Page 2921 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 15 August 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(2) also notes:
(a) this Government’s excess fees, charges and taxes has resulted in a number of clubs closing and many other struggling to stay afloat;
(b) that NSW clubs and pubs pay a lower percentage of tax than ACT clubs; and
(c) that the regulatory conditions in the ACT make operating a community club difficult and restrict opportunities for growth, increased employment and greater community benefit; and
(3) calls on the ACT Government to:
(a) assure ACT community clubs that they will continue to be able to administer their own community contributions in accordance with the desires and interests of their membership;
(b) commit to the ACT community that any short fall in community contributions as a result of changes will be funded by the ACT Government in the form of sporting and community grants; and
(c) pledge that the public consultation process will proactively seek community input and assess a range of options—not just taking away the autonomy and decision making of clubs in the ACT.
If you close your eyes and listen, if you be very, very quiet, you can hear the rumble from out in the suburbs. You can hear the sounds of disquiet. Out in the suburbs, they are not happy. They are not happy because of what this government is proposing regarding clubs’ community contributions. And I can totally understand why.
My father, Tom, was a very wise man on many fronts. One of the things that he often told me was: “Son, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” When it comes to the community contributions model, it ain’t broke. I am not saying that it is perfect, but the reality is that such a system may never be perfect and I fear that we are going to trash what is good in the fruitless search for perfect.
I understand that the parliamentary agreement suggested a review of this system and that at some stage an appendix was added. I am sure that was not there at the start; I would love to know exactly when that was added. This appendix states that the government will establish an independent charitable fund irrespective of its appearance in the parliamentary agreement.
The community are very loudly stating that they are just not going to wear it. Mr Ramsay and others have intimated that there is a scare campaign in this space, that those pesky Liberals are getting the locals frightened and they are all jumping at shadows. How dare we go out into the community and suggest that a club may have all of its community contributions siphoned away into a big brother fund! My message to Mr Ramsay is: minister, yes, this is a scare campaign, but it is a scare campaign of your doing. It is a scare campaign of the highest order, and the fear is real.
The discussion paper that the government released had three possible options. Option 1—right at the top, Madam Speaker—was:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video