A parliamentary committee has condemned the process surrounding the possible sale and development of Rosehill racecourse, questioned the viability and value to NSW taxpayers of the proposal and recommended that an inquiry be set up into the operations of Racing NSW.
The final report from the Select Committee on the Proposal To Develop Rosehill Racecourse was published on Friday and contained 10 findings and five recommendations.
One of the key findings, which concerned unanswered questions surrounding the involvement of Premier Chris Minns, and the need for the report to be referred to the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), was leaked earlier this week.
However, the remaining findings are equally damning about the process, whether the proposal offers value for either the NSW public, and the viability of alternative proposals to racing at Rosehill, including the Brick Pit.
Staff Writer
The conduct of Racing NSW comes under the microscope in the recommendations section.
Recommendation 2 is that the Legislative Council considers establishing an inquiry into Racing NSW. Recommendation 3 is that the NSW government conduct a thorough review of the Thoroughbred Racing Act 1996, which should consider whether the Act is fit for purpose.
A fourth recommendation deals with animal welfare and a government review of the Thoroughbred Racing Act and the Prevention of Cruelty Act.
The final recommendation is that the Legislative Council reaffirms its support for the Parliamentary Evidence Act 1901 and the critical importance of witnesses to committee inquiries giving direct and honest evidence at all times.
This came after contentious evidence throughout the public hearings and the referral of at least one piece of evidence to the parliamentary privileges committee.
The first recommendation is that the NSW government update its ministerial diary disclosure requirements “to mandate an accurate description of attendees, purpose and any conflicts of interest and extend these requirements to Shadow Ministerial spokespeople”.
That recommendation is driven by the meeting between ATC executive Steve McMahon and Premier Minns, as well as his chief of staff, on October 30 last year, where the Australian Turf Club’s idea to sell off Rosehill was first raised with government. In Minns’ diary. the meeting with his friend of 25 years was listed as “a meet and greet”.
Finding 2 of the report was that “the use of “meet and greet” to describe the meeting of Mr Steve McMahon and the Hon Chris Minns MP, Premier, on 30 October 2023 is inaccurate, misleading and does not adequately describe the purpose of this meeting”.
Bren O’Brien
“It is inappropriate given the long-standing friendship of Mr McMahon and the Premier and the nature of the matter discussed at the meeting. Ministerial diary disclosures should properly disclose the purpose of meetings.”
Finding 3 continued this theme saying: “There was significant conflicting evidence regarding the proposal to develop Rosehill racecourse, including unanswered questions surrounding the involvement of the Premier.”
That led to the finding that the Committee report should be referred to ICAC.
The first finding was that the committee did not receive evidence that when McMahon met with ATC chairman Peter McGauran and chief executive Matt Galanos on October 26 “the Australian Turf Club had any accurate, verifiable basis to believe that 40,000 dwellings would secure a metro station at Rosehill”.
Another finding was that the government has breached guidelines around the unsolicited proposal process “by failing to maintain impartiality when it championed the proposal and for making the public announcement prior to the end of stage one of the unsolicited proposal process”.
The report also found that the announcement of the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the ATC and the government on December 7 last year was poorly handled.
“Communication between the Australian Turf Club, its board and members, and the general public should have been better managed throughout the whole process,” it read.
A further finding said there was “conflicting evidence and uncertainty with the financial assumptions behind and the financial viability of the proposal to develop Rosehill Racecourse”.
The report also dealt specifically with the prospect of an alternate site for Rosehill should it be sold off.
“The Brick Pit site at Sydney Olympic Park is highly unlikely to be able to accommodate a racetrack due to environmental factors, including the endangered status of the resident green and golden bell frog population and the ongoing instability of land at the site,” Finding 8 said.
“Outside of the Brick Pit site at Sydney Olympic Park, which is unsuitable to accommodate an alternative racetrack, no other viable or feasible sites have been identified to create another racetrack in metropolitan Sydney,” Finding 9 followed.
The final finding questioned the entire viability of the proposal.
“The evidence before the committee did not demonstrate that the proposal to develop Rosehill Racecourse presented immediate monetary value for the New South Wales taxpayer or would, alone, make a significant impact in meeting New South Wales’ national housing accord targets,” it said.
Bren O’Brien
“It may, however, provide wider economic and social benefits and make a positive contribution to resolving a chronic housing shortage in Sydney.”
The NSW government has three months to reply to the report. It does not have to act on the findings or recommendations, but does have to provide reason why it won’t.
