Page 4492 - Week 14 - Thursday, 1 December 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The amendments give the Minister the ability to cut returns to ACT race clubs and the Racecourse Development Fund and the Territory, to enable ACTTAB to offer better odds to punters, just in case a corporate body such as Tabcorp in Victoria begins a raid on the market share by upping the ante or offering more to its punters in Victoria. It sounds, in theory, like a good idea and, in theory, it is. The Minister can alter the cut to the ACT bodies by a disallowable instrument under the Subordinate Laws Act 1989. In relation to a disallowable instrument, Mr Lamont's presentation speech stated:
Any decision to change the deduction rates will be determined by a disallowable instrument, and members can be assured that the whole process will be transparent to the Assembly and the people of Canberra.
When I read that speech I remembered Mr Berry's statement to this house when he introduced a Bill to decorporatise ACTTAB. He said that every direction, every piece of paper and everything else was going to be done with the knowledge of the Assembly. What the Minister omitted to say was that, if the Assembly disallows any changes to the prescribed payments to the clubs or the Racecourse Development Fund, the payments that already have been cut cannot be reversed. In other words, it is a Clayton's disallowable instrument. If there is any doubt of that, the Minister himself, in a letter to Mrs Carnell dated 29 November, said:
I am further advised that the effect of disallowance has no retrospective application. Any actions or decisions taken in relation to a determination are a valid exercise of power until the instrument is disallowed.
What that says is that, if the Victorian TAB, for example, decides that for the Geelong trots meeting tomorrow afternoon they are going to offer more than 85 per cent, and the Minister then decides that he is going to offer the same as Victoria and does it, he then comes into this place and puts down the instrument. It lies on the table for a number of days - I think it is 28. In turn, this Assembly decides that this is not what the Assembly wants him to do, so we move disallowance and that disallowance is successful.
If these amendments go through, there is no retrospective action that can be taken, after the Assembly decides that, for that money that has been already taken out of the RDF and the other areas to be returned. So, notwithstanding that this Assembly has disallowed something, that disallowance is a Clayton's disallowable instrument. It is not retrospective; nothing can happen. Any change that is made cannot be undone, and by the time it is done, obviously, it is too late. This is not transparent at all. It is done, and the community and the clubs will find out after the event. It is a cunning way of doing something, and there will be no recourse through this Assembly. This is a problem with the amendment.
Another mystery is the apparent urgent need for this legislation. The Minister and the department say that the occasional regional race meeting may require an increased offering to punters to match the competition. Also, the Minister said, major metropolitan race meetings will not attract the need. The Tabcorp of Victoria has yet to launch any competitive market rate which could have motivated this need.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .