Page 3946 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 25 November 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
They went into the new venue, but did they get the licence? Apparently not, because we are still waiting for low-cost accommodation and we are still waiting for the master plan. Mr Rattenbury, I will be very intrigued as to whether sitting in cabinet has informed you of where the licence is coming from and how it is moving forward.
This is Mr Rattenbury again:
If in 12 months time, at the end of that period, we find that there is still a case that the board seems to be the issue, not the being in a backwater of the Treasury portfolio, then we can reconsider this issue.
We know the board is not the issue because the minister praised the board in his closing speech. He praised people like Brian Acworth; he praised the members on the existing board for the great job they do. In this process, five years later, very little seems to have changed except the minister’s desire to have his own way. In 2009 the Greens finished by saying:
For the reasons I have outlined, we feel that there will be a loss of energy and expertise there; it is not a step forward; therefore, the Greens will not be supporting the bill in its current form.
Apparently being in cabinet changes all of that. You get the seat with the government; you get to play with the big boys and you go along for the ride. It will be interesting to hear Mr Rattenbury tell us what has changed and explain how, after five years of being in a different portfolio, things have got so much better. But apparently not a great deal has happened. We still do not see action on some of the proposals that boards have brought to us over the years, and it is that drive, that business acumen, that desire to make something better of what we already have, that will be lost when this occurs. It is that expertise in the business world that something like EPIC deserves.
I assume the master plan has not been progressed because they are still waiting on the tricode study. My memory is that the tricode study for the co-location of thoroughbred, harness and greyhound racing was due out in August. Here we are in November, and we are yet to see that study. Again the EPIC board is nobbled by a government that cannot conduct its own business. It seems to want to blame the board for not progressing anything and not taking that licence that was granted five years ago to move ahead. The issues will not change because you are lessening the influence that you have.
I recall some of the strident words from the minister when we last had this debate about how this was a symbol of microeconomic reform—the $200,000 saving over the four years—perhaps the only example of microeconomic reform the Treasurer was able to quantify. He said:
… a sensible minor administrative measure that will save taxpayers $200,000 over the next four years.
That was from 2009 to 2013. What has gone begging in that time because government processes, government red tape and the government’s attitude to EPIC have stalled
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video