Page 1827 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 15 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In the presentation speech for this Bill on 20 May he said:
The measures provided for in the legislation will provide for greater accountability of ACTTAB operations.
Mr Berry argues that decorporatisation will increase accountability and maximise revenue. I will deal with these arguments separately. Let us have a look at accountability. A comparison of the measures of accountability, before and after the Bill if it happens to get through, can go this way. Right now, before the changes that Mr Berry wants to promote, ACTTAB is a public company. The board are accountable as directors under the corporations law and the latest law on directors' duties. Under a statutory authority, though, the board is not accountable under the corporations law. That is a matter of fact.
Let us have a look at some other areas. Right now, under the current situation, the company is accountable under the corporations law and the Territory Owned Corporations Act to prepare and table a statement of corporate intent. Under Mr Berry's proposed situation, as I said before, it will not be accountable under the corporations law; there will be no requirement to file a statement of corporate intent; it will not be liable to pay taxation to the ACT Government. As it is currently constituted, it is liable to audit; it has to present an annual report; it is liable to pay taxation to the ACT Government at the corporate rate; and it is subject to direction from the shareholders. That is in section 17 of the Territory Owned Corporations Act.
Who are the shareholders, Madam Speaker? There are only two shareholders, and they happen to be - surprise, surprise - the Chief Minister, Ms Follett, and the Deputy Chief Minister and Minister for Sport, Mr Berry. So the situation is this: There are two shareholders in this company - the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister - and, if the two directors want the TAB to bet on cockroach races in Manangatang, that is what the TAB has to do, because it is now subject to the direction of the two directors. There are only two directors, as I said before - the Chief Minister and the Deputy Chief Minister. Both of those Ministers are eminently accountable to this Assembly, notwithstanding what they do, because they are elected members of this group. For Mr Berry to stand up here in this room and try to convince us that he wants more accountability is utter nonsense.
Let us have a look at the revenue side. Mr Berry seems to think that if ACTTAB is decorporatised this will maximise the revenue earning potential of ACTTAB. This argument will not stand examination, Madam Speaker. ACTTAB's last filed statement of corporate intent shows that ACTTAB achieved a profit ratio of 10.8 per cent on turnover. That is not too bad for times as tough as these. In other words, Madam Speaker, for every $100 bet, $10.80 was distributed to the Government and the racing industry in that year. This amount does not include retained profits or reserves, which at 30 June 1992 amounted to $12.6m. If you want to see the figures, let us look at the ACTTAB Ltd annual report for 1991-92. Cash reserves held by ACTTAB from profits previously made amounted to somewhere around $5.3m. So, Madam Speaker, ACTTAB as a corporation has been able to sustain high levels of turnoff without having recourse to its reserves. In the 1992 financial year the total amount payable for distribution from a turnover of $85m was almost $10m.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .