Olympic Games Ticket Allocation

The Hon. M. J. GALLACHER (Leader of the Opposition) [2.44 p.m.]: I move the following motion, as amended by leave:

1. That under Standing Order 18 there be laid upon the table of this House and made public without restricted access no later than 5.00 p.m. on Wednesday 27 October 1999 all documents including letters, memoranda and files, whether recorded in written or electronic form, relating to:

(a) the allocation of premium ticketing for the Year 2000 Olympic events held by the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, that is, tickets not offered to the general public by SOCOG in its July 1999 public ticket offer, but reserved by it for sale at a premium,

(b) all applications held by the committee for premium tickets for the Year 2000 Olympic events, and

(c) all deliberations and minutes of the SOCOG Ticketing Commission relating to premium tickets.

2. That an indexed list of all documents tabled under this resolution be prepared showing the date of creation of the document, a description of the document and the author of the document.

3. That anything required to be laid before the House by this resolution may be lodged with the Clerk of the House if the House is not sitting, and is deemed for all purposes to have been presented to or laid before the House and published by authority of the House.

4. That all documents relating to the purchase of premium tickets by individuals are to be delivered to the Clerk of the House and:

(a) made available only to members of the Legislative Council, and

(b) not published or copied without an order of the House.

This motion is straightforward and meets a number of expectations of members of this Chamber and members of the wider community. At the outset I will spell out the reason for my amendment, to avoid causing confusion. Last week the Government spoke to a number of crossbench members about identifying individuals who were fortunate enough to purchase tickets for the Olympic Games. Today, in an endeavour to put this concern to rest I have moved that individuals who have purchased tickets will have their names, for the purpose of examination by this Chamber, protected until such times as the House decides it wishes to have further clarification of any such purchase.

It is important to recognise that this amended motion does not in any way impact upon organisations which have purchased tickets. For that reason I elect, at the outset, to spell out the
Page 1869
reasoning and concerns of the Opposition with regard to the matters raised by the Government, and I will address those matters later. The need for this motion follows the biggest confidence trick played on the Australian people by the New South Wales Government, in particular by all those responsible for ticket allocation for the Olympic Games next year. I do not intend to go down the path of saying who is individually responsible for what has happened, but I cannot stop other honourable members doing so.

The outrage displayed by Opposition members is indicative of outrage throughout the community. I will not name those responsible for this confidence trick, but I cannot make the same promise on behalf of other members of the Opposition. This has been a smoke and mirrors trick of mammoth proportions. The Parliament and the community know the answer to the question widely asked about who is responsible.

Today I will reveal exactly what has occurred. In doing so I give the Government an opportunity to finally come clean and put this horrible mess to bed. I offer the Government a lifesaver in this motion which will give the Government an opportunity to reveal to the community the grubby and underhand way in which the people of this State were duped into believing that they had a chance to purchase tickets to the listed host of events.

Following widespread community outrage over this dash for cash by certain elements of the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, the Government has elected to come clean. The truth should be known, but the Government has elected to come clean only in part, only a little bit. The Government has been forced to come clean following attacks by the Opposition mounted in this Chamber and in the other House last week, attacks quickly overtaken by community outrage.

The Opposition is speaking for the people of New South Wales and for the entire nation. We want to know what backroom deals were done. We want to know the truth, and we want to know it now. The Opposition is committed to ensuring that the truth, the whole truth, becomes known. My motion gives the Government an opportunity to come clean on exactly what has been going on.

In the past couple of days the media has reported that the Government intends to spell out exactly what has gone on, but has said that it will not reveal the names of those who went through the back door to purchase tickets at whatever price the Government elected to put on them. The Government did not want to tell the whole truth, only part of the truth. That is a little like being part pregnant - there is no such thing! The community cannot be expected to sit back and accept that the Government has given the rich and the influential a gold-plated opportunity.

The Hon. J. M. Samios: Point of order: I know that this issue is embarrassing to the Government, but the noise coming from the Government ranks makes it very difficult to follow the speeches.

The PRESIDENT: Order! I ask honourable members to reduce their level of conversation.

The Hon. M. J. GALLACHER: The community cannot be expected to accept that the Government has allowed the rich and the influential a gold-plated, diamond-encrusted rails run to the starting line next September and excluded those directly shouldering the impact of the Treasurer’s budget cuts to fund the Games. What does the Government offer the people? The Government has offered the people front-row seats - in their own lounge rooms! The Government effectively has told people that they can sit in front of their television, grab a six-pack and have a great time, but they should not expect to be part of the Olympic Games.

The Government is saying, "Come down to Darling Harbour by all means and feel the ambience, walk through Darling Harbour. You may even bump into a support group from another nation’s Olympic team and you will feel privileged." But the ordinary people will not get in the way of the rich or the privileged, who will have the red-carpet treatment to every event. There is no limit on the Visa cards of the rich, and there is no limit on the underhand tricks that this Government will play to pay for its Olympics. Until yesterday the Leader of the Government proudly touted throughout New South Wales that these Games will be the people’s Games. We have heard it more than once or twice.

The Hon. J. H. Jobling: Which people?

The Hon. M. J. GALLACHER: As the Hon. J. H. Jobling interjected, which people are they talking about?

[Interruption]

The PRESIDENT: Order! The Opposition cannot have it both ways. I upheld the point of order by the Hon. J. M. Samios that Government members should not interject. The same ruling applies to Opposition members.

Page 1870

The Hon. M. J. GALLACHER: The old mates act is alive and well in New South Wales. That is no more evident than in the underhanded way in which premium tickets have been allocated not only in this State and this country but, indeed, worldwide. Richo’s fingers reach far and wide and when these documents come before this Chamber honourable members can be guaranteed that his fingerprints will be all over them. There is no doubt that the Parliament will be looking at putting in its own ninhydrin unit, a system that identifies fingerprints on paper. I guarantee that his fingerprints will be found all over this grubby little mess.

Which people is the Government talking about when it says these are the people’s Games? Is it talking about the people of western Sydney who are rightly concerned that police resources will be stripped away and sent to Homebush Bay while crime continues to spiral out of control in other areas of Sydney? Criminals will not take a holiday during the Olympic Games. That probably comes as a surprise to members of the Government.

Criminals will probably work longer and harder because they know police will be involved at Homebush Bay and they will have a free run to do whatever they like. As members behind me rightly point out, it will not be only the people of metropolitan Sydney who will feel the impact of the Government’s action with regard to the Games. What about the people of western and south-western New South Wales who are concerned about the lack of road funding or the cuts in local hospital facilities? What was in it for them in the first place and what is in it for them now?

Many parts of our community will be hard hit in one way or another by the Olympic Games. Most Australians, known worldwide for their love of sport, were willing to put up with the difficulties and inconvenience knowing they had a chance to win a seat at the Games. They knew that even though things would be tough and traffic a nightmare, this was their chance to take the family to the Olympic Games. A falsehood has been inflicted on the people of this State.

My family is no different. Like many people in this State we applied for tickets to the opening ceremony, the soccer final and the swimming. We knew the likelihood of winning seats through the ballot system would be tough, but we put our entries in under the old Australian adage that you have to be in it to win it. Like the remaining 99 per cent of our community who missed out, we waited in expectation for the gold letter to come through the mail to tell us that we had won chance-of-a-lifetime seats.

We told ourselves there was no way this allocation of seats could be rigged. We believed it was going to be fair. We believed, foolishly, that the Government intended to run the allocation of tickets to these Games in a fair and equitable way. I cannot believe that members in this Chamber today are debating one of the greatest tricks and false pretences ever imposed on the people of New South Wales. Every Opposition member, every member of the crossbench, and possibly everyone in the gallery, foolishly believed the words of the Australian Olympic Committee President, John Coates, that were reported in the Daily Telegraph on 25 April 1998:

You will be very surprised at how many tickets we will be able to offer the schoolchildren of New South Wales in the company of parents.

We were truly surprised! Further, when Sandy Hollway said in the same report:

A significant majority of tickets will be for Australians rather than overseas, and the vast bulk of those will be in a general ticket distribution rather than through sponsors or other means.

Only 1˝ years ago this statement was being put forward as the answer to everyone’s concerns. Everyone in the community went to sleep on 25 April 1998 content that come the day when the ballot opened we would all be in with a show, we would all have a chance. It is worth noting that in the debate that has ensued in this Chamber on this issue Government members have been mute. They have not said one word. We have not heard one backbencher on the Government side say, "Hear, hear, we want to know the truth".

Not one Government Minister has said they want to get to the bottom of this. The truth is they do not want to know. I suggest that once the papers are placed on the table all will become much clearer. All will become known, not only to this Chamber but to the people of New South Wales. I love the term used by Sandy Hollway that "a significant majority of tickets will be for Australians rather than overseas". It is amazing how things can change for the worse in just over 12 months.

On 25 April last year we slept easy knowing everything was in hand because we had the assurance that the Government was doing the right thing for the people of New South Wales. In addition, the International Olympic Committee Co-ordinator, Mr Jacques Rogge, who has the oversight of organisations outside of SOCOG and beyond the reach of the Minister for the Olympics, said in an interview that he was surprised that 85 per cent of the Olympic tickets would go to Australians, to the Australian community.

Page 1871

What has gone so terribly wrong? I look forward to the Government tabling the documents. I also look forward to the Leader of the House or, if he cannot answer the question, perhaps the future leader of this House, the Special Minister of State, explaining why Mr Rogge said that 85 per cent of the people of New South Wales would get tickets - 85 per cent is much more than 33 per cent.

Today we read in the newspapers under the caption "Lie 1" that SOCOG said 3.5 million tickets were available to Australians in the public ticket ballot, while the real figure was 3.08 million. However, that is not really lie No. 1. I draw honourable members’ attention to the Sydney Morning Herald of 3 July 1998 in which the Minister for the Olympics is reported as promising that 4.5 million tickets would be available for ordinary Australians when the ballot opened. If one takes the time to look at a number of reports around that time, one sees a number of references by the Minister to 4.5 million tickets being made available.

What happened to the extra one million tickets? What happened to the 3.5 million tickets described in the media reports that confronted us this morning as being the subject of a lie? Is it any wonder that the people of New South Wales are rapidly losing confidence in the ability of the Government to manage anything? The concern is that the green Games, as they are being touted by the Government, will become the greenback games of the year 2000.

The Minister for the Olympics also promised 1.5 million tickets at between $10 and $19 for socially disadvantaged groups. What disadvantaged groups was he talking about? Was he talking about the battlers from the Tattersalls Club or about that small but significant group of unfortunate people who, down to their last couple of million dollars, make the Business Review Weekly’s top 200 each year? Who is the Minister talking about when he promises 1.5 million tickets at between $10 and $19 for socially disadvantaged people? This whole affair is a shocking nightmare.

I call on the Government to table the documents as listed in the motion before the House. Nowhere is the Government’s contempt for and deceit of the Australian public more evident than in the words of the Minister for the Olympics when he said, as reported in the Sydney Morning Herald on 3 June 1998:

It will be a ballot. Just put in. It won’t be who you know or friends of friends. It will just be a fair ballot system. I feel very intractable about that.

Exactly what did the Minister mean when he said, "It will be a fair ballot system. You have only to put in your ballot. We will not use the old mates formula to determine whether or not you win a ticket."? There is nothing fair about what the Government is doing to the people of New South Wales. We must now examine, first, the role of this Government and, second, the role of the Minister in this whole sorry affair. We must also consider our role as a true House of review and hold this Government accountable to the people of New South Wales for its actions thus far.

Under this Government there is only one other option, one remaining chance for people in this country to go to the Olympics. The Minister has not revealed it yet, but I guarantee that he will. People should buy themselves a pair of running shoes and start training because that is the only way they will be able to go to Homebush. It is the only chance that they will have under this Government of getting to the Olympic site.

[Interruption]

I note that one of the interjections from honourable members opposite is, "It is a bit late." That is so true of the Government’s attitude to this sorry affair. I am sure all honourable members recall the public stoush that took place in April last year between the Minister for the Olympics and the International Olympic Committee official, Mr Primo Nebiolo. When Mr Nebiolo requested 85,000 free tickets Mr Knight stoically refused to give him the tickets and stated that he would do whatever he could to preserve those tickets for ordinary Australians.

It is obvious now what he meant by ordinary Australians. He, in fact, meant the rich, well-paid, influential mates of Richo and the Australian Labor Party. It does not really matter whether or not they are Australian; it is just a matter of whether they have a big enough bank balance to cover the cost of these tickets. The revelations continue about how individuals other than Australians have access to these tickets. In the last 48 hours we have heard that a number of American-based sports-promotion agencies have received thousands of tickets that should otherwise have gone to a much beleaguered Australian public.

The time has now come for this Government to spell out the truth about this ugly affair. The motion before the House is very straightforward; it calls on the Government to table all records with respect to the offer and acceptance of premium tickets, together with all minutes and correspondence
Page 1872
regarding the decision to go down this dark and sinister path. The Opposition is committed to clearing the air on this issue. We recognise that the Government and some members of SOCOG are concerned, allegedly, about the privacy of individuals.

When referring earlier to a foreshadowed amendment, I alluded to the fact that the Opposition is prepared to continue to protect those fortunate individuals who have taken up this Government’s most generous offer. However, the Opposition will not resile from the fact that there has been some skulduggery with regard to the way in which this Government and the Minister for the Olympics have dealt with various organisations, not only in New South Wales and throughout this country but also worldwide.

This Chamber has a responsibility to the people of New South Wales and this country to finally put to rest what occurred in the backroom deals done by SOCOG or the Government in Sussex Street. In the view of the Opposition - a matter to which I alluded earlier - if the Government is innocent, it has nothing to hide in relation to the purchasing of premium tickets. However, I assure members on the crossbenches and the wider community that the Opposition is not hell-bent on causing angst or embarrassment to those fortunate individuals who have been able to jump the queue.

I am led to believe that the amendments to the motion, which I foreshadowed earlier in debate, will be moved later by one or two members on the crossbenches. I look forward to the moving of those amendments. The Government has until 5.00 p.m. tomorrow afternoon to table all the documents referred to in the motion. I assure the Leader of the Government in this House that a failure to do so will not only bring about swift action by members of this Parliament; the pain that the Treasurer will experience in the wider community will be far worse.

Reverend the Hon. F. J. NILE [3.05 p.m.]: I am sure that all honourable members agree with the sentiments expressed by the Leader of the Opposition. In the minds of the public the Olympic Games ticketing arrangements have become a fiasco. We must conduct an inquiry into not just the issuing of premium tickets but all the arrangements relating to the issuing of tickets by the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG]. For that reason, I move:

That the question be amended by omitting all words after "That" at the commencement and inserting instead:

General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1 inquire into and report on all matters relating to SOCOG ticketing, and in particular:

(a) the allocation of premium ticketing for the year 2000 Olympic events held by the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games, that is, tickets not offered to the general public by SOCOG in its July 1999 public ticket offer, but reserved for sale at a premium, and

(b) all deliberations and minutes of the SOCOG Ticketing Commission relating to all ticket sales and not only premium tickets.

(2) That the committee report by Tuesday 23 November 1999.

Obviously, that committee will report to this House. All honourable members and, in particular, members of General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1, would know that that committee has already arranged for a hearing on 8 November to deal with the Olympic ticketing matter. At this stage the Minister for the Olympics, Mr Michael Knight, and Mr Hollway will be attending. The hearing had to be delayed, however, as Mr Hollway is embarking on a prearranged two-week holiday break. The Minister indicated that Mr Graham Richardson will also appear before the committee.

On Friday this week the committee will vote on the issue of whether or not to request Mr Richardson to attend that hearing. There will be three key players: the Minister, Mr Hollway and Mr Richardson. I am involved in discussions with the Minister to require other members of SOCOG staff who have been involved in ticketing to answer questions at that committee hearing. General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1 has already conducted an estimates hearing into Olympic Games ticketing. The committee must follow up its reference calmly, deliberately and factually.

All of these issues must be carefully considered by a committee that represents all sides of the Parliament - Government, Opposition, and crossbench members - and those facts must be tested and put together in a report to be presented to this House. The motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition - undoubtedly with the best of intentions - may cause serious concerns for the 2000 Olympic Games. We must maintain our bipartisan approach to those Games. However, that bipartisan approach is experiencing severe cracks at the moment. It is important for all honourable members to avoid point-scoring. We must obtain the facts, conduct an investigation and report to the House.

We all want the Olympic Games to be a success. Our purpose must be to ensure that in every way possible. The Games must also be a financial
Page 1873
success with no remaining deficit. At our first meeting the Government said, and SOCOG agreed, that a $30 million surplus to the State could be maintained, and that one way of achieving that was through sales of premium ticket sales, which number only a small quantity of the overall tickets available for the Games.

Corporations and other bodies are prepared to pay a large amount of money to secure premium tickets, and those ticket sales will bring in millions of dollars of revenue, which, in the long run, will provide the surplus at the end of the Games. This present outcry about tickets will be nothing compared to what will happen if taxpayers who did not get tickets to the Games somehow have to pay for any deficit. That will be a serious reflection not only on the Government but on all members of Parliament of this State. We must avoid an Olympic Games budget deficit in every way possible.

The Opposition took up the point based on information first published in the media, which inferred that thousands of premium tickets were being set aside for the so-called rich. In fact, the number of tickets set aside in the premium packages is less than 802 for the opening ceremony, which represents 0.76 per cent, and 709 tickets for the closing ceremony, which represents 0.66 per cent of tickets available. Those figures include also a second category of combined premium and hospitality tickets that SOCOG referred to as hospitality tickets. Together, those categories total only 802 tickets for the opening ceremony of a total venue capacity of 118,000 seats.

However, because of problems associated with the layout of the stadium - the need to provide seating for commentators, areas for cameras and other matters - some seats cannot be sold. Therefore, the total capacity of tickets to be allocated is 105,262, of which 802 were put into the premium-hospitality category. The media have blown up the figure to give the impression that that category could have been half or quarter of all available tickets. The same allocation applies in respect of other events at the Olympic Stadium and at other venues.

For example, for swimming events premium and hospitality packages total 750 tickets of a total capacity of 14,660. The premium packages issue must be brought into perspective by the House. That is why my amendment makes it clear that the committee should continue its investigation into all matters relating to SOCOG ticketing, not only to premium tickets. For that reason subparagraph (b) of my amendment states:

all deliberations and minutes of the SOCOG Ticketing Commission relating to all ticket sales and not only premium tickets.

I am sure the Opposition would agree that the important question is: Where did all the tickets go? If only 800-odd were allocated to premium and hospitality packages for the opening ceremony, where did the rest go? Crossbench members have had extensive briefings by the Minister and his staff. At the briefing this morning, which lasted for more than an hour, we were provided with a print-out of all tickets allocated for main events - opening ceremony, closing ceremony, swimming and so on.

That print-out shows - and some crossbench members were concerned at this aspect - that a large number of tickets appear to have been allocated to overseas purchasers. For example, for the opening ceremony 32,206 were allocated to other countries, but that is part of a contract that SOCOG signed to hold the Games; certain tickets in fairly large quantities must be provided to every accredited Olympics committee in each of 200 nations. Of course, that adds up to a large number of tickets.

Ticket allocations to the press, non-Australian sponsors, national Olympic committees and other bodies total approximately 32,000. For the opening ceremony the Australian Olympic Committee was allocated more than 4,000 tickets; Australian sponsors, 7,461; hotels 271; Stadium Australia-Stadium Gold, which was an early SOCOG fundraising project to try to get funds in early, 33,600 tickets; suites, 2,079; and the Olympic Club, 424. Premium and hospitality packages were allocated only 802. That is where the tickets went.

I said to the Minister this morning that it may have been better when the process was publicly advertised to say, "Order your tickets, but there are only 24,296 tickets available for the opening ceremony for Australians to purchase." I believe that may have been an incentive to order tickets. Some people were a bit laid back and thought they would order later. Those who did that will now not get a ticket. If that information had been provided at the beginning, we would not have had this controversy. People would have seen that SOCOG was handling the ticket sales in a sensible way and that only a certain amount of tickets were available in Australia as part of its allocation.

Although we are hosting the Games, we do not get all the tickets. That was not made clear to the public in the advance publicity. SOCOG’s objective obviously was to sell tickets and it concentrated on that task. The controversy would have been reduced if SOCOG had said it was not selling 120,000
Page 1874
tickets to the opening ceremony, and instead was selling 24,000. The same process would apply to all other events. I agree that the public has a right to be upset.

During a previous inquiry I said to the Minister that those who missed out on the first round ballot should have preference in the second round. His belief was that that was not physically possible because of the computer program. To me that seemed to be one way to reduce the hurt experienced by those members of the community who missed out completely; that they might get some tickets in the second round. To miss out on tickets in the second round and get nothing at all will really rub salt into the wounds of many Australians, and that could easily happen.

I ordered tickets to the opening ceremony, the soccer finals and other events, but I did not receive any tickets. I hope that with my second order I might get some tickets, but again, that will be a matter of chance when tickets are allocated again by computer. It may have been better to allocate tickets on a first-in-first-served basis because those who missed out got their second orders in quickly to try to get a ticket. A first-in-first-served ticket allocation may have helped satisfy those who missed out.

I hope those facts and figures will help the House to get this ticketing issue into perspective. I trust there will be bipartisan support for my amendment, which will, in the long run, achieve what the Opposition seeks to achieve. The Opposition will have two members on the committee to ask questions. Under the rules of the committee, other honourable members can support the inquiry as it would not be a closed inquiry.

As this would be a special reference, hearings could be heard in camera, if necessary. If the committee wanted the Minister to disclose information that may have some commercial impact on the success of the Games it could vote to hear that evidence in camera so that only committee members would be present. That would be a decision for the committee in due course.

The Hon. M. R. EGAN (Treasurer, Minister for State Development, and Vice-President of the Executive Council) [3.19 p.m.]: The Government will oppose the motion by the Leader of the Opposition. However, it will support the amendment moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile to refer these matters to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 1.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN [3.20 p.m.]: I support the motion. Not since the days of the Rum Corps have we achieved such infamy. Who would have thought that here, in Australia, the world’s premier sporting event would be run by a bunch of cheats - not five blind mice as headlined in today’s newspaper, but a bunch of cheats? Before I speak to the motion I should outline my involvement with sport, lest I am labelled as anti-Olympic by the backroom spin doctors in the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG]. I represented the Australian Army at interservice level in Australian rules football, tennis, squash and marathon running.

I have held the State ultramarathon record, and I organised the world’s longest, toughest and richest ultramarathon between 1984 and 1991. I have also organised and directed international marathon races in Sydney, and an international mile foot race down George Street in Sydney. I worked with the Melbourne Olympic Committee to organise the 4,000-kilometre torch relay between Darwin, Cairns and Melbourne when Melbourne made its bid for the 1996 Olympics.

I was as proud as any other Australian when we won the right to stage the 2000 Olympics. I am well aware of the tremendous benefits that flow to the host country of any Olympic Games for many years after the event. But now, together with millions of ordinary Australians, I feel that the opportunity of the millennium is being sullied by secret, backroom deals among an elite bunch of mates. The Olympic ticketing fiasco is one of the most dishonest, deceptive and shameful confidence tricks ever played on ordinary Australians.

I would venture to say that it is the greatest breach of trust ever perpetrated by a secretive Labor Government and a super-secretive Olympic movement on a trusting and unsuspecting Australian public. It is a betrayal of young Australian Olympic athletes who, thus far, have devoted their entire lives to realising their Olympic dream, a dream empowered by the opportunity to compete in front of a home crowd in Sydney. At this level, where the margin for success can be measured in thousands of a second, that extra Aussie voice could well be the difference between a dream realised and a dream stolen; or, in this case, a dream sold to the highest bidder.

Australia’s head swimming coach, Don Talbot, said that Americans dominated the crowd at the Atlanta Games and helped their local team. He estimated that more than 90 per cent of the seats
Page 1875
were occupied by Americans and the remaining seats were for the rest of the world. But in our 1,500 metre swimming final, our premier swimming event, Australians will occupy fewer than 30 per cent of seats. Our very own Thorpedo risks having been sold out by SOCOG spivs, by those on the other side of the House and their Labor mates.

What type of Australians will make up the 30 per cent? Will they be raw, enthusiastic, vociferous cheerleaders for our Aussie athletes? Absolutely not! It is obvious that secretive backroom deals have been done to set most of the seats aside for plastic, corporate sports fans, Australia’s very own social X-ray set. The dinkum Aussie sports fans will have to stay home and watch the events on television, well out of earshot. Our elite athletic champions such as young Dean Pullar will have just 597 Aussie supporters in a crowd of 12,000 to cheer him on in his quest to defeat the Russian world champion, Dmitry Sautin, for Olympic gold in his home town.

It is a travesty that our athletes will have to get used to a new Australian chant based on the clink of Chardonnay wine glasses from a distant corporate box and a condescending cheer of, "Come on what’s-his-name!" It is a disgraceful betrayal. Who gave these corporate carpetbaggers - Michael Knight, Graham Richardson and John Coates - the right to turn our greatest Olympic sports stadium into a gigantic corporate mates box? Do these spivs not know anything about atmosphere or national esprit de corps?

Have they not ever stood on a hill amongst battalions of battlers urging on their local team? Do they not understand that these dinkum supporters do not want any favours, or special deals, or comfortable corporate surrounds? All they want is an opportunity to stand shoulder to shoulder with their flags and cheer home their young Aussie heroes. Who gave them the right to sell off the dreams, goals and aspirations of our young athletes to the highest corporate bidder? Who gave them the right to sell off our home ground advantage for these Olympics? Who gave them the right to secretly execute the greatest sporting sale of the century?

There is no more clear example of the hypocrisy of the new Labor Party than this sell out of its own working-class ideals. I venture to say that many older Australians would be prepared to give up their Olympic seats if they knew our kids would get an opportunity to sit in the stadium and savour the atmosphere. And why should they not? It is in their millennium. Our millennium belonged to young athletes like Herb Elliott. Herb was 16 years of age when he sat at the Melbourne Cricket Ground in 1956 and saw Vladimir Kuts run down his opponents in the 800 metre final. That heroic run provided the spark that ignited the desire in Herb Elliott to become an Olympic athlete.

How many Herb Elliotts will miss out on this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity in Sydney because some young corporate spivs, or wealthy ruddy-faced mates will have most of our available seats? When Nick Greiner formulated the vision for Sydney to host the first Olympic Games of the new millennium, and when John Fahey went on to realise the dream the city was ecstatic. Both Nick Greiner and John Fahey knew that a sporting event of this magnitude demanded the best corporate leader in Australia, so they carefully established the criteria and the remuneration package to attract the right person for the job. But when Labor accidentally won the election in 1995 the criteria changed.

It is a matter of record that SOCOG provided a once-in-a-lifetime, jobs-for-the-boys opportunity for its mates. But, more importantly, Graham Richardson was put on the SOCOG board as kingmaker, a title he used to devastating effect in his Federal parliamentary days. His personal ethics are well documented in his books as doing whatever it takes to win. He is a self-confessed liar and a notorious backroom wheeler and dealer. Which corporate giant did Richardson encourage to assume the presidency of the biggest show in town? None other than former Campbelltown City Council social worker, Michael Knight, a disciple of the Richardson whatever-it-takes school of political ethics.

Michael Knight switched his political allegiance from left to right when it was more advantageous for his personal advancement to do so. When he got his snout in the ministerial trough he deserted his working-class constituency at Campbelltown and joined the silvertails at Roseville, on Sydney’s leafy North Shore. Now we have a self-confessed liar and an ideological charlatan running the biggest show in town. Since he and Richo captured the control room of the Australian Olympic machine he has cut a swathe through the professional management of the organisation by getting rid of the bloke who successfully managed our bid, Rod McGeoch, and other self-made sporting role models such as Tracey Holmes, and stacked the place with mates from Labor’s Right.

It is little wonder that we have had to endure the internationally embarrassing marching band fiasco, and that we now have to suffer the sad
Page 1876
consequences of one of the greatest sporting scams in our history. These tickets were offered to clubs. Were they offered to the Campbelltown Catholic Club, the Campbelltown RSL Club, the Blacktown Workers Club, the Rooty Hill RSL Club, or Penrith Panthers?

The Hon. A. B. Manson: Yes.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: They were? I am pleased to hear that. How many did they get? I have a letter dated 31 May 1999 signed by Sandy Hollway, the Chief Executive Officer of SOCOG to all members of Parliament. The letter states in part:

The Games are for all Australians and we believe that these, the "Athletes Games", will be a wonderful and unique experience.

The briefing paper states:

Because millions of tickets have been especially reserved, for most sessions Australians will simply order their tickets and automatically get them.

Where there’s a session of sport, like a swimming final, where more people want a ticket than there are available seats, everyone will be treated fairly.

The briefing paper continues:

The 30 May offer will include the vast majority of the tickets set aside for Australians - more than 3.5 million tickets.

If we mislead the Chamber we lose our jobs as parliamentarians. Sandy Hollway has misled the whole nation because we now know that just a smidgen over three million tickets were available. The briefing paper further states:

The ticket sales process is designed to be fair by providing plenty of time to order and equal access to tickets for all Australians . . .

Whether you’re a rich businessperson, you live in Perth or you worked on the Olympic Stadium, you’ll have the same opportunity to secure tickets.

If that is true, why will the Government not table the documents that the Opposition is seeking? Mr Hollway said, "You will have the same opportunity to secure tickets." If everyone had the same opportunity, the evidence should be laid on the table; otherwise those statements should be retracted, In an article this week Mike Carlton referred to the Olympics as the so-called follies. He said:

The SOCOG board would save itself an awful lot of pain, scorn and humiliation if it would stop behaving like an inner-city branch of the NSW ALP. The similarities are considerable: the obsession with stealth and secrecy, the incessant number-crunching, the shoving and leaking for political advantage, the dribbling of only such carefully doctored droplets of information as the plebs need to know. It’s all there in spades.

Silly to expect anything else, I suppose, when the show is run by a politburo of Michael Knight ("the soft-voiced killer", as he is described in the eagerly awaited Bob Carr diaries) his factional mentor, Graham "Whatever-it-takes" Richardson (the Packer ambassador to SOCOG) and the suave and implacable John Coates of the AOC.

It amazes me why Graham Richardson did not hand out tickets to everyone who attended Jamie Packer’s wedding last weekend. Mike Carlton said further:

They are doing it the only way they know how. Candour and public disclosure are as foreign to them as Swahili. With this troika at the top there is little need for the other board members bothering to turn up.

Except, of course, that these three musketeers keep shooting themselves in the foot every three months.

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: Chris Hartcher has an obligation. He should resign.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: You will not get away with that shot. Mike Carlton continued:

We are only just over the public relations disaster of the foreign marching bands, with all its retreat and defeat in the attendant legal battles and, still, the possibility of seven-figure compensation to be paid. That was a Knight-Richo special.

It will be paid not out of their pockets but out of the pockets of ordinary Australians, who did not have a chance to get tickets but who will have to foot this bill. He said:

Now the great ticketing fiasco is fast becoming another quagmire, and you can nail it down to secrecy in each case, that and cack-handed political decisions made with knee-jerk haste.

Secrecy is the hallmark of this Government:

Above all, the ticketing should have been seen as fair and open to everyone.

As Sandy Hollway said it would be when he wrote to the Opposition:

But for all the ear-bashing we have had about "our Olympic Games", in the public perception it is now Their Olympic Games which some of us might get lucky enough to attend.

The clunker was SOCOG’s reluctant disclosure of the so-called premium program with its red carpet entrance to the Games for the rich and well-connected. It was like pulling teeth without an anaesthetic, but eventually we learnt that the gentlemen members of Tattersall’s Club -

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: Did you write this?

Page 1877

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: No, this is Mike Carlton.

The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt: It is a great speech.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: It is great, and one should look at the headlines that have been produced. Australia is on show for the biggest marketing event in the world and there are headlines such as "Need, greed and tickets" - the slogan of the ALP - "Sold Out, ‘Ugly’ truth of Olympic ticket allocation" and "How a nation was betrayed". Mr Richardson, the chairman of the SOCOG ticketing subcommittee, said in the paper today, "I don’t think we have been dishonest." He is a liar and a cheat, although he does not think he has been dishonest. He does not know the difference.

Richardson’s values are so corrupted and blurred that he does not know the difference anymore. That is a sad indictment on him. Mark Taylor, one of our greatest ever test cricket captains, was used in an endeavour to pull Richardson out of the quagmire and try to give some credibility to the grubby ethics and grubby deals. The Government should call on Graham Richardson to apologise to Mark Taylor because his name has been sullied. It is a disgrace. An article in the Sydney Morning Herald today reported:

"I am the ugly face of capitalism," SOCOG’s commercial and marketing manager Paul Reading said with a distinct touch of pride.

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: He is running for Liberal Party preselection.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: He may well run, mate, but he will have to keep on running. The article continued:

I’m not employed to give advice on equity; this is about raising money.

What an indictment on the Labor Party and its working-class roots! It is about the worst aspects of grubby capitalism.

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: Grubby capitalism?

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: Labor capitalism is grubby capitalism because it is not based on values; it is based on mateship and cronyism. The article further stated:

What a pity then that SOCOG’s marketing campaign insisted for so long on running the line that this was "the people’s Games" and that "every Australian had an equal chance of getting the tickets they want".

After an hour of questioning yesterday on whether ticketing was pulling in big money, Graham Richardson stated bluntly, "As far as I am concerned we have done what we had to do." This is an extension of "We will do whatever it takes." What an arrogant, condescending statement. Kevan Gosper - and one thing I can say about Kevan is that he at least is an international athlete -

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: So is Coates.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: Yes, but Richardson and Knight are not. The only Olympic sport they have been involved in is backstabbing and front stabbing - and they would be gold medallists in that. Kevan Gosper outperformed Reading because he managed to present the ugly face of the IOC by insisting that the public should be grateful that SOCOG was belatedly agreeing to provide some of the facts on the ticketing debacle. He said:

If you ask me if we’ve got anything to apologise for, I’ll give you an answer very simply . . . no.

Apparently he believes there is nothing to apologise for and the public should just eat cake and be grateful that they will be able to watch the Games on television. The only regret shown yesterday was that the public were not told about the premier packages for the elite a bit earlier - or was it just that the information was leaked first without a SOCOG spin? Graham Richardson admitted that this was a mistake. The editorial of the Daily Telegraph on Richardson stated:

Arrogance reaches a new level. Graham Richardson, after a lifetime in the cesspool of backroom ALP politics, is blunt, ruthless and arrogant.

Yesterday, he also displayed a contempt for Australians who had paid in advance in the hope of fair treatment in obtaining tickets for the Sydney Olympics, billed as the People’s Games . . .

Mr Richardson and Mr Reading have compromised their positions and, by their silence up until yesterday, have breached public trust.

Both Mr Richardson and Mr Reading should resign their appointments in the hope of restoring faith in the Games administration from an Australian public which has been the unwitting dupe in this pathetic affair.

Labor often says that it is the social conscience of the Australian people and that the Liberals are silvertails.

The Hon. R. S. L. Jones: It is the other way around now.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: It is the other way around now. Recently I looked at Michael Knight’s
Page 1878
resumé, which showed that at one time he was a labourer. I would like to see that! That would have been either just before or just after he attended Cranbrook, which is an established "working-class" school attended by many people from Campbelltown. Labor holds the working-class people in contempt, and thinks it can get away with it. It should reassess its policies if it wishes to retain government in 2003. The Hon. P. T. Primrose is a former mayor of Campbelltown and there is no doubt that he was a hardworking mayor.

The Hon. P. T. Primrose: I will have to make a personal explanation if you continue.

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: I did not say you were any good; I just said you worked hard. He is now a member of this House. He lives in the area and has all the time in the world to look after the concerns of the working people of Campbelltown, and he should establish an office and do that. However, I have to hold many interviews with people in that area because there is no-one else for them to see.

Whom do people from the housing commission areas of Airds and Cromer ring? They ring Charlie Lynn because he lives there. They know that he was the former shadow member for Campbelltown and that he is now the shadow minister for western Sydney. I spend all my time driving to Campbelltown because Labor’s local member is in the back of his chauffeur-driven limousine with a bottle of Bollinger and is being driven across to the North Shore. He is a "virtual" member.

The Hon. P. T. Primrose: What are you talking about?

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: The Hon. P. T. Primrose should be quiet because I am actually trying to do him a favour; I am trying to get him promoted. I would like him to have an office in Campbelltown so that the people of Campbelltown can receive good, honest political representation. I believe that if any credibility at all is to be salvaged, the Minister for the Olympics should be made a member of this House. Then he will not have to pretend to have a constituency at Campbelltown; he can be a "virtual" member - by press releases and the odd gracious appearance.

Then the Hon. P. T. Primrose should become a member of the other place so that he can establish an office in Campbelltown and provide a service to local constituents. That would be a good, positive step towards restoring some form of credibility in the eyes of the working class whom Labor members have betrayed. Labor Party members live in places such as the North Shore. The Minister for the Environment, Bob Debus, represents the Blue Mountains but lives somewhere in Glebe and the Minister for the Olympics, Michael Knight, represents Campbelltown but lives in the leafy suburb of Roseville.

The Hon. P. T. Primrose: What about Hawkesbury? Where does the member for Hawkesbury live?

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: I go out there. I am the shadow minister for western Sydney and I look after there. If the Labor Party made those changes that would be the first step towards restoring some credibility in that the eyes of the working-class people that Labor members purport to represent. If members of the Labor Party do not think they should take that step, they should remember what happened to Jeff Kennett, who was perceived to be arrogant. He went to the Michael Knight-Michael Egan-Bob Carr school of arrogance, and although he was not a patch on them, look what happened to him.

If Labor is to salvage any semblance of credibility from this disgraceful scam, and if there is to be any hope of restoring national and international credibility as well as credibility relating to the ticketing process, the documents relating to the premium tickets must be tabled so that we can all see which companies and which clubs received which tickets. That is not too much to ask. People do not care about the ticketing process, and neither do I. I cannot afford to go to the Olympics so I did not apply for tickets, but I am a supporter of the Olympics.

I know there are people who make much more money than I do who can afford to go to the Olympics and who can afford to pay a premium price for premium tickets. I have no chip on my shoulder about that - that is fine - but I and others like me should have known that up-front. If people had known that was the arrangement, they would have accepted it and said, "That’s fine." People can watch the events on television and they can savour the atmosphere by going to the venues.

People can go to some of the lower-priced, less-popular events and be part of the Olympic spirit, and they can certainly all be the beneficiaries of the Olympic Games because of the international marketing power this event will have in years to come. Australians would have accepted that, but they will not accept liars, cheats and scammers.
Page 1879
Unless the Government tables the documents, all rights to any sort of credibility will have been forfeited. Having tabled the documents, Michael Knight and Graham Richardson should be sacked for lying to, and cheating on, ordinary Australians. If those things are done, this Parliament will get back to being a bipartisan institution.

The Hon. J. J. Della Bosca: So you are threatening the Olympics now?

The Hon. C. J. S. LYNN: No. If a former Campbelltown social worker can run the Games, I can run them, if the Special Minister of State wishes. I used to organise international sporting events and I will step in if the Government wants me to. I will give advice, and I will do so free of charge. I have wide experience in that area - more than the Minister for the Olympics ever had - both as an athlete and as a sports organiser, so if the Special Minister of State is in trouble he should just give me a hoy and I will come and help him in the spirit of bipartisanship. Until the Government gets rid of those blokes and tables the documents, members of the State Labor Government will bring disgrace to the Games, and the Sydney 2000 Olympics will be regarded as one of the great lost opportunities.

The Hon. P. J. BREEN [3.44 p.m.]: I speak against the motion moved by the Opposition and I support the amendment moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. The motion seeks to analyse and dissect the premium tickets offered by the Sydney Organising Committee for the Olympic Games [SOCOG]. Paragraph 1 (a) of the motion asks about the allocation of premium tickets, but that question has already been answered by SOCOG. There are 320,000 premium tickets that have been offered or already sold. Paragraph 1 (b) asks about applications held by SOCOG for premium tickets, how many have been received and, importantly, who applied. Paragraph 1 (c) requests all the deliberations and minutes of the SOCOG ticketing commission relating to premium tickets.

Those issues were first raised at the budget estimates hearings on 15 October 1999, which I attended as one of the crossbench members, together with Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. The Hon. D. T. Harwin, one of the Coalition representatives, asked the Chief Executive of SOCOG, Sandy Hollway, a question which started the commotion. It is worth repeating the question asked by the Hon. D. T. Harwin, which was directed to the Minister as follows:

I want to go back to the quantification that Mr Hollway gave earlier of the gold tickets -

he used the words "gold tickets"

- to make absolutely certain that I have it correct. Ten and a half thousand stadium packages were purchased back by SOCOG as the basis for these gold ticket packages, by 18 sessions, which gives about . . . 250,000 tickets . . .

Mr HOLLWAY: Yes, subject to my checking and correcting if that is wrong . . .

In response to that question, Mr Hollway, as I have just read, said, "Yes, subject to my checking and correcting if that is wrong." What was wrong was the Hon. D. T. Harwin’s question. There were no such things as gold tickets. Mr Hollway had spoken about "stadium gold packages" - a reference to a disastrous stadium float, but there were no such things as gold tickets. It is no wonder that Mr Hollway had to qualify his answer.

There never were 250,000 gold tickets. Mr Hollway took the question to refer to premium packages and, importantly, said he would need to check the figures. I then asked Mr Hollway whether my family members who had not applied for tickets would get another chance. Mr Hollway replied:

I would not want to come across as a crass salesman, but if your family calls 13 63 63 and registers we would be happy to send them a book the next time round. In November we will make available to anyone who wants it, and widely available throughout Australia, yet another ticket book . . .

I then asked:

Will there be a publicity campaign along similar lines?

Mr Hollway replied:

Very much so. I was not being facetious when I mentioned 13 63 63. We have a system whereby if someone wants to preregister to get that book and did not order before, they can do that now.

Subsequently Mr Hollway said - and Mr Paul Reading also said - that everyone wanting to apply for premium tickets could phone that number, 13 63 63. Since the budget estimates hearings the press has been in a frenzy about the program. The frenzy has been led by the Sydney Morning Herald following a freedom of information inquiry. Perhaps the most interesting feature of the front page of today’s Sydney Morning Herald is not the bold headline but, rather, the pie chart which appears in the context of the republic debate and is clearly wrong. It seems that SOCOG is not the only organisation that is capable of publishing incorrect pie charts.

The reality is that if people want to be fair - which is the one thing that everybody seems to agree on - it must be acknowledged that most people
Page 1880
did not apply for the top events such as the opening and closing ceremonies, either because they could not afford the tickets or because the chances of getting the tickets they wanted were better if they did not ask for tickets for top billing events. As I said earlier, information was available simply by ringing the SOCOG ticket number. My sister, Janette Warby, rang the number and passed on information to me. Relying on that information, I chose events in the second and third line of choice, and my selection was successful.

I suggest that people who have been disappointed by the allocation of tickets will have ample opportunity to obtain their fair share of the pie if the ticketing process is allowed to take its course. To intervene now, as the Opposition’s motion would have honourable members do, would simply ruin the process by exposing purchasers of the premium packages and hospitality tickets to unwanted publicity.

If the Opposition’s motion is passed, the proposed $60 million in revenue from premium packages and hospitality tickets will be jeopardised. I fail to see the point of incurring that kind of budgetary damage. With the greatest of respect to the Leader of the Opposition, who moved the motion, I ask him, as a former policeman, to consider the premium packages and hospitality tickets as if they were tickets to the police ball.

Honourable members would have purchased tickets to the police ball at some stage in their lives. Would they want their names to appear on the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald as having bought those tickets? I doubt it! Tickets to the police ball are sold under the counter and out of the limelight. If people who bought tickets to the police ball were named, no-one would buy them and the ball would be a big flop. I urge honourable members to remember that, to vote against the original motion, and to support the amendment moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES [3.50 p.m.]: I support the amendment moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. It would be dangerous to have all these details released to the public; it would cause tremendous problems in selling premium packages, which are necessary to fund the Games. I have examined the sales figures for "A" tickets and other tickets which were presented to me this morning. I was shocked to discover that, while 3,800,535 tickets are available, only 285,936 "A" tickets are available to members of the public.

Therefore, of the 1.75 million "A" tickets available, the public is able to purchase only 285,936. In other words, the public is allocated 33.25 per cent of the total tickets but only 16.38 per cent of the "A" tickets. Members of the public are being treated like second-class citizens. For the opening ceremony 89,848 "A" tickets are available but members of the public, Australians, are allocated only 7,984 tickets, or 8.88 per cent. However, of the 10,330 "D" tickets, the worst tickets, Australians are able to purchase 10,000, which is 97 per cent. Again, they are being treated like second-class citizens.

The Hon. D. F. Moppett: Those seats are behind concrete pillars, and other places.

The Hon. R. S. L. JONES: They are not behind concrete pillars, but they certainly do not have good views. For the closing ceremony, 92,848 "A" tickets are available but the public are able to purchase only 4,788, or 5.16 per cent. There are 5,237 "D" tickets available, and the public is allocated only 5,000, or 95 per cent - again they are being treated like second-class citizens. A diving final event, on 24 September, has 9,400 tickets available, but only 81 tickets, or 0.86 per cent, are allocated for members of the Australian public. Of the 9,400 tickets available for a diving final event on 26 September, only 16 tickets, or 0.16 per cent, are offered to members of the public. That is an absolute outrage.

Of the 9,400 tickets available for a final diving event on 28 September, only 382, or 4.4 per cent, are available for members of the public. On 30 September, 9,400 tickets are available for another diving final event but only 782 tickets, or 8 per cent, are offered to the general public. For football, 63,000 "A" tickets at the Olympic Stadium are on offer, but only 7,200, or 10.6 per cent, are on offer to the public.

For rhythmic gymnastics there are 6,000 tickets available, with 246 for the first final and 159 for the second final on offer to the public, or roughly 3.5 per cent. For a swimming final on 16 September, 14,300 tickets are on issue but only 737, or 5.15 per cent, are available to members of the public. On 17 September, 14,300 tickets are available and only 649, or 14.5 per cent, are offered to the public. On 18 September, of the 14,300 tickets available, only 631, or 4.4 per cent, are offered to the public. On 19 September, of the 14,300 tickets available, only 768, or about 5 per cent, are offered to the public.

Of the 3,200 tickets available for a tennis final on 27 September, only 203, or 6.3 per cent, are on offer to the public. For a tennis final on 28 September, of the 3,200 tickets available, only 224 are on offer to the public. This pattern carries through the whole ticketing process. Members of the
Page 1881
Australian public are being treated as second-class citizens and are getting a raw deal. Sure, they may get 33 per cent or more of the total number of tickets available, but they are getting the worst tickets. That is an outrage. In order for Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile to conduct his inquiry I move:

That the amendment of Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile be amended by adding at the end:

(3) That there be tabled with the Clerk of the House by 5.00 p.m. on Tuesday 2 November 1999:

(a) an indexed list of all files held by SOCOG relating to Olympic ticketing, and

(b) details of all deliberations and minutes of the SOCOG Ticketing Commission relating to all ticket sales,

whether recorded in written or electronic form.

(4) Any document required to be tabled under this order is to be:

(a) made available only to members of the Legislative Council, and

(b) not published or copied without an order of the House

Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile needs to obtain these details in order to carry out a proper inquiry, and unless this motion is passed he will be hamstrung. I understand that there are great sensitivities involved, and my amendment does not allow for information to be made available to the public. This information could, and would, be used politically. It might well damage the sale of a number of packages. I support the motion moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile, with my amendment.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [3.56 p.m.]: The Greens support the amendment moved by Reverend the Hon. F. J. Nile. I foreshadow that the Greens will move an amendment to his amendment to require the inquiry to look at the ticketing process involving people with disabilities and disadvantaged people. In Australia many people are angry about the ticketing process, and they have a right to understand how the process has been undertaken.

The Olympics have been on the nose for a long time, and corruption has become synonymous with the Olympic process. But now that we are moving closer to the event and the tickets are coming on line, people are starting to feel more confident about having a chance to go to the Games, to share in the spirit of the Olympics and participate in the joy of sport.

However, people have now found out that they have been conned, and that feeling is shared by Mark Taylor, whom SOCOG conscripted to sell tickets. Australians have not and will not have anything like 50 per cent access to tickets for popular and premium events and sessions. This is despite the strong marketing impression created by SOCOG that they would have access to that level of events. The Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS] has done a great deal of work on this issue. NCOSS has shown that SOCOG’s ticketing policy allows high-income people two opportunities to purchase Olympic tickets for prestige events.

For the opening and closing ceremonies and premium events such as swimming and athletics finals, the better off can purchase both the highest-priced "A" category and lowest-priced "D" category tickets. This is an option which low-income people who cannot afford A-priced tickets do not have. Under the SOCOG ticketing process many tickets designed to give low-income people access to prestige events have been taken up by high-income earners. SOCOG’s refusal to quarantine cheap tickets for the most popular events for the least well-off in the community is totally wrong and unacceptable and it needs to be changed urgently.

There are no cheap tickets to the basketball final, which is popular with young people, particularly those from working-class backgrounds, and the disadvantaged. Also, there are no cheap tickets to the gymnastics or tennis. This situation needs to be thoroughly investigated.

NCOSS sought the urgent consideration by the SOCOG board of the following measures, and I urge SOCOG to report to the inquiry on the immediate public release of the details about the number of tickets remaining for sale in all sessions of all events; to give a commitment to conduct the second ticket ballot on an event basis rather than allocating all the ticket requests of applicants that come out of the ballot draw; to guarantee that there will be 1.5 million Olympic opportunity tickets at the previously advertised price available across all sessions for all events, that were not sold out in the first-round ticket ballot; and to reallocate unsold premium package tickets at Olympic opportunity ticket prices to low-income people through either a Centrelink ballot or a ballot conducted by NCOSS of its member community organisations for distribution to clients. This is a very clear proposal and would start to bring some confidence back to SOCOG and the whole Australian conduct of the Olympics.

Page 1882

The other matter to which the Government should give consideration is the way in which people with visual disabilities have been treated in the allocation of tickets. They have had virtually no access to information about the ticketing process. It is time the Government came clean in this regard. People with such disabilities have had to battle to find out what tickets are available, quite apart from having to make a decision on which tickets they would like to purchase. In June this year a complaint was lodged with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission by Mr Bruce Maguire, a blind citizen, following SOCOG’s refusal to produce the first round ticket book in braille.

Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.