by this Archer news. Some support Archer's handling of abuse issues, others vigorously don't. For some of the latter it may be some consolation that "groangate" has finally claimed a scalp.   (On 1 October Archer claimed on Facebook that she was not the groaner and had taken the heat for others who did not own up.)