Transcript of the concluding moments of the No-Confidence motion debate in the Tasmanian House of Assembly, 5 June 2025. The votes from the floor having been tallied as 17-17, the Speaker Michelle O’Byrne rises to address the Assembly.

Michelle O’Byrne – Speaker

Given the significance of the vote before us and the media commentary on the role of the Speaker in this deciding vote, I will take the opportunity to provide reasons for the practice of the exercise of the Speaker’s casting vote.

Standing order 167 obliges the Speaker, or any other presiding officer, as the case may be, to vote upon a question put to the House to resolve the matter after a division has resulted in an equality of votes. The standing order is also prescribed in Section 25 of the Constitution Act 1934

The Westminster practice, and that of some other jurisdictions, is that in order to avoid any imputation upon their impartiality, it is usual for the Speaker, when practical, to vote in such a manner as to not make the decision of the House final and to explain their reasons, which are entered into the journal.

The Westminster principles are for the Speaker to vote in such a way that the Speaker remains impartial and appends to the political affiliation and to vote in such a manner as to not make the decision of the House final, and where no discussion is possible, decisions should not be taken except by majority on the floor of the House.

Notwithstanding the principles outlined above, Erskine May also provides that the Speaker is at liberty to vote like any other Member, according to their conscience, without assigning a reason. As noted in the companion to the Standing Orders second edition on page 181, given the proportional representation of parties and the relatively small membership of the House, and therefore the greater likelihood of the Speaker being in the position of casting a vote, consideration of the pure application of the Westminster tradition has, in practice, in this place, been heavily weighted by the political practicalities in consideration of the direction of the casting vote.

For this reason, the political culture of the House and its practices differ significantly from most other jurisdictions, and particularly the Commons, where the occasions on which a Speaker is required to give a casting vote are rare.

The House of Assembly of the 41st parliament, 1989 to 1992, provided an equality of votes on the floor. During that Parliament, the Speaker, a member of the Labor Party, cast his vote with that party on every occasion, including a want of confidence vote, which brought about a change of government.

Similarly, in the 50th parliament, ’21 to ’23, the Speaker, a member of the Liberal Party, cast his vote with that party on every occasion, including on votes to protect the government and individual members from censure and from confidence / want of confidence motions.

I have voted with my party since assuming the chair in 2024. I am a member of the Labor Party. When I was elected to this position, it was made clear to this House and the public that despite no longer attending the caucus and strategy meetings of the Labor Party, that I would always vote with them.

No one in this chamber could realistically expect me to provide confidence to a Liberal government.

No one would expect me to turn my back on the rules of a party that I have believed in my entire life and been a member of for longer than some members of this chamber have actually been alive.

Unlike some Members of this chamber, I’ve always believed in the values of my party, the party to which I’m a member. My membership of the Labor Party is not purely expedient or opportunistic. It is governed by life’s long held values that will not change.

As I provide my casting vote today, I do so in the knowledge that regardless of the outcome of today’s vote, the stability of this Parliament is fundamentally under question. If I was not in the chair and the Government had held this position, the vote would be won on the floor.

Notwithstanding the considerations of the Premier and the Lieutenant Governor in this process, the die is cast and the state is on the inexorable path to another early election. The Budget before this House faces almost insurmountable challenges in both its form and in its timing.

As a result, I’ve sought advice on the issue of supply. In the event this Budget is not passed, I’ve been advised that in the absence of the approval of the Appropriation bills currently before this House, alternate arrangements need to be established to fund government services beyond one July 2025.

I’m sure no one in this House would like to see a situation where payments are not made to government employees, or there is a failure to fund service delivery or the organisations that provide them.

While there are automatic supply provisions in the Financial Management Act of 2016 they are limited to approximately two months of service delivery. Given the current uncertainty, it is considered that two months’ supply will not be sufficient.

As such, it is imperative the Parliament resumes so it can consider and approve appropriate Supply bills to fund government services before 1 July, 2025. These bills would not countenance unforeseen circumstances on matters not encompassed already in a 2024-2025 budget. They act only as a continuation of the status quo. They also will have limitations on the flow of funds under contractual obligations. Passing the Supply Bill, however, must be a priority.

I am also very mindful that the future of the AFL teams will be tested by the decisions and actions of the next few weeks. I support the team. I took one of the first business cases to the AFL as minister.

To say the pathway to the team has been poorly handled is an understatement, but Members of this House should not underestimate the passion that Tasmanians have for their team.

I am further aware of the impact to them people of Tasmania on potentially being thrust back into an election cycle so quickly. For some it may very well be the third election in a matter of months.

Members, the events and contributions on this debate and the matters leading up to it have also caused me to reflect on my own tenure and the challenge of being an Opposition Speaker. I’ve been a Member of Parliament since 1998 in the Federal and State Parliaments.

I’ve served in this House for almost 20 years. I’ve been witness to many situations which highlight the need for a functioning democratic process in this place. For our society to work, our parliament has to be able to function.

The obligation to remain true to lifelong values, to honour the trust placed in me by the people who voted for me as a Labor Member, to give my loyalty to my party, whilst also ensuring that the independence of the role of Speaker in the House of Parliament is maintained and the powers conferred upon me whilst in the role are fairly dispensed, comes with an inherent conflict.

I tried to do this and to do it well. I’ve taken the respectful conduct and efficient operation of this place as my greatest obligation as Speaker. I hope the next Speaker continues to do so.

However, votes like the one before us now have highlighted the moral and practical challenges presented by the conflict between the intent of the standing orders, the independence of the Speaker’s role, and political practicalities of Parliament.

So I reflected not only on my appointment as Speaker, but my continuing future in this House, and I will have more to say about that in coming days. I apologise for this rather lengthy contribution, and hope that Members understand that an explanation of my thinking was necessary.

I remind Members again of their obligation and imperative that the state’s financial obligations are met and in the circumstances we now find ourselves in. We need to meet again to pass either a Budget or a Supply Budget with some urgency.

With the vote before us today under the provisions of standing order 167 and with reference to the [inaudible] when I was elected to the chair, I cast my vote with the ayes. The ayes have it.

We can now unlock the doors. The Premier has the call.

Jeremy Rockliff – Premier 

Well, thank you, Honourable Speaker, and I acknowledge and respect the vote of the House today, as I have respected, every single vote that has taken place in this House in my 23 years. And I thank you Speaker for your very eloquent reasoning. And our friendship that goes back to the early 1990s in actual fact –

Michelle O’Byrne – Speaker

You might want to point out what pub that was in.

Jeremy Rockliff – Premier

A well-known establishment in Launceston you used to frequent. And you were Labor, and I was Liberal, and I always respected your Labor values and that of your family, which will always be Labor values. And you respected mine. And we’ve been foes in this place, but always friends outside of it.

In my personal opinion, this is a very sad day for Tasmanian. I want to thank Honourable Members for their contributions. And within those contributions, even those that have voted for this motion, I thank you for at least acknowledging some of my contributions in this place.

It’s a sad day as well, because I put a lot of line, a lot on the line for this Parliament. It wasn’t easy to get a 35-seat Parliament through my team, but I knew was the right thing to do, and I still believe it was the right thing to do, because what we have in this Parliament, as I’ve said over the course of the last 14 months, is an eclectic mix of people from all backgrounds, which is how a Parliament should be in actual fact, and I wanted it to work.

I believed in it, and actually still do. I still do because of the results that we’ve had over the course of the last 14 months where everyone in the Parliament has got something through that they feel passionate about and believed in.

And this hasn’t been 100% Liberal minority government success. We’ve got most of our agenda through simply because of our negotiations between each other, and that’s why I’m so disappointed, if not brokenhearted, frankly, of what the Tasmanian people who elected us in March 2024 to work together.

And yes, not everything’s gone to plan. Name me a Parliament in the state of Australia, where everything goes to plan.

And it’s been difficult. The economy has been difficult. Name me a Parliament or a Government of all colours across the nation that isn’t coming out of one of the toughest times of the last century where we’ve had to reach in and support Tasmanians.

It’s cost us emotionally, and it’s cost us financially, but we had to do it, and we’re paying for that now, I accept, but there’s not a budget in the country, maybe with the exception of Western Australia, which isn’t under challenge as this one is; no one’s denied that.

What I find most disappointing is the rationalisation of the vote, if you like, and I’ll be damned if the Labor Party is going to choose the leader of the Liberal Party that I love. And the recklessness of the Leader of the Opposition. At the end of the day: this was just a grievance debate, which we could have had any other day.

The budget we’re debating, it’s not through yet. The Spirits, yes, failure, which I’ve apologised for, and under the Westminster system, a minister was held accountable for.

And privatisation. We haven’t promised to sell a single government business. What we’ve done is actually do the work to see if a government business is best in public hands, or indeed can deliver better service in private hands. But we haven’t made a decision to sell a single business. And if we had, if we had you all, you all would get a vote. Would get a vote, which is what democracy is all about.

And Honourable Speaker, there’s not too many speeches like that where you mentioned an AFL team, I must say. The large majority of this discussion, particularly from the Green side of the Parliament, talked about the stadium and the AFL and AFL-W team, and I’ve been advised by all the hard heads in my party not to go down that track. Why? Because it’s bad for votes.

Well, I’ve always said ‘stuff votes’. I said it when I moved to the 35-seat House of Parliament, and I’ll say it for the stadium for as long as I damn well live, because I believe in it.

And I have a right to believe in it, just like those opposite have a right not to. Have a right to believe in no native forest harvesting or whatever the Greens believe in, of course, and passionately, at the very least, we know what you stand for, and I respect it.

But I believe in this team so passionately because it’s working now. Young kids right now believe and are aspiring. It’s created an energy and to see Kath McCann break down the other day in that media interview, I broke down with her when I saw it, because it said that this was more than a team. This is about the future of our state and the crossroads of our state.

If I cannot, or we cannot, work together when we’ve been fighting for so long, when we’ve been pushed out the door disrespectfully. If we cannot invest in a team, in the infrastructure required, in an industrial wasteland next to a sewerage works, then what the hell are we doing?

And that’s why, and that’s why I believe so passionately, which ultimately I believe is probably why I stand here right now, but I will always believe in it. And you know, because you’ve said so, even the people that have voted against me today, know where I stand, particularly when it comes to supporting and giving hope, hope to people of disadvantage in our community.

But it’s not just about that and the recklessness that we’ve seen this week in the middle of a Budget week where the Budget contains investment to Marinus, which unlocks our future energy generating capacity, where we can secure our own future energy, encourage businesses to Tasmania, but also invest in wind and solar and all the things that Tasmania is known for.

That’s why I’m so disappointed the Leader of the Opposition has not only diminished this Parliament himself, his party.

And you might get rid of me, mate, but I tell you what: they’re coming for you as well, because you will always be known as a wrecker.

And it is a sad day. And I mean what I say: I will advise the Governor of the vote in the House and the context of it. I will also advise, if Mr Winter cannot command a majority in this place, most reluctantly, we would need to go to an election.

I saw the Honourable Member’s statement today where he would not do a deal with the Greens. Well, why? What’s this all about? What is this all about? You refused to do a deal and take the Treasury benches when you probably could have in March 2024.

But we had the courage with just 14 members of a 35-seat House of Assembly to give it a crack. and a crack, we have given. The very best. I believe we have tried, but I will continue to act in the best interests of Tasmania.

Because of of course Mr Winter’s recklessness, our team will be back in here in the coming days to provide our nurses, our teachers, our paramedics, our child protection officers and policemen and -women, with a certainty that the Leader of the Opposition has robbed of them with his selfish actions this week. We will pay, and have the mechanism to pay, a hard working public servant.

Make no mistake, this will be an election that Tasmanians don’t want and Tasmania cannot afford. But be that on Mr. Winters and the Labor Party’s head; this has been a selfish grab for power, which we will fight and we’ll do our darnedest to win.

I want to acknowledge the Members of the cross-bench with whom that we have worked collaboratively together over the past 14 months, where we have delivered some real outcomes for the benefit of Tasmanians. All members of the cross-bench, but I want to thank particularly the people that have supported me today.

Ms Pentland, Ms Beswick, thank you. It’s not easy making these calls and these momentous occasions of which this is but thank you for being responsible, and thank you for representing your electorates in the best interests of Tasmania, for stability is what we promised, what you promised me, and you promised the Tasmanian people. I respect it.

Mr O’Byrne, thank you. You are a statesman. You will never resile from your Labor values, and I respect that, and you have worked with a Liberal Premier and delivered some real outcomes for your constituency and the people that have always respected and voted for you, and I want to thank you very much for that and your passion, also for aspiration in our state.

I want to thank our team, my team, our team, for your loyalty. It has not been easy by any stretch of the imagination, and you have stuck by me. And I really, really appreciate it through thick and thin. And that has not been easy. Thank you. I really, really appreciate that, your loyalty and your respect.

By gee I respect you because we’ve had some challenges to work through, and some of you I’ve walked alongside for almost two decades. I am passionate about this state. We have invested to build a better Tasmanian. We have invested to keep our kids safe. We have invested in our schools and our hospitals, and most importantly, for the people that work within them for jobs and we. Have done our darnedest in collaboration with the federal government of all colours, actually, to keep our economy strong.

And I am not going to let the Leader of the Opposition Mr Winter destroy all that for what is an ultimate power grab.

This is about – and I would have preferred a battle of ideas, strong, robust discussion, alternative ideas and you know, a real, if I can call it in the nicest possible way, a bare pit brawl on policy and ideas for the future of Tasmania over the course of the next few years.

And maybe you might have worn me down. The polls might have gone down south when it comes to preferred leader, but it would have been a fair fight. This is not a fair fight. This is a cowardice action.

And the only job you’re interested in, of course, is not the jobs of Tasmanians, but it’s getting mine. I’m not going to let the Labor Party choose the leader of the Liberal Party, and I’m going to fight this all the way

Michelle O’Byrne – Speaker

Members in accordance with practice the House having agreed to a want of confidence motion in the Premier, I will now leave the chair and the sitting of this House is suspended until the ringing of the division bells.

Tasmanian Times (TT) is a community-based news and current affairs service covering the island state of Tasmania. It exists to provide a diverse view of Tasmanian issues. TT creates and supports independent media content utilising the best of modern technologies and tried-and-true practices of public-interest journalism.

Support us in expanding our coverage and developing new content by and for Tasmanians. 

New initiatives on the way include:

  • a weekly podcast covering current affairs
  • a revamped website
  • a monthly cartoon competition
  • a user-friendly app for both Android and Apple devices
  • a weekly roundup of key stories