Tasmania 2025: Confidence Position Tracker

Premier Rockliff recommissioned pending meeting the House on 19 Aug
Labor or an independent expected to move constructive no confidence motion 

If motion passes, Labor expected to form government

If motion fails, Liberals remain in office for time being

At this stage neither side has or seems likely (with current position) to get 18 votes in secured long-term confidence and supply agreements

Article current as of 13 August or later (if I remember, will update this date as edits added)

----

Provisional tally on constructive no-confidence vote

As of 13 Aug if no changes in declared positions, constructive motion will not pass in its intended form.  However it may be defeated.  

Yes: Labor (10)

Potential (3) Kristie Johnston, Craig Garland, Carlo Di Falco

No: Liberals (14)

Potential: Greens (5)

TBD (3): George Razay, David O'Byrne, Peter George

----

This morning Premier Rockliff met with Governor Baker and sought to be recommissioned pending the meeting of Parliament to determine his Government's fate.  The speed with which this request was granted, entirely in accordance with precedent (see detailed reasons here) should be a wake-up call to those at The Australian and the ABC who entertained that it might be otherwise and repeatedly passed off an international law expert as a constitutional law expert (and later even as 'some experts') in order to do so.  The interesting news is that matters will come to a head sooner rather than later with the faster than expected recall of Parliament on August 19 to sort out the mess. No date earlier than the start of September had previously been seen in speculation.  

In my pathways to government article I explored three main pathways to forming the next government: a Liberal government with formalised confidence and supply, a Liberal government without formalised confidence and supply, and a Labor government with presumptive confidence and supply following a successful no-confidence motion.  The first of these looks less likely following Craig Garland's announcement that he will not be making a confidence agreement with the Liberals and will be exploring possible arrangements with Labor.  

In summary (updated from time to time) Labor's motion appears unlikely to succeed unless there is progress on convincing the Greens to vote for it.  

This article is to track progress towards either side having 18 votes on the no-confidence motion/amendment expected to be moved on the first sitting day.  It is confined to public statements and simply seeks to summarise every party's or member's position based on information to hand.  

In the tracking tally above I classify parties or crossbenchers as follows:

Confirmed: Has signed a confidence and supply agreement or has clearly stated they will vote for or against the motion

Likely: Has ruled out confidence for one side and expressed clear possible interest in supporting the other without apparent reservations

Potential: There is some indication that this person might vote on this side - either a previous no confidence vote without a clear new position, or a statement indicating they wouldn't vote for the other side without changes

TBD:  Did not support previous no-confidence motion and has not given a clear indication of preferring one side over the other (has either criticised both sides or neither).

 Listing as "potential" or "likely" does not mean it is impossible for the MP to support the other side.

Other things about the no-confidence motion

I would expect Labor to obtain constitutional law advice on the exact content of the no-confidence motion.

The most common form for a no-confidence motion on the sitting of Parliament is an amendment to the Address-In-Reply (see previous article for 1989 example)

The first order of business for the House prior to resumption is the election of the Speaker.  Frequently in such cases this has served as a proxy for the subsequent no confidence vote but that will not necessarily follow in this case.  (I have a Not-A-Poll on preferred Speaker on the sidebar, but may put one up with fewer options when the field narrows).  The Speakership election will not affect the outcome of the confidence vote unless an odd number of MPs do not vote for whatever reason.  

A no confidence motion can be amended by the House, subject to the will of the Speaker if that will is upheld by the House.  If an amendment succeeds the vote would then be on the motion as amended.  However if the amendment was to remove the statement of confidence in Dean Winter, Labor might respond by abandoning the motion on the grounds that the crossbench were not committed to stable government.  

It is possible that the Liberals could survive the initial no-confidence motion but be brought down by (yet) another one weeks or months later - this could happen if some crossbenchers feel the return to Parliament is too soon for them to have completed negotiations and information-gathering and want more time.  

It is also possible that Labor could form government following the motion but that this government could also prove unstable, especially if crossbenchers were unhappy with Labor (in)actions on their policy interests.

It's possible in theory for an MP to abstain from voting on a no-confidence motion by leaving the chamber.  However I can't remember a case where it ever occured.  It could also create ambiguity as a defeated Prenier might argue they could recapture support from the abstainers.  

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

Liberals (14)

* Have been recommissioned to form government pending survival on floor of the House

* Have released a stability framework for discussion with crossbenchers

* Have said they will not do any deals with the Greens.

* Have made policy concessions - ending 40,000 hectare "wood bank" in controversial forest blocks, phase out support for greyhound racing by 2029. 

* Have not secured any known guarantees of supply and confidence

Labor (10)

* Moved final no-confidence motion in previous Parliament, but voted against amendment to include stadium in reasons

* Will move or support a motion of no confidence in Rockliff and confidence in Winter on first sitting day

* Will make Ruth Forrest Treasurer if they form government.  Forrest will be the sole non-Labor Minister and Craig Farrell will resign as President of the Legislative Council to become Leader of Government Business

* Have released an integrity policy*

* Are seeking to negotiate with all non-Greens crossbenchers and are discussing a confidence and stability plan with them, but have not released it publicly subject to discussion of its contents with them

* Have had meetings with Greens, but have not included Greens in stability plan process

* Have ruled out any "deal" with Greens, but appear willing to accept their support on confidence and supply if given freely

* Are not supporting phasing out greyhound racing, saying it needs careful consideration following due process

* Have not secured any known guarantees of supply and confidence.

(* NB this includes proposed spending caps for parties, candidates and third parties, which in my view need to be handled very carefully to avoid unfair many-vs-one situations)

Greens (5)

* Voted for multiple no-confidence motions in previous Parliament, and to amend final no-confidence motion to include stadium

* Have repeatedly said that Labor needs to have meaningful discussions with them about how Parliament would operate.  

* Will not give "enduring and stable" support for full term without discussions.  (Detailed comments here)

* Said on Aug 7 Labor needs to have "meaningful conversations, negotiations" and that "That hasn’t happened yet and with 12 days until parliament, this is getting serious."  Had face to face talks with Labor on Aug 10 described as "the start of a conversation"

* Said on Aug 12 that at this stage they could not support motion, citing lack of policy compromise on stadium, environment and "budget repair so that money goes back into health and housing". Claimed Winter had "no capacity or intention to negotiate in good faith".  Said they were not giving the Liberals a guarantee of supply.

* Have said they don't have confidence in Jeremy Rockliff but also do not want to cause another election

* Have ruled out abstaining on the motion

Carlo Di Falco (SF+F)

* New to Parliament

* Has stated he is open to working with either side

* Has stated policy priorities including gun and deer culling laws, telecommunications and rural health that will affect his support

* Has said he will not support Liberals unless they completely drop proposal to phase out greyhound racing

Craig Garland (IND)

* Voted for final no-confidence motion in previous Parliament, and to amend final no-confidence motion to include stadium

* Initially expressed openness to working with either side

* Has stated that he will not be making a confidence and supply agreement with Liberals, and is open to voting no confidence in them again 

* Has said that only Labor can deliver stable government and is interested in discussions with Labor

* However has since said that both major parties "are stuck in majority government headspace" 

* Has now said he may support Liberals if they are willing to compromise and make concessions.

Peter George (IND)

* New to Parliament

* Has said he would not have voted for no-confidence motion in previous Parliament

* Reported before election as not intending to sign confidence and supply agreements

* Has said support for "a minority government" is conditional on progress on key issues including phasing out salmon farming and most native forest logging, abandoning Macquarie Point stadium, and transparency improvements, a well as housing, health and education

* Has criticised Liberals' stability framework and approach to negotiations

* Has supported making Ruth Forrest Treasurer.

* Has positively reported that he discussed a possible supply and confidence arrangement with Labor, without any decisions being taken at the time

* Has now expressed concern that Labor "needs to understand that minority government means actually compromising and collaborating"

Kristie Johnston (IND)

* Initially provided letter to previous Rockliff Government outlining an approach to questions of confidence and supply.  This was widely misinterpreted as a statement of confidence and supply but was not

* Voted for multiple no-confidence motions in previous parliament, including attempt to amend final no-confidence motion to include stadium

* Reported before election as not intending to sign confidence and supply agreements

* Issued joint statement with Peter George and Craig Garland 

David O'Byrne (IND)

* Supported Liberals on confidence and supply in previous parliament, including signing agreement and voting against all no-confidence motions on floor

* Withdrew confidence support from Michael Ferguson as a Minister, triggering Ferguson's resignation from Cabinet

* Has stated he is open to working with either side

* Has stated he will not accept any ministerial or parliamentary position 

* Has stated his approach will be not "transactional" and will be focused on stability not policy outcomes

* Has said he will be influenced by Labor's poor result but also by the "size, scope and opinions of the crossbench"

George Razay (IND)

* New to parliament

* Has said that on Launceston Council he doesn't telegraph decisions in advance of making them

* Has said he will work with whoever is able to form government (has not said how he will contribute to deciding who that is!)

* Has said discussions with Labor about collaboration were "positive"

Tasmania 2025: Just As Hung But More Polarised

TASMANIA 2025: LIB 14 (=) ALP 10 (=) GRN 5 (=) IND 5 (+2) SF+F 1 (+1)
(Changes from 2024 result.  JLN (3 seats 2024) did not run, their former MPs running as two Nationals and one independent, all defeated)

Counting is over for an election that finished up in much the same place as last year's ... but not quite, and this will be a rather different parliament despite the big three all coming out with what they went in with.  At present, Premier Jeremy Rockliff is intending to be recommissioned to meet the Parliament (see pathways to government article), but the storm clouds have been gathering since election night as to whether he has any prospect of surviving another no-confidence motion when Parliament resumes, let alone whether he can govern with any stability.  It didn't get any easier for him yesterday with Craig Garland ruling out supporting his party and expressing willingness to vote no-confidence again, and Peter George expressing serious reservations (while also making comments that might not make life easy for Labor either).  The writs will be returned on Tuesday, kickstarting the week in which the Governor must appoint somebody, presumably Rockliff, to meet the House, preferably sooner rather than later.

The past four minority governments elected as such in Tasmania lost the next election outright, some of them heavily.  This is the first to stop that rot since the Reece Government was re-elected with a majority in 1964, and that government had spent over two years in majority during its term after picking up a seat on a recount.  The Rockliff government has not only avoided net seat losses but had a 3.2% swing to it.  And for those saying that the days of majority government are gone forever, beware, they did not actually miss one by very much.  The Liberals finishing eighth in three divisions has enabled me to determine that on swings of 0.94%, 1.82% and 2.30% from the winners, they would have won the final seats in Franklin, Clark and Lyons respectively - the first two of which would have given them the numbers for a potential government with Carlo Di Falco and David O'Byrne (assuming those two were agreeable).  In Bass, the Liberals' elimination in tenth place makes it hard to be sure what swing would have won them the seventh seat, especially as keeping the Liberals in the final seat race requires eliminating someone who didn't actually get excluded.  But I think that about a 3% higher primary vote would have been enough, meaning the Liberals could have won a majority off about 43%.  Wherever it goes from here, this was a close election.

2025 Tasmanian Election: Pathways To Government

This article is part of my Tasmanian election 2025 postcount coverage.  

Link to tallyboard thread

Links to individual postcount pages: Bass Braddon Clark Franklin Lyons

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

I did write a fair amount about the formation of the next government in the tallyboard thread but it's got somewhat buried in the postcount pages and I wanted to do a new thread to discuss the different pathways to government that might occur after the election. At this time we are starting to see what I suspect will be rather a lot of gnashing and wailing on the pages of The Australian (especially if Labor keeps trying to form government) but a lot of it is clueless.  (Just a note in case anyone thinks I am part of the gnashing and wailing for my tallyboard heading "Tasmania Remains Ungovernable" - nup, it was a reference to "become ungovernable"; I am celebrating the way Tasmanians collectively refused to be told what to do and gave the major parties back another mess.)

As I start this article the numbers sit at Liberal 14 Labor 10 Greens 5 IND 4.  The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers are strongly placed in Lyons and the last seat in Bass is a multi-party scramble with five or six contenders - we will know the outcome of that around August 2.

Meeting the House

The first thing I want to underline is that whatever the numbers, whatever the deals, whatever the deal-shaped objects, Jeremy Rockliff is the incumbent Premier.  As the incumbent he has the clear right by convention to be recommissioned in order to "meet the house" and enable it to decide his destiny.  Also he clearly intends to do it.   It is common for Premiers in minority governments who appear to have lost the election (and it is not clear this is the case for Rockliff yet) to do this, because in theory an MP who was going to back the opposition might change their mind in the middle of the debate, and because decisions about whether a Premier has lost confidence should be made by Parliaments and not by the Governor's reading of MP's letters.  The widespread misreading of Johnston's 2024 letters is a good example of why confidence needs to be determined on the floor.  It is only where the office of Premier is vacant that the Governor must make a provisional decision.  

2025 Tasmanian Postcount: Lyons

ALL NUMBERS HERE ARE UNOFFICIAL - CHECK THE TEC PAGE FOR OFFICIAL NUMBERS

LYONS (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 JLN)

(At Election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 Nat)

SEATS WON 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 SFF

SEAT WINNERS: Jane Howlett (Lib), Guy Barnett (Lib), Mark Shelton (Lib), Jen Butler (ALP), Brian Mitchell (ALP), Tabatha Badger (Green), Carlo Di Falco (SFF)

SEAT LOST: Andrew Jenner (Nat)

NOTE: The Lyons count involves a complex Hare-Clark scenario and has been rated Wonk Factor 4/5.  

Click here for link to tallyboard page with links to other postcounts

2025 Tasmanian Postcount: Franklin

ALL NUMBERS HERE ARE UNOFFICIAL - CHECK THE TEC PAGE FOR OFFICIAL NUMBERS

FRANKLIN (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 IND)

SEATS WON (CALLED): 2 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 2 IND

SEAT WINNERS: Eric Abetz (Lib), Jacquie Petrusma (Lib), Dean Winter (ALP), Peter George (Ind), David O'Byrne (Ind), Rosalie Woodruff (Grn), Meg Brown (ALP)

SEAT LOST: Nic Street (Liberal)

IND (Peter George) gain from Liberal

Click here for link to tallyboard page with links to other postcounts as written

2025 Tasmanian Postcount: Clark

ALL NUMBERS HERE ARE UNOFFICIAL - CHECK THE TEC PAGE FOR OFFICIAL NUMBERS

CLARK (2024 Result 2 Liberal 2 Labor 2 Green 1 IND)

SEATS WON (CALLED) 2 Liberal 2 Labor 2 Green 1 IND

SEAT WINNERS: Kristie Johnston (IND), Ella Haddad (ALP), Josh Willie (ALP), Vica Bayley (GRN), Helen Burnet (GRN), Marcus Vermey (Lib), Madeleine Ogilvie (Lib)

(Ogilvie defeats Simon Behrakis (Lib) in close intra-party battle)

Click here for link to tallyboard page with links to other postcounts as written

2025 Tasmanian Postcount: Braddon

 BRADDON (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 JLN 1 IND)

(At Election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Nat 1 IND)

SEATS WON (CALLED) 4 Liberal 2 Labor 1 IND

SEAT WINNERS: Jeremy Rockliff (Lib), Gavin Pearce (Lib), Felix Ellis (Lib), Roger Jaensch (Lib), Anita Dow (ALP), Shane Broad (ALP), Craig Garland (IND)

SEAT LOST: Miriam Beswick (Nat)

Liberal gain from National

Click here for link to tallyboard page with links to other postcounts as written

2025 Tasmanian Postcount: Bass

ALL NUMBERS HERE ARE UNOFFICIAL - CHECK THE TEC PAGE FOR OFFICIAL NUMBERS

-----------

BASS (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 JLN)

(At Election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 IND)

SEATS WON 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 IND

SEAT PARTY CONTEST: George Razay defeated Labor

SEAT WINNERS: Bridget Archer (Lib), Michael Ferguson (Lib), Rob Fairs (Lib), Janie Finlay (ALP), Cecily Rosol (GRN), George Razay (IND)

WITHIN-PARTY BATTLE: Jess Greene (ALP) defeated Geoff Lyons (ALP). 

SEAT LOST: Rebekah Pentland (IND), Simon Wood (Lib)

Final seat was a six way race - eliminated from contention in order: Pentland, Greens, Liberals, Shooters, Fishers and Farmers, 3rd Labor.

NOTE: The Bass count involves a complex and novel Hare-Clark scenario and has been rated Wonk Factor 5/5. 

Click here for link to tallyboard page with links to other postcounts

Tasmania Remains Ungovernable: 2025 Election Tallyboard And Summary

Tasmania 2025: Liberals Have Won Most Seats

Government formation however TBD

Rockliff has stated intent to be recommissioned.  If he proceeds, Parliament will need to pass another no confidence motion if it wishes to remove him and install Winter.  

FINAL RESULT 14 LIB 10 ALP 5 GREEN 5 IND 1 SF+F

BASS 3 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN 1 SF+F

BRADDON 4 LIB 2 ALP 1 IND

CLARK 2 LIB 2 ALP 2 GREEN 1 IND

FRANKLIN 2 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN 2 IND

LYONS 3 LIB 2 ALP 1 GREEN 1 SF+F

Links to seat postcount pages:

BASS

BRADDON

CLARK

FRANKLIN

LYONS

Other articles:

Pathways To Government

Tasmanian Election Day 2025

Live coverage at this link on election night

This article is part of my Tasmanian 2025 election coverage.  Click here for link to main guide page including links to effective voting advice and seat guides.

--

We're here again Tasmania.  It seems like only yesterday that I was writing such a piece, because it almost was.  Today ends the shortest gap between elections in any Australian state since Vince Gair's Labor government destroyed itself in Queensland 1957 and started 32 years in the wilderness.  

The 11-year old Rockliff Government is chasing history that it seems to be struggling to achieve yet again.  Not since 1921 in any Australian jurisdiction has a government been forced to an election by losing a no-confidence motion and survived.  Not since 1959 has a Tasmanian government that served a whole term without a majority survived, and not since 1964 has a government elected in minority done so.  (The Reece government gained a majority for a chunk of its term on a 1961 vacancy recount).  

Tonight I will be doing live coverage for Pulse Media which will be at the link below the picture above, unless advised otherwise.  There will probably be an intro comment up around 6-ish depending on logistics but expect the real action to start around 6:30 and go til around 11 or possibly later.  I will be based at the tally room.  I ask media other than Pulse not to contact me by phone or email between 5 pm and the end of the live coverage.  I may be available quickly after that for a few other interviews (feel free to say hi in the tally room when I don't look too busy to arrange).    Scrutineers are very welcome to send me news and figures by phone or email.  

There may be a "late night live" thread here.  I may start postcount threads late tonight or they may be left til tomorrow morning.  For tomorrow, I will be available for interviews mostly though I will be pretty busy through to 4 pm and unavailable for up to an hour at times.  Media are not to call or text me between 1 am and 9 am unless booked tonight.  

Tasmania 2025: YouGov Has Majors Much Closer

 

Live coverage at this link on election night

This article is part of my Tasmanian 2025 election coverage.  Click here for link to main guide page including links to effective voting advice and seat guides.

YOUGOV Lib 31 ALP 30 Green 16 IND 20* Nat 2 SF+F 1

* could be overstated through poll design issues
Seat estimate for this poll Lib 13 ALP 11-12 Green 6 IND 4-5

Thankfully a final YouGov public poll has appeared for the fairly sparsely polled Tasmanian state election, albeit unfortunately without seat breakdowns, and if it is to be believed then Labor are doing better than the recent DemosAU and Liberal EMRS internals have suggested, and the Liberals are doing much worse than the latter.  I was hoping we would get a poll today and suspecting it might pull my aggregate in line with the widespread view that Labor has run a poor campaign and is at risk of losing vote share, but it's actually better for Labor than the polls since the last YouGov have been.  This would find the Liberals with a measly one-point lead which would give them no possible path to government assuming that Labor is willing to take it and the Greens to help Labor do so.  Indeed it's not impossible if this poll's true that Labor and the Greens could get a majority together (a Labor/IND combined majority would be unlikely).  It's always possible that YouGov's polling of the state has a house effect, but this could also be true of the DemosAU polls.  (There is some history of Labor often doing badly in robopolls for state elections, and DemosAU is primarily a robopoll, albeit one that weights for education, which should help).  

Anyway, we have two main final polls with a very different take on where Labor will land but it remains the case that no poll has given the Liberals more than a remote path to government if the forces that voted for the no-confidence motion work together.  And it would be pretty silly for Labor and the Greens at least not to - by working together here I just mean being willing to kick the Liberals out in another no confidence motion if needs be and then at least have some minimal arrangement to satisfy the Governor that Dean Winter can be Premier.   While there's no poll that gives the Liberals a clear path, the better polls for them wouldn't have to be too far wrong for them to get 15 seats with three they might work with (say Rebekah Pentland, David O'Byrne and John Tucker ... hmmm I'm not really sure Jeremy Rockliff and Tucker can work together ...)  But at this stage that would be fairly surprising.

2025 Tasmanian Polling Aggregate V1

Live coverage on election night on Pulse Tasmania - Link will be posted here when known - No paywall!

TASMANIA 2025 POLLING AGGREGATE (NOT A PREDICTION) Lib 35.0 ALP 30.3 GRN 15.3 IND 14.9 NAT 2.5 SF+F 1.9

IND adjusted for design issues with polling independents

Seat Estimate for this aggregate (total of electorate estimates in brackets) Lib 13-14 (13) ALP 10-12 (12) GRN 5-7 (6) IND 4 (4) NAT 0-1 (0) SFF 0-1 (0)

This article is part of my 2025 Tasmanian election coverage. Click here for link to main guide page including links to seat guides and voting advice.  

(18 July: Aggregate has been updated here, with minimal changes.)

This article is not a prediction

Just wanted to make that extra clear!  Some people cannot read.  

Bradfield Court Of Disputed Returns Challenge

BRADFIELD (NSW, IND, 0.01)
Disputed Returns challenge to win by Nicolette Boele over Gisele Kapterian (Lib) by 26 votes

This is an ongoing thread to follow the challenge by Gisele Kapterian (Liberal) to Nicolette Boele's (IND) victory by 26 votes in the seat of Bradfield.  This is the first CDR challenge by a candidate to be based on the count, rather than eligibility or alleged misconduct issues, since Fran Bailey's (Liberal) win in McEwen 2007 was challenged by now MP for the seat Rob Mitchell (ALP).  On comments about the case available so far the case is likely to be very similar to McEwen in proceedings.

I previously covered the main part of the Bradfield postcount in a general teal seat postcount thread and the late postcount (distribution of preferences phase) and recount in a Bradfield specific thread.  I also covered the Goldstein partial recount and count history on a separate thread that may be useful for comparisons.  

Boele had been down for the count at times in the initial count but got back up again, mainly on a very strong batch of out of electorate prepolls followed by the very last batch of postals breaking strongly to her (not such an unusual thing).  She went into the distribution of preferences 40 votes ahead but dropped back through the distribution to finish it 8 votes behind.  This is not surprising because in the distribution the votes that get the most attention are votes for minor candidates, so the candidate more reliant on preferences is more likely to suffer if votes are found to be informal on further scrutiny.  The recount has the opposite dynamic - at this stage the primary votes of the leaders have been less checked than the preferences, and so this can hurt the primary vote leader.  Which it did.  Boele started very slowly in the recount and was still three votes behind and running out of booths when there was a big shift to her in the Turramurra PPVC, which was the last big prepoll to be recounted.  Boele also then made gains in other booths in the St Ives and Turramurra areas and finished 26 votes ahead.  

Unlike the Goldstein postcount which saw several large corrections and errors before the result was eventually established, the Bradfield postcount and recount was about as smooth to these outside eyes as these things get.  The corrections were generally small and on the scale of what is generally expected - changes of rulings on specific votes, very minor counting corrections and just one correction of slightly larger size (a 22 vote correction in Kapterian's favour).  The 15-vote swing to Kapterian in Turramurra PPVC was on formality rulings, not a counting error.

The Liberals floated a possible challenge on June 8 and I noted that none of the claimed grounds were convincing. Claimed reasons for concern were that the distribution of preferences and the recount had different winners (not surprising for the reasons stated above), that the number of informal votes increased (not surprising because sequence errors can easily be missed in the earlier counting stages) and that the number of total votes increased (not surprising because the AEC does not know for sure at the start of the count exactly how many ballot papers there are and some slight movement in this total is normal).  

There was not until now any public suggestion that the Liberals had issues with AEC interpretations of specific votes.  While there will always be some lineball votes that the losing side might object to, there has also not been any suggestion that there are systematic errors.  The Liberals will have to argue that there are a number of errors sufficient to overturn the margin so it will be interesting to see what those arguments are.  If there were persistent patterns of suspect rulings I would expect these to have come to notice by now and the lack of such seems unpromising for their chances of getting enough votes overturned.  

I have not yet seen the petition and will comment on it if/when available but the media reports so far indicate that is wholly about ballot paper interpretation; indeed Kapterian has stated that the petition does not seek a by-election (as could be the case if the Liberal Party was arguing voters were deprived of the ability to vote, or voted who should not have done.) The framing of the Liberal Party's decision to lodge the challenge is that this is about giving their candidate every chance by sending the reserved ballots to the "third umpire".  

The process

The 2008 McEwen case was referred by the High Court to the Federal Court and decided by a single judge; I expect this one will be so too, as it is a fact and evidence heavy matter involving the interpretation of electoral law, and not a constitutional matter.

Assuming that is so, the court will examine the reserved ballots (about 800 that were challenged and decided on by the Electoral Officer for NSW during the recount).  Following this the court can make the following decisions:

* The result stands.

* The result is reversed and Kapterian wins.  In this case Boele would lose her seat immediately and be replaced by Kapterian.

* The election is void.  In this case the seat is vacated and a by-election is held with a fresh nominations process; both Boele and Kapterian would presumably run again.  However, this would only occur if at the end of the process the court ruled the correct result was a tie, or perhaps so close to a tie that after taking multiple voting into account a winner could not be decided.  (The number of unexplained multiple markoffs in Bradfield is understood to be just two).

The court can also modify the margin.  This happened in the McEwen case twice with the court initially amending the margin from 12 to 27 votes then later giving a supplementary ruling that changed it to 31.

There may be procedural legal argument but I would expect that at some point the judge will end up examining all the reserved ballots and producing a table listing the results of the re-examination. 

The court is obliged to decide the case as quickly as it reasonably can.  In 2008 the Court took just over four months to dismiss the petition from its lodging.  This would take us to close to the end of the year.  It may be that this case can be faster if there is less preliminary argument than in 2008.

Mitchell v Bailey (2008 McEwen case)

The McEwen main judgement is well worth a read as background to this case for those interested; it is likely to be referred to frequently.  Many votes had been ruled informal where there was a reasonable interpretation that allowed them to be ruled formal.  For instance a ballot paper contains the numbers 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 and a figure that could plausibly in isolation be the letter S or the number 5.  Intuitively it is overwhelmingly likely the voter intended to write a 5 and happens to write their 5 in a way that could also look like an S.  Largely as a result of such issues the Court changed 141 ballots from informal to formal and only twelve from formal to informal.  The number of votes for Mitchell that were fished out of the informal pile easily exceeded the margin, but the judge did not only examine the votes Labor objected to but examined all the reserved votes and found that Bailey had been more disadvantaged by incorrect formality calls than Mitchell.

(It is not clear from the judgement text what became of the infamous "V8 Supercar" vote on which the voter according to Labor's petition had numbered all the boxes, crossed out the names of the candidates and replaced them with the names of motor racing drivers.)

The rulings made in the McEwen case are very well known and are reinforced in AEC practice so I would expect that the chance of blatant errors here is a lot lower and that the chance of a margin shift even of the size of that in McEwen isn't high.  But we will see.  

Updates will be added as the case proceeds and a link will remain in the sidebar in the Upcoming and Recent Elections section.  

Update 16 July

The ABC has reported some details of the petition, which I have not yet seen myself.  

"The petition claims the electoral officer wrongly rejected at least 56 ballots which favoured Ms Kapterian.

This includes 22 ballots where the officer concluded certain numbers were not distinguishable from other numbers, and 34 ballots where numbers were deemed illegible."

Distinguishability depends on whether the Electoral Officer can confidently conclude that of two similar numbers, for instance, one is a 1 and one is a 7 and not the other way round.  As concerns illegibility, for instance if a ballot is 1,2,(mysterious squiggle),4,5,6,7,8 it is not enough to assume that the mysterious squiggle is a 3 just for the sake of rendering the ballot formal.  The mysterious squiggle must reasonably resemble a 3.  Kapterian also claims 93 ballots favouring Boele were accepted that should have been rejected based on similar arguments (she alleges 49 with duplicate numbers and 44 cases with unclear numbering).  It's highly unlikely that the AEC would have both been too lax on one candidate and too harsh on another.  

"She argues a further two ballots favouring Ms Boele were admitted despite "having upon it a mark or writing … by which the voter could be identified.""

This depends on what the marks or writing are.  If they are initials (for instance where a voter crosses a number out, rewrites it and puts their initials to confirm the change) then the McEwen case has plenty of precedent regarding this.  The mere presence of initials does not identify the voter as there are likely to be many voters with any given combination.  Something like a name and address may be deemed to identify a voter.

17 July

Anne Twomey's video here is a good watch.  She mentions that in the McEwen case, although the candidates didn't object to all the reserved ballots between them in the case, the court nonetheless had to review all the ballots and invited submissions on six that neither side had objected to.  The reason for this was the court needs to determine whether the result could have been different after making necessary corrections.  Twomey also explains the term "illegal practices" that may be confusing in reading the McEwen case.

20 July

The petition is here.  (Link fixed now 31/7, somehow nobody complained)

31 July

Documents (pay per view) have started appearing in the High Court portal, including directions submissions.  

8 August

The petition - including the matter of what to do if the margin ends up being two votes or less (within the margin of possible double voting impacts) - has been kicked down to the Federal Court as expected.  A Federal Court docket has opened.

DemosAU: More Friendly Fire Than Seat Swing?

DemosAU Lib 34.9 ALP 24.7 Green 15.6 Nat 2.7 SF+F 1.8 IND 20.3
Total of projected individual seat breakdowns for this poll Lib 13 ALP 10 Green 7 IND 4 Nat 1

(IND vote likely to be inflated because of format limitations)

(Green vote distribution appears unusual so real seat tally for this statewide vote share could be lower)

This article is part of my 2025 Tasmanian election coverage.  Link to main guide page including seat guides and effective voting advice.

---

One of the many remarkable elections in Tasmania was in 1986.  On the surface Robin Gray's first and only re-election sounds exremely dull; the Liberal Party won 19 seats just as it had in 1982, and Labor won 14, ditto.  Yet that election was a bloodbath with 15 incumbent MPs losing their seats, 13 in effect to their own party.  This sort of violence became less common in the 25-seat system, an especially tame case being 2006 when all 23 recontesting incumbents were returned.  (The only interesting thing about that was that nobody much thought it would occur).  Based on the recent Pulse Media DemosAU poll we could be heading for a milder case of this with at least six incumbents at serious risk of losing to their ticketmates but few clear signs of either major party gaining or losing more than the odd seat anywhere.

I have a copy of the full results of this poll [EDIT: which have now been posted publicly].  The full poll includes candidate breakdowns by electorate, which I have not seen since EMRS did it a few decades back.  While the writeup below is very detailed a reminder this is just one poll, and in the next few days I intend to produce my usual cross-poll aggregate.  

2025 Federal Post-Election Pendulum

As in 2022 I've decided to issue my own post-election pendulum for the 2025 federal election.  I've done this partly because post-election pendulums seem thinner on the ground than usual this year, but mainly for the same reason - pendulums like the Wikipedia version miss the point of what the pendulum is for by putting classic ALP vs Coalition marginal seats on the same axis as contests between the majors and the crossbench.  The seat of Wills is now very marginal on a two-candidate preferred basis between Labor and the Greens, but a swing against Labor in two-party polling (should one occur) will not predict whether that seat might fall. 

Also in doing 2PP pendulums one finds out things - such as that the Coalition is in even bigger trouble for the next election than the scale of the 2PP disaster makes obvious.  The inflated swings to Labor in marginal seats at this election have created a skewed pendulum where Labor could lose the 2PP and still win a majority.  

At this election claims of the demise of 2PP swing as a predictive tool were even harder to get away from than in 2022 ... and even less correct!  The overwhelming story of the election was the 13 classic seats that switched from the Coalition (ignoring defections) to Labor.  The six seats switching from a major party to a non-major candidate or vice versa were a sideshow, especially as for totals purposes two of them cancelled out.  There is a lot of hype about how "no seat is safe any more" but for all of that no safe seat held by a major party fell and the only 2CP-safe seat that fell at all was a Greens seat (Griffith) that was clearly marginal on a three-candidate basis.  And the odd 2CP-safe seat falling is nothing new.

What Can We Really Draw From The Liberal EMRS Poll?

EMRS JUNE 15-17/JUNE 29-JULY 1
FIRST WAVE LIB 32.3 ALP 28.7 GREEN 14 IND 19.2 NAT 1.8 OTHER 3.9
SECOND WAVE LIB 34.5 ALP 28.2 GREEN 13.9 IND 17.8 NAT 2.1 OTHER 3.5

The two waves are statistically more or less identical

Combined they suggest a roughly unchanged parliament 

Today's Mercury saw some numbers from a Liberal Party commissioned EMRS poll taken in two waves of 550 voters ahead of the 2025 election.  I don't include party-commissioned polls in my aggregates (it's bad enough to have to include polls commissioned by unknown forces within Tasmania's perennially bashful brown paper bag "industry groups").  In general parties will make strategic decisions on whether to release polls they have commissioned based on whether they like the results or not, and there is a lot of evidence (cf Freshwater Strategy at the federal election) that internal polls can show parties doing better than they are.  

The Liberal Party might not be delighted with the results of this EMRS polling, but it is much worse for Labor as it shows Labor making no progress towards even being the largest party.  A voter who accepts that will also most likely accept that Labor have sent us to an early election without any real prospect of forming a workable government themselves, and might well want to punish them for that.  But the Liberals are also using the figures to argue that they are in the hunt for four seats in Bass and Braddon and also that Labor might be squeezed to one in Franklin.  (Yep, 3-1-1-2.  It is a set of numbers, I suppose.)

2025 Federal Election Pollster Performance Review

NOTE FOR TASMANIAN READERS: Comments re the Liberal-commissioned EMRS poll will be added tonight (Sunday 6th), possibly around 8 pm.

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

Oh no, not again ...

On the day after the 2019 federal election I did the most media interviews I have ever done in one day, eleven.  Eight of those were entirely about the same thing: the polls being wrong.  That day and in the coming days journos from as far afield as Japan and from vague memory Switzerland wanted to know how Australia had gone into an election with Labor unanimously ahead about 51.5-48.5 and come out with the Coalition winning by the same amount. Was this part of a global pattern of polls being increasingly broken and underestimating the right?  (Answers: no and no - it was just a shocker by Australia's high standards).  

The day after the 2025 federal election it was obvious something had gone astray with polling again, and by something near the same amount, but the media reception was muted.  I think I did only one interview where the polling was even part of the report's initial focus.  The ABC did an article about the polling, but it was so quarter-arsed that it omitted four final polls, initially got the 2PPs of four others wrong, and even when "corrected" continues to this day to contain errors about what the final poll 2PPs were.  There were a few other articles that were better.

What Happens If An Ineligible Candidate Wins In A Tasmanian State Election?

This article is part of my 2025 Tasmanian election coverage.  Link to main guide page including links to seat guides and voting advice.

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

Something bubbling away in the state election campaign which I have so far avoided writing a full article on is the alleged controversy (and I don't believe the claims really have any merit) about Franklin Labor candidate Jessica Munday's eligibility to be elected.  However the appearance in today's Mercury (and also now Pulse) of a claim that the entire election might have to be voided and rerun over this is something that I think I should comment about.  Advance summary: no.  I also thought this was a good opportunity for a general article about ineligibility in Hare-Clark elections and what can be done about it if it occurs.  

There Must Be Some Way Out Of Here: YouGov and DemosAU Tasmanian Polls

YouGov Liberal 31 Labor 34 Green 13 IND 18 other 4

DemosAU Liberal 34 Labor 26.3 Green 15.1 IND 19.3 other 5.3

IND vote likely overstated in both polls

Seat estimate if YouGov poll close to accurate 13-14-4-4 (Lib-ALP-Grn-IND)

Seat estimate for DemosAU 13-11-5-4, 2 unclear 

This article is part of my 2025 Tasmanian election coverage.  Link to main guide page containing link to other articles including electorate guides.  

At the 2024 Tasmanian election, voters elected a parliament where it wasn't easy to form a government at all, and the one that was formed didn't last for long.  Labor was unwilling to even try to form a government that would have involved the dreaded Greens, and the Liberals were only willing to form a government with what was left if it was basically a Liberal government with relatively minor concessions to others.  When that ceased to be a viable option upon the loss of the key vote of Andrew Jenner, the government was unable or unwilling to adjust to the fact that it was hanging by Craig Garland's fishing line, and here we are.

How To Best Use Your Vote In The 2025 Tasmanian Election

This piece is part of my Tasmanian 2025 election coverage - link to 2025 guide page including links to electorate guides and other articles.

This piece is written to explain to voters how to vote in the 2025 Tasmanian election so their vote will be most powerful.  It is not written for those who just want to do the bare minimum - if you just want to vote as quickly as possible and don't care how effective your vote is then this guide is not for you.  It is for those who care about voting as effectively as possible and are willing to put some time into understanding how to do so.  This is very near to being a carbon copy of my 2024 guide but I have put it out as a 2025 edition with some very minor changes tailored to this year's election.  

Please feel free to share or forward this guide or use points from it to educate confused voters.  If doing the latter, just make sure you've understood those points first!  I may edit in more sections later.

Please do not ask me what is the most effective way to vote for a specific party, candidate or set of goals as opposed to in general terms.

Oh, and one other thing.  Some people really agonise about their votes, spend many hours over them and get deeply worried about doing the wrong thing.  Voting well is worth some effort, but it's not worth that.  The chance that your vote will actually change the outcome is low.  

Tasmanian Nationals Are Lambie Chaos 2.0

This article is part of my 2025 Tasmanian state election coverage. (Link to main guide page with links to other articles here.)

I was going to write an article called "There Are Too Many Independents" but on seeing the full rollout of candidates for the state election I feel that higher duty calls.  There are too many independents this election (a record 44; some are competitive or at least entertaining but I'll be impressed if even ten get their deposits back) but that can wait.  I want to make some comments about the latest coming of the Tasmanian Nationals.

We've been here before.  In the leadup to the 2014 election there was a Tasmanian Nationals branch that was briefly part of the federal Nationals and was under the stewardship of former Labor MLC Allison Ritchie (never herself a candidate).  Initial enthusiasm for that run included Michael McCormack tweeting (above) that the appointment of Ritchie was "a coup for Christine Ferguson" (then Nationals Federal President).  Less than a month after McCormack's tweet the branch had been disowned by the federal party, who tried but were powerless to cancel the state party name registration.  The rogue branch's curious crew of candidates, including a legal dope advocate and a former Socialist Alliance member, polled a risibly tiny vote tally and the Nats name disappeared. 

2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: Lyons

This is my Lyons electorate guide for the 2025 Tasmanian State Election.  (Link to main 2025 election preview page, including links to other electorates.)  If you find these guides useful, donations are very welcome (see sidebar), but please only donate if you can afford to do so.  Note: if using a mobile you may need to use the view web version option at the bottom of the page to see the sidebar. 

Lyons (2024 result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 JLN, at election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 Nat)

Most of the state

Rural, outer suburban and forested.  

Lots of tiny dispersed towns that take many years for an MP to work

Candidates

Note to candidates: As the number of candidates becomes large, continually changing link and bio details could consume a lot of my time.  It's up to you to get your act together and have your candidacy advertised on a good website that I can find easily well ahead of the election.  On emailed or Twitter/Bluesky request by July 12 at the latest I may make one free website link change per candidate at my discretion; fees will be charged beyond that.  Bio descriptions and other text will not be changed on request except to remove any material that is indisputably false.   

Where a link is available, a candidate's name is used as a hyperlink.  Emails from candidates who do not understand this will be ignored.  

I am not listing full portfolios for each MP, only the most notable positions.  Candidates are listed incumbent-first by cabinet position/seniority and then alphabetically, except if stated otherwise.

2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: Franklin

This is my Franklin electorate guide for the 2025 Tasmanian State Election.  (Link to main 2025 election preview page, including links to other electorates.)  If you find these guides useful, donations are very welcome (see sidebar), but please only donate if you can afford to do so.  Note: if using a mobile you may need to use the view web version option at the bottom of the page to see the sidebar. 

Franklin (3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 IND)

Eastern shore Hobart (Clarence City), much of Kingborough, Huon Valley, D'Entrecasteaux Channel

Urban/outer urban/treechange/rural

Candidates

Note to candidates: As the number of candidates becomes large, continually changing link and bio details could consume a lot of my time.  It's up to you to get your act together and have your candidacy advertised on a good website that I can find easily well ahead of the election.  On emailed or Twitter/Bluesky request by July 12 at the latest I may make one free website link change per candidate at my discretion; fees will be charged beyond that.  Bio descriptions and other text will not be changed on request except to remove any material that is indisputably false.   

Where a link is available, a candidate's name is used as a hyperlink.  Emails from candidates who do not understand this will be ignored.  

I am not listing full portfolios for each MP, only the most notable positions.  Candidates are listed incumbent-first by cabinet position/seniority and then alphabetically, except if stated otherwise.

2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: Clark

This is my Clark electorate guide for the 2025 Tasmanian State Election.  (Link to main 2025 election preview page, including links to other electorates.)  If you find these guides useful, donations are very welcome (see sidebar), but please only donate if you can afford to do so.  Note: if using a mobile you may need to use the view web version option at the bottom of the page to see the sidebar. 

Clark (2 Liberal 2 Labor 2 Green 1 IND)

Western shore Hobart, primarily Hobart City and Glenorchy City

Inner and outer urban

Candidates

Note to candidates: As the number of candidates becomes large, continually changing link and bio details could consume a lot of my time.  It's up to you to get your act together and have your candidacy advertised on a good website that I can find easily well ahead of the election.  On emailed or Twitter/Bluesky request by July 12 at the latest I may make one free website link change per candidate at my discretion; fees will be charged beyond that.  Bio descriptions and other text will not be changed on request except to remove any material that is indisputably false.   

Where a link is available, a candidate's name is used as a hyperlink.  Emails from candidates who do not understand this will be ignored.  

I am not listing full portfolios for each MP, only the most notable positions.  Candidates are listed incumbent-first by cabinet position/seniority and then alphabetically, except if stated otherwise.

2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: Braddon

This is my Braddon electorate guide for the 2025 Tasmanian State Election.  (Link to main 2025 election preview page, including links to other electorates.)  If you find these guides useful, donations are very welcome (see sidebar), but please only donate if you can afford to do so.  Note: if using a mobile you may need to use the view web version option at the bottom of the page to see the sidebar. 

Braddon (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 JLN 1 IND, at election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 IND 1 Nat). 

North-west and western Tasmania including Devonport, Burnie and Ulverstone

Regional/rural/remote

Candidates

Note to candidates: As the number of candidates becomes large, continually changing link and bio details could consume a lot of my time.  It's up to you to get your act together and have your candidacy advertised on a good website that I can find easily well ahead of the election.  On emailed or Twitter/Bluesky request by July 12 at the latest I may make one free website link change per candidate at my discretion; fees will be charged beyond that.  Bio descriptions and other text will not be changed on request except to remove any material that is indisputably false.   

Where a link is available, a candidate's name is used as a hyperlink.  Emails from candidates who do not understand this will be ignored.  

I am not listing full portfolios for each MP, only the most notable positions.  Candidates are listed incumbent-first by cabinet position/seniority and then alphabetically, except if stated otherwise.

2025 Tasmanian State Election Guide: Bass

This is the Bass electorate guide for the 2025 Tasmanian State Election.  (Link to main 2025 election preview page, which will include links to other electorates.) If you find these guides useful, donations are very welcome (see sidebar), but please only donate if you can afford to do so.  Note: if using a mobile you may need to use the view web version option at the bottom of the page to see the sidebar. 

Bass (2024 Result 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 JLN, at election 3 Liberal 2 Labor 1 Green 1 IND)

North-east Tasmania including most of Launceston

Mixed urban/small-town/rural

Candidates

Note to candidates: As the number of candidates becomes large, continually changing link and bio details could consume a lot of my time.  It's up to you to get your act together and have your candidacy advertised on a good website that I can find easily well ahead of the election.  On emailed or Twitter/Bluesky request by July 12 at the latest I may make one free website link change per candidate at my discretion; fees will be charged beyond that.  Bio descriptions and other text will not be changed on request except to remove any material that is indisputably false.   

Where a link is available, a candidate's name is used as a hyperlink.  Emails from candidates who do not understand this will be ignored.  

I am not listing full portfolios for each MP, only the most notable positions.  Candidates are listed incumbent-first by cabinet position/seniority and then alphabetically, except if stated otherwise.

Announced/Expected Candidates For The 2025 Tasmanian State Election

Introduction

This article is a list of endorsed, self-declared or expected candidates running in the 2025 Tasmanian state election (Link to main guide page).   I've written it mainly to keep tabs on the mushrooming tally of candidate announcements before I have time to get my candidate guides in order.  Incumbents, marked with a *, are assumed to be running again unless they announce retirement or are deselected.  Rumours are noted for interest but are by nature unreliable and will be noted as debunked once that is so.  Media-reported candidates for preselection who have not yet been announced as party candidates are noted as "intending".

I am aware of some people who have made Facebook posts saying they are running without saying which electorate.  It is not entirely clear if they are serious.  I am disregarding these for now pending further information.

Declared Candidate Tally

I expect the Greens to run 35 candidates.  Numbers who ran in 2024 shown in brackets.  This tally includes candidates seeking preselection.

Liberal 35 (35)

Labor 35 (35)

Greens 35 (35)

Independents 44 (29) (record high, excluding "Green Independents" in 1992)

Shooters Fishers and Farmers 3 (11)

Nationals 9 (not then registered)

Animal Justice Party apparently not running (5)

Jacqui Lambie Network not running (12)

Local Network deregistered (5)

Total 161 (167)

2025 Tasmanian Election Guide: Main Page

TASMANIAN STATE ELECTION 19 JULY 2025

SEATS AT ELECTION LIB 14 ALP 10 GREEN 5 IND 4 NAT 2 (1 IND and 2 NATs were elected as JLN at 2024 election)

CAUSE OF ELECTION: No confidence motion passed in Premier Jeremy Rockliff, no alternative government could be formed

This election has been run and the Liberals have won the most seats - Click here for tallyboard page with links to postcount pages

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

Welcome to the main page for my 2025 Tasmanian state election coverage.  Yes we are really here again! This page will carry links to all the other articles about the election that I write prior to the close of polling, and will contain general big-picture stuff and links to all the specialised articles (once these are written).  It will be updated very frequently.  Each electorate will soon have its own guide page, to be rolled out in the next few days. These are my own guides and I reserve the right to inject flippant and subjective comments whenever I feel like it; if you do not like this, write your own.  This guide and all the others will evolve over coming weeks.  

Very pleased to annunce I will be covering the election counting night for Pulse Tasmania, presumably from the tally room; this coverage will not be paywalled.  All post-count coverage will occur on this website.  

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

Tasmania 2025: The Election Cliff

No confidence motion in Premier Jeremy Rockliff passed 18-17.

By convention Rockliff will resign unless he can secure a fresh election from the Governor.

At this stage of term Governor should seek to appoint a replacement Premier if possible.

However it seems doubtful that a stable and willing alternative government can be formed as Labor does not appear willing to form a stable government without an election.

House is sitting to pass supply after which Rockliff will request election.

Election seems highly likely.

Earliest possible date July 19.  (Latest August 9 if election granted immediately).

Governor will not make an immediate decision as of Tuesday night.  

WEDNESDAY NIGHT: Election Confirmed - July 19

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

Tuesday 9:40 A quick fresh post of where we are at ahead of today's sitting of State Parliament, much of this being a distilling of last week's article.  I will have some commitments during the day today and tomorrow so updates may not be instant if things happen quickly.

Last week the House of Assembly passed a motion of no confidence in the Premier Jeremy Rockliff with the support of ten Labor MHAs, five Greens, independents Kristie Johnston and Craig Garland, and Andrew Jenner who was with the Jacqui Lambie Network (or as I am now calling it, Notwork) then but has since been dumped.  

This early in the term a Governor should seek to appoint a replacement Premier if one can be found who can satisfy Her Excellency Barbara Baker that they will have the support of the house on confidence and supply matters at least for a reasonable time.  However there has been no signs whatsoever of such a replacement emerging.

Labor Tables No Confidence Motion In Premier Rockliff

No confidence motion in Premier Jeremy Rockliff passed 18-17.

By convention Rockliff will resign unless he can secure a fresh election from the Governor.

At this stage of term Governor should seek to appoint a replacement Premier if possible.

However it seems doubtful that a stable and willing alternative government can be formed as Labor does not appear willing to form government without an election.

House will sit on Tuesday to pass supply after which Rockliff will request election.

Election seems most likely but there are paths by which it might be avoided. 

Earliest possible date July 19.  

In-theory alternatives:

* Rockliff resigns, new Liberal Premier (no-one yet appears willing, unclear they would command confidence)

* Mid-term transfer to Labor (Labor appears unwilling to govern with Green support)

* Crossbench Premier (very unlikely either major party would support)

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

Things might come to a head quickly here or it might be a fizzer but I thought I should put something up following today's news that Opposition Leader Dean Winter has used his budget reply speech to table a no confidence motion in Premier Jeremy Rockliff.  

2025 Senate Notes Part Two

This is part two of a detailed review that I write after each Senate election.  See part one for a general introduction and coverage of proportionality, winning vote shares, preferencing impacts and the curse of Inclusive Gregory.  This part covers Senate 2PP, How to Vote cards, just-voting-1, exhaust, informals, below the lines, and poor performances.

Senate 2PP

Senate 2PP is useful especially for looking at personal votes in the House of Representatives - how an MP does in Reps 2PP relative to their party's Senate 2PP in similar seats may give an insight into how popular they are.  I determine Senate 2PP by adding the above-the-line two-party preferred vote between the two major parties to the below-the-line two-candidate preferred vote between the lead candidates of the two parties.  It has only been a useful measure to calculate since Group Ticket Voting was abolished.

Because preferences in the Senate are semi-optional, Senate 2PP can tend to amplify a clear winner because of exhausted votes, and it also tends to favour Labor in that the 2PP exhaust rate off Greens votes is very low compared to other parties.  The previous election Senate 2PPs were: 2016 50.08 to Labor,  2019 52.66 to Coalition and 2022 52.93 to ALP.  At this election Labor won the Senate 2PP 56.76-43.24, a 3.83% swing.

NSW 56.54 (+5.34)
Vic 57.13 (+1.21)
Qld 52.12 (+4.55)
WA 58.16 (+0.96)
SA 60.42 (+6.67)
Tas 64.00 (+8.96)
ACT 72.34 (+6.00)
NT 54.97 (+2.16)

Senate 2PP doesn't gauge the performance of other parties; thus Labor won three seats in Victoria with a lower 2PP than WA where it missed out.

2025 Senate Notes Part One

This is the latest in a string of articles that I write after each Senate election tracking certain themes in the Senate races.  Previous volumes in the series were called Senate Reform Performance Review, referring to the 2016 Senate changes that got rid of Group Ticket Voting.  I think now we've reached the point after four elections where it's very clear that the new system works very well indeed and needs no longer to be considered on probation, hence the shorter title.  For previous instalments see 2016 part one, 2016 part two, 2019 (single article) and 2022 (single article).  On the agenda for this issue are:  proportionality, winning vote shares (with a focus on the One Nation wins from behind), preferencing impacts, and the curse of Inclusive Gregory.  Part two covers Senate 2PP, How to Vote cards, just-voting-1, exhaust, informals, below the lines,  and the fun bit about people who we wonder why they bother.   And yes that includes the ACT Liberals! 

I've decided again to split the article into two because the volume of material this time is a bit much for one go.  At least for my own feeling that I'm spending a lot of time on a single article that I haven't released anything from yet.  

In this article I treat Labor, Greens and Pocock as comprising the left of the Senate (in relative terms, this should not be taken as me declaring Labor to be an outright left-wing party) and Coalition, One Nation and UAP as the right (with Jacqui Lambie treated as neither though these days there is a case for treating her as left if anything).  

Goldstein Count History And Partial Recount

GOLDSTEIN (Vic, IND vs Lib est 3.9%)
Tim Wilson (Lib) has provisionally won by 260 votes
AEC has authorised a partial recount

Wilson will win unless large errors are found during partial recount

RESULT: Wilson won by 175 votes.   

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

Updates

Updates will be posted here scrolling to the top.

Saturday 1:55: It's finally over, Wilson has won by 175 votes and the seat will be declared.  

Saturday 31st 11:35 am: The end cannot be far away as corrections are now showing to absents, dec prepolls and all booths except Hampton PPVC where only minor changes are expected though I do not know how many postals are to be checked.  Wilson leads by 164 following the expected Brighton corrections which actually cut his lead by 65.

2025 Senate Button Press Thread

Welcome to my 2025 thread to cover the so-called "button presses" (in fact the execution of a computer routine) that distribute preferences for the Senate and determines the Senate results.  

I have not had nearly as much time to work on projecting the Senate counts this election as in the past because it's been impossible to get away from the complexity and number of the in-doubt House of Reps counts for long and because of other work commitments.  In particular I probably would have been able to call Tasmania if I had had the time to do a few days scrutineering (and had been able to find anyone willing to appoint me) but such things were not to be.  

On this thread states/territories will appear once there are no unapportioned votes shown as awaiting data entry.  Normally based on past practice the button press follows a few days after that with the declaration shortly after (in the absence of any recount request that might be caused by a micro-close margin).  Until I have seen a state reach zero unapportioned votes, commentary about it continues on the previous National Senate postcount thread.  

Legislative Council 2025: Montgomery, Nelson and Pembroke Live And Post-Count

Montgomery: Casey Hiscutt (IND) won after preferences as expected
Nelson: CALLED (7:09 pm) Meg Webb (IND) re-elected
Pembroke: CALLED (7:33 pm) Luke Edmunds (ALP) re-elected

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Donations welcome!

If you find my coverage useful please consider donating to support the large amount of time I spend working on this site.  Donations can be made by the Paypal button in the sidebar which also contains PayID instructions or email me via the address in my profile for my account details.  Please only donate if you are sure you can afford to do so.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Live comments (scrolls to top)

All updates are unofficial, check the TEC site for official figures

Thursday 29th:  Unsurprisingly Hiscutt has done better than the Liberals on preferences; in fact he has won massively, 61.7-38.3 getting 76.9% of preferences that flowed to the two leaders (these figures are still subject to very minor change).   In Pembroke Ritchie snuck into second late in the primary count and moved 6.9% clear of Allan after preferences but still lost to Edmunds 58.2-41.8.  In all Ritchie got 59.2% of preferences.  In Nelson there will be no preferences; Meg Webb has 51.7%.  

EMRS: Government Trails Placebo Opposition

EMRS LIB 29 (-5) ALP 31 (+1) GRN 14 (+1) JLN 6 (-2) IND 17 (+5) Others 3
Independent is generic option - likely overstates support at actual election
Election "held now" would result in a very hung parliament

When Brad Stansfield tweeted the above spoiler yesterday it was easy to imagine what might have been coming.  At the recent federal election the Liberals were sent packing in northern Tasmania, losing Braddon and Bass with enormous swings and being thrashed in previously ultra-marginal Lyons.  There was a federal primary vote swing across the state of 9.3% to Labor and 8.4% against the Liberal Party.  Perhaps the federal election was a sign that the Liberal brand was more on the nose at state level than might have been expected and that Labor would be surging towards an election-winning position?  Or perhaps just the timing of the latest EMRS poll could see a degree of federal contamination such that state Labor picked up an afterglow from the federal triumph?  Well, no.  The poll is "wow!", unlike Peter van Onselen's infamous "Newspoll wow"s which were habitually followed by meaningless changes in the Newspoll.  But it is not the sort of "wow" that narrative would have expected.  

Instead, it's a tale that's been running for years - the ageing and stumbling Liberal government shedding and shedding more vote share and Labor still picking up little or nothing in this poll series.  Currently the government trails 29-31.  In August 2022 it led 41-31.   Tasmanians separate state and federal politics - strongly - and Labor is still not breaking out of the very low 30s.  The overall picture is that Labor is content to avoid rocking the boat, being as bipartisan as possible on wedge issues like the stadium and salmon farming, and wait for the government to fall over.  Presumably some point is eventually reached where the government is so on the nose that Labor support has to grow at least enough to make Labor the biggest party.  That said if we continue this trend indefinitely the crossbench will govern before they will.

2025 Late Postcount: Calwell

CALWELL (ALP 12.4%)
Basem Abdo (ALP) vs Carly Moore (IND) 
Abdo leading on primary votes during preference distribution

ALP retain 

I should have given Calwell its own page from the start but the unique nature of the count was not so obvious from the early primary figures which I covered on the seats where indies may make the final two page.  On the day after the election it was obvious that the very low major party primaries in a huge field in Calwell created an in-theory chance that independent ex-Labor mayor Carly Moore could get into the top two.  However soon after that, another independent, Joseph Youhana, surged, creating a unique situation where even a three-candidate preferred count was of no use as it could not be known for sure which independent (if either though very likely one of them will) would make the final three.  The AEC now has a distribution of preferences page up.   This is a familiar process to Tasmanian audiences as the TEC routinely does this for Legislative Council elections where stuff like this happens (OK that was an extreme case, only four candidates have won from third in LegCo history), but a new thing for federal elections.

The primaries in Calwell are:

Abdo (ALP) 30.51
Ghani (Lib) 15.7
Moore (IND) 11.94
Youhana (IND) 10.73
Garcha (GRN) 8.29

Moslih (IND) 6.86

Toma (ON) 3.76

Del Rosario-Makridis (LCP) 3.16

Hawu (Aus Citizens) 2.92

Bengtsson (FF) 2.57

Issa (TOP) 2.46

Ragupathy (IND) 0.56

Peach (unendorsed - unregistered Socialist Equality Party) 0.54

2025 Late Postcount And Expected Recount: Bradfield

And it has come to this ..

BRADFIELD (Lib vs IND est 2.5%) 

Gisele Kapterian (Lib) vs Nicolette Boele (IND) 
Boele led by 40 votes at end of indicative 2CP count.

Kapterian led by 8 votes at the end of distribution of preferences

Automatic recount started Monday 26 May

Boele has won by 26 votes after full recount

Boele will be seated, result can be challenged but will be an MP pending any case

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

Not-A-Poll Reset 1 of 2025: Dutton Loses Seat

This morning Sussan Ley became the first female federal leader of the Liberal Party, elected 29-25 over Angus Taylor.  Taylor was running on a ticket that included the insane proposition that Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, a member of the Liberal partyroom for five earth minutes, should become deputy leader.  This was especially crazy because Price was such a totemic candidate for the toxic idea that the Coalition should be more Trumpy (making her a shadow minister for government efficiency when they already had one was one of the Coalition's many mistakes).  

All this is not to say I would have been remotely keen to vote for Ley if I was a Liberal party room member either, in fact, given this choice, I could not have possibly voted for either.  While Taylor generally seemed to be making very little effort in the previous term, Ley on the other side struck me as trying too hard and serially out of her depth.  Most notably so when she criticised the AEC over voting interpretation rules for the Voice Referendum during the ticks and crosses beatup, when the Coalition had not made any attempt to change the legislation, but there were many other examples.  

The good news for the Liberals is it probably doesn't matter.  If Ley is a success well and good, and if she fails they can tick and flick the box of having had a female leader and use it as an excuse to not do that again in a hurry.  Their two-term strategy for winning in 2028 is a crash scene (in part because they tried to turn it into a one-term strategy and wasted seats like Menzies in the process) and realistically this term is about rebuilding, trying to finish off the teals with help from the new donations regime (if it survives the High Court) and seeing how they go thereafter.