weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

More documents

Recommendations

Info

23 Aug 2005 Racing Venues Development Amendment Bill 2609 about Russ Hinze. The fact is that a lot of the history of this goes back to those times when the club was dudded by Russ Hinze. There is no doubt about that. If members ask the club, it will give testament to that today. But we cannot turn back the clock. All we can do is make sure that it remains viable, and that is exactly what this is about. This is about viability. It is not a nefarious motive to give clubs an opportunity to do something other than the mainstays of harness racing, show societies and greyhound racing. The reality is that that is what pays the bills. I acknowledge the admissions of the member for Mount Coot-tha and a couple of other members that they have been to the Big Day Out. I am a little bit too old for that, but my son has been there. When it was put to me as a suggestion, I was thinking very carefully about whether or not I might bring this legislation forward because I am not too sure that I want my next bloke going down there and getting sunburnt and all the other antics that they get up to down there. Mrs Reilly: It’s very safe. Mr SCHWARTEN: I take that interjection. I suppose I am something of an old nark. It is pleasing that we have young, progressive members of parliament here to keep us on track. The reality is that the relevance of the Big Day Out and all of those events is that until now the trustees did not have the power to do that, and that is all this bit of simple legislation is about. It is about enabling those trustees to do it. I note the very sensible contribution of the member for Surfers Paradise, who said that trustees are put in place to do just that. There is no necessity whatsoever to prescribe to the trustees how they might go about their business. If the day arrived that the trustees were not doing what they are there to do, and that is to ensure that harness racing, dog racing and the show are all viable and underpinned by these other events, then they would be removed. If it needs to be changed, then the act—for those who have read it and understand it—is very specific in talking about how the Governor in Council has a role in doing that. I thank all the members for the sensible contributions that have been made, with the exception of the member for Warrego, and I commend the bill to the House. Motion agreed to. Consideration in Detail Clauses 1 and 2, as read, agreed to. Clause 3, as read, agreed to. Insertion of new clause— Mr HOPPER (4.44 pm): I move the following amendment— 1 New clause 3A At page 4, after line 13— insert— ‘3A Insertion of new s 17A After section 17— insert— ‘17A Trustees must give priority to purpose connected with racing ‘In dealing with land under their control, the trustees must give priority to a purpose for which the land may be used that is connected with racing over another purpose for which it may be used.’.’. I spoke on this issue in the second reading debate, and I think the minister got the gist of it from my speech. The reason we put this amendment forward is that in dealing with land under their control we emphasise that the trustees must—and I emphasise ‘must’—give priority to a purpose for which the land may be used that is connected with racing over another purpose for which it may be used. Do not get me wrong, the opposition agrees that if the club is struggling outside money should be brought in. <strong>Government</strong> members talked about the Big Day Out. I talked about the Big Day Out as well. But what will happen if a major event comes forward and the race dates have been set in a calendar 12 months in advance? This is what we want to protect. We want to protect this club—and any future clubs—from any outside interference. As they start to raise more money from outside, what will happen to those calendar dates? We all know how hard it is with different betting. Racetracks and race clubs cannot possibly attract the numbers of people that they used to years ago. On a Saturday 30 years ago Eagle Farm and Doomben used to have 30,000 and 40,000 people there. That does not happen nowadays, and racetracks are no doubt turning towards outside money. This is exactly what we are trying to protect—those calendar dates. We would really ask the minister to support this amendment today. Mr SCHWARTEN: I hear what the honourable member is saying, and again I refer him to my earlier comments and to the comments of the member for Surfers Paradise. I notice that the member for Gaven is in the chamber. His race dates are set. On Friday, 19 August 2005 we had the Robert Poole Pace Race 5 at the Gold Coast Harness Racing Club. How did that date arrive? It was set by the <strong>Queensland</strong> Harness Racing Board. The control body establishes the dates and that is done in
2610 Racing Venues Development Amendment Bill 23 Aug 2005 consultation with all the other events. This is not the tail wagging the dog; this is about cooperation. Those trustees know what their job is. I hear what the honourable member is saying. It has been suggested to me before by people from the Gold Coast Harness Racing Club and so on that they think the big dog is eating the little dog. I do not see that. Those trustees are set up there for a very good reason. Back in the old days when that was set up—and I am not going to go there—those trustees were appointed to ensure that harness and dog racing remained viable. Perhaps if a few National Party people took a leaf out of the book of the Labor Party and sponsored a few race meetings we might have a few more of them down there. Mr HOPPER: I table the explanatory notes. Mr HOBBS: I note that the minister recognises there is an issue here, and I think there is, too. Unless there are some safeguards inserted into this legislation, this particular race club at the Gold Coast could have a vast majority of its income—it has a majority now—such as 90 per cent of its income coming from other sources. We think that there needs to be some sort of checks and balances. A while ago the minister acknowledged the fact that, yes, there could be a bit of an issue, and he thought there were some mechanisms there. Can the minister explain again quite clearly what he thinks the safeguards are to stop a major racing event being overshadowed by some other non-racing function? Mr SCHWARTEN: I am only going to explain this once. Let us take the Robert Poole harness race last week sponsored by the Australian Labor Party on the Gold Coast, as an example. Let us say that the trustees decided that they did not want the Labor Party to have a race meeting last week. Let us suggest that the harness racing people on the Gold Coast supported it but the trustees did not; the trustees were all members of the National Party and did not want it happen. I know that would never happen, but let us just use that— An opposition member interjected. Mr SCHWARTEN: This is the sort of scenario that the member opposite is talking about where the trustees act improperly. The first thing that would happen is that Robert Poole’s branch of the Labor Party, who sponsored this race, would complain to the Harness Racing Board. The very next thing that would happen is that the Harness Racing Board would complain to me and those trustees would be out of a job. That is the first thing that would happen because they are acting contrary to what the established legislation has them doing, and that is to look after racing. The other point is that if the trustees want to change some other event or get rid of racing on the Gold Coast, then they are going to do that in only one way, and that is to go through the Governor in Council. They are the safeguards. They are no different to any other trustees. Trustees are put there because they are trusted. To hogtie them and suggest that this is tied up and tie up that and tie up the rest of it defeats the purpose of having trustees. I know the member opposite has no faith in trustees. The member really is sailing close to the breeze, as far as I am concerned, in attacking the character of those people who have been appointed. However, the reality is that the safeguard is in the government of the day appointing the people who are there. If the member does not have faith in his own ministers if they were there to appoint trustees, then that is his doing, but I have faith in the trustees that we have at the moment. Mr HOPPER: In the minister’s statement just then he said that we might be attacking the character of the trustees. In no way at all are we doing that. He has read this totally wrong if that is his attitude. The reason that we put the amendment forward is, as the minister stated before, that the big frogs are swallowing up the little frogs. We do not want that to happen. We do not want any threat to the actual race club itself as this club may get bigger and better with outside functions. What we are trying to put in place through this House is a mechanism that will protect the actual race dates and race clubs and the members in it, and that is rightfully so. The harness board could get rid of the trust if that was not the case. We can legislate this today by passing this amendment and putting it into solid law. Question—That Mr Hopper’s amendment be agreed to—put; and the House divided— AYES, 18—Copeland, E Cunningham, Foley, Hobbs, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Lee Long, Lingard, Menkens, Messenger, Pratt, Rickuss, Rowell, Seeney, Springborg. Tellers: Hopper, Malone NOES, 62—Attwood, Barry, Beattie, Bligh, Boyle, Briskey, Choi, L Clark, Croft, Cummins, N Cunningham, Fenlon, Finn, Flegg, Fouras, Fraser, Hayward, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Keech, Langbroek, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Livingstone, Male, McArdle, McNamara, Mickel, Miller, Molloy, Mulherin, Nelson-Carr, Nuttall, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Pitt, Poole, Purcell, Quinn, Reeves, Reilly, Reynolds, E Roberts, N Roberts, Robertson, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, Stuckey, C Sullivan, Wallace, Welford, Wells, Wilson. Tellers: T Sullivan, Nolan Resolved in the negative. Clause 4, as read, agreed to. Schedule, as read, agreed to. Bill read a third time. Third Reading
Page 1 and 2:
PROOF ISSN 1322-0330 WEEKLY HANSARD
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents — Tuesday, 23 A
Page 5 and 6:
2536 Papers 23 Aug 2005 PAPERS PAPE
Page 7 and 8:
2538 Ministerial Statement 23 Aug 2
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
2550 Scrutiny of Legislation Commit
Page 21 and 22:
2552 Private Members’ Statements
Page 23 and 24:
2554 Questions Without Notice 23 Au
Page 25 and 26:
2556 Questions Without Notice 23 Au
Page 27 and 28: 2558 Questions Without Notice 23 Au
Page 33 and 34: 2564 Members’ Ethics and Parliame
Page 35 and 36: 2566 Matters of Public Interest 23
Page 45 and 46: 2576 Constitutional and Other Legis
Page 47 and 48: 2578 Transport Legislation Amendmen
Page 49 and 50: 2580 Transport Legislation Amendmen
Page 51 and 52: 2582 Housing Legislation Amendment
Page 53 and 54: 2584 Education (Queensland College
Page 55 and 56: 2586 Succession Amendment Bill 23 A
Page 57 and 58: 2588 Succession Amendment Bill 23 A
Page 59 and 60: 2590 Queensland Competition Authori
Page 69 and 70: 2600 Racing Venues Development Amen
Page 77: 2608 Racing Venues Development Amen
Page 81 and 82: 2612 Plumbing and Drainage and Othe
Page 99 and 100: 2630 Child Safety Legislation Amend
Page 111 and 112: 2642 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 One pa
Page 113 and 114: 2644 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 years.
Page 115: 2646 Adjournment 23 Aug 2005 Finall
show all

weekly hansard - Queensland Parliament - Queensland Government

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?