Rebecca White said stadium prioritised against state's interests

The government allowed the Labor motion seeking leave to debate the no-confidence motion on Tuesday morning, after having used its numbers in the lower house to crush previous similar attempts in the past.

Ms White said she was seeking to move the motion against Premier Jeremy Rockliff for a range of reasons, including the government's failure to cap power prices, the state's worsening school results and its prioritisation of the stadium project over more critical needs.

But the two former Liberal Party backbenchers at the centre of the political storm over the past fortnight confirmed just after the debate started that they would be voting with the government against the motion.

Ms Johnston said while it was important to test the confidence in new minority governments, a 12-hour debate was too much, especially given the state's other priorities like housing and the fact that the result was already known.

"I think it's important to have this debate, it should be limited though - having 10-hours plus allocated to a no-confidence motion isn't the best use of parliament's time, especially when there's a clear indication that this motion won't be supported," she said.

Labor Treasury spokesman Dr Shane Broad took a different view.

"This is the most serious motion we can debate in parliament - this is a Premier who said he wouldn't govern in minority, and now he's leading a minority government," Dr Broad said.

"The Premier is pretending that two of his own members haven't walked, it's like the Black Knight in Monty Python - he's lost all his arms and limbs and is saying come back and fight."

"He's really struggling and he's putting on a brave face, but he has to stand up and acknowledge his failures, he has to justify the indefensible."

He asked how the Premier could have given the AFL a "blank cheque" over the stadium and team deal "in good conscience".

At a later press briefing, the independents Lara Alexander and John Tucker both said they were not satisfied with the answers to the questions posed during question time that morning.

Mr Tucker had asked why Mr Rockliff signed a deal giving the AFL so much control over the Tasmanian football team when the state government was funding most of the stadium's cost.

Ms Alexander asked whether the Premier was concerned that the possible appointment of former Premier Peter Gutwein as chairman of AFL Tasmania would be a conflict of interest.

Mr Tucker also refuted Labor claims that he had been mislead by the Premier over whether there would be a final scrutiny vote of the stadium project under the Project of State Significance process.

The government on the weekend confirmed the stadium project would be built as a Project of State Significance, which allows it to bypass normal planning processes and instead go through a committee of the Planning Commission.

Mr Tucker said he had believed that the process would allow a final vote in parliament, but it later emerged that this might not be accurate.

On Tuesday, he said he believed Mr Rockliff had been misinformed by ambiguous information presented on the Planning Commission website.

Despite that, he would not commit to a Greens plan to amend laws to ensure that a final scrutiny vote is put to parliament.

"We're still engaging with the Premier on that subject," he said.

The government this morning allowed a motion seeking a debate over a Labor no-confidence motion to pass - just weeks after it used its numbers of the house floor to crush a similar Labor move.

Opposition leader Rebecca White said she was seeking to move the motion against Premier Jeremy Rockliff for a range of reasons, including the government's failure to cap power prices, the state's worsening school results and its prioritisation of the stadium project over more critical needs.

She also cited the government's recent string of "record" budget deficits, its "failure" to fix the housing crisis and its new status as an "weak, unstable, minority" government as reasons for the motion.

She also said she moved the motion because Mr Rockliff had overseen "a dishonest and dysfunctional cabinet which has repeatedly misled Tasmanians".

In response, Mr Rockliff defended his government's record on the state's economy, its industrial relations policy and its support for jobs and businesses.

He said Tasmania was enjoying record tourism spending of $3.8 billion, just months after the industry emerged from the pandemic-induced downturn.

"We have supported them, keeping them alive and well and in work through that massive disruption of COVID-19, and we have spent considerable funds to do so, and it has had a considerable impact on our budget," Mr Rockliff said.

Retail trade is booming, and the state has low unemployment of just 3.8 per cent, he said.

In health, he said every state of Australia was under enormous pressure, including Tasmania.

But he said the government was proud of achievements there, including securing the future of the Mersey Community Hospital, introducing a four-year elective surgery plan and cutting waiting lists for elective surgery by 17 per cent in the last 12 months.

The state health system now has 1400 more nurses and 400 more doctors than was the case under Labor, he said.

Other achievements including securing funding for the new LGH helicopter landing pad, expanding the state's exports, and reaching wage deals with public sector unions.

Greens Leader Cassy O'Connor, who supported the Labor no-confidence motion, criticised Mr Rockliff's record on health and housing.

She said Liberal cuts had removed ambulance staff, while thousands of Tasmanians were on wait lists for public housing.

She said rents in Hobart and Launceston have risen 50 per cent in five years.

Leader of Government Business Nic Street said he would support the seeking of leave to debate the no-confidence motion and indicated he was confident of the government's support on the floor.

"We will allow this debate to go to its natural conclusion," he said of the motion.

Both government and opposition members voted for the motion allowing the debate.

The government will rely on votes from newly independent members John Tucker and Lara Alexander to survive the motion once the debate is concluded.

In a joint statement this morning, both members confirmed they would be supporting the government on the motion.

"Independent MP for Lyons, John Tucker, and Independent MP for Bass, Lara Alexander, said they will not support the no-confidence motion brought by the Labor Party in parliament today," the statement read.

The two rebel MPs also put the kibosh on efforts, led by the Greens, to obstruct the government's stadium plans by amending its funding in the upcoming state budget.

"Neither will they support attempts by the Greens to amend the budget or force a premature decision on the proposed stadium before all the facts have been revealed," the statement read.

According to Mr Tucker, the independents' agreement with the Premier ensures that they "provide confidence and supply in return for a change in the government's direction on the proposed stadium assessment and other matters".

MORE TO COME

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: