It was former Prime Minister Paul Keating who once famously referred to the Senate as “unrepresentative swill”, presumably at a time when the Senate wasn’t supporting whatever it was he wanted to do.
Apart from the final term of the Howard government, the Government of the day has rarely had the numbers in the Senate to push through their agenda, certainly since the political crisis of 1975.
That the Government of the day is never complimentary of the Senate should be a hint to all of us that in fact the Senate does a pretty good job at holding the Government to account (power corrupts; checks and balances; and all that).
Some of the Senate’s very best work, which is mainly invisible to the majority of Australians who are generally more concerned about how their footy team is going (a sentiment I understand completely), involves the work of the Senate Committees, who spend their time investigating the latest hair brained scheme being put forward by the Government (giving money away; building white elephants, pork barrelling etc).
The range of things the Committees look into are quite varied, including: gene patents; bank mergers; childcare; the welfare of international students; access to justice; bushfires in Australia; climate policy and men’s health.
In other words, stuff that actually affects the daily lives of all of us.
But occasionally the committees look into things that strike one as odd.
I’ve only just discovered that the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee recently completed an enquiry entitled: Matters relating to the establishment of an Australian Football League team for Tasmania.
Call me crazy, but this seems like a bizarre subject for our elected federal representatives to worry themselves about.
Part of the scope of the inquiry was to determine “whether the decision of the Australian Football League (AFL) Board of Commission to prioritise admission to its competition of teams from Western Sydney and the Gold Coast over a proposed team for Tasmania is fair and equitable.”
I would have thought a commercial body should be able to make its own decisions as to where it will focus its operations without having to worry about the equity of such decisions. It’s a bit like telling BHP to put its head office in Alice Springs in the interests of equity.
This bit is really interesting. An argument in favour of the AFL establishing a team in Tasmania put forward was to ward off the threat of soccer in that state.
I kid you not – it’s in the report!
This is the Committee’s conclusion: “Finally, the committee is of the view that the committee’s plan for a Western Sydney team are very ambitious. Although it is not the committee’s intention to tell the AFL how it should manage its expansion plans, there are cultural barriers facing a Western Sydney-based AFL team that appear to be insurmountable.”
The gratuitous advice from the Committee does not end there, the report continues: “There must be concern, however, that primary school-aged children participating in modified Australian Rules via school programs will not necessarily translate into meaningful support for the code.”
True enough. But that’s for the AFL to worry about – not politicians!
Friday’s Age quotes Andrew Demetriou as saying that the AFL would pay scant attention to the Senate finding that there were “cultural barriers…that appear to be insurmountable”, and fair enough, too.
Honestly, for a group of Australian politicians to suggest that a section of the Australian population will never, ever take to the great Australian game … it makes me want to suggest that they are better off getting back to investigating something useful, like gene patents.
Nicko
Guest
Plus Parramatta Goannas now Holroyd-Parramatta founded 1979 Baulkham Hills 1976 now East Coast Eagles 1999 Richmond Nor-West Jets & Hawkesbury Saints
Nicko
Guest
Western Sydney is a long way in front in 2 major areas. $$$ Business and corporate sponsorship, Tassie like Canberra just does not have the major sponsors to support an AFL club, what big companies are based in Tassie? Currently very players are drafted from Western Sydney, its population contains a large percentage of Australia's sporting talent, with a local team constantly promoting the game at local schools more players will be spotted and drafted or placed on scholarships, a massive plus for all AFL teams and supporter which over time will improve the talent available, not dilute it. Plus Tassie's population will not all jump onboard and support one team (as per any city or state) many already have teams.
Pippinu
Roar Guru
I'm just reading the story now, it goes from page one to page four, ok, fair enough, but guess what else is on page 4??? A picture of Rudd, Lowy and Blatter holding the WC trophy!!! Godwin Gretch trumps them all!!!
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Being a sporting political story, this is related to this thread to a certain degree. This story is appearing on the front page of the Age today, I kid you not!!! That Canberra public servant embroiled in those whole fake email business with Malcolm Turnbull, Godwin Gretch has been caught out again!! This time, it transpires that he wrote a letter as a Treasury official making out that the PM had pledged to allow the Bulldogs to relocate their gaming facilities to a new housing estate on the Maribyrnong River. Two things about it: 1. There was no such pledge from the PM (certainly not officially); and 2. he happens to be a Western Bulldogs supporter!!! It's just too good. Politics and sport - who said they don't mix??!!
Michael C
Guest
Bill - it's a key part of the whole issue. You can't expect participation to increase if you don't have A. the grounds and B. the clubs. For all the auskickers in the world, if they have no where to go and play - what's the point? The AFL has spent up big in NSW and QLD on ensuring that the facilities that exist are of a good quality, and to establish new facilities as much as possible. The obvious partnership is with cricket - and the benefit of that is you have minimal seasonal overlap - as distinct for example to the grassroots soccer/rugby which do certainly risk conflict around the rectangle pitches. Soccer and the Rugby codes can also, more easily adapt to a footy oval (by not using 40% of it) - whilst Aust Footy has to revert to 9s or 12s compromised rules on a rugby/soccer pitch. So - for the AFL in an expansion market - ovals is a key aspect. Cricket NSW has a focus on ground improvements in the region too. ANd obviously their imperative is not the same as soccer/rugby interests when it comes to ground improvements. They've highlighted the number of elite players from the region, and are focussed on further harvesting the region and improving facilities. Thus - a good time for the AFL to be working the marketplace with a willing and financial partner that doesn't overlap seasons. btw - the Blacktown development is of 2 ovals - one main one with 1500 capacity small grand stand and embankment capacity for about 8500. btw - the list below supposedly lists the 8 senior and 18 junior clubs in 'west sydney'. (it was off the Blacktown Olymp Park website back at the announcement of the project): Junior Teams Senior Clubs Blue Mountains East Coast Eagles Emu Plains Norwest Jets Penrith Penrith St Clair Holroyd-Parramatta Hawkesbury Moorebank Magpies Quakers Hill Campbelltown Holroyd-Parramatta Camden Winston Hills Wollondilly Blacktown (Rooty Hill) Liverpool Holsworthy Ingleburn Campbelltown Camden South Campbelltown Wollondilly Baulkham Hills Kellyville One assumes they have access to ovals.
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Bill I know of the cricket/aussie rules ground development at Blacktown, but don't know the details (I think people have mentioned that it was once used for baseball??) I know of the following teams in the greater Western Sydney area (used liberally): Balmain Dockers, founded 1903 Western Suburbs Magpies founded 1926 Pennant Hills Demons founded 1971 Cambelltown Blues founded 1975 Penrith Rams founded 1981
Redb
Roar Guru
Bill, I'm no expert on the park level Sydney sporting landscape, but the AFL in partnership with Cricket NSW and the Blacktown Council are building an AFL ground with a 10,000 capacity. It's primarily for use for pre season AFL games, local comp, Under 18s, training, etc in winter, cricket in Summer. I know also of Rouse Hill in Western Sydney, capacity about 3,000. Pretty much anywhere cricket is played, AFL can be played. Redb
Bill
Guest
A few questions I have concerning AFL expansion in Sydney. Are there many dedicated AFL grounds out in Western Sydney/Sydney in general? If not do the AFL propose to use cricket ovals for junior teams? If this is the case does this mean competing with RL, RU and soccer for grounds. I know in many soccer comps in Sydney the lack of available grounds means some fixtures (or generally all fixtures for women) are played on Sundays instead of Saturdays.
Redb
Roar Guru
Pip, Yeah read that as well. Geez what if we build another AFL team in NSW for players to aspire to ;-) NSW has ten times the population of Tasmania it's all about potential Senators, learn to grapple with the concept. Redb
Michael C
Guest
Pip - I've been pointing out for a while the QLD is already most comfortably the number 4 state and that NSW (esp if you include ACT) is challenging Tassie (and NSW has much, much more potential upside). Is there a result yet for QLD vs NT??
Pippinu
Roar Guru
I only just noticed that NSW/ACT has defeated Tasmania in the under 18 national championships earlier today to claim the division two title. It was a pretty big win too - Tasmania were held goalless in the first half, with NSW/ACT kicking the first six goals of the game. Maybe WS deserves an AFL licence ahead of Tassie afterall?? (the very best kids in this team will be immediately snapped up by the new club)
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Jimbo you might be right - but if the AFL wants to throw their money around, it's their business - it is not a topic that warrants the attention of a Senate Committee who have far more important things of national interest to look at. It's not for politicians to sit in judgement of how a commercial organisation chooses to invest its own money and in what geographic areas it chooses to focus its activities.
Redb
Roar Guru
The point is regardless of any of the Senator's footy teams, most AFL fans (90% according to a fan survey) net alone convenient political football fans like this senate mob, think Tassie deserve a team over Western Sydney. It's heart versus head stuff. The potential of the Western Sydney market was not evaluated only the current sporting landscape. There is a growing twist of agendas for those who voice for and against this decision. I bet the Tassie A League bidding group were voting for Western Sydney to get the AFL team. How unTasmanian. :-) We are yet to see the bid team for the AFL licence I think they jury is still out on it's chances until we see the sausage, at the moment it's all sizzle. In saying that I again raise the Melb Storm example of a team created to build from the bottom up with no participation,etc. What happens on the field (success is mandatory) will be just as important as off the field for the AFL's Western Sydney team. It's a shame Barry Hall will be too old for the Western Sydney, now that would generate some rivlary from the outset. Redb
jimbo
Guest
Pip, Sydney is to AFL like Melbourne is to blue vein cheese!
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Ok - The Age acually reports 3 senators from Tassie, anyway, this is who barracks for who: Fiona Nash, NSW, none Glenn Sterle, WA, Geelong Christine Milne, Tas, none Guy Barnett, Tas, Richmond Annette Hurley, SA, Port Steve Hutchins, NSW, Sydney Don Farrell, SA, Adelaide Julian McGauran, Vic, Melbourne Kerry O'Brien, Tas, Collingwood John Williams, NSW, Sydney Interestingly, there were three Tassie senators (of which one had no team), and three NSW senators (of which one had no team, while the other two were Sydney supporters, not that I'm suggesting anything).
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Simmo This is the make up of the committee: Fiona Nash, chair, NSW Glenn Sterle, WA Christine Milne, Tas Bill Heffernan, NSW Annette Hurley, SA Steve Hutchins, NSW Don Farrell, SA Julian McGauran, Vic Kerry O'Brien, Tas John Wlliams, NSW Sorry, there were only two senators from Tassie, I incorrectly thought there were three. The Age actually ran an article on this showing who each of the Senators barracked for (of course!! now that's of real public interest!!) Only Fiona Nash didn't have a team, all the others did (and some were surprising - when I got home tonight I might post it). But to answer your question - the Committee pretty much prepares the report as one - and since there was no minority report or anything like that, I can only assume that they were all in agreement. Interestingly, the Chair, Fiona Nash, the only not to have an AFL team according to the Age, is a National, and her office is in Young - so one can presume that if she likes any form of football, it will be rugby league (and hopefuly I won't be torn to shreds by the rugger buggers for saying that).
Simmo
Guest
It was open for NSW Senators to back the AFL franchise for Sydney. I haven't read the report. Did they?
Pippinu
Roar Guru
Simmo The point is whether a senate committee should be wasting its time (and taxpayers' money) looking into a matter that lies squarely with the responsibility of the AFL, a commercial organisation. Right or wrong, it's a matter for the AFL to worry about. If they get the decision wrong, if they lose money, if soccer becomes the preferred game in Tassie - bad luck!! They're going in with their eyes wide open, it has been decided at Board level, and they are using their own resources in supporting the decision. The AFL has also expressed the view that it's a bit judgemental and patronising for 10 Senators to suggest to the population of West Sydney that they are so different to the rest of Australia that they can't possibly ever take to aussie rules. Now people on the Roar might agree that the people of West Sydney represent a separate species to other Australians, but the AFL doesn't agree with that viewpoint. Their starting point is that the Australian game should be available to as many Australians as possible. Towser I'm not sure if I suggested that it's the first time a Senate Committee has involved itself with sporting bodies, I'm saying that this specific question was not one that would ordinarily concern Senate Committees. I'm not familiar with the inquiry you mention, but I could imagine that such an issue would cross over into a lot of areas of direct government interest, e.g. employment law, trade practices, corporate law, taxation, etc. In regard to this AFL matter, three Tassie senators were clearly chasing the economic benefits that an AFL team would bring to their state, but equally, why shouldn't the people of West Sydney be entitled to such economic benefits? So where we are talking about private investment, and the activities of a commercial orgnisation, it's not up to Government to decide that one area is more worthy than another to get the fruits of that activity (of course, if the taxpayer is funding it, then the Government can decide on such things).
Redb
Roar Guru
I'm waiting for the postumous Senate enquiry into rugby league;s creation of the Melb Storm franchise in 1998. I beleive there were no virtually no teams, net alone juniors at the time in Melbourne. The Central Coast of NSW a RL heartland was totally ignored by the ARL and NRL. Oh yeah Central Coast doesn;t have senate representatives unlike Tasmania as a State. Redb
Towser
Guest
Pippinu There was the Senate Stewart enquiry into football transfers if I remember correctly in 1994. Not the first time the Senate has involved itself with sporting bodies. Probably more sporting interference if you delve a bit.