Page 2915 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 29 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
$33.65? Why is training for both softball and baseball charged at $4.65 for senior and $1.70 for junior, while training for senior Rugby League is billed at $16.65 per hour? Australian Rules, on the same sort of oval, is even harder hit, with match play charges of $34.20 an hour. And interestingly, on the question of vandalism, the department advises that details of vandalism are not recorded for each ground and nor are the labour costs. We have hundreds of hectares of land, and dozens of fields with a variety of infrastructures, and there is no recording of what it costs to maintain these assets on a field-by-field basis. So how do we plan for development?
I am thankful that the department provided such detail but, sadly, it does not resolve the difficulty for senior and junior sports clubs in the Tuggeranong valley, Belconnen or Gungahlin—all over Canberra. That difficulty is the availability of sufficient ovals. It is interesting to note that while in estimates I was assured that there is no such thing as a single-use oval policy. Remember, minister, that we talked about that? In fact, there does indeed appear to be a single-use oval policy. The Lanyon football club that I spoke of had sought access to the Banks oval, but access was denied. The minister has now confirmed that it is not possible for the Lanyon football club to use Banks oval because of infrastructure already in place, including long-jump pits and throwing sectors. Frustratingly for the members of the Lanyon football club, this oval is their local oval. It is used, according to the minister’s own figures, for only 175 hours a year, and that use is in the summer season, while the Lanyon club’s usage requirement is only during the winter months.
So we have a single-usage sport oval used only in summer—a total contradiction to what you told us in estimates, minister. I refer to the answer sheet that you gave us. This is the question that I asked on 27 May: “Why was Lanyon football club not permitted to use the Banks neighbourhood oval?” Mr Barr responded, “The answer to the members’ question is as follows: the Banks neighbourhood oval is a dedicated athletics facility; the infrastructure in place, including long-jump pits and throwing sectors, would not allow for the two football pitches as required by the Lanyon football club to fit.”
Minister, I am told that with more strategic use of available space—it is a big area of land, and you can see that on the TAMS sites. Even if, despite all the information we have been given, there is not enough room for two football pitches to fit, there certainly should be sufficient area for at least a single football pitch to be added inside the running track so that athletics is not inconvenienced and a local club gets some winter usage of a football pitch which currently is lying totally empty.
This would also be in line, minister, with your own strategic priorities that we spent a fair bit of time talking about this morning. (Second speaking period taken.) In relation to strategic priority No 7, we were talking about maximising support infrastructure, minister. You were telling us about the great plans. And indeed the Strategic plan for sport and active recreation is a good document; it has been put together by some very good people who understand the way sports usage and sporting facilities should and can be maximised.
Strategic priority 7 is “Maximise supporting infrastructure”. Priority 7.5 is “Promote more partnering and sharing resources in program delivery, coordination and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video