- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Council
- 11 June 2002
Greyhound Racing Bill; Harness Racing Bill
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 40 of 51
| Next Item »
GREYHOUND RACING BILL
HARNESS RACING BILL
Page: 2948
Second Reading
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA (Minister for Police) [8.35 p.m.]: I move:
That these bills be now read a second time.
I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.
Leave granted.
The object of the legislation before us is to repeal the:
- Greyhound Racing Authority Act, and
- Harness Racing New South Wales Act;
and to provide for the restructure of the Greyhound Racing Authority and Harness Racing New South Wales so as to:
- Separate the commercial and regulatory activities; and
- Give greater emphasis to the autonomous commercial management of the harness and greyhound racing industries.
The harness and greyhound racing industries are each to have their own commercial board to exercise the strategic and commercial governance of the relevant code.
Each commercial board is to be independent of Government and will not represent the Crown. This is the basis on which the Thoroughbred Racing Board was established, and is consistent with Government racing policy to give greater autonomy to the minor codes of racing in relation to commercial decision making.
The pivotal features of the new structures are that the commercial boards are to be separate and independent bodies in their own right, and that they will each have an independent chairperson.
The two commercial boards will largely follow the structure of the 'commercial' component of the existing Boards except that:
- Each board is to have an additional member which would be the independent chairperson; and
- The greyhound industry commercial board is to have a further additional member to provide individual representation to the National Coursing Association and the Greyhound Breeders Owners and Trainers' Association.
The independent chairperson of each commercial board is to be a person with appropriate high level business skills. That person is to be selected by other members of the commercial board after a recruitment process conducted by external consultants, much in the same manner as the recruitment process for the chair of the Thoroughbred Racing Board.
Each bill provides that the independent chair cannot be a member of a committee of a race club, including in the 12 months prior to selection. If a member of a race club or a club employee, that person must suspend their membership or terminate their employment, prior to appointment.
Such protection against a conflict of interest is further strengthened by the provision in each bill which places a duty on each member of a commercial board to act in the public interest and the interests of the relevant racing code, as a whole. This is to overcome the issue of members acting narrowly in the interests of the body that nominated the member.
In addition, the existing informal arrangements by which board members sign confidentiality deeds upon appointment have been formalised by the provision in each bill which makes it an offence to disclose information acquired in the exercise of official responsibilities, except if it is for official purposes.
The bills also provide, if the commercial board so wishes, for the same person to serve as the independent chair and the chief executive officer. This provides significant flexibility for the purpose of containing costs, a matter which I will expand upon shortly.
Other members of each commercial board are to be representative of industry and participant groups along the same lines as the status quo. That is, representation from clubs and industry participants.
Both bills also require the relevant commercial board to seek the Minister's approval for borrowings of more than $1 million, or some other amount which may be prescribed. This measure is on the basis of an individual loan, or of an aggregate amount over a year. This is a safety valve measure to ensure that the new commercial boards act prudently.
Each commercial board is to be responsible for such matters as:
- Registration of race clubs
- Strategic development and business governance
- Distribution of TAB Ltd payments in accordance with the Racing Distribution Agreement
- Developing and reviewing policy in relation to breeding and grading or handicapping of racing animals.
The main elements of the bills reflect the wishes of the majority of industry stakeholders who made submissions to a recent review. That review, which I asked my department to conduct, was in relation to:
- The composition and activities of the Boards of HRNSW and the GRA, and
- Whether the present structure of HRNSW and GRA Boards is appropriate and effective.
The dual board structure recognises the priority of reform for commercial reasons. There is also a revamp of the functions of the two regulatory boards.
The bills contain provisions which strengthen the requirements in relation to codes of conduct and the disclosure of pecuniary interests by Board members. The ICAC has provided advice in relation to these matters.
The bills propose important reforms on the regulatory side.
At least one person of each of the three member regulatory boards must have legal qualifications, and the other two must have experience in one or more of the following areas:
- Management or administration
- Veterinary qualifications
- Working knowledge of the racing and wagering industry.
In addition, in keeping with protecting against conflicts of interest, the following persons are not eligible to serve on the regulatory boards:
- A person who is, or was, in the previous 12 months, a member of a committee of a racing club
- A member or employee of a racing club
- A person licensed by one of the controlling bodies
- A person with a financial interest in a racing animal
Each regulatory board is to be responsible for such matters as:
- Registration of racing animals and licensed persons
- Administration of the relevant Rules of Racing–except with some qualifications regarding commercial matters
- Ensuring the integrity of racing and associated wagering/and
- Records management necessary to support such integrity functions.
The bills contain a number of other associated requirements. They are mostly of a transitional, consequential or start-up nature, and are necessary to:
- Facilitate the process of structured change management; and
- Ensure that there is continuity of regulatory and commercial functions during the transition period.
An important aspect of that restructure process is the need to ensure that all staff of the existing two boards are consulted about the changes.
Accordingly, the department has established a consultative framework which involves the staff, the Public Service Association, the Public Sector Management Office and the management of the two controlling bodies. Such an approach enables full discussion of any issues of concern relating to staff employment and entitlements.
All staff entitlements are protected by the bills. All existing staff are to be transferred to the new regulatory boards, thus preserving all public sector entitlements. Staff whose functions are transferred to a commercial board will, if they wish, be given preference for an equivalent position with a commercial board. Such preference will be available for 12 months.
Staff taking up such preference will be eligible for a special termination payment in recognition of the loss of public sector conditions of service. They will also be protected from being made redundant in the transferred position for 12 months.
Staff whose functions are transferred will not be compelled to transfer, nor will there be forced redundancies. The usual public sector redeployment arrangements will apply to the regulatory boards which will remain as statutory authorities.
The second stage of the restructure proposal involves examining the possibility of amalgamating the two new regulatory boards, that is, the Harness Racing Authority and the Greyhound Racing Authority.
The Government’s decision to restructure the present control and regulation arrangements for the harness and greyhound racing industries indicates that such action must be preceded by a feasibility study which is to report back to Cabinet.
Such a feasibility study will closely scrutinise the possibility of efficiencies to be gained from economies of scale and the benefits in terms of staff recruitment, training and career development.
However, amalgamation will not be at the expense of the integrity of racing regulation. If savings can be made, their benefit will be applied to the racing industry by, for example, increasing prize money.
This restructure proposal represents a significant and major reform for the harness racing and greyhound racing industries. This will provide them with the opportunity of securing a viable future on their own merits, and in accordance with their own business and strategic acumen.
The separate and independent commercial boards will be able to focus exclusively on the day to day business arrangements, and also on strategic decision making to secure the future of the industry.
Both the commercial and regulatory functions will be re-invigorated and prepared for the challenges of the future.
The present reform is another of the many commercial reforms and achievements that the Minister for Gaming and Racing has been responsible for since 1995.
In 1996, it was the establishment of the Thoroughbred Racing Board. That Board is comprised of appointees that provide for industry wide representation, and an appropriate mix of commercial and regulatory experience.
In 1997, it was the privatisation of the TAB.
Each year since privatization the TAB has increased its payments to the racing industry. In the 1997-98 financial year it was $142 million. That has increased in the 2000-01 year to $183 million.
These increases are the lifeblood of the New South Wales racing industry. Without such increases our racing industry would not be able to compete and its viability and future would be in doubt.
In 1998, there was the first phase of the restructuring of Harness Racing NSW and the Greyhound Racing Authority. That initial change provided for greater industry representation on the boards of the controlling bodies, and the undertaking that there would be an evaluation of that new structure at the end of the three year term of each board. That evaluation has resulted in the proposal at hand.
In 1998 and 1999, it was the reform and update of the antiquated Gaming and Betting Act 1912, including the introduction of the offence for a person in New South Wales to bet with an overseas wagering operator on Australian racing events.
Such legislation minimises the threat from wagering operators outside New South Wales who seek to free-ride on this State's racing industry. These operators are happy to exploit our racing and poach our racing revenues without contributing to the cost.
It is with some urgency that the Minister for Gaming and Racing has led the debate regarding the practice by some jurisdictions of the licensing onshore of such large overseas wagering operators who contribute little to the racing industry. The Minister’s intention is to prevent the opportunistic scavenging of our racing industry revenues, and therefore the destruction of many racing industry and country based jobs.
The Minister has also met recently with other Racing Ministers to discuss the best means by which to address these issues nationally and in a measured way.
Other important reforms have included:
- The review of the adequacy of sexual harassment policies, procedures and practices in the New South Wales racing industry. Consequently, the three controlling bodies have been directed to implement best practice policy and procedures. This has been recognised as such by other States and Territories and adopted as a national model.
- Significant tax reform for bookmakers. First in 2000 sports bookmakers received a reduction in taxes on certain sports bet types, and just recently the Minister announced that the 1% State turnover tax on racing bets was abolished.
- The introduction of a responsible wagering program which requires race clubs and TAB outlets to adopt gambling harm minimisation measures.
The measures put forward in this proposal are to enable, as mentioned earlier, the re-invigoration of the management and regulation of the harness and greyhound racing industries to ensure their future viability.
However, the opportunities provided by Government will only work if professional and capable people are nominated to serve on the commercial boards.
Gone are the days when it was sufficient to nominate a person merely on the basis that he is a good bloke and once owned a good horse or greyhound.
In the present environment, it is imperative to the survival of the harness and greyhound racing industries, which are facing increasing competition for the leisure and gambling dollar, that appointments are made on ability and merit. It is essential that professional persons of the highest calibre with business acumen and experience are appointed to the new commercial boards.
It is essential that once appointed the members of the new commercial boards each select an independent chairperson and chief executive with skills at a similarly high level.
I am therefore very pleased to be able to introduce the present proposal, as a part of a long list of reforms designed to modernise and bring commercial reform to the governance of the racing industry in this State.
I commend the bills to the House.
The Hon. JOHN JOBLING [8.35 p.m.]: The Opposition does not oppose the Greyhound Racing Bill and the Harness Racing Bill. The Greyhound Racing Authority and the Harness Racing Authority have indicated their support for these bills. They do not oppose the bills and are satisfied with the content and the approach taken in these bills. These bills follow the privatisation of the TAB, the Greyhound Racing Authority Act 1985 and the Harness Racing Act 1977, which were amended to separate the commercial and regulatory functions of the two boards. At the time the intent was to provide what could be described as greater industry participation and representation of participants. In April 2001 the Government at the time conducted a review of the composition and activities of the two boards. From my understanding, a further feasibility study will be undertaken.
The Greyhound Racing Authority and the Harness Racing Authority of New South Wales will be restructured under the provisions of these bills to separate the commercial from the regulatory activities of the boards. That desirable outcome will give a greater representation, something about which both authorities are happy, to give autonomous commercial management of the Greyhound Racing and the Harness Racing authorities. The boards will clearly follow the structure of the commercial component of the existing boards and will consist of five members, as proposed, including an independent chair. The regulatory boards will consist of three members. There are surprisingly few arguments against these bills. The Minister in the lower House indicated that the Government may accede to the foreshadowed amendments of the Opposition in the Committee stage.
Harness racing clubs and greyhound racing clubs, which are part and parcel of country activities, have a dedicated following in country New South Wales. Country people are concerned about the long-term outcome and viability of their reasonably small clubs. They do not attract large numbers of participants or punters through the gate. From time to time they struggle, but they provide a commercial activity and a bit of colour to the various country areas in which they exist. Their officers are dedicated and those who attend the race meetings are loyal. I will do what I can to ensure continued participation in country areas where these clubs exist. The clubs realise that moving to a commercial board will create certain problems. The clubs are aware that a 10.45 per cent share of takings is at stake, even though it is not enshrined in a legally binding agreement. Country harness racing is not a signatory to the intracode agreement. Therefore, when one considers the numbers that are before us, there is no guarantee that country racing in these two domains will have any representation on the board. Obviously, that is extremely concerning.
I know the time and effort put into both the harness and greyhound racing clubs in my area of Muswellbrook. The arguments suggest that we must consider a number of things. Both the Greyhound Racing Authority and Harness Racing New South Wales have indicated that they are happy with and agree with the general thrust of the legislation. It is probably a good move to place both codes of racing on a greater commercial footing—they will continue to succeed only if they are soundly based commercially. I understand that both authorities accept that it will be necessary—this week, next month or next year—to make some hard commercial decisions. It is in the interests of the two racing bodies to accept it. They accept that some decisions will be made on a purely commercial basis. They equally accept that this may have some adverse effect on smaller racing clubs in country areas. That approach is very sensible and thoughtful, and tends to ensure their future existence. The Opposition is clearly aware of the potential threat this could pose, which is the basis on which we will move the amendments to ensure representation of country racing interests on a commercial board.
Most people will accept this as a highly desirable outcome for a statewide industry that employs probably more people than any other industry in New South Wales. As the legislation points out, the appointment for each board is to be three years. It also sets out the responsibilities of each board, including registering racing animals—dogs and horses—and devices to persons, administering the relevant rules of racing, ensuring the integrity of racing and associated wagering, and testing for drugs. The Minister has indicated that he proposes to examine the feasibility of amalgamating the two regulatory boards that these cognate bills will bring into existence. It is my understanding that the Minister has been quite fair about it and has given an undertaking that any attempt of a proposed amalgamation will not occur if it is to be at the expense of the integrity of racing regulation.
The Opposition is concerned about a rumour in the industry. I would appreciate it if the Minister could reconfirm the Government's intention: will the chairperson of Greyhound Racing New South Wales or Harness Racing New South Wales be able to hold the position of chief executive officer concurrently? It has been suggested that it would be advisable to appoint one person to the two positions. Although it may not be the intention or, indeed, the preference of the board to follow this practice, the existence of this option has caused a degree of concern throughout the country, particularly, and considerable anxiety. Support for the bill exists. We have consulted with the Greyhound Racing Authority and Harness Racing New South Wales, and we agree that the general thrust of the bill is supported and welcomed. It will place both codes of racing on what is clearly a commercial footing. They need to do this for their survival. We are pleased to see that it is happening.
We believe the Government has it right: two representative bodies in the industry. However, if it is purely a commercial decision—even though it may be acceptable in urban areas that have bigger clubs—we must ensure that it does not affect country areas. Obviously, we have received a lot of correspondence from many people in this area. If responsible people in the industry are not satisfied that the industry is being advanced by this mechanism we will raise those problems in the House. The two amendments deal with representation from country racing clubs on the commercial board of each code. At this stage it is my intention to move to both the Greyhound Racing Bill and the Harness Racing Bill an amendment that would provide that two persons be nominated by the greyhound or harness racing club other than those referred to in the appropriate paragraphs, with one of those nominees being nominated to represent the TAB and the other being nominated to represent country racing.
The amendments overcome the major problems with the bills. The Minister for Gaming and Racing said that he has no problems with the amendments and that the Government is prepared to support them. I refer to Hansard of 5 June. In his reply to the second reading debate the Minister noted the comments of the honourable member for Lachlan, who adequately and comprehensively dealt with this legislation. The Minister then said:
... I have no problem with the amendments to be moved in the other place, which will achieve the same end that the Government intends and are representative of the country view.
With those brief comments, I indicate that the Opposition does not oppose the bills but will move the two foreshadowed amendments in Committee.
The Hon. IAN COHEN [8.51 p.m.]: The Greens are pleased to support the Harness Racing Bill and the Greyhound Racing Bill. They will replace Harness Racing New South Wales and the Greyhound Racing Authority with new regulatory bodies. Both industries will now have two separate regulatory bodies, separating disciplinary matters from other matters. The non-disciplinary regulatory bodies will be responsible for, in the case of greyhound racing, registration of greyhound racing clubs, greyhound trial tracks and the cancellation of registration on grounds other than disciplinary grounds and for policy on industry development; and, in the case of harness racing, registration of harness racing clubs and harness racing associations, and the cancellation of registration on grounds other than disciplinary grounds and policy industry development. The Greens are pleased with the assurance given by the Minister that all staff transferred or otherwise as a result of the new regulatory system will have all their staff entitlements protected and preserved and that there will be no forced redundancies as a result of the bills. The Greens are pleased to support the bills.
The Hon. RICHARD JONES [8.52 p.m.]: I have a letter from a former board member of Harness Racing New South Wales expressing a number of concerns about the legislation. He wrote:
While the Industry acknowledges there is an ongoing need for reform, our concern is not only with the content but with the process in which this Bill appears to have been "rushed" into being and with the blatant lack of consultation with the Industry as a whole.
He noted a number of questions about the Harness Racing Bill that he wished to highlight. They were:
Splitting the current Board into two, with the new Commercial Board appearing to have no assets.
The obvious increased (and unaffordable) cost to the Industry that two Boards will generate which will result in prizemoney reductions.
The Legislation was "hidden" from the Industry.
Amalgamation of horses and greyhounds is "chalk and cheese" whereas thoroughbred and standardbred horses is a compatible amalgamation.
Coupled with this is the fact that participant groups who are members of the inaugural Industry Advisory Board have inexplicably been excluded from this Board in the new Legislation, something which is against the Minister's "policy" of participants involvement.
The former board member asked a number of questions, which I forwarded to the Minister. I have received answers to those questions, and I put some of those on the record. The first question was:
The Harness Racing Industry, from the Minister's perspective, has probably enjoyed the best period of stability since the Government took office and certainly since Mr Face has been the Minister. Why then has the Minister decided that a restructure of the Industry was necessary?
The answer by the Minister was:
The restructured Harness Racing New South Wales and GRA Boards commenced three year terms on 1 January 1999. At that time the Minister indicated that reviews would be undertaken towards the end of the restructured Boards' three-year terms to evaluate the impact of the structure.
The 1999 restructure occurred in the environment that the Government had deregulated the management and control of the thoroughbred racing industry, and that its policy direction was that the racing industry should be given greater commercial autonomy.
Accordingly, in April 2001 the Minister directed that reviews be undertaken of Harness Racing New South Wales (HRNSWW) and the Greyhound Racing Authority (GRA) in relation to the:
1. Composition and activities of the HRNSW and GRA Boards; and
2. Whether the present structure of the HRNSW and GRA Boards is appropriate and effective in terms of the objects of each Board's enabling Act.
Submissions to the review were sought by notices placed in the press and industry periodicals over the weekend of 28 April 2001 and the closing date for submissions was 25 May 2001 (Daily Telegraph, Trotguide and the Greyhound Recorder).
Thirty one submissions were received on GRA matters, and thirteen submissions were received on HRNSW matters.
In addition:
- the Department wrote to all harness and greyhound racing clubs, and related industry associations, to invite submissions.
- there were extensive discussions with the Chairs of Harness Racing NSW and the Greyhound Racing Authority.
The two Bills accord with the outcomes obtained from the consultation and policy development process outlined above.
The former board member asked this question:
Upon whose advice did the Minister act, and what knowledge do they have about contemporary issues in the Harness Racing Industry which places them in a position to give that advice?
(Note that neither the full Board of Harness Racing NSW, nor the Chief Executive of HRNSW were consulted prior to the reform package being sent to Cabinet and that Harness Racing NSW was actively discouraged from putting in a submission in regard to the Minister's reform proposals).
The answer supplied by the Minister is:
See answer to question 1.
Also:
- the Chairperson and Chief Executive of each of the two codes were consulted during the course of the preparation of papers for Cabinet; and each of the two Boards were provided with a confidential briefing about, and access to, an exposure draft of the Bill relevant to their code of racing.
The input from the formal review process, the consultations outlined above and the Government's policy direction that the racing industry should be given greater commercial autonomy, were the basis of the policy development for the Bills.
I will not read all of this person's questions, but his third question was:
What does the Minister perceive to be the problems in the Harness Racing Industry and how will the restructure overcome those problems?
The Minister responded:
Without repeating the substance of the Bill, the restructure provides the opportunity for the two industries to—as they have sought—achieve a right to exercise commercial and strategic management of their respective industries totally independent of Government direction.
I will not take up the time of the House now reading onto the record a number of other questions and the responses from the Minister. I will send those responses to the former board member. The Minister has gone to some length to answer the questions posed by that person. I would point out that the Council of Social Service of New South Wales [NCOSS] fully supports the legislation. Alan Kirkland, the Director of NCOSS, wrote to my office a few days ago saying:
I am writing to advise that the Harness Racing Bill has the strong support of NCOSS. We believe that in addressing problem gambling it is vital to ensure that the regulatory structures for the gambling industry are strong, independent and appropriately balanced. We believe that the Bill, which will establish two separate bodies—a Regulatory Board and a Commercial Board—is essential to ensure the integrity of the regulatory process.
I support the legislation based on that advice and the advice from the Minister.
The Hon. MALCOLM JONES [8.57 p.m.]: I simply wish to put on the record that the Harness Racing Bill is largely the result of a report of the Regulation Review Committee completed in 2001. Many of the recommendations contained in the report have been taken up in this legislation. I trust it will go a long way towards remedying many of the problems that the Regulation Review Committee uncovered. There were a number of such problems. However, the primary problem was that a trainer who presented for racing a horse with a reading of 35 millilitres of total carbon dioxide per litre of blood—with an additional tolerance of 1.2 millilitres—was automatically disqualified and prevented from earning a livelihood from the industry for 12 months. That is because the trainer was deemed to have submitted for racing a horse that was not fit for racing.
The stewards who conducted inquiries into such matters were the policeman, the judge, jury and sentencing authority. Trainers were automatically found guilty. Clause 33 of the Harness Racing Bill establishes a new Harness Racing Appeals Tribunal to hear such appeals. I trust, based on my knowledge of the harness racing industry, that this bill will go a long way towards resolving the problems uncovered by the Regulation Review Committee. As far as the Greyhound Racing Bill is concerned, at this stage I have no comment. I support the Harness Racing Bill.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA (Minister for Police) [8.59 p.m.], in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to this debate. The proposed legislation provides an opportunity to reconstitute the current composition and structure of the controlling bodies for harness racing and greyhound racing to provide for a separate regulatory board and an independent commercial board for each of the harness and greyhound racing codes. Each commercial board is to exercise the strategic and commercial governance of the relevant code. Each such board is to be independent of the Government and will not represent the Crown. Each such board is to have an independent chairperson. This restructure proposal represents a significant and major reform for the harness racing and greyhound racing industries. It will provide them with the opportunity of securing a viable future on their own merits and in accordance with the business and strategic acumen of people drawn from, or appointed by, the two industries.
While the priority for reform is on the commercial side, that is not to be at the expense of the regulatory functions of the controlling bodies for the harness and greyhound industries. Indeed, the statutory basis for the two regulatory boards has also been reinvigorated, particularly with regard to managing any conflicts of interest and also by prescribing qualifications for board members. The Minister for Gaming and Racing responded to issues raised by the Opposition in the debate last week. I will respond to them in a similar vein. It is understandable that people are uneasy about change and that they are apprehensive about reforms that they might find challenging. Nevertheless, let me reiterate the Minister's assurances that the reforms proposed in these bills give the harness and racing industries the opportunity to take charge of their future, free of government interference and in accordance with the best strategic and business planning that those industries can bring to bear to the task.
The cost of the proposal has been the subject of considerable speculation and misinformation. The bills contain many significant measures to ensure that the boards operate at optimum efficiency. For example, each bill provides that a commercial board may, if it wishes to do so, appoint the same person as the independent chairperson and chief executive officer. Further, such a commercial board may determine, after it assesses its functions, that it does not need a chief executive officer and may recruit appropriate executive staff at a more modest level. Such staffing decisions are a matter for each commercial board to determine according to its priorities and vision and, of course, the ability of the industry to afford such measures. Another important cost control measure is the cap on borrowings by each commercial board. The bills provide that individual loans, or the total in a 12-month period, which exceed $1 million are subject to ministerial approval. That threshold can be varied by regulation if that is considered necessary.
On the regulatory side, the budget of both regulatory boards must be approved by the Minister before industry funding is released for that purpose. That provides for scrutiny of the economy of the expenditure of the two statutory bodies and also ensures that adequate funding is provided to assure the integrity of harness and greyhound racing, and associated wagering. Further, close consideration will be given to avoiding duplication of common services to both boards in each code of racing. Such common business centres—for example, accounting, human resources and information technology [IT]—should, wherever possible, remain with the regulatory board and be subject to service level agreements between a commercial board and a regulatory board. There is no need to have two accounting sections, two IT centres, two human resource centres, et cetera. Such services can be provided by one organisation to the other without compromising the integrity of the separation of the commercial and regulatory functions. Such an approach is also aimed at maximising the operational efficiency of each organisation and minimising disruption to staff employment.
The Minister for Gaming and Racing has also addressed confusing misinformation regarding the amalgamation of the two new regulatory boards. The second stage of the proposal involves examining the possibility of amalgamating the two new regulatory boards, that is, the Harness Racing Authority and the Greyhound Racing Authority. The press release announcing the Government's decision to restructure the present control and regulation arrangements for the harness racing industry and the greyhound racing industry indicates that such action must be preceded by a feasibility study which is to report back to Cabinet.
Such a feasibility study will closely scrutinise the possibility of efficiencies to be gained from economies of scale and the benefits of staff recruitment, training and career development. However, amalgamation will not be at the expense of the integrity of racing regulation. If savings can be made, their benefit will be applied to the racing industry by, for example, increasing prize money. The proposed changes are of a structural nature and are designed to improve the commercial and regulatory governance of harness and greyhound racing. They also, by the way, improve the bottom line of the administration costs of the industry and, therefore, provide the possibility of more funds being distributed to industry participants.
Another issue that has been raised is the concern that certain sectors of each industry, such as country clubs or industry participants, will lose their representation on the new boards. Such concern is unwarranted, as the future representation of these two groups will continue at current levels. That is to say, each board now has a country club or non-TAB representative as well as an industry participant representative. They will have the same representation on the new commercial boards. On this issue, the Minister acknowledges that the Opposition foreshadowed an amendment which would give certainty that each commercial board must have a country representative. The Minister indicated support for that proposal, which formalises the present arrangements and clarifies that the non-TAB club representative is in fact the representative of country race clubs.
The claim has been made that the new commercial boards are not answerable to anybody. While it is true to say that they will be totally independent of the Government, that does not mean that they are not accountable. The first and most significant measure of accountability is that they are accountable to the industry group that nominated them to the board. They are also under a statutory duty to act in the best interests of the industry and in the public interest. Each bill imposes that duty on its commercial board. They are also under a duty to act in accordance with the racing distribution agreements between the racing industry and TAB Ltd, the aim of which is the commercial success of the racing and wagering industries. The Minister also indicated last week that he believed that the two industries were at a significant crossroad. He expressed the hope that they recognise this as an opportunity for them to demonstrate the maturity and business acumen that is appropriate to the needs of securing the future viability of their industries.
In particular, he asked that the relevant industry bodies give close consideration to the persons they nominate to the new commercial boards. The future of these industries rests on the business skills and acumen of the members of the new boards. It is time for these industries to take responsibility for their economic future. In the interests of securing appropriate financial returns, there has been discussion about the possibility of varying the arrangements by which owners and trainers provide racing animals for racing. Any such proposals would be a matter for the new commercial boards to consider in the usual way for accessing business proposals. It is an industry management issue: it is not a Government matter. Further to the proposal to appoint the same person as chairman and chief executive officer, the legislation merely provides the flexibility for both industries to adopt that course of action. The final decision will be one for the industry and not for the Government. I commend the bill to the House.
Motion agreed to.
Bills read a second time.
In Committee
The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will deal first with the Greyhound Racing Bill.
Part 1 agreed to.
Part 2
The Hon. JOHN JOBLING [9.10 p.m.]: I move:
Page 4, clause 8 (1) (c), lines 26-29. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:
(c) two persons nominated by greyhound racing clubs (other than those referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b)), with one of those nominees being nominated as a representative of TAB clubs and the other being nominated as a representative of country racing,
In debate on the second reading of this bill I made the Opposition's position clear. Concerns have been expressed about the problems facing country racing. The Government indicated that it supports this amendment in general terms, which will place country racing in an equitable position and ensure its future. I commend the amendment to the Committee.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA (Minister for Police) [9.11 p.m.]: The Opposition has proposed an amendment to the bill that will ensure that a member of the commercial board is designated as a country club representative. The Minister for Gaming and Racing indicated last week that the Government was supportive of such an amendment, particularly after strong lobbying from Country Labor branches. This amendment will formalise existing arrangements and ensure that the non-TAB club representative is essentially the country representative. Accordingly, it will give certainty to that arrangement. The valuable role of country racing and country race clubs is recognised by the Government. As I said earlier, after strong representations from Country Labor, the amendment is supported.
Amendment agreed to.
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Parts 3 to 8 agreed to.
Schedules 1 to 6 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN: Order! The Committee will now deal with the Harness Racing Bill.
Part 1 agreed to.
Part 2
The Hon. JOHN JOBLING [9.13 p.m.]: I move:
Page 4, clause 8 (1) (b), lines 26-29. Omit all words on those lines. Insert instead:
(c) two persons nominated by harness racing clubs (other than New South Wales Harness Racing Club Ltd), with one of those nominees being nominated as a representative of TAB clubs and the other being nominated as a representative of country racing,
As I stated earlier, this amendment will ensure that country racing remains relevant. The Government accepted the Opposition's amendment to the Greyhound Racing Bill. I hope that it will also accept my sensible amendment, which supports country racing, to the Harness Racing Bill.
Reverend the Hon. FRED NILE [9.14 p.m.]: The Christian Democratic Party supports this amendment. The Christian Democratic Party has a lot of contact with the harness racing industry and I believe the amendment will help those in the industry who will be affected by the bill.
The Hon. MICHAEL COSTA (Minister for Police) [9.15 p.m.]: As previously stated, following strong representations from Country Labor, the Government supports the Opposition's amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Part 2 as amended agreed to.
Parts 3 to 8 agreed to.
Schedules 1 to 6 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bills reported from Committee with amendments and passed through remaining stages.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:38:27 : Update this page