Give minority government a chance to succeed if Tasmanians vote for it

They've talked of instability, chaos, and far-out legislation getting through parliament. It's a pretty grim picture.

Premier Rockliff's recent assertion that the House of Assembly had become "unworkable" due to a lack of majority government echoes this sentiment.

But is that sentiment based on fact?

Yes, Tasmanian voters usually punish a minority government when they get a chance to vote them out. The Liberal government was voted in as a majority and has become a minority thanks to two turncoat Liberals.

What if Tasmanian voters elected a minority government? Would they give it a chance to succeed?

Using some Tasmanian governments and the most recent federal hung parliament of Julia Gillard as an example, minority governments can function effectively and get good, workable legislation through parliament.

They can even do well in certain aspects of governance.

So, let's look at the argument that minority governments are unstable. The current Rockliff government's decision-making has become fragmented and has led to resignations; in contrast, the Gillard government, with two moderate rural independents, was very stable.

Historical data tells us Tasmania has had governments since 1945, including the current administration, operating in a minority. Some of these minority governments have shown remarkable stability. Historical data tells us the minority governments of 1959-64 and, more recently, 2010-14 were relatively stable and passed long-lasting legislation.

Analysis reveals that minority governments are no more prone to ministerial turnover than their majority counterparts. For instance, when it held a majority, the first two years of the current government's term witnessed a similar rate of resignations as those experienced during its minority phase. Similarly, past minority governments, such as the Liberal-Centre party government of 1969-72, navigated challenges without succumbing to constant upheaval, further debunking the myth of inherent instability.

Minority governments in Tasmania have displayed a good hold of driving policy change and implementing reforms.

Tasmanian minority governments have left a positive mark on the legislative landscape. The 1996-98 minority Liberal government's comprehensive overhaul of firearm laws and the decriminalisation of homosexuality stand as proof minority governments can implement long-lasting and popular legislation.

Recent pressure from the crossbench has compelled Premier Rockliff to tackle issues such as animal welfare in abattoirs and provide greater transparency regarding proposed infrastructure projects. This responsiveness proves if a leader of a minority government can be adaptable, that government can be very effective.

Should we be scared of a minority Tasmanian government after March 23?

The narrative that minority governments are inherently unstable, unreliable, and unproductive can be disproven.

Tasmania's experience with minority governance demonstrates those administrations were capable of stability and effectiveness.

Rather than trying to scare voters into believing minority governments are inherently flawed, perhaps we should embrace the potential for a government willing to compromise and be inclusive with its decision-making to be innovative rather than stuck in party ideology.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of whomever we elect to make the parliament work, regardless of the composition of the government.

After March 23, voters should give either a Liberal or Labor-led minority government a chance to be a viable democratic representation of Tasmanians. If we give a minority government a chance, voters could witness a more inclusive and dynamic political landscape, which would benefit all of us.

Craig Thomson is the editor of The Launceston Examiner.