Ivan Dean, Speeches Index

Tuesday 12 April 2011

GOVERNMENT BUSINESSES SCRUTINY COMMITTEE B

Mr DEAN ( Windermere - Motion) - Madam President, I move -

That the report of Government Businesses Scrutiny Committee B for 2010 be considered and noted.

I move this motion because of the need, in my opinion, to give all members an opportunity to engage in a debate on government business enterprises where they have not been involved. These are the matters that were identified and came before our committee. Specifically another reason is the angst that is existing within the area of racing and some of the issues relating to the water corporations. I will spend a little time on those areas.

The members of our committee were: our chairman, the member for Apsley, the member for Rosevears, the member for Launceston, the member for Elwick and the member for Mersey. When you get together and there is a wide knowledge base it is interesting to be a part of that process and to listen to the areas which members come from in delving into these businesses that we have a requirement to closely scrutinise.

I might add when we were talking about the racing issue, and I will go into that in a little more detail in a moment, that with regard to Tasracing the information that we got from our stakeholders and from every stakeholder, and I will mention those shortly, was negative in many respects. There was not too much complimentary or congratulatory information that came out of all the stakeholders involved in that area.

I think it suffices to say that they still have a huge amount of angst, a huge amount of frustration, as to what is happening in their area. The matters that we raised in our committee with the minister, to my knowledge and to the knowledge of the stakeholders, none of those issues have been addressed and it is still going down a similar track that it was back in December of last year when we were looking at these matters.

The minister at the time was concerned at some of the things that we were saying but I am not convinced that at the end he was strongly of the view or belief that we were portraying accurately the position of the stakeholders involved. That is how I gauged that discussion.

Madam President, I will just touch on TOTE. Generally, TOTE is seen as performing well, running an efficient and effective business and engaging well with stakeholders including those engaging and using their facilities and all outlets engaged in TOTE business. In fact, there appeared to be a marked change in the relationship with the agencies that were operating TOTE facilities. If we go back - I think it was two years ago when we looked at TOTE - some of the agencies were concerned about the relationship that they had with TOTE, particularly in regard to the contact they were having with TOTE. That has certainly changed. That came out during our briefings. I do not recall one agency person coming to us with any concerns on this occasion, which was not the case previously. That is a good story and a good position to have.

The TOTE sale was raised through some of our meetings. The Treasurer at the time, Mr Aird, advised the committee that the act providing for the sale of TOTE would be repealed by the introduction of a bill to the Parliament this year, 2011. He was unequivocal on that, but of course he is no longer the Treasurer and also no longer a member of the Parliament. It will be interesting to see whether or not the current Treasurer will introduce that bill and when.

I addressed this issue and made that statement about a week ago. We now know that what was said by the then Treasurer is not going to happen. That is a matter I will talk a little more about in a moment. This was raised, I might add, at the rally on Saturday and I will talk about that a little more in a moment as well. We know why these people are frustrated; we know why these people have this angst and so on when they really do not know what is happening. They are told one thing today and then tomorrow they are told something else. There is just no consistency with the way they are progressing in relation to this matter.

In my opinion and that of the member for Launceston, in the first place it was the wrong decision to put TOTE up for sale, to pass that bill to sell off TOTE. One of the reasons I did not support that bill then was the fact that I did not believe that we had been given a transparent and clear understanding of just what was going on. In fact I am of the view that we were given some untruths in some areas. I have raised that previously in this Chamber, Madam President. I was very concerned about some of the information that was coming through in relation to TOTE.

Mr Parkinson - That's a bit strong.

Mr DEAN - I have said it in this Chamber before. I think you should remember it was about statements allegedly made about the sale of TOTE; when they were made and when they were not made and the agreements entered into.

Mr Parkinson - I thought that was investigated and the Treasurer of the day was found not to have been involved in giving untruths. I think you should steer away from that one.

Mr DEAN - Madam President, at the end of the day I was not satisfied that TOTE ought to be sold and I still stand by that position now. I will do whatever I possibly can to ensure that that does not happen.

Mr Harriss - Just on that - through you, Madam President - are you aware that in recent days Minister Green has addressed the matter in the House of Assembly and wouldn't deny that it's off the agenda?

Mr DEAN - I was going to come to that. I am aware of that. I actually overheard that conversation and that was raised again at the rally on Saturday that I attended at Mowbray - the fact that it was now back on the books and that that bill would not be introduced, as was stated, to rescind the sale of TOTE.

Ms Forrest - I'd hardly think it's a viable option to sell at the moment. I wouldn't have thought there'd be many buyers out there at the moment because their renewal with Supercorp comes up soon and there's a lot of uncertainty around that.

Mr DEAN - You are absolutely right, there are some uncertainties about that. I just do not know why at this stage, in the heat of the moment - and that is really why it is being considered - this is being considered at a time when this Government is in dire trouble with its finances. What do they do? The first thing is to turn to a business that they own, that they can see will probably provide them with a way out.

Ms Forrest - But not much money at the moment, I would suggest. It would not be worth a sale at the moment.

Mr DEAN - Well, I do not know what it would be and what they would get for it; you are right. The problem is, if they went down the position of a sale today, whether or not they would accept less for it than it is worth.

Ms Forrest - They would have to because it is a greater risk associated with it at the moment.

Mr DEAN - That is what I mean.

Ms Forrest - So why would you sell it?

Mr DEAN - That is why I say that to make that decision today in the heat of the moment is likely to be the wrong decision.

Mr Parkinson - What decision are you talking about?

Mr DEAN - If they are going to sell TOTE. The minister has now said on the record that the bill will not be introduced and that the sale of TOTE is now not out of the question. That is what the minister has said.

Mr Parkinson - I think you might be taking that out of context.

Mr Harriss - No, he was quite clear about it.

Mr DEAN - It has been in the media as well. In fact, I will provide a copy in a moment; it is in my folder where the minister is on record -

Mr Parkinson - I presume it is not - through you, Madam President. The Premier was on the record the other day indicating that core assets were not up for sale.

Ms Forrest - Is that a core asset?

Mr Harriss - Hardly!

Mr Parkinson - I think she was specifically talking about energy assets at that stage. I do not know what you are saying; whether governments should never consider the sale of assets? I think we have had a lengthy debate about whether governments should be involved in the racing industry or not, other than by way of assisting. I think the Treasurer of the day, in the matter you are referring to - through you, Madam President - saw a window of opportunity but then that closed off and of course the sale was not able to go ahead.

Mr DEAN - No, I have certainly got it there but the position was, as I understood it, very clear from the minister, that the bill certainly would not be introduced into the House this year, that is 2011, to veto the sale of TOTE and it was back on the books again.

Mr Parkinson - I do not know. I am unaware of it.

Mr DEAN - So, Madam President, it is fairly clear during our discussions with our stakeholders and since then this matter has arisen again. I do have the document in front of me. It was in the Mercury 8 April:

'Sale of TOTE on the cards; Government looks at coffers boost.'

I will just make a couple of quotes from what is in the media. Once again, the media might not be right but it has not been corrected. I quote:

'The cash-strapped State Government has confirmed it is again considering selling TOTE Tasmania to help fill a budget black hole.'

Mr Parkinson - What are you quoting from?

Mr DEAN - Mercury 8 April this year.

Mr Parkinson - Oh, that would be accurate, wouldn't it.

Ms Forrest - Did you get the Hansard and have a look at it?

Mr DEAN - Well, no. What I said was this was in the Mercury, to my knowledge there has been no correction in the Mercury to state that what the Mercury said is wrong so one would have thought that -

Mr Parkinson - What does that prove?

Mr DEAN - Well, if they had made a statement along the lines that TOTE is back on the market, one would have thought that the minister would have come out firing and said that this is nonsense and it is not and corrected it. To my knowledge, that has not happened. I will continue the quote a little further:

'Acting Treasurer Bryan Green yesterday told Parliament the Government had no intention of repealing the legislation that enables it to sell the gambling business because of Budget concerns ?

As recently as November the Government claimed it was committed to ensuring the company remained in public hands and would seek to rescind the legislation.'

I am quoting now from parts; I am not going right through the whole piece.

Mr Parkinson - Was that a Sue Neales article?

Mr DEAN - No, it was Danielle McKay.

' 'The racing industry and the Tasmanian people are rapidly losing patience with the Government's lack of honesty about the future of TOTE' ?

Mr Green said the move was a sensible financial decision for the State Government after it took just $10 million from TOTE's dividends last financial year, much less than expected.'

[3.30 p.m.]
I think very clearly, Madam President, there is a big question mark about TOTE and its future.

Mr Parkinson - The minister has indicated the need to maintain flexibility.

Ms Forrest - Not ruling anything out or anything in.

Mr Parkinson - That is right. That does not mean it is up for sale or there is any plan afoot.

Ms Forrest - She is not ruling anything in or anything out. She has been saying that ever since she became Premier, I believe. Nothing is ruled in or out.

Ms Rattray - I have started using it myself actually.

Mr DEAN - So you are not refuting any of the statements I just made in relation to the minister's position on TOTE? Thank you very much for that. I appreciate that.

Mr Harriss - He is falling right in behind you.

Mr DEAN - He is falling right in behind me.

Madam PRESIDENT - Do not put words in the Leader's mouth. He can do that himself.

Mr Parkinson - I dare not express a personal opinion.

Members laughing.

Mr DEAN - Madam President, I want to go straight into the stakeholder meetings that we had and I will identify some of the issues that came out. There is a whole raft and I could be here for the rest of the day and half of tomorrow if I was to go into every issue they raised with us but I will just pick out what I believe to be some of the more pertinent issues that they came out with because these are common elements that come forward.

Nearly all of these issues again came out in the rally on Saturday at Mowbray. I will go through a few. I might add, Madam President, that these are the people our committee spoke to during this process. We spoke to Tas Breeders, the Harness Racing and Pacing Club, Betfair, Thoroughbred Breeders, Jockeys Association, Racehorse Owners Association, trainers and Trainers Association, the Auditor-General, Greyhounds and Tasmanian Racing Club.

I do not think we missed too many out of there. We went right across the whole spectrum of stakeholders involved in the area of racing in this State. We went out to make sure we did not miss too many and I do not think we have. There are others we could have spoken to, Madam President, who are also engaged in this business in one way or another - those are the ones that hang off the side. That is the farmers who produce the grain and the feed for these horses, you have the veterinarians, Roberts and Websters and some of those places. I am told that over 60 per cent of Roberts' business deals with horses and horse racing and all of that sort of thing so I would be interested to know if that is a correct figure or not.

Ms Rattray - That is a significant percentage.

Mr DEAN - It is.

Ms Rattray - We know farmers are struggling but I am not sure they are struggling that much.

Mr DEAN - It is a figure that was just given to me and I did question it at the time but no doubt some significant part of their business is involved with race horses and owners and supplying equipment and all of those other things that are necessary and required by trainers and breeders and so on.

The rally on Saturday 9 April indicates very clearly that it is not getting any better, Madam President.

The new track at Devonport was raised by a number of stakeholders and some supported it and others did not. That was a bit of a cross-section there, wasn't it, with the synthetic track. I am not sure whether or not that is now moving ahead, Madam President. You know this State does not need a synthetic track. Some are saying yes it does, others are saying it does not. The Thoroughbred Breeders are saying that a synthetic track is difficult to race on. If you are racing on grass and you have to race on a synthetic track the horses react differently and there are lots of issues.

Mr Gaffney - I think the horse has bolted there.

Mr DEAN - Is that right?

They queried too, Madam President, that the minister and I think Tasracing were saying that when this track is up and available for races, no races should be lost in Tasmania. The Thoroughbred Breeders and some of these other stakeholders were telling us that they do not believe that that is the case because many of them are domiciled in the southern part of the State and it would take them four hours to travel to Devonport and they would have to have their equipment and horses and everything else ready, and usually these decisions are made at fairly short notice because of wet conditions and so on. Simply having a synthetic track at Devonport would not mean no missed races, they are saying. They raised that but, as I said, there was quite a lot of support for that synthetic track as well.

A matter that was common right throughout this process and is still common today was a lack of good decision-making and communication in Tasracing. That was causing much frustration and angst across the industry. It came up time and time again whilst we were talking with the stakeholders. They are saying that there is a lack of understanding of how communication should take place between Tasracing and the board and the industry. They are beside themselves. As the minister now knows from the rally on Saturday, that is a still a huge issue.

There was a lot of comment about the Magic Millions and the fact that this year was a terrible year for them with their sales. In fairness I need to say that I heard the minister say on Saturday that it was a poor position right across the country for Magic Million sales. There was no real difference here in this State than across the country, he said at that meeting.

The industry say that we need a new purpose-built facility at Inveresk where they conduct these sales and that more effort put into this would provide a better outlook for them. They wonder where that is at, whether that is being considered or whether it will be.

The subject of jockeys was given robust debate. I think that we have eight or nine registered jockeys in this State. The industry is dependent on fly-in jockeys from the mainland and that is creating a lot of angst and problems here. There are currently 68 meetings in this State and jockeys have to be brought in for all of these meetings. They come in, as I understand it, on Thursday for the Thursday-night racing. Lodgings, travel and meals have to be paid for and they have to be looked after in every which way. There is a lot of expenditure and I think the stakeholders were saying that a lot of the funding for that was coming out of money that should have been going back into stake moneys - the stake pot was suffering as a result of the need to do this. There was very little foresight put into having the required number of jockeys in this State.

A question continually asked was why was Tasracing not addressing this issue here in this State. Currently trainees are required to take their courses on the mainland and because there are only 68 meetings annually it is not sufficient to sustain them full-time.

The $6 million expended on lights at Launceston was also raised and in the main it was raised in a fairly negative way. What was coming through to us was that this was a spur of the moment decision without much forethought. They were also saying that there has not been enough support given to night racing in Launceston and that there is very little marketing of it. The lights were switched on on the first night, and I was there for that and other members might have been as well. It was a great night, and there was a full house. The racing industry will now tell you that the only people that you see there on Thursday at the night racing are the breeders, the trainers, the bookies, TOTE and the jockeys - those with an immediate involvement in horses. They say it is just not working and that it is running at a loss. They again raised this on Saturday at the rally.

They are saying that it is all very well to have these sorts of things but you have to ensure that the product is saleable internationally - into the Asian markets and elsewhere. That is where you start to get the returns and the dividends back for your product. They are not too certain that that sort of thing is happening.

They raised the Heads of Agreement position. It has been going backwards and forwards for years and without result. I think that might now have been signed off but that was raised at the time. We were discussing this in December last year.

Meetings with Tasracing were seen as very poor. Meetings used to be at Ross, the agendas appeared to be all the same, things they asked to be put on the agenda were never put on the agenda, nothing came out of the meetings and there was no follow-up to anything coming out of the meetings. They are frustrated with what is going on. I spoke to a number of these people on Saturday and they said that nothing has changed.

They say the making of complaints is not an issue. They are able to make their complaints but they have no idea where the complaints go and no idea what the results of their complaints are because feedback is almost non-existent. They are also critical of what they see as government intervention. The political intervention is not necessary and what they are saying is that the organisation should be able to do what the organisation needs to do without restriction and without being hamstrung.

Staff levels within Tasracing were raised. The industry is not sure why there are so many personnel within Tasracing and they are not certain what they do. They raised the issue of the marketing officers; I think there are four in that team. They are not satisfied that they are getting good results from the marketing team at all. They query the amount of work that they are doing and what they are doing, but once again they are not getting the information that they need in relation to these issues.

The track in Hobart was referred to as a dog's breakfast and I think we all know that.

Ms Forrest - A greyhound's breakfast?

Mr DEAN - Yes, a greyhound's breakfast - that is a good one. There is money wasted. It is still a mess for what was expended and what did the industry get? That is a good question, what did they spend on it and what did the industry get from this? The issues are around that and I now know from what the minister was saying on Saturday that they are revisiting this and a lot of work is going to occur on Tattersall's Park.
What the industry are saying is why was it not fixed in the first place? What went wrong with the huge amount of money that was expended there to go back now and redo it or whatever they are doing? This is just an indication, they say, of mismanagement. What they say is their industry is treading water and is becoming a cottage industry.

This industry employs, I am told, about 3 000 direct employees and we then have many people hanging off the side of those direct employees. Some on the weekend were saying to me that they would probably employ in this State up around the 6 000 mark.

Ms Rattray - I have heard about 7 000 - through you, Madam President - and that has been a pretty accurate figure for quite some time.

Mr DEAN - It is a huge business, Madam President. Some people just see a few horses out there racing of a Saturday, Thursday night or whenever it is - Sunday - but they do not stop to think of the people that the industry employs in this State. As I understand it, it puts about $90 million back into the economy of this State. I think $90 million was the figure given to me. It is a big business in this State.

There is a funding shortfall - and this was raised in our briefings - of about $7 million to $8 million. Madam Chairman may have the accurate figures there but the shortfall was about that amount.

The number of meetings was raised on a number of occasions again, Madam President. It used to be 94, I understand, and that was reduced to 68 and they say there are now 2 000 less runners in the State. They are saying that is also having an impact on racing in this State.

The international markets are a necessity - for six races to be put into the Singapore market would mean $600 000 to Tasmanian racing. Thursday night racing, I have mentioned, is a disaster for the State. Apart from industry members, owners, trainers and jockeys nobody else attends. Consistency for a product was another matter that was raised on a number of occasions. In other words they need to know when their races are taking effect but what they say is that they are given a calendar of events but the calendar continually changes. It is very difficult for thoroughbreds, in particular, to race on the Thursday night and to race again on a Sunday. It has been poorly planned and put together without any consideration of the people providing the horses that are racing, and there has been very little communication. Again, it becomes a communication matter.

[3.45 p.m.]
What they are saying is that inconsistency will break them in the end. If they cannot get consistency, if they cannot get it right, a lot of these people will not be in the business for much longer. They criticised the board and the political appointments in relation to board members. They are of the view that it should have been industry appointments. That was an issue that received some discussion.

The Integrity Committee membership was raised from the point of view of the funding of those members on that board. All members are receiving handsome allowances or salaries or whatever. I am told that they meet four times a year so the stakeholders have asked what is happening the rest of the time, for them to attract the moneys that they are. They are saying that this is money off the top, which could be paid back into the industry.

As I raised briefly a while ago, there is a lack of training programs, no farrier programs, and plenty of work in this area.

They are saying that Tasracing and the board ought to be looking at meeting with the Education department and UTas with a view to putting some training programs into place in this State.

I would have thought that it would have been happening and it probably is happening but if it is, they are not aware of it. They are saying there ought to be courses in this State for stablehands, horse handlers, farriers, jockeys, you name it - all those areas of expertise in this industry. There ought to be something occurring within the Education department or within UTas somewhere. They are saying there are opportunities there for that to occur but they are not convinced it is happening or there is any interest in making it happen.

Funding is another issue that was continually raised. They raised lack of funding as being one of the obstacles to the industry thriving, to the industry moving forward. They referred to the promises originally made when the changes occurred two years ago and that stake moneys would be CPI adjusted annually. What they are saying is that is not happening, the promises have not been adhered to and that is again causing them concern.

They queried that in a fairly big way. In fact what they are saying is that racing in Tasmania should be run from Victoria. Tasracing should be abandoned and Victoria should take it over and they would probably get a better result.

Another interesting issue is that it is being said that the moneys are not being expended appropriately and where they should. They say, and I will use their terminology here, Tasracing gets ripped off all the time. They mentioned two issues; one was a modesty board that was to be erected at Mowbray Racing Centre. It was to be a screen board about so high and it ran for the entire Mowbray members' room which would be about 40 or 50 metres in length. It was about that wide. What they say was Tasracing got a quote to do that job. Their quote was $36 000. Tasracing did it themselves for $3 000. I probably could have done it for about $2 000 because it was only a matter of buying the screen and riveting it on.

They gave another example of a media room and Sky Channel interview room at Mowbray. Tasracing's quote - this is coming from them, it is advice from these people - was $170 000; the local quote was $59 000 to put those things into place.

What they are saying is, money is not being managed properly or effectively and dealt with in the way it should be. 'Terribly dependent on government funding'; that came out from one of the interviews we had. The five-year plan does not even say they will make a profit. Has the deed been signed off? I am not sure whether it has been signed off yet or not. I suppose it probably has. Tasracing funding of $27 million has to cover everything - prize moneys, expenses and there is no money there for maintenance. Have they really thought about the model they are working with? The corporate plan talks about more international racing. What have they done or are doing? The opinion of some is that it is a poor model.

Quorum formed.

Mr DEAN - Madam President, I was saying the opinion of some is that it is a poor model. I have pages and pages of these complaints but I do not intend to go through all of those other issues.

I want to turn to the rally on Saturday. I would have thought that a lot of these issues that were raised with us and that we raised with the minister, would have been sorted out and that there would have been changes occurring that they are aware of. The rally on Saturday was quite a vocal meeting and very clearly the industry was upset. They had a great representation there from across the State; in fact, about 200 people turned up for that rally. They raised nearly all of the issues that I have just spoken of, plus others, at this rally on Saturday. I want to read what the rally notice said. This was the rally notice that was sent out:

'RACING INDUSTRY RALLY
Mowbray Racecourse - Members Level
Saturday 9 April at 2.30 pm.

Our industry is really at the crossroads with large cuts to funding, broken Government promises, disastrous yearling sales, falling numbers of owners, jockeys and trainers and a Racing Board that is clearly out of touch with the industry participants.

Come and meet with the Racing Board and Minister for Racing who run our industry and ask the questions you need answered.

If you care about your racing industry then you

WILL ATTEND THIS MEETING NO MATTER WHAT!

Let's get the answers we deserve.

Be there - Saturday 2.30. Buses will be leaving Elwick ...'

That was the context of the brochure that was sent out to members. Madam President, I want to say that I congratulate and commend the minister. Mr Green was there. He confronted these industry representatives and he spoke on his side of the issue, so I do congratulate him. The meeting attendees were extremely concerned and frustrated by the fact that Tasracing and the board were all given invitations to be there as well but not one attended. It is suspected, of course, that the Government might have given them a word that they should not be there; I do not know. The industry was extremely upset about that, that they did not take sufficient interest in what was happening to even be there and listen to their complaints and their concerns. They saw that as a slight on them and, as I said, they were very upset about it. In fact, Madam President, what happened there was that the minister gave an undertaking at that meeting to organise and arrange a forum to allow the industry people the opportunity to be there, with Tasracing and the board or whoever else to be there as well, for the purposes of raising all of their issues and with a view to trying to work through this as we move forward.

Madam President, at the end of this meeting, after the minister had left, the meeting participants tried to move a no-confidence motion in the board and Tasracing. There was a lot of discussion around the no-confidence motion and it failed - and it only failed because the minister said before he left the meeting that he would organise and arrange for this forum to take place, so they said in view of that they needed to give the minister an opportunity to look at and satisfy some of their issues and their concerns, so they were very appreciative of that. That is the reason the no-confidence motion did not succeed and the only reason.

Just one or two of the issues that came out during the attendance of the minister, Madam President: there were comments like incompetent board, incompetent Tasracing, management structure and the shafting of the industry - all of these sorts of things were coming out and very strong statements. They were leaving no stones unturned. What they did say, Madam President - and I guess it was taken as a bit of a warning at the end - one member, a spokesperson for the group, stood and he made the comment that they would behave like gentlemen and ladies for the time being but if they needed to get dirty they would. They were pretty strong words coming from that group of people. I just hope that Tasracing and the board and the minister do take on board some of these issues, that they do arrange this forum, as I have no doubt the minister will, and that a lot of these issues are aired.

I do not know when we will next be looking at them or whether it is in two years' time that we will obtain them.

Ms Rattray - It is.

Mr DEAN - It will be interesting from our point of view when we talk to the stakeholders again in two years' time as to whether or not these same issues or similar issues will come out, Madam President. I would hope not. I certainly hope that the majority do not at least.

I just want to leave that, Madam President, as I think I have made enough comments on that point but just briefly on Onstream and the water authorities and I will leave it to other members if they want to. We, as a committee, had the opportunity to have a talk with the four water authorities, the three regional bodies plus Onstream, and it was an interesting session with all of the groups, and I must say that Onstream looked after us in our request to look at their premises and their facilities and they showed us around and gave us a good insight into the functions and things that they were doing.

Madam President, there were a number of issues there. We looked at the premises for a start off; Onstream currently have two premises, the one in Hobart and the one in Launceston and they are both fairly luxurious premises and it is costing Onstream - I have forgotten what the amount was but other members might recall the amount - but I understood it was about almost $250 000 or more to rent these premises, so there is a large amount of money going out on the rental of those two properties that Onstream have. Then they have other facilities of course in the State as well but the amounts paid there - I think they are living with other organisations and there is no real cost to them in occupying those spaces.

[4.00 p.m.]
It is interesting. Staff numbers in Onstream are referred to and the question arising was: is Onstream really needed, is Onstream necessary? It is certainly necessary under the legislation; it is a requirement that Onstream be a part of the process but it is felt by many that the functions carried out by Onstream could be carried out by the regional bodies. There might be a necessity for some centralisation of some of the functions but they were of a view that the Onstream functions could be more economically controlled by and worked within the regional bodies.

Common issues came out there such as water bills not going out. I understand in some areas water bills still have not gone out. At December of last year I think Onstream had been in operation for 12 months or a bit longer and they are saying that to not have a billing process in place at that time was not acceptable at all. They should have concentrated on that right from the word go; to get their billing structures right rather than, as some said, going off on other tasks and taking on private work outside of the regional water bodies. They were saying that there ought to be a concentration on getting their things right in the first instance. I do not really disagree with that comment.

Mr Gaffney - Through you, Madam President - they just did one job worth $148 000, didn't they, and then they went back into their core business.

Mr DEAN - If I remember rightly, the CEO Christine Mucha said that they were still going out into private enterprise. Other members might recall that discussion as well. There has since been paperwork on that as well. There was an interview on ABC; I think it was a Stateline interview where they indicated that yes, they were applying for private business in certain areas such as technology and those areas of expertise where they were able to provide some support. What people are saying is that they should be concentrating on their core activities, their core functions and providing services for the regional bodies, getting all of that absolutely right in the first place and then, if there is spare capacity, perhaps there would be no reason why they could not venture off into some other areas.

A little bit like Tasracing, there were some concerns raised about the communication channels between Onstream and the authorities. I read from a comment that was provided to us:

'There is an underlying discontent regarding the level of engagement between the councils as owners and the corporations. In part there are transitional issues relating to changes of responsibility but on the other hand there appears to be a lack of structure and opportunity to conduct communication relating to demands, needs and future planning.'

Once again, we have an organisation that is in place and it would seem they may have some communication problems, et cetera, that they need to address. Maybe they have addressed those issues because we are talking about December of last year and it is now almost mid-April so perhaps some of those issues have been resolved.

Madam President, I think that is where I will round it off. The GBE process is certainly a good process, in my view. We now have a different system where we will be able to engage these businesses at any time if a committee sees fit or there is a real need to scrutinise some of these businesses. I must say the assistance and support that we had and the government members that we were able to speak with and question about these enterprises all gave their best and gave us the support and assistance we needed going through that process. No shields were put up. It was straightforward, it was clear, and we thank the Government for making all of those people available to us.

In conclusion, Madam President, I would just urge the Government, Tasracing and the board to really have a serious look at what is happening and where they are going with the Tasmanian racing industry because it is seen as an area that is starving of support and starving of communication channels.

Return To Main Page. Return To Speeches.