Rosemary Bolger.
ANY major change to the way GST is carved up among the states is a serious issue for Tasmania.
It's a shame it's so dull. A "worthy but boring" story as my first news editor would have said.
Not only is it boring, it's complex and technical.
We're talking about a battle being waged between the small and big states on the merits of horizontal fiscal equalisation versus a per capita method. Quite a mouthful.
A quick recap. The bigger states want a greater share of the GST with WA leading the charge for a per capita system - a set dollar amount per person.
You don't have to be a mathematical whiz to work out that's not good for states with small populations who rely on HFE, a system based on ensuring each state is capable of providing the same standard of services.
In fact, if WA had its way, it would reap an extra $2.4 billion and Tasmania would be $700 million, or $1300 a person, worse off.
It was mildly interesting last year when Opposition Leader Tony Abbott seemed to forget for a moment that Tasmanians have access to the internet and can find out what he says in Western Australia.
Visiting the rich state in April, he said he would consider a system "closer to" a per capita method.
Almost a year on, we're still hearing about it thanks to Labor's dogged attempts to strike fear into the hearts of every Tasmanian at the prospect of a Liberal federal government prepared to rip $700million out of the state's budget.
It's become its number one attack strategy against an opposition dominating the polls.
Two weeks ago, Premier Lara Giddings even managed to link South Australia's new tourism campaign (leaving Tasmania off the map) to the GST. Don't ask me how.
On Monday, Finance Minister Penny Wong was in town to try to stir it up again, launching advertisements and a social media campaign.
This weekend, 20,000 flyers urging people to "Abbott-proof" the state have gone out.
However, in trying to add some shock value to capture the attention of the public, which understandably has zero interest in the finer points of our tax distribution formulas, Labor has gone too far.
Realistically there is no way the Liberal Party will implement a per- capita system.
Mr Abbott will not rip out $700million or even $600 million from the state's budget just like that, as Labor keeps suggesting.
In fact, the Liberals have confirmed they'll stick with Tassie's preference, the HFE.
Putting aside these exaggerated, never-going-to-happen scenarios, there's still enough worrying signs that some changes to the existing HFE formula are in the Liberals' policy pipeline.
Mr Abbott could so easily neutralise Labor's attack by detailing exactly what he has in mind for how the GST would be spread out.
His oft-repeated line "Tasmania will not be any worse off" doesn't cut it.
This vague statement and his reluctance to go into detail raises valid questions:
Does he mean no worse off in the wider scheme of things?
Will he make up for any reduced GST with other grants tied to specific projects?
Is he more afraid of upsetting his powerful WA Liberal colleagues?
Already struggling with reduced GST revenue as the overall pie shrinks, Tasmania can't afford any change, whether it costs $6 million or $600 million.
Getting a clearer commitment from the Opposition is certainly a worthy cause, but, try as Labor might, the pursuit is unlikely to be a vote winner.
Rosemary Bolger is The Examiner's chief political reporter.