Page 4504 - Week 14 - Thursday, 1 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Another issue needs to be clarified. When we had our briefing, there was no indication at all from Tabcorp that they were going to move down this track.
Mr Lamont: On particular projects.
MRS CARNELL: No; none at all. I actually asked that question quite specifically, because we would be somewhat negative towards legislation for some hypothetical situation that Tabcorp had not indicated was likely to happen. If the answer we should have got at the briefing was that they had indicated that from 1 January next year they are likely to go down this track, it dramatically changes our position on this whole issue. The other information that we were given was that the racing clubs have not been consulted at all.
Mr Connolly: Legislation without consultation; dear, oh dear!
MRS CARNELL: It is very interesting, because Mr Connolly has been very negative about that. I have actually apologised for him. I wonder whether the Minister is interested in apologising for a letter from the Greyhound Racing Club, which says:
Thank you for your initiative in circulating - - -
Mr Lamont: And the others; there are three of them. It has already been read. I was not as stupid as you were. I did not vote on and put through abysmal legislation, as you did yesterday.
MRS CARNELL: Mr Lamont, I am asking some quite sensible questions on this legislation. It appears that the racing clubs were not consulted. We were also told at our briefing that the racing clubs would not be parties to decisions on whether or not the ACT actually did run with Tabcorp on any particular meetings; and they would also not be parties to any discussions about how the particular percentages that they get from the TAB would be lowered - and I assume that they will always be lowered - after a decision to go with Tabcorp on a revised return to the punters. Those issues are really important ones. Mr Lamont, we found it very hard to understand why the racing clubs did not want to be parties to those consultations, taking into account that the three parties that have a real interest in this are the racing clubs, the TAB and the Government. We understand that the Government and the TAB will be parties to those decisions, but not the racing clubs.
In a nutshell, the questions that I would like you to answer are: Will we be able to stay linked if this legislation is not passed? Do you have the power now to change the amount that you pay to the punters on a particular race meeting? Will you ensure that the racing clubs are parties to consultations on what will actually happen to the vast percentage of the money that they actually get to run their establishments? If they are not parties to those decisions, it dramatically impacts upon their capacity to do the job that they are there to do.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .