Homebush Motor Racing (Sydney 400) Bill 2008
OBJECTIVES:
The object of this Bill is to facilitate the conduct of an annual motor race at Homebush; to constitute the Homebush Motor Racing Authority and to confer functions on the Authority; and for other purposes.
COMMENT:
The Sydney Olympic Park is a wonderful development of which the citizens of Sydney and the whole state are justly proud. It is a jewel in the New South Wales crown, and it took a lot of time and tax dollars, very careful design for the creation of a green and sustainable site, and effective implementation to bring to life the dream of so many.
Now it is thoroughly established and thriving, a masterpiece of excellent planning, enjoyed by over 8.5 million users annually, as a place to take one’s family for picnics, for jogging and walking, exploring the historical sites, attending various cultural events, an excellent facility for bird watching, riding bicycles, and other healthy activities – the kind of activities we fund health promotion campaigns to convince the people of New South Wales to participate in – and they have responded whole heartedly and taken up these activities at the Sydney Olympic Park. The people of Sydney and New South Wales love their Sydney Olympic Park, and make excellent use of it.
Changing the essential character and purpose of the Sydney Olympic Park by converting it into a V8 Super Car Racing area is not just a local issue; it is an international one, which may surprise you. Let me explain: Australia has entered into international trade agreements with Japan, China, and South Korea – nations that are otherwise in danger of over-developing every single metre of natural space within their borders, even those wetland areas that have been used for millennia for annual migratory purposes by the species of migratory birds that live in all our countries.
Most bird species are seasonal in their habits, and spend the winter in the warmer climes and the summers in the cooler ones. They are trans-national citizens, seeing the stretch from Australia up the flyway to Korea and Japan as their home. They deserve acknowledgement from us, and access to their habitats. If not they will die – because this land is where they rest, feed, mate, raise their young, and prepare to return north when it is time.
If this parkland is destroyed or made uninhabitable by pollution or noise, they have nowhere else to go to perform the basic activities of life. In Asia it has been reported that many birds have been observed simply dropping dead from the sky, starved and exhausted, while flying farther in the fruitless search for appropriate sites after theirs have been heartlessly built over.
To prevent this terrible scenario from occurring here Australia has entered into Trade Agreements with these Asian nations, with all signatories agreeing to protect the environments of the migratory birds that use their areas.
Such agreements include provisions that expressly state that the Government shall “seek means to prevent damage to such birds and their environment”. Well these are those birds, and this is their environment that we pledged to protect – here in the ponds and grasses of Sydney Olympic Park.
Phil Straw, the Vice Chairman of the Australasian Wader Studies Group, wrote to inform me that “A team of ecologists from Birds Australia, the Australian Museum and a number of universities worked in close association with the Olympic Park Authority to coordinate one of the largest development and restoration projects in the world to provide a world-class wetlands, and wildlife habitat in balance with recreational venues, sporting facilities and the commercial sector.”
“This work at the Sydney Olympic Park has attracted worldwide attention for its excellence, notably from planners from China and other parts of Asia where similar restoration and habitat creation projects have been underway. That is all under threat now, as extensive research has proven that noise from motorways has a detrimental effect on nesting birds, and the noise from a racetrack is likely to result in species leaving the area. This would be a tragedy after so many years hard work by some of Australia’s top ecologists and planners.”
Peter Marsh, the NSW and ACT Chairman of Birds Australia, wrote to explain that “all animals depend on sound to communicate, navigate, avoid danger and find food. Human-generated noise can alter their perception and so interfere with their normal functioning, and harm their health, as well as alter reproduction, survivorship, habitat use, distribution, abundance, or genetic composition. Although the noise impact from the proposed Supercar races may be over a short period of time, the abrupt disturbance and volume of these impacts may be enough to frighten them away. This would be extremely serious.”
We owe it to the other nations to which we are pledged through treaties, to the people of NSW, and to the birds themselves, not to destroy any aspect of this place. To breach those agreements would be very bad form, internationally, and would give the other nations carte blanche to, in their turn, do the same.
We have to do the right thing, not only because it is right but because of our responsibility to meet and model the highest standards of international citizenship regarding such treaties. So it is, you see, an international environmental issue.
Pointing out that fact should be enough to change the nature of this debate, but it may not, so I shall point out several other drawbacks of the plan to transform the Sydney Olympic Park into a raceway.
The removal of hundreds of beloved and beautiful trees, landmarks to the local residents, is a terrible thing – every healthy mature tree in the urban environment is working hard to filter our pollution-filled city air of car exhaust and industrial fumes, making the air breathable, and making the city livable.
The preliminary estimate of trees destined to be destroyed to make way for concrete barriers and racing roadways is in the hundreds. With so many absolutely barren places in this brown land why would we seriously consider the destruction of a beautifully treed area that is considered by all to be an ideal Green Precinct?
That the race organisers promise to replace the trees later means nothing. A mature, living tree now is worth more than all those promises of future tree planting activity that may or may not be honoured.
The air filtering which provides a healthy atmosphere, the shade, habitat, beauty and pleasure they provide now is needed and desired by the affected animals and humans alike, on an ongoing basis, more than ever. Experts maintain that the removal of the maturing trees will set the Sydney Olympic Park back 20 years.
Besides the trees, and the estimated 140 species of birds living in the Sydney Olympic Park area, many of which are considered threatened or endangered, there are the endangered frogs and plant species.
Worldwide the health of frogs is used as an ecological indicator of environmental health, and these creatures are already under threat from human activities. That they have found some refuge and are able to live in this area attests to its success as a green and sustainable environment. Any damage to the Narawang Wetlands habitat at the Sydney Olympic Park will be exponentially worse for them.
The State and Federal Governments have a plan in effect until the year 2010 to protect the habitat of the Green and Golden Bellfrog. The Frog is listed as a vulnerable species under the Commonwealth Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and is also listed as endangered under Schedule 1 of the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act.
These frogs breed mostly in the brickpit, but the runoff from the proposed racecar pit area – which is slated to be located next to the brickpit – will potentially damage this environment with ethanol, oil and gasoline waste. And no technology presently exists which can entirely prevent that damage, despite assurances from organisers that environmental socks will be placed to soak up these wastes. The trees, birds and frogs are all under threat from this proposed Bill.
There are also hundreds of ‘companion’ cats, dogs and birds living in the homes in this area. Such creatures are exquisitely sensitive to noise and are terrified by loud screeching, careening and unpredictable noises . It will be very harmful for them to be bombarded with the high decibels expected. Reacting in alarm to it the pets may try to escape, injure themselves in the process, be hit by cars or lost, or even just fly into the walls in terror as they try to get away.
But even if they stay safely indoors they will still be at the mercy of the noise, which will be perceived as threatening. Such noise easily permeates and penetrates residential walls as if they were not there. This kind of predictable, planned noise of organised motor sport should be isolated – away from population centres.
The inevitable spillage of oil, petrol and other wastes that will seep into the ground or down the gutters will make its way into the Recycled Water Plant causing problems that may potentially cost the taxpayers millions of dollars to fix. This pollution of water is unconscionable in our drought-affected state!
The air pollution generated from the planned use of the E85 fuel, which is a blend of 85% ethanol and 15 % unleaded petrol, is unhealthy for people living in close proximity to the track. In this era of climate change, in response to the deadly global threat of increasing greenhouse gases, it would be far more sensible to discourage all inessential human activities that produce massive amounts of pollution. Motor racing should go the way of the gladiatorial games, as belonging to another age, one that we look back upon and shake our heads in wonder.
Excessive noise pollution will be imposed on the human population – upwards of 95 decibels from 300 cars for 3 days as well as the roughly 1200 semi-trailer movements in and out of the park to set up and dismantle the track.
Exposure to excess noise is known by medical science to raise the heart rate and blood pressure and contribute to anxiety; it should not be inflicted on populations as if it is of no importance. Using earplugs from the chemist is of no use in such situations. And commercial tenants who have leases with clauses guaranteeing quiet enjoyment will be barred from seeking compensation under the proposed legislation, as the new authority will be able to circumvent all planning and environmental laws to ensure they can do whatever they want.
There are additional concerns reported to me in hundreds of emails and letters from other appalled residents across the state, such as the issue of problem driving and street racing. Our city and suburban streets are already deadly to the innocent drivers killed regularly by uncontrolled and apparently uncontrollable car racers. But instead of discouraging racing we turn around and set up an activity that will lionise racers – do we really want to inspire more of them? The answer from the public is a resounding “NO”.
There are also aesthetic reasons when you consider that seven kilometres of concrete barriers and fencing are to be erected every year (and then dismantled, as they are to be there ‘temporarily’). However in other states that were promised the same thing the concrete barriers were eventually made into permanent fixtures since it was too expensive, and too much trouble, for the race organisers to continue to bring them in and remove them every year. Those guarantees had been in writing stating that this would never occur – but it did. The same empty promises would very likely be entered into here, as that is their proven modus operandi.
There are also all the prudent economic arguments that many of my constituents have pointed out. The expenditure of up to $30 million on any activity with no guaranteed economic return at an unprecedented time of international monetary meltdown, when the state hospitals are desperate for money – with women in labour being turned away from understaffed hospitals and giving birth at the side of the road, and massive job cutbacks planned across the Area Health Services, the education sector suffering, pensioners living on a pittance, DOCS under-resourced, the state transport infrastructure creaking under the weight of an expanding population, unemployment on the rise and public servants (police, fire fighters, nurses, teachers and ambulance officers) refused real wage increases – the expenditure of $30 million dollars is not good stewardship – it is appalling at this time for the government to use taxpayers’ resources to fund a car race. In this time of financial crisis NSW residents believe that it is absolutely critical for us to fund the core services as a priority, and that is the only moral and ethical thing to do.
The history of the V8 Supercar Race in other states has been abysmal, leading to regular large losses by taxpayers over the years – just ask the people in Victoria about their experience with Albert Park. The Victorian Auditor-General showed in his 2007 report ‘State Investment in Major Events’, that the Grand Prix did not deliver value for money for Victoria. The Auditor-General found that the spending by the anticipated “big spenders” did not outweigh the costs to Victorian taxpayers of staging the event. And the touted massive television exposure worldwide was found to be a false claim as the audience has dropped year after year – 500 million in 1996 but only 100 million in 2008. This is a sport that is losing sponsors and supporters; perhaps that is why the NSW Government is getting such a hard sell from the organisers.
Even the onsite patronage figures were exaggerated as they included multiple entries by people who left the site and returned, the media, the police and security, the race teams, the catering staff, everybody with free passes, and so forth. All of them were counted in the attendance list that was touted by organisers who claimed that 300,000 people attended, when the real number was the same as for any other Grand Prix type race around the world – from 80,000 to 120,000 over 3 days.
As far as the expected benefits of attracting tourists to Melbourne, the Auditor-General was unable to identify ANY benefits from the expected tourists. Visitors staying at overseas owned establishments are not injecting money into the local economy.
The organisers boasted that restaurants and cafes were overflowing, but it wasn’t the ones around Albert Park. Those businesses suffered a serious loss of business during the race. That, in fact, is probably the reasoning behind the section of the proposed legislation which blocks compensation claims from businesses around Homebush for the losses they are expected to suffer during the races. This is backed up by a survey of 327 traders around Albert Park that showed that 25% reported increased business, 29% noticed no change, and 46% reported business losses.
Assurances that there would be a “cap” of government contributions at $30 million do not take into consideration the other costs, and there are likely to be many – such as provision of security services, the major advertising campaigns attracting people to the event, infrastructure upheaval such as re-siting over 100 light poles and the electrical cables for street lighting and domestic supply, as well as the expected removal and re-placement of bus shelters.
The people who write to me are appalled at the way their concerns are being ignored and belittled by both the Premier and the Minister for State Development. Their quiet neighbourhoods are being threatened with an inundation of unbearable motor noise, road chaos, crowds and the usual loutish antisocial behaviours that accompany such spectacles especially when there is alcohol available. That includes increased violence, vomiting and urinating in the nearby gardens, accidents and injuries, and the general social mayhem that is unwanted and out of place in these neighburhoods.
Up to 10 weeks of the year there will be limited use of the park by the citizenry who have incorporated it into their daily lives – six weeks before the event are required for setting it all up, and four weeks afterwards are required for pulling it all back down again. This involves work crews and their semi-trailers coming and going for that period of time, and means that regular users of the park will be unable to access their usual areas, including commuter-cyclists using the Bay to Bay Cycle-way connection to the Parramatta Cycle-way that passes through the Olympic Park.
Residents are also concerned that they will not be able to park outside their homes when the crowds pour in, and that the Olympic Park Station will not be able to cater for the influx of estimated 100,000 people at the race – the station is too small and not enough trains run in and out of there. And in general it has been noted that the type of people interested in motor sports are not big users of public transport; they drive. There would be much more space for sufficient parking out at Eastern Creek. Residents point out that if buses are to be provided they will be yet another cost to the taxpayers.
Others are very concerned that residential and commercial property values will decline sharply in surrounding suburbs if this goes ahead because most people simply would not choose to live next to a racetrack. Residents wonder if they will be compensated for this fall in value, but I can guess the answer is ‘no’.
And it was actually suggested to them by the Minister that if they didn’t like it they could just rent their place out during that time and leave the area like many people in Queensland apparently do! At least he was admitting that people do want to get away from these events, if they can possibly manage it!
But that ease of mobility is just not how most working or retired people’s lives work. This is not an attitude respectful of the people and their families in these areas. This is not social justice. There has been no public consultation and the residents have a right to be heard when they say they don’t want it.
The Sydney Olympic Park Authority Act has strong environmental protection measures that will require special legislation to be enacted to bypass it to allow the race to proceed, and that is precisely what this proposed legislation does. The Sydney Olympic Park Authority (SOPA) has already voted on this issue, and rejected unanimously the idea for this race happening there, but their stance has been ignored. How can this happen? They are the authority responsible for managing and maintaining the Park as a lasting legacy for the people of New South Wales, and this decision that will devastate the Park is being completely taken out of their hands. And that is not right.
The Local Councils around the Sydney Olympic Park, those of Parramatta, Strathfield, Auburn and Ryde have also whole-heartedly opposed the plan.
My understanding of the very basic, foundational premise of the concept of democracy is that the people get a voice both directly and through their elected representatives, in what happens to them, to their tax dollars, and to their environment, as well as the actions taken by their leaders. Is that what we are observing here? To me what we are seeing sounds more like this definition of bullying: “To force one’s own way aggressively or by intimidation without regard to the feelings of the person or people on the receiving end.”
Most of my constituents are NOT against V8 Racing, nor am I. But I am against holding it at Sydney Olympic Park when there is a purpose built track for this at Eastern Creek International Raceway, where the population density is much less.
I believe that the Eastern Creek site is far preferable for this event for a number of reasons. It is an excellent facility that is already owned by the Government, so that any monies spent will be an investment – improving a facility already owned by the people.
Eastern Creek is a specialised motor racing area already booked throughout the year by commercial organisations, trade shows, driver training, etc. It operates at a profit, and the accumulated surpluses are enough to contribute to the funding for the desired re-surfacing of the track. There is easy vehicle access from both the M4 freeway straight into the car park, and from Wallgrove Road.
Using the Eastern Creek site will enable a variety of motor races in different configurations without any set up or dismantling costs involved, and lastly it inconveniences a much smaller number of residents.
The V8 fans’ Internet blog “V8central” has had some interesting comments that clearly show that even their fan base may not think very much of the Homebush proposal:
“Let’s face it, the track plan they have in place for Homebush is pathetic.”
“Wait until they see how limited the viewing is at a street circuit like Homebush.”
”The NSW government has no clue – they go from one bungled decision to another. If they approve a race at Homebush at least we can say they’re consistent, I guess.”
“Homebush will see the government wasting tax payers money on a event that is unwanted by a lot of motorsport fans, environmentally unsound and has all the hallmarks of being a very boring track.”
“Still unbelievably frustrating as a NSW tax payer – millions of our dollars are going into a 3 day event rather than our infrastructure and permanent motorsport facilities that have a year round benefit.”
If, as demonstrated by these quotes, even the V8 racing fans are not excited about having the race at Homebush then there should be a serious review of the government’s intentions.
I will not support any Bill that allows V8 Supercar Racing to be established at Sydney Olympic Park against the will of the Park Authority, the Local Councils, the local citizenry and the fans of V8 racing.
I do not support this Bill.
