Page 2453 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 13 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
If the government are cash strapped and have to cut something and they cut the funding, the industry will be in dire straits. There is no certainty in what is happening, and there is no certainty for the racing industry in the ACT in this amendment.
Let us look at the human side of this bill, the staff. The federal government have put up some assets for consideration for sale in their current budget. Imagine if they had attached to those assets a proviso that the staff would have certainty for three months. The outrage and the howls of horror from those opposite would be long and loud. It seems that it is okay that the ACTTAB employees get three months of certainty, and that is all this government has got for them: three months of certainty, but that is okay. People will hear and see what is happening to ACTTAB and know how this government acts.
For me, the question is fair and reasonable price. What have we actually surrendered, and what is the true value of what has been surrendered over 50 years? As Mr Rattenbury said, some said we might get more. He proposed that some had said we might get less; that is true. But I have no doubt that Tabcorp have done the numbers, and Tabcorp think this is a good deal. I wish Tabcorp well. It is nice to see private enterprise getting on, and their CEO will be very happy with this, I have no doubt.
But the question is: what have we given up for the short-term? So much about this government is short term. We see it in their land sales without a long-term view—just sell another block of land to balance the budget. Everything is short-term about this government. Signing up to a 50-year licence arrangement without being able to detail the financial case to this Assembly—the estimates committee probably should have been given this information but it was not; the announcement came basically after the committee had finished its process—does leave me with some concerns.
I hear the Treasurer say that, if the Auditor-General wants to do the review, they do not have any problems with that. Well, leave part 3 in. When we refer things from this place to the Auditor-General, it is still the Auditor-General’s decision as to whether they do it. It is important that we get this right. This cannot be undone. Given the level of concern amongst the employees, and still with the level of concern from the industry, it is important that, before the sale is actually finalised, this happens.
I will finish with reading this article from the Australian again. What we have given away are cheap, long-term licences. That is the analysis of the industry and the market. The article states:
TABCORP’S David Attenborough has helped ensure the company’s long-term future with cheap long-life licences through his ACTTAB acquisition. We have sold this cheaply.
That is the analysis of the market. It is interesting. I asked: how was it determined what was sold? I was told in the briefing that bidders were able to make offers. So the question is: did all the bidders ask for the same thing and offer the same price based on that? And did other bidders know that you could get 50-year licences on a lot of these things with either zero or very, very low tax rates? Would they have changed their bid? That is something we will never know.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video