State of the State reply 17/3/26
[3.29 p.m.]
Ms BURNET (Clark) - Honourable Speaker, we are living through a period of profound democratic strain. Across the world, trust in governments and public institutions is eroding. The rise of populism, nationalism, authoritarianism, extremism, are responses to the growing impatience with economic and political systems that reward the rich and powerful while leaving others behind.
Tasmania is not immune. The warning signs are all there:
entrenched and growing inequality;
rising housing stress;
people who can't afford the basics;
more Tasmanian children growing up in poverty;
a social housing waiting list climbing past 5400 applicants;
more people sleeping rough on our streets and in our parks;
deteriorating health and education outcomes; and
young people leaving the state because they cannot see a future for themselves here.
When the government routinely breaks its promises, when it fails to deliver the basics for all its citizens, ignoring the advice of experts and the evidence, why should we be surprised when citizens become anxious or disillusioned or fall for populist solutions?
Last year in my state of the state reply, I talked about 10 principles of good government. These were:
good governance;
making reparations with the Palawa people;
delivering for vulnerable members of our community;
addressing intergenerational debt;
fiscal responsibility;
having strong public institutions;
reducing inequality and improving tolerance;
improving environmental stewardship and responding to climate change;
balancing the interests of the business community and various groups; and
being generous with knowledge.
For me, these principles still stand. This year is no different. We still need these, and yet the government falls short on most.
If you listen to the Premier's state of the state address, you would think everything was just fine. He focused exclusively on the economy, business and industry and said nothing about the day-to-day lives of Tasmanians. Well, Premier, here is my SOS to you. Right now, it is not good for a growing number of ordinary Tasmanians who are struggling to put a roof over their head, fuel in their cars and food in their mouths.
In years to come, our society will be judged by how we treat our most vulnerable and disadvantaged, and for them, Tasmania is not necessarily a good place to be. It's a place where the social housing waitlist has increased by 62 per cent in six years;, and that in 2023 the government set a target of 2000 social homes by 2027, but more than halfway in we only have 745 new social homes.
This reality affects people like Jamie, whose time on the housing waitlist is over five years, and it's not only people on the waiting list for social housing. It's students finishing courses whose wages have eroded or who are saddled with HECS debt, who cannot afford a rental, nor afford the deposit on a new home. The dream of security of a home for many young Tasmanians is replaced by relentless battles for survival.
Governments are also judged by their priorities. Whilst we do not have the threat of a pandemic, we do face the shock from oil insecurity in the Middle East. And how will Tasmanians judge the Rockliff government on prioritising infrastructure projects, particularly in times where Treasury, in their fiscal sustainability report, named up the spending priorities of government that are bleeding the state's finances dry. There is no clearer example than the Macquarie Point stadium folly, signed off by this parliament late in 2025. The Premier promising so much and yet already failing to deliver on time, nor to any familiar budget, will be, as Richard Flanagan so eloquently described at the Public Accounts Committee inquiry in June 2024, he said:
The stadium is now a catastrophe of accelerating chaos. Each new bad decision begets a dozen worse … we may assume that instead of a billion or three now it may be 10 billion 20 years - instead of hell now hell on hire purchase for decades to come.
The intergenerational debt just on the Macquarie Point stadium project alone is breathtaking. The costly impacts of mismanagement of Marinus and the delivery of two new Spirit vessels add to the crippling debt scenario generations of Tasmanians will be paying for.
Often you learn more from what is omitted from a speech. The Premier's omissions were telling. Truth, nor treaty, nor land returned for Palawa were mentioned. Tasmanians' outcomes for health, housing, education and fiscal management, and the record, are deeply troubling but didn't rate.
As we hurtle towards the budget of 21 May, community organisations, so important for creating a softer landing for those who rely on their services, are diving for the same crumbs from this government in a diminishing, shallower pool of money.
Many public servants' wage negotiations have stalled, as if the Treasurer wishes to hold off negotiating in good faith with unions because no-one locks in an agreement if they don't want to fund. Unless, of course, it is for the logging industry or the gaming industry.
The depth of the financial hole Tasmania is in should come as no surprise to this government. The 2021 Fiscal Sustainability Report clearly identified the risks and downward trajectory if the government did not take action. In other words, the government knew the fiscal cliff it was about to approach but chose not to apply the brakes. Instead, it covered its eyes and hit the accelerator on high‑risk, high‑cost capital commitments like Marinus Link and the stadium, handouts for business and middle‑class welfare, a trade that continues even now, with the Premier announcing $10 million for a Launceston developer to build a convention centre and doing shady deals with a developer for Wilkinsons Point, which it has been warned by one of its own departments could cost the Budget up to $100 million.
The deterioration in our fiscal position is plain to see. According to the 2026 Fiscal Sustainability Report, interest payments are crowding out essential services. The capacity to respond to shocks like wars and increasing disasters related to climate change is diminished. Treasury clearly states that the three‑pronged approach to fiscal repair to reduce economic impacts is lower operating expenditure, higher state taxation and lower infrastructure expenditure, yet the Premier and his Treasurer refuse to accept this advice and instead appear to be willing to let the public service and community groups disproportionately bear the burden of the repair needed to address this debt crisis.
Honourable Speaker, I will turn to some of the positive signs of reform and where the government is making progress. I am genuinely excited by Minister Archer's willingness to look at a long‑term, whole-of-government preventative health strategy. Coming from local government, she realises that active, healthy, connected Tasmanians are fundamental to reducing demands on our ambulance, hospital and community services, but it needs investment and commitment. I welcome minister Ogilvie's willingness to work with crossbench colleague Craig Garland on the marine environment act, and minister Vincent, who I met with yesterday to discuss areas of his portfolios such as infrastructure, housing, planning, transport and local government, is making some inroads into coordinating land and transport use, but it is a monumental task.
Arguably, with Trump's invasion of Iran and the shock to the world's and our reliance on fossil fuels, there is no better time than now for the minister to act on creating a smart, responsive, accessible commuter service, starting with working with what you have and to immediately improve our bus services. The plans minister Vincent has for dismantling a corpulent Department of State Growth could help build homes and take a strategic approach to projects and it may also apply pressure on what has been a series of long‑delayed business cases and poorly managed infrastructure over budget projects, but I am concerned about many of the important functions that have been swallowed up by State Growth and I'm also very concerned by what this means for hardworking state public servants and I question the way in which this news was delivered.
It had all the hallmarks of a premier with an eye for the news cycle, not on the wellbeing of the public service and public servants. The Premier said in his speech and in his answer to my question last time we sat that he is not seeking to slash and burn, but if cutting a department by 250 jobs is not slashing and burning, I fear what is to come for other public servants in other departments vital in delivering important projects and services for Tasmanians.
I strongly believe that it is the responsibility of all members of this delicately balanced parliament not just to hold the government to account but to help them govern, to put forward solutions. The changes we face are urgent. We cannot expect that we can wait for another state election, we need solutions now.
Over the remainder of the term, I will be focusing much of my time and energy on the areas of health, housing, public transport, making our cities more liveable, real action on climate change, and good governance. Here are the approaches I will take and advocate for that can make immediate and lasting improvements.
The 2026 Fiscal Sustainability Report makes clear that rising health expenditure is one of the main risks to a sustainable state budget. One-third of our state budget is spent on health, and we cannot continue to approach health the same way. How do we make that money go further? A thoughtful, properly funded preventative health strategy will reduce long‑term costs, help Tasmanians avoid stays in hospital, improve workforce participation and enhance wellbeing, but it requires sustained funding, legislative backing and cross-departmental integration. I will encourage the minister so that this reform is given the priority and funding it deserves and to ensure it doesn't just end up as another nice glossy plan sitting on a shelf.
In regard to real action on climate change, the review of Tasmania's climate legislation this year presents a critical opportunity to reduce our emissions and prepare for the unavoidable changes that climate change will bring. This response requires changes to the legislation to strengthen it. Reduction of emissions from transport, agriculture, waste and heavy industries have flatlined for decades. We need legislated emission reduction targets just like they have done with renewable energy targets, and integration of climate policy actions across government.
While the Climate Change Action Plan for 2023‑25 identified some reasonable actions, the approaches it identified were underwhelming. The review of the act and the next Climate Change Action Plan need to do better. I commit to working with the government and the Environment minister to see this happen. Premier and Minister Ogilvie, if we do nothing, it will be our children who will suffer.
One of the most effective ways to address climate change and growing inequality is to improve Tasmania's public and active transport networks. The need is now. Greater Hobart's transport system is failing everyone. Ever-increasing congestion is an expected part of the daily commute. Only around 4 per cent of Hobart's commuters use public transport to travel to work. Much like the buses it proposes to replace, the government's strategic business case for a rapid bus network finally arrived earlier this year after long delays and it acknowledged that unreliable and infrequent services disproportionately impact people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage and mobility barriers. A functioning rapid bus network valued at a capital cost of $860 million is still years away, with the prioritised northern corridor deliverable in six years' time. We can't afford to wait for a rapid bus network. We need improvements for our current commuter services if this is to be a serious option to filling the petrol tank.
We also need urgent action to address the housing supply. Remember, the fastest growing cohort of homelessness is older women and women fleeing domestic violence, and don't forget the hundreds of young people in rental or purchasing limbo because of a chronically unforgiving housing market. I'll be advocating for a 10 per cent statewide target for social and affordable housing, inclusionary rezoning requiring at least 15 per cent affordable dwellings in major developments, stronger protections for renters and limits on excessive rent increases, effective short‑stay accommodation, and a clear prioritisation for those most vulnerable groups.
I'll finish by talking about improvements to our democracy. At the beginning of this speech, I talked about the global threats to democracy and, of course, to international law. Our own parliament comes into focus as to how the government and this parliament functions. Good governance requires evidence‑based decision‑making. This means seeking out the best information, the best advice, and acting on that advice, not ignoring it.
Good governance also requires scrutiny. I welcomed yesterday's launch of Parliamentary Friends of Integrity by independent colleagues Meg Webb MLC and Kristie Johnston, and I welcome the announcement today by the Premier to adopt recommendations of the Snell and McCormack reports on Right to Information, yet over the past 10 years, this House has sat fewer days on average than any other lower House in the country. According to research prepared by the Parliamentary Library, over the past 10 years, our House has set an average of 41 days each year - five days less than Victorian and 15 days less than Western Australia. I'm committed to working towards achieving a more productive parliament. I want to see debate on a return to four‑year fixed‑terms government, and I want to see more sitting days.
The government needs to adequately fund the independent statutory authorities in charge of policing integrity to ensure they can effectively do their work: the Ombudsman, the Integrity Commission and, of course, the Auditor‑General.
Good governance also requires respectful debate in the parliament. Tasmanians expect and deserve more of us in our role as leaders. Less bickering and name-calling, less retreating back to our tribes, less ego, less shouting, more listening to each other's ideas. We need to acknowledge and discuss our differences and to seek to understand each other's views. Where we disagree, we need to disagree respectfully.
We all have the responsibility to distribute that rising tide of wealth and growth so that all Tasmanians boats are buoyed, not just a select few. Our government and our parliament must see that and govern for us all.