weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

23 Aug 2005 Racing Venues Development Amendment Bill 2601
racing. Currently only the Parklands Gold Coast Trust has been appointed to control the Parklands
greyhound and trotting venue on the Gold Coast. Whilst the government states that no further trusts are
likely to be appointed due to their policy of transferring ownership of racing venues to racing bodies, the
potential does exist to use this legislation in the future in new venues. The trustees, in an attempt to
maximise revenue to support the activities of Parklands, have rented the venue for a variety of other
purposes, for example, as an indoor sports centre, for the Big Day Out concerts et cetera. Normally
such rentals have not interfered with the conduct of harness and greyhound racing at those venues. We
all know that our race clubs are usually a very, very great facility; they are usually a very good asset
sometimes in the very middle of a town or a major city. I know that country race tracks are also used for
many other events. Usually country race tracks are where the showgrounds are. Many country towns
include every sporting facility at those facilities.
Doubts have arisen as to whether the actions of the trustees in undertaking these revenue-raising
activities have been operating strictly within the terms of the act. There is a potential argument that
these activities are not for purposes strictly connected with racing. Accordingly, the bill has been
prepared to ensure that the actions of the trustees in renting the venue to raise revenue do not infringe
the act because a strict definition is applied. The opposition will support this attempt to permit the
trustees to seek to maximise revenue from the land comprising a racing venue. The opposition is,
however, a little concerned that the revenue raising should not distract from the fundamental purpose of
ensuring that the venue is always primarily used for racing purposes—not another function instead of a
race day. That is where we are a little bit worried. If a race club had a big popular event, such as a singer
or an event of great significance, it could impact on the actual plan of that race club. We do not want to
see any race days shifted because a race club gets into outside entertainment and that sort of thing.
That is the point I am trying to raise.
Accordingly, an amendment will be moved by us to ensure that the trustees must always give
priority to the use of that venue for the purpose of racing rather than other fundraising activities. We are
not trying to stop any fundraising activity; we just want to protect racing within that club. The opposition
is concerned about this because of the actions of the government appointed harness and greyhound
control bodies in seeking to reduce or eliminate greyhound and harness racing in vast areas of the state,
such as is currently occurring in Townsville and has occurred in Toowoomba and is currently planned for
Albion Park. There is a real concern that Parklands will be sought to be transferred into a general
purpose venue rather than a dedicated racing complex, which is the fundamental reason it was
established in the first place. Given the level of development that is occurring on the Gold Coast, there is
every reason to fear that the development pressure for access to such a large area of relatively
undeveloped land will grow in the future. The opposition seeks to ensure the continued survival of
Parklands fundamentally as a racing venue for harness and greyhound racing. We have heard the
Premier speak many times in the House about over a thousand people moving to Queensland every
week. No doubt that will put pressure on places like the Gold Coast. There is massive real estate down
there and many people are moving to that area. The opposition is fundamentally trying to protect the
racetrack itself.
Under this government we have seen the closure and decline of numerous racing venues in all
three racing codes. We have seen the closure of Townsville harness racing, and the Albion Park
harness and greyhound venue is under threat again. Parklands is situated in the heart of the Gold Coast
and it is a major source for potential land development. It must be protected from the potential of having
its use transformed either by being sold, as is proposed for Albion Park, or by having the trustees slowly
but surely change it from a racing venue to some other purpose as a result of pressure over the years.
The only thing that saved the exhibition grounds in Brisbane from falling into the hands of
developers is that the RNA actually owns the exhibition grounds. In discussing this bill with my
colleagues we looked at some major clubs in our cities and if some of those clubs could perhaps build a
venue to bring in outside money I think it would be an excellent idea. We will be supporting this bill and I
would ask the minister to closely look at my amendment as I bring it forward later because I think it is a
darn good idea.
Mr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (3.55 pm): Since the Parklands Gold Coast racing venue
commenced operation in 1988 it has been developed by the trustees to include showground pavilions,
an indoor sports centre, a car park and food and beverage canteens of a high standard. That indoor
sports centre also includes an indoor cricket facility which is a very popular facility in my electorate.
Due to its unique design the Parklands Gold Coast racing venue is recognised as the best dual
purpose harness and greyhound venue in Australia. As well as the harness and greyhound clubs, the
tenants of Parklands Gold Coast include the Gold Coast Show Society, which holds its annual show
each September, and the managers of the indoor sports centre. The trust was originally constituted
under the Land Act 1962, which was later repealed and replaced by the Land Act 1994, and was subject
to a deed of grant in trust under which the trustees were permitted to use the land for racing, recreation
and showground purposes. Between 30 June 2005 and 3 July 2005 the trust was reconstituted under
the Racing Venues Development Act 1982 with the cancellation of the deed of grant in trust and the
vesting of the freehold title of the land with the state of Queensland. It was intended that the trustees