Sydney Olympic Park V8 Supercar Races

Ms LEE RHIANNON [4.24 p.m.]: I move:

That this House notes:

1. (a) that it appears that a Government announcement of a final decision on the proposal to stage a V8 Supercar racing series at Sydney Olympic Park is imminent, despite the fact that there has been no consultation with the community, and no social or environmental impact statement or cost benefit analysis has been produced,

(b) that after numerous previous unsuccessful proposals to the Government, the current proposal by V8 Supercars Australia is being supported by the Minister for State Development, Ian Macdonald, whose department has given in principle support for the event to incur State supported losses of $32 million in the first year and over $18 million annually for the next three years, a total of $86 million,

(c) that the negative impacts on Sydney Olympic Park and its environs include:

(i) the cutting down of approximately 700 trees to accommodate the track,

(ii) approximately 7km of concrete blocks and steel capping fencing will have to be transported, assembled and dismantled each time the event is staged, as well as up to 4km of spectator fencing,

(ii) some 1,200 truck movements of 25 tonne semi trailers will be required each time the event is staged to assemble and dismantle the track,

(iv) loss of amenity for the patrons of Sydney Olympic Park due to the closure and disruption of the park for up to ten weeks each year for track works,

(v) excessive noise pollution impacts on the residents of Homebush Bay and Newington during construction and dismantling of the track and during the event, as well as other pollution such as exhaust and oil spills,

(vi) an adverse environmental impact on local fauna species, particularly birds,

(d) that this proposal represents the hijacking of an iconic community trophy for short term narrow commercial interests, and is totally at odds with the whole of Government sustainability guidelines and the design aims and function of Olympic Park as a world class example of sustainable urban renewal and development,

(e) that the proposal has been unanimously rejected by Auburn, Parramatta and Ryde councils and the Sydney Olympic Park Authority, and there is a groundswell of public opposition from nearby residents and patrons of the Park, who have signed petitions and held public meetings, and

(f) that there is a more feasible alternative site at Eastern Creek, which has already been used for V8 Supercar racing and where minimal track works would be required.

2. That this House calls on the Government to:

(a) detail which departments are involved in the assessment and approval process for the Sydney Olympic Park V8 Supercar event proposal, what plans each department has in place and what stage the proposal has reached,

(b) make public any reports prepared or received by government in relation to the event,

(c) explain how it can justify the expense and inconvenience of staging this event at Homebush when there is a ready alternative venue at Eastern Creek, and

(d) reverse any decisions of support taken to date, and instead allocate sufficient funds to upgrade Eastern Creek raceway so it can continue to host a variety of motor racing sports.

I appreciate that the House has supported debating this matter now and has recognised that this is a matter or urgency. I have brought it on in response to a report on the ABC that seems to have come from the Minister for State Development, the Hon. Ian Macdonald, in which he said that he finds it hard to understand some of the opposition to the supercar race on environmental grounds. The Minister suggested that a decision on this matter is imminent. I look forward to hearing his contribution to the debate. When I was explaining why this matter is urgent I said that this is not a debate about not having V8 Supercar races; that is not the issue. It is about the venue. An alternative venue is available in the western suburbs. I have been in contact with Geoff Arnold, President of the Australian Racing Drivers Club. He has set out a very clear case for why it would be wiser to hold the V8 Supercar race events at Eastern Creek. Some issues are financial and one big issue is of creating a permanent home. Wider benefits could follow from using wisely the money raised at the events and locating the race at Eastern Creek. Referring to the Australian Racing Drivers Club, Mr Arnold said:

The ARDC calls on the State Government to make Eastern Creek a priority in its feasibility study regarding V8 Supercar racing.
A $30million investment each year in a street race would be far better directed to a permanent complex where the benefit can be felt year round.

Eastern Creek is owned by the State Government. It is in the government's best interest to invest in it, before spending funds elsewhere.

The benefits of Eastern Creek to NSW tourism can arguably be as great as those if a race were held at the Olympic Park complex. Eastern Creek's greater benefit is in driver training, and looking after the youth of the region. Its benefits extend substantially past a once-a-year event.

The cost of a street race would be $30 million in the first year and around $30 million every year after for setup and teardown.

Mr Arnold has made a number of important points, particularly about the benefit in driver training. I have had a couple of radio debates with Minister Macdonald about this matter and I was surprised that he tried to make out that holding the race at Homebush would be a way to educate young drivers. That is actually the exact opposite of how it works. I have read about this and heard from my colleagues in Adelaide, and people in the racing industry have since underlined it. When streetcar races are held, such as the one held in Adelaide some time ago and the one held in Melbourne, the number of deaths of young men leaving the event and driving home increases because they are revved up. They race away and are involved in tragic accidents.

The facility at Eastern Creek can be used year round for safe driving practice. I cannot emphasise that point enough! Other material supplied by Mr Arnold underlines the huge waste that will occur if the race is held at Homebush. That would result in a whole host of environmental issues, particularly as it was supposed to be a world-class ecologically sustainable precinct. For a supercar race, large sections of roadway would need to be ripped up and many trees removed, and we have all heard about that. A large amount of equipment would have to be trucked in and trucked out every time a race is held. The material from Mr Arnold operates on the assumption that a 3.5 kilometre circuit requires barriers on both sides of the track and a pit entry and exit. That is the standard practice used on the Gold Coast and elsewhere.

Also, seven kilometres of concrete barriers would be required, and each barrier would be approximately four metres in length and weigh at least four tonnes. That equates to 1,750 barriers or 7,000 tonnes of cast concrete. That will result in a huge number of truck movements. The waste would be excessive. Mr Arnold calculated that there would be a total of 303 loaded semitrailer movements onto the site and everything would be repeated in reverse to get the equipment onto the site. It is not just the concrete barriers that are needed as steel fabrication is needed for the big fences. The venture is excessive and wasteful. A huge amount of money would have to be pumped into the event, year in, year out. Remember that no profit will be made in the first few years. I hope that the Minister for Primary Industries will inform the House of his association with the people behind this push to hold the race at Homebush. During a radio interview he acknowledged that a principal player was a friend of his—

The Hon. Duncan Gay: No, he is a decent fellow.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: The Minister acknowledged that he was very close to this person and, when I challenged him about that association, he asked, "Well, what's wrong with that?" Everybody is entitled to have friends, and we develop our friendships—

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: You have some people mixed up.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: No, I have not. I look forward to the Minister clarifying the situation and explaining honestly how the process will work. The public deserves the right to scrutinise and debate the cost benefit analysis of holding this race at Sydney Olympic Park before a final decision is made. The Greens are extremely concerned about the way in which the Government is handling this proposal. The public has been locked out yet again, which is why we have brought on this debate today. News that the Sydney Olympic Park Authority found the proponent's budget figures were inaccurate and underestimated the true cost of the event underlines why the project deserves careful scrutiny. I understand that not one member of the authority supports holding the race at Homebush. That speaks volumes. Authority members were working on future uses for the park when suddenly they heard about the Minister's proposal. We must ensure that this debate is brought to the attention of the new Premier, Mr Rees. He makes out that this is a new government and that he is using a new broom to sweep it clean. This should be the first project that falls off the table and into the rubbish bin. The Government claims it has financial problems—although that assertion has been challenged—and we need more money for public transport and a range of other public services. Therefore, this project should certainly not go ahead.

It is also interesting to recall that the former Premier was not totally supportive of the proposal. He seemed to come on board only in the latter days of his leadership, when he was running into problems. In September 2006 former Premier Iemma rejected the V8 Supercars Australia proposal, saying that the event was too expensive at a time when spending was necessary on essential infrastructure. I ask members on both sides of the House: What has changed? The only difference is that spending on essential infrastructure has become more urgent. The public deserves to know what has changed other than the Government's increased thirst for a story to divert attention from its woes. I put it to the Premier and his other Ministers—I have no faith that the Minister for Primary Industries will change his mind because he has locked onto this project—that the project will not divert attention from the Government's woes but will focus more attention on them.

It is wasteful to spend millions of dollars on infrastructure that will be ripped down every year when the event could be held a few kilometres away at Eastern Creek. That world-class facility benefits not just the racing car fraternity but young people who clearly need to learn safe driving practices. We must remember, too, that the costs will spiral higher and the benefits will be minimal. Many overseas precincts have stopped holding V8 Supercars races on street venues. I understand that big V8 Supercars events are held currently at Bathurst, Melbourne, the Gold Coast and Adelaide. In December 2007 the Queensland Government knocked back a V8 Supercars pitch to hold a street race in Townsville. The Canberra experience is very interesting. The staging of the V8 event in Canberra from 1999 was expected to produce significant economic benefits for the Australian Capital Territory, but instead it led to a net loss of more than $11 million over three years, which resulted in the event's abandonment.

[Interruption]

The Minister interjects to say that the event in Townsville is going ahead. Perhaps Queenslanders are not as bright as we had hoped and are still making the same fundamental mistakes as the Minister. There is no justification for holding the event at Homebush. Research and experience reveal that V8 Supercars events can be a financial drain on the host city, with costs spiralling out of control and recurrent funding required. I note that the Minister is scowling.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: That is not the experience. Look at the economic model in South Australia.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Why did they move it in Surfers?

Ms LEE RHIANNON: Thank you, Mr Gay. The Canberra experience speaks volumes. A sizeable section of the racing fraternity want the event to be held at Eastern Creek. That would save money and deliver a better project. How can the Minister argue against that? Research into these events reveals that the costs are more than the economic and tourism benefits gained. I expect the Minister will produce figures to show that the event will boost the economy by millions of dollars. Similar claims were made about the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation conference and World Youth Day. But where is the proof? Where is the analysis to show that the economy will benefit and that the Minister has not simply plucked a figure out of the air to justify continuing with a project that is clearly in trouble? Experience also shows that these events can result in less than expected job creation and smaller attendance figures.

Furthermore, media coverage is usually focused on the track, not the city. That is important because one of the selling points often advanced by people who, like the Minister, get hooked on big projects is that it is a way to sell our city to the world—think of all the wonderful media coverage and priceless television footage. But consider how similar events are often promoted overseas. The camera work focuses on the track, the race, the drivers and the spectators; there are no views of the beautiful city or the venue. As I said before, research reveals that street racing promotes drink driving and speeding around the time of the event. I challenge the Minister to make a link with the terrible, tragic deaths of young people in illegal street races. There was another accident last night. This is a complex issue. Young people in particular like to race cars and, as a society, we must determine how this can be done safely. An event such as this is bad news financially and environmentally, and encourages bad driving practices. I urge members to support the motion.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [4.38 p.m.]: The Opposition supports the motion. I come to this debate from a different perspective from that of Ms Lee Rhiannon, who is not concerned about motor racing. I am a motor racing supporter to my bootstraps.

Dr John Kaye: That is a bit unfair.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: She spoke about the venue and her concerns about the effects of motor racing. She certainly did not wholeheartedly support motor racing.

Dr John Kaye: This is about street racing.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: Do the Greens want our support on this motion? Opposition members support the move to Eastern Creek, but that venue needs a great deal of work. Eastern Creek was developed to host the 500cc Motorcycle Grand Prix. The bigger bikes do not race in the Motorcycle Grand Prix, just as the bigger cars do not race in Formula One race events. Members would be aware of the Indy street race that is currently held at Surfers Paradise.

Some of the problems that I see many of the teams have with street circuits are the tightness of the courses and the cost of repairs. The Indy street race at Surfers Paradise no longer counts towards the V8 Supercar championship. The V8 Supercar race, an outstanding formula-based race, has been developed on the rivalry between Holden and Ford. It is a handicap event—a bit like the Melbourne Cup really. Australians do not like people to have an edge over other competitors in any of our sporting events. Organisers of the V8 Supercar race have been careful to ensure that the performance capabilities of all vehicles are equal, so that it becomes a test of one's driving ability. Over the years we have had some outstanding drivers in this series—Dick Johnson, Craig Lowndes, the Kelly boys, the "Enforcer" and Craig Baird. There has been a good mix of drivers.

It is important that the event be moved from Homebush Bay to Eastern Creek, as we do not need another street circuit; there are more than enough street circuits as it is. Sydney once had numerous race circuits, for example, Oran Park, Catalina Park and Warwick Farm. In the late 1960s I remember going to Warwick Farm to watch Leo Geoghegan, Stormin' Norman Beechey and other boys slipping through Creek Corner. I remember the Phantom Bugler. That was car racing at its purest.

The best thing for the people of New South Wales would be not to waste money each year putting yet another street circuit in place but to spend that money on Eastern Creek. As I indicated earlier, the Eastern Creek circuit was developed basically for motorbike racing. It is not an ideal spectator circuit for the "tin tops", in particular the V8s, and I concede that it needs some work done to it. I am sure that the Minister will say that the circuit is not ticking over as it should, and he will probably try to shift the blame to the Coalition because we established it when we were in government. I supported it then and I still support it.

The Hon. Ian Macdonald: It is a bike track.

The Hon. DUNCAN GAY: It is a bike track, and that is why it needs money spent on it to make it a proper car track. At the moment Formula 1 is looking for a new home, but I realise that this venue is not ideal. I do not know whether the Minister is brave enough to negotiate with Formula 1 about that. I would not recommend that he do so, because he would have to pay an arm and a leg to get anything from Bernie Ecclestone. The key issue relating to Eastern Creek is its development. We require a permanent solution and money must be spent to develop that circuit.

An enhanced track would facilitate the training of young drivers. Today we were reminded of this Government's tough stance on L-plate drivers. Our young people need proper training. They do not need advanced driving courses; rather they need to be trained to drive defensively and they need proper training in the handling of a car. Rather than making them and their parents criminals by making them drive hundreds of hours on our already clogged roads during holiday breaks, the Government should be developing venues such as Eastern Creek to facilitate that learning. Money would be better spent on enhancing an asset we already have rather than blowing it on additional circuits. This Minister likes circuses and the chardonnay set. I know he does not like drinking chardonnay—he has moved on from that—but he likes the odd circus. Having the V8 Supercars and Mr Cochrane's mob at Homebush Bay is too much for him to resist. However, it is the wrong move for the community and for motor sport.

The right move would be to provide money for an enhanced raceway at Eastern Creek and remove the problems confronted by the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport Limited [CAMS] and the Australian Racing Drivers Club [ARDC] at Eastern Creek. People like Colin Bond, who had to adjudicate on all these issues last year, do not need such hassles. The Opposition supports the motion moved by the Greens.

As I indicated earlier, we have a slightly different view on motor racing than that espoused by the Greens, although Dr John Kaye has assured me that he is a great fan of motor racing. I have been led to believe that the Greens are the greatest petrol heads in this House! In situations like this one's enemies become one's friends. This important racetrack must be improved. Frankly, the Government has pulled the wrong rein in relation to this issue, and that is wrong for the sport, for the community, and for the training of our future drivers. I indicated earlier that we had lost all our car racetracks. Catalina Park and Warwick Farm have gone and Oran Park is about to be sold off for housing. The only venue that is left has to be enhanced. Such a multimillion dollar investment would convey an important safety message if it were done properly.

The Hon IAN MACDONALD (Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Energy, Minister for Mineral Resources, and Minister for State Development) [4.46 p.m.]: That was an interesting approach by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, given that the greatest advocate for this proposal has been the Opposition. On 13 December 2006 the Opposition released a statement pledging that a Coalition government would hold a V8 Supercar street race at Sydney Olympic Park. The then Leader of the Opposition said that, if elected, he would contribute around $14 million in startup costs for the race and around $3 million in annual funding. He went on to say that he would inject at least $100 million of new income into the New South Wales economy over the next five years and create 260 jobs. He said:

I want the V8 Supercar race at Sydney Olympic Park to become as big as the Bathurst 1000 and the Indy 300 on the Gold Coast. The Bathurst 1000 race adds $40 million to New South Wales economy and I would hope to replicate that over time.

It was interesting to hear the Opposition's changed approach. I propose to deal with the motion—something the Deputy Leader of the Opposition did not do. It seems he is happy to support it, regardless of what is in it. He has not dealt with the matters on which we are being asked to vote, which are distinct from his sentiments about whether the Homebush Bay site is appropriate for street car racing. On 19 July the V8 Supercar organisation wrote to the management of Eastern Creek and made it clear that it would not again be going to Eastern Creek. Its reasons for that were numerous—not just the fact that as a motorcycle designed track Eastern Creek is completely inappropriate for car racing. Promoters of all racing forms have had enormous difficulties at Eastern Creek because of inadequate transport services to the site. Anyone who has attended a significant event at Eastern Creek would know the difficulties associated with that.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: It is the same at Homebush Bay as it is at Eastern Creek. Come on!

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition should let me make my contribution without interruption. I did not interrupt him.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: You are talking to the shadow Roads minister.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is showing his ignorance as a shadow Roads minister; I think he should be quiet. One of the great virtues of Homebush Bay is that it has a railway station servicing the site. There is also the bus network and ample car parking. Its very central location has meant that crowds of up to 100,000 and more attend events there, particularly during the Olympics—I think even recently there were double events that attracted those sorts of numbers.

The Hon. Rick Colless: The Swans only got 20,000 to their last game.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: Yes. It was a pretty sad, wintry, wet night, unfortunately, but the Swans won the game. On one evening around that time the area was able to cope with both a Bledisloe Cup match and a major function at Acer Arena, attracting a combined crowd of around 100,000, we believe. That crowd dispersed very quickly, precisely because of the magnificent transport advantages of this site, which enable people to get away efficiently and effectively, mostly on public transport. That is part of the reason why this Homebush Bay proposal is before us. Eastern Creek has clearly failed to attract significant crowds—people know what a disaster area it is—and there are significant difficulties in getting to and from that site.

I now refer to paragraph 1 (f) of the motion. The point about Eastern Creek is that if we are to bring it up to scratch for this type of event, we will have to spend, it is believed, in the order of $125 million. If we were to be a little more fanciful, and do as the Hon. Duncan Gay did and bring Formula 1 racing into calculations, it would require a spend in the order of $400 million—because one of the core requirements of Ecclestone and Co. is an embedded track, not a street track, and they would require a stadium that seats about 50,000 people. The track works would be massive to make it suitable for that type of vehicle. In addition to that, Victoria has just signed a new five-year agreement with F1 for a total of $250 million. So to get Eastern Creek up and running for that event, we would have to think in terms of spending $650 million, and that is the figure in today's dollars. It would require outbidding Victoria in 2015 after the end of its next five-year agreement plus bringing that track up to scratch.

Homebush is not suitable for a grand prix at F1 level either, in my view. It would require a massive spend on the track alone, let alone the moneys to successfully bid on what organisers call their fees for service, that is, supplying the event to the State. Paragraph 1 (f) of the motion is completely inappropriate given the fact that the group has indicated they are not going there anymore and because there will not be such an event in Sydney as Oran Park is closing, as the Hon. Duncan Gay mentioned. It is the final race this year and there will not be an event next year unless it is at Homebush Bay. It is all done and finished.

I will just run through some aspects of the resolution. There has been significant consultation, particularly with the affected businesses. The Sydney Olympic Park Business Council has supported this proposal and has made that clear. The major organisations—the stadium, Acer, the RAS, Accor—

[Interruption]

I am talking about the businesses that operate there and have to survive there, not the land management group. They have all supported it. That deals with paragraph 1 (a). In paragraph 1 (b) a series of statements are made about the event incurring State-supported losses of $32 million in the first year and over $18 million annually for three years, a total of $86 million. Where these figures have been dragged from is beyond my imagination. I cannot work out where those figures have been grabbed from because the capped figure the Government was talking about was in the order of $25 million over five years, and that included the initial capital outlay and a provision for the services each year.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: In the order of $25 million? You are joking! That is rubbish.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: That is the capped figure. Paragraph 1 (c) refers to the cutting down of approximately 700 trees to accommodate the track. That is not the case. The proposal has been amended and only 120 trees will be affected. In the main they will be relocated. They consist mainly of Manchurian apple trees—a North Asian species, not a native. Where possible they will be relocated. In relation to the concrete blocks and steel fencing and capping, yes, some infrastructure will have to be brought in—as is the case with all street races, whether Clipsal or Indy or some other street venue. Street venues seem to be very popular indeed in the world of racing. That is why F1 has stayed in Melbourne, apart from the incentive of $250 million, because they have got a street race. They want it.

There will be no road closures, although there will be partial road closures during the initial construction in the first year. There will be very little disruption in the future in the bump-in and bump-out periods. That has been dealt with at great length. In relation to the noise impact on residents, I point out there are 6,000 residents living in sight of the Indy track at Surfers Paradise and each year the residents who want to be there because they love the event remain there, and those who do not want to stay make quite an amount of money by renting out their properties.

Homebush is an events site; it was purpose built for events. We already have various types of activities conducted there: Hilux cars and trucks belt around the RAS track. Motorbike sports are held there and it is proposed to bring motocross there next year. The site needs further significant activity to take advantage of the fantastic infrastructure to which I have referred, such as the transport facilities. I do not believe that car racing has requirements that are different in reality from those of other sports that use the site. The event can extend over three days once a year at this wonderful site, and its amenities can be used in diverse ways. The motion contains many inaccuracies and misleading statements.

I make it very clear that this sport has massive public support. It is the third most watched sport on Australian television. On average, on a Sunday the events attract an audience of about 2.2 million people across the nation. Surveys that have been conducted in Sydney show that something like 25 per cent of the population actually follow this type of sport and can, when asked, name most of the key participants and relate something about the history of the sport. I am sure it would enjoy incredible popularity west of the inner city and would have great support in the western areas of New South Wales. It is quite appropriate that the Government support sporting events that capture the interest—

The Hon. Duncan Gay: No-one is criticising your support of the sport. It is the location.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The location is perfectly appropriate. A number of interstate people think it is an absolutely ideal site for the race. On the issue of whether or not such an event makes money, I cite reports on events over the past two years for which figures are available. The economic benefit of the Clipsal was $26 million in 2005 and $26.9 million in 2006, and the total Indy benefit in 2003 was $50 million. These events attract substantial support that in turn translates to government support. A new track is being built in Townsville, Queensland, for an event that will be held in the middle of next year. It is a partially street-based track. The Federal Government has contributed $25 million and the Queensland State Government also has contributed $25 million. The Queensland State Government is investing substantially in that track in Townsville.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: How come it is costing them $50 million and you can do it for $5 million? They are rubbery figures.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition makes a good point. I am glad he is present in the Chamber because his comments give me the opportunity to further develop the argument. A large part of the additional cost of the Townsville circuit is attributable to the permanent pit-stop-cum-function centre. The costs escalated because both governments required the proponents to ensure that the circuit's buildings could be used as permanent training centres throughout the year. The circuit will involve permanent structures, but the New South Wales proposal does not encompass having permanent structures in place, other than alterations to the track.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: That means you will have to rebuild it every year.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: But that is easy. We rebuild stands and regularly put them up and take them down. We weave in and out of temporary barriers in one form or another everywhere throughout Sydney.

Pursuant to resolution debate interrupted.

Leave granted on the request of Ms Lee Rhiannon that debate on the interrupted business continue.

Debate resumed.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: The other States have been not so coy about this. As I have illustrated amply, they support and in some cases own the event in their State. The Clipsal and the Indy require very little in the way of permanent structures whereas other circuits, such as at Bathurst and Townsville, will have permanent structures. I find the Deputy Leader of the Opposition's attitude on this topic amazing. The proponents have made it clear that they will establish a substantial program of driver training that will involve their main drivers. That will be conducted in and around Sydney at appropriate schools.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: It is for one day a year. You are talking about every day of the year.

The Hon. IAN MACDONALD: There will be a longer lead-in time than one day. Let me examine the success of these events. Early in the first quarter of the year, the first race was held in New Zealand at Hamilton. The Auckland burghers knocked it back because they could not make a decision to support it. Obviously, Hamilton grasped the nettle. Hamilton is a city with a population of 100,000. The race was attended by 176,000 people over three days and was a great success. The Auckland authorities copped a shellacking from the media throughout the country for not attracting the event to Auckland.

This document contains a lot of exaggeration, is very unfair in its approach to this event, and does not take into account its value to Sydney. Economic benefit analysis reveals that the gross State product will increase by approximately $110 million over five years, that there will be 30,000 additional hotel visitor nights in Sydney each year, that $1.1 million will be received directly from payroll taxes, and that the equivalent of 110 full-time jobs will be created. The current proposal is much more rigorous and tighter than previous proposals. Objections by a number of unsupportive organisations have been examined in great detail. The Government and I believe that this event will be a powerful attraction on the events calendar and will attract tens of thousands of people. The Homebush site is ideal and has all the advantages of public transport. I believe the proposal represents an event that will be enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of people in the State who are enthusiastic supporters of motor sport. I reject the motion and call on members to join me in voting against it.

Dr JOHN KAYE [5.05 p.m.]: I support the motion, but before outlining my reasons I make it clear that I am not a fan of V8 Supercar racing or any other form of motorcar racing. However, I do not deny people the right to enjoy sport. The key motivation behind the debate is not about whether V8 Supercar racing is good or bad. That is not the issue. The issue is whether or not it is sensible to have supercar street racing at Homebush when, with medium investment, the event could be held appropriately at Eastern Creek.

[Interruption]

That was very unparliamentary language.

The Hon. Robert Brown: I apologise. I was carried away.

Dr JOHN KAYE: It does not worry me. The State is at the point of making a major error. A bad decision not only will cost real money but also will inflict unnecessary damage on Eastern Creek. We have a purpose-built facility at Eastern Creek for motorbike racing. Investment in the Homebush site is estimated by the Minister to be $125 million—although I challenge the Minister to produce the documents proving that it will be $125 million. With an investment of $30 million in improvements to Eastern Creek, it would become a perfectly acceptable facility for V8 Supercar racing. More importantly, we will have a permanent facility involving no dismantling or setting up.

The major problem associated with V8 Supercar street racing is the set-up cost. A 3.5 kilometre track involves 7 kilometres of security fencing, 7 kilometres of concrete blocks and 7 kilometres of steel fencing caps on top of the blocks that will require 1,212 25-tonne semitrailer movements in and out of Homebush. That estimate does not take into account marquees, amenities for spectators and so on. But if the event were held at Eastern Creek, there will be no heavy vehicle movements to and from the site. However, assessing the suitability of a site goes beyond those considerations.

Eastern Creek already has stadiums. With further investment in modifications, it would be an appropriate facility for large crowds. With the right type of stadium design, 60 per cent of the raceway will be visible from the stadiums at any given time, whereas with street racing spectators are lucky to see 6 per cent of the raceway or one-tenth of the race that they would otherwise be able to see from a purpose-built stadium. It is totally unfair to spectators to force them to go to Homebush Bay when all they will see is 6 per cent of the race whereas, if the event is held at Eastern Creek, they will see 60 per cent of the race.

The Minister first estimated a cost of $125 million to reconfigure Eastern Creek but then, in a high-speed flight of fancy, his estimate of the cost of holding Formula 1 races at Eastern Creek was $400 million. If we wanted to land a space shuttle at Eastern Creek, that would probably cost $4 billion! The point made by the Minister is simply not relevant. No-one is talking about Formula 1 racing. We are debating V8 Supercar racing. We challenge the figure of $125 million. The Australian Racing Drivers Club says that the cost is about $30 million. Interestingly, that $30 million is more or less the cost of one set-up and take down of the race at Homebush Bay. Street racing does not have a great track record.

The Hon. Robert Brown: That was a good pun.

Dr JOHN KAYE: A good point, thank you. I urge honourable members to look at the report of the Australian Capital Territory's Auditor General on street racing in that territory. It lost about $11 million in the last year it ran street racing. New South Wales stands to lose about $32 million in the first year street racing is held at Homebush Bay, and about $18 million each year thereafter. At a time when the Government claims that the budget is in crisis, why on earth are we wasting $32 million on a set-up and take down that we simply do not need to inflict on ourselves every year? The Minister needs to pay careful attention to the voices of members of his own party. I understand that prior to the last election Barbara Perry, the local member—she is also a Cabinet colleague of Minister Macdonald—distributed a leaflet stating that she was opposed to street racing at Homebush Bay.

I understand that the putative next member for Ryde, Nicole Campbell—she is a Ryde councillor and the environment manager at the Sydney Olympic Park Authority—has expressed opposition to V8 Supercar racing. The Ryde by-election will be interesting when it comes to V8 Supercar racing. The Minister has described those opposed to V8 Supercar racing as having some kind of religious bent or commitment against V8 Supercar racing at Homebush Bay; yet the putative Labor candidate for the seat of Ryde is on the record as being a member of that religious affiliation. It will be interesting to see what role the Minister plays in the Ryde by-election. Will he turn up and stand side-by-side with Nicole Campbell and Barbara Perry, and have the courage to have a public debate?

The Hon. Marie Ficarra: That's never going to happen.

Dr JOHN KAYE: I do not think it will happen, either. It is an act of grotesque dishonesty on the Government's behalf. On one hand it is rushing this legislation through; on the other hand the Government has preselected a candidate for the seat of Ryde who rightly opposes this proposal. It is alarming that we are committing the State to one-off expenditure of $32 million and ongoing expenditure of about $18 million each year after a deal was done behind closed doors without any public debate. The Minister's public statements show that he is completely committed to this, regardless of the evidence. There has been no public documentation and no public discussion of the costs or the benefits of hosting this race elsewhere, particularly at Eastern Creek.

The Australian Racing Drivers Club, which runs Eastern Creek for and on behalf of the State Government, is extremely enthusiastic to have the money spent to reconfigure Eastern Creek to host V8 Supercar racing on an ongoing basis. This would be a massive saving to the State in the long term: the investment would provide ongoing benefits to the State, increase the capital value of the State and in the end provide a much better spectator experience for V8 Supercar racing. There can be no arguments, other than those conducted behind closed doors in secret deals between the V8 Supercar racing club and the Government, that V8 Supercar racing should not be hosted at Eastern Creek.

Ms LEE RHIANNON [5.14 p.m.], in reply: I thank members for contributing to this debate. It was interesting to hear the Minister's arguments and omissions, but I shall deal with some of the points he made. He said that driver training and safety would work well at the Homebush Bay venue. Let us remember that Eastern Creek is a year-round venue, which means that driver training and safety issues in terms of how young people handle cars could be dealt with year-round. Clearly, there is a much greater opportunity for driver training, particularly for young people of the region, if V8 Supercar racing is held at Eastern Creek.

It is interesting that the Minister did not talk about the jobs that would be generated by this project. Is it not a standard argument by Labor that the project will bring more and more jobs to this area? The Minister failed to say that; he is starting to learn that he must be careful about how much he fudges an issue because he is being exposed for doing that. Eastern Creek would be a much better investment in creating jobs for the region. The employment opportunities during reconstruction and with permanent staffing at an Eastern Creek enhanced venue would be considerable. That is another good reason that Eastern Creek should host the V8 Supercar racing.

The Minister argued about public transport—how to get hundreds of thousands of people to Homebush. It is true that at present Homebush is more suitable than Eastern Creek, but that can be turned around. It would be easy to provide greater bus access to bring people from the Blacktown transport interchange and, as members know, the M7 ring-road is close to Eastern Creek. So the argument that public transport to Homebush is better can be easily demolished. Eastern Creek currently hosts the V8 Supercar racing and should continue to do so, with Government support. Eastern Creek is owned by the State Government, and it is in the best interests of the State Government and the people of New South Wales for the Government to invest in that centre.

Eastern Creek is already profitable and makes a strong contribution to Sydney and its immediate precinct. I understand that in 2009 the Australian Racing Drivers Club will pay the New South Wales Government more than $600,000 in rent for that venue. I understand, from everything I have been told, that Eastern Creek is well managed. Investment in Eastern Creek, as the Greens are urging, is not speculative, which is what investment in the Homebush venue is. Investment in Homebush is a complete unknown in how any public money would come back to benefit the people of New South Wales. Therefore, I argue that the benefits of Eastern Creek to New South Wales tourism are much greater because it is a year-round venue.

It is important to remember what is happening at Eastern Creek at present. The Australian Racing Drivers Club [ARDC] has commissioned Apex Circuit Design, one of the world's leading race circuit designers, to develop a master plan for Eastern Creek to move it into the future. The ARDC has provided $350,000 for that project. On one hand the ARDC is investing money to develop Eastern Creek so that it can become a world leading circuit; on the other hand the Government is turning its back on a government-owned centre and investing in a temporary speculative project at Homebush. So much of this simply does not add up. Members should remember that the Sydney Olympic Park Authority board has twice rejected the proposal, and three neighbouring councils have voiced concerns. One must ask: how silly is the Government to proceed with this project and vote against this motion on the eve of the Ryde by-election? Is the Government on a kamikaze mission? It is difficult to understand what is happening. Is the Minister following in Mr Costa's footsteps? At times he has modelled himself on the former Treasurer. When he puts forward these ludicrous schemes he is failing to be loyal to his Government.

In the debate the Minister also failed to explain his relationship with Tony Cochrane, which I imagine will come forward in time. It is interesting to read some of the remarks of Mr Cochrane, Chairman of V8 Supercars Australia. When he talked up this event I was reminded of the many conversations I have had with the Minister during the years when he pulled figures out of the hat to try to win an argument. When one knows the reality he often can be caught out. Perhaps that is what he has in common with Mr Cochrane. Extraordinarily, Mr Cochrane said that a record 22 million Australians tune into the V8 Supercar championship series. That is a fair number and makes one wonder when the Australian population is 20 million how he arrived at that figure.

The Hon. Robert Brown: There is more than one race.

Ms LEE RHIANNON: Yes, precisely. Mr Cochrane has seriously misrepresented Australia's official source of television audience measurement, OzTAM, by using it as the cumulative total of the people watching the event. One person may watch V8 Supercar races 20 or 30 times during the weeks they are held, and each time it is counted as an individual hit to portray a huge following of V8 Supercar street races. V8 Supercars Australia actually boasted "a 25 per cent hike in total viewers across Australian metropolitan and regional markets with a return of touring car racing to the 7 network last year after its decade on the 10 network". Mr Cochrane claims a 20 per cent increase in the number of people who watch supercar races on television. Motor Sport has analysed the figures and found that after eight rounds of V8 Supercar racing in year two on channel 7 the audience actually retreated by about 14.2 per cent, based on reports from the media agency Mitchell, the same agency V8 Supercars Australia quoted when making its 22 million viewers announcement in 2007. Those seriously dodgy figures should not be relied on. I query a lot of Mr Cochrane's statements.

It must be remembered that holding street racing at Olympic Park is at odds with the original vision for the site of the Olympic Games in its post-development period. It was certainly not what Mr Carr promised at the time. The current master plan and the new draft plan promote the site as an environmentally sustainable town centre for residents, businesses and local workers. That would not be possible with this V8 Supercar event. Who does the Minister for Primary Industries consult? He does not get past the business community, which should be consulted, but so should a lot of other stakeholders, particularly the residents and the community in surrounding areas. I urge members to support my motion as it will send an important message to Premier Rees to do the right thing for the people of the Homebush area, his own party and to manage the budget wisely. He should not go on a suicide mission with such a ridiculous project.

Question—That the motion be agreed to—put.

The House divided.

Question resolved in the negative.

Motion negatived.