|
|
|
|
Home Our Objectives Publications SAP Kits How You Can Help Media Releases Photo Diary Newsletters Parklands Code Photographic Record Radio Programme Related Links |
Extension of the contract:
Save Albert Park's position remains the same. As the saga of the Grand Prix in Albert Park continues, the more is our campaign validated. By extending the contract another five years the Brumby Labor Government has clearly shown that its allegiance lies not with the ordinary citizens of this state, but with the business interests which benefit from the Grand Prix event. The government has ignored the findings of the Auditor-General's 2007 cost-benefit analysis, and has disregarded the negative environmental effects of the event. It has put a motor race ahead of the needs of the community. It insults the intelligence of Victorians by presenting hype and footling claims as to the benefits of the event, such as appeared in Premier Brumby's July 4 media release. Save Albert Park has a responsibility to continue its campaign however intransigent the government remains and however futile the struggle appears to be. There has to be opposition, or worse outrages will be inflicted on Victoria's citizens. There is hope; any contract can be re-negotiated, any contract can be cancelled. Formula One is an inherently unstable organization.
There is an election in 2010, and even though no help can be expected from the present State Opposition, a popular groundswell can produce unexpected results, as happened when Kennett lost power in 1999.
A carbon-neutral Grand Prix? Not in Albert Park Premier Brumby has claimed that the Grand Prix in Albert Park will be 'carbon-neutral'. This is yet another baseless claim. In 2006 the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC) claimed that each event produced 200 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. This figure was stated to include the truck transport of 40,000 tonnes of temporary race infrastructure into and out of the park. The AGPC then said they had arranged to have Greenfleet plant 747 small trees in the Murray-Darling Basin, which would render the event carbon-neutral. In 2007, the AGPC re-calculated their 'event-related' emissions, and stated that the emissions amounted to 1011 tonnes. Their calculations were based on the following fuel use: 112,669 litres of petrol, 2,786 litres of LPG, and 279,597 litres of diesel. The number of trees Greenfleet had been paid to plant had risen to 3,773, which the AGPC said would sequester the 1011 tonnes of greenhouse gas over the lifetime of the trees. The trees planted annually by Greenfleet are not all potential forest giants. They are native trees which vary depending on the area of planting, and have an average lifetime of about 30 years. If these trees survive 30 years of drought, fire and neglect, they may succeed in absorbing the emissions from the Grand Prix. But there were ten events held before 2006, before any trees were planted, and that amounts to over 10,000 tonnes of emissions. None of that will be absorbed by Greenfleets trees, and it will take 30 years to absorb the emissions from the 2008 event. Also, the emissions from the air transport of race teams and equipment into and out of Melbourne vastly exceed that from the event itself. The Grand Prix in Albert Park can never be rendered carbon-neutral by tree planting. Extension of the Grand Prix contract The following statement was handed to media representatives who sought interviews with SAP on July 4, 2008. The announcement of the extension of the Grand Prix contract should put the last nail in the coffin of the Brumby Government. The decision contradicts all rational thinking; it is wrong politically, financially, economically and environmentally. Politically, John Brumby would have earned the respect and the gratitude of the Victorian electorate if he had cancelled the contract immediately, or at least after 2010. There is no justification whatever for continuing the contract, if the basic consideration is the welfare of the Victorian people. Financially, the race event is a disaster for the state. The 2008 lost $40m, the 2009 and 2010 races will lose about $95m, and from 2011 to 2015, the losses will total about $300m. In all, from 1996 to 2015, the losses on this event will amount to around $600m. For what? The Auditor-General in his 2007 report found that the Grand Prix was an economic loser for Victoria, not a winner. The Grand Prix is NOT good for Victoria ... it is bad. When the whole world is talking about climate change, John Brumby is going to continue bringing a Formula One motor race to Melbourne, and stage it in a temporary circuit in a public park. This means trucking 40,000 tonnes of race infrastructure in and out of the park. The race event consumes hundreds of thousands litres of petrol, LPG and diesel fuel, just to entertain people. It means air-freighting in from Europe many tonnes of cars and equipment. It is the antithesis of responsible action to combat carbon emissions. Save Albert Park will continue the fight against this stupid decision. The mealy-mouthed media In an apparent attempt to sound like responsible and independent media, instead of a government cheer squad, The Age and Herald Sun have both been sounding off about the Grand Prix operating losses, and the secrecy surrounding the race licence fee paid to Formula One. On July 4, the Herald Sun said this in part of its editorial headed 'Racing ahead': Losses this year were $40 million and the Auditor-General found that costs outweighed benefits. The race attracts tourists and creates employment and the GP has its own aura. But the Government must show greater transparency over its use of taxpayer money. There is no longer any excuse for secrecy. The Government must make public the licence fee it is paying to Mr Ecclestone. The excuse that it cannot be disclosed because it is a commercial arrangement does not wash.
On July 7, The Age said, in its editorial 'Two cheers for saving the Grand Prix for Melbourne': The people who write these editorials must know that the licence fee is included in the expense item 'Event Management and Staging' in the Grand Prix Corp.'s annual reports. They would also know how much other circuits are paying. It's not a big deal to make an educated guess at what we pay. And does it matter if the guess is a bit out? No it doesn't. City of Port Phillip condemns race extension Port Phillip mayor, Cr Janet Cribbes, issued a media release on July 4 condemning the extension of the race contract. The main text is reproduced below. The City of Port Phillip has condemned the State Government's decision to extend the Australian Grand Prix contract until at least 2015. "It's bad news for Albert Park Reserve, bad news for our residents, and bad news for Victorian taxpayers", mayor Janet Cribbes said. "The Grand Prix should not be run in a public park, it's as simple as that. It restricts access to local residents and sporting clubs and does terrible damage to the grounds. It inflicts noise, parking restrictions and major inconveniences onto our residents" "After 14 years, residents have had more than enough. Why should they have to suffer all that for a car race whose public price tag blew out to $35 million last year." "There is still no research which has actually quantified the increased level of tourism it generates. As last year's Auditor-General's report explains in chapter and verse, the alleged economic benefits are not well supported by the facts." Cr Cribbes said Premier John Brumby's description of the Grand Prix "as the jewel in Melbourne's major events strategy" was risible. "It's more like a tarnished stone", she said, "Surely the jewel in the crown is the Melbourne spring racing carnival which brings more money and more people - and a lot more enjoyment - to this city without all the downsides or the drain on the public purse". Cr Cribbes said the agreement not to use any artificial lighting for the race was hardly a major concession for Formula One Management. At 5pm in March daylight saving is in full swing and artificial lighting is simply not necessary. However, I still have some concerns that noise and disruption will continue into the night , lights or no lights. Cr Cribbes said Albert Park sporting clubs and local traders have made it clear to the council for many years the Grand Prix is not good for them. "Clubs are forced to relocate for months while the race is bumped in and out and their playing fields are damaged. Most local businesses don't do well over the Grand Prix weekend." "It's simply not fair that this event is exempt from the normal legislative protections empowering Victoria Police and the Environment Protection Authority to take action on noise and other infringements on residential amenity." (Albert Park Reserve constitutes 59% of the open space within the City of Port Phillip but it is administered by the State Government agency, Parks Victoria.) Silverstone loses the British Grand Prix According to an announcement made by the President of the FIA (the man with a clouded reputation, Max Mosley) the British Grand Prix will move from Silverstone to Donington circuit from 2010. Silverstone lost the race because the circuit, operated by the British Racing Drivers Club, could not afford the race licence fee. Desperate appeals to the British Government for financial assistance failed. The way the news was put out is strange; normally Bernie Ecclestone would do this. Another strange aspect is that it is a kind of re-run of the 1999 proposal to transfer the race to Brands Hatch. This fell through after the sports promotion company Octagon (an offshoot of the US Interpublic group) bought out Brands Hatch and put the race back to Silverstone. Octagon lost heavily in promoting the Silverstone GP, and in 2004 ended up paying $US90 million to get out of its contracts with Formula One and Silverstone. Donington needs $US200 million to upgrade the circuit, and its isolated country location is not ideal, being described as 'much more like Magny Cours than Silverstone'. The race licence fee is reported to be about $US50 million for two years, paid in advance. The whole proposal sounds like another financial disaster in the making. Source: grandprix.com. July 4 2008 Hulls not in the loop? On July 6, the Herald Sun ran a jeering article, 'GP Facts overtake Mr Hulls', claiming that the report in the Sunday Herald Sun on June 15, which stated that a verbal deal had been struck regarding the extension of the Grand Prix contract, was in fact correct, and that the acting premier, Rob Hulls, was wrong when he 'smugly' dismissed the report. The Herald Sun went on, "Rob Hulls who has a well- deserved reputation as a bully, was either conveniently fibbing or not kept in the loop about Grand Prix negotiations". We suspect the latter. So why did the Herald Sun have the inside knowledge? Possibly because its parent company, News Corp., may (as has been reported) have been in discussions regarding the purchase of the Formula One companies: Source: grandprix.com, June 13 2008 More on Brumby's deceptive and misleading statements. |