Brisbane Racing Club (PDF 305 K) - Office of Liquor, Gaming and ...

BRISBANE
RACING CLUB
11 March 2013
Liquor and Gaming Red Tape Reform
Office of Regulatory Policy
Department of Justice and Attorney-~eneral
Locked Bag 180
CITY EAST QLD 4002
By Email: redtapereform.@iustice.qld.gov.au
Dear Sir/Madam,
Re: Liquor and Gaming Red Tape Reform
I am writing in regard to the Government discussion paper regarding liquor and gaming red tape
reform and other reform proposals for. the regulation of liquor and gaming. We are happy for this
submission to be open for public scrutiny. BRC responds in its dual capacity as the owner of two
licensed racecourses (Eagle Farm and Doomben) and a licensed community club (Gallopers Sports
Club).
Support for reforms
Brisbane Racing Club (BR~:) supports the Government intention to ensure Queensland’s gaming
industry remains the cleanest in the world and also its commitment to cutting red tape that
unnecessarily adds to business costs. BRC supports the development of a vibrant entertainment and
tourism industry. BRC understands its contribution towards employment, leisure and the local
community. For example, the economic impact of AAMI Stradbroke Day 2012 is set out below:
3,440 visitors from interstate
645 visitors from overseas
23,814 visitor nights were generated
~;10.32m spending in Queensland
600 casual staff
90 full time staff
76 horses from interstate and overseas
The sport of thoroughbred horse racing is under pressure in Queensland from competition interstate
and overseas. More flexible regulation of both the liquor and gaming industries is critical to the
improvement of horse racing in Queensland.
EAGLE FARM & DOOMBEN
BRISBANE RACING CLUB LIMITED
PO Box 817 Hamikon Central, QEeensland 4007. Administration Office: Eagle Farm Racecourse, 230 Lancaster Road, Ascot, QEeensland 4007.
P: 61 7 3268 217I * F: 61 7 3868 2410 ~ W; w~v, brc,¢om.au
ABN: 80133 679786 ACN: 133 679786

Background
BRC’s core activity is thoroughbred horse racing. BRC operates Eagle Farm and Doomben
racecourses under a Commercial Special Facility Liquor Licence. BRC holds 98 race meetings each
year, racing nearly every Saturday and Wednesday each week. BRC also owns Gallopers Sports
Club with 91 Gaming Entitlements. In May/June, Brisbane hosts Australia and New Zealand’s best
horses for the Channel 7 Brisbane Racing Carnival.
Objectives
The objectives of BRC are:
Data
The encouragement, promotion and development of thoroughbred horse racing and other
incidental related purposes, and to carry on any other activity which directly or fndirectly
enhances or furthers the interests of thoroughbred horse racing.
Undertake such other activities not inconsistent with the objectives set out in clause ~ to
enhance, promote or protect the interests of the Company.
Promote and develop the Eagle Farm Racecourse and Doomben Racecourse as well as any
other racecourses owned or operated by the Company from time to time as premier racing
facilities and event centres.
Number of members
Number of full time employees
Number of part time employees
Number of volunteers
Annual attendance
Horses in work
Prizemoney
Number of trainers
Number of stablehands/trackriders
6,000
9O
600
16
220,000
500
$31,000,000
48
315
Community Support
Please note the figures below represent the joint contributions from Brisbane Racing Club and
Gallopers Sports Club.
Non
Item
.......................
Cash Cash Total
Per Annum
,,,
Cash donation to bowling club 75,000
.........
75,000
Maintenance of bowling greens 50,000 50,000
Provision of bus to bowling club 5,000 5,000
Provision of free use of greens for community bowling 5,000 5,000
,.,
Ma!nte.n.a..~c.. e .of equestrian/community sports field 50,000 50,000
......
Depreciation of equestrian/community sports field 58,000 58,000
Equestrian/community sports f.!.e.1 d fo r use b.Y co.mmunity 25,000 25,000
Sponsorship/donations - bowling club 7,500 7,500
Sponsorship/donations - general community/charities/schools 25,000 25,000
. .

Maintenance of local school/club sports fields e.g. Brot~rs RFC SO, O00 50,0O0
Winter carnival school art comp,,et!~ion .... 5,000 5,000
50,000
Provision of new shed to scouts - rent free ................
so,,;,o,o, o ....
QId Government Emergency Evacuation centre- on request
,,, ,m
Provision of equipment and labour for corn, m,u,,n, ity benefit ..... 10,000 10,000
PCYC Events 7,500 7,500
Blue Light Disco ~i~e hall hire 10,000 10,000
Hendra Pony club- maintain grounds .......... , ..... 10,000... 10,000
Racing Museum - fundi,n,g. ..... 25,000... 25,00o,_
2013
Refurbishin~~milton.Scout .ha!.l...f..o.r community use ........ i00,000 100,000
Community Race Club Contribution Scheme,,.-,,Bundaberg ......
..
2,000 2,000
Community Race Club Contribution scheme..-...L.ockyer Valley 5,000 5,000
Community Race Club Contribution Scheme- Gymp,!e,. 1,000 1,000
Community Race Club Contribution Scheme - Deagon 10,000 lO, OO.O.._
...............
St Vincent’s. Hospital - Mt Olivet ......... 12,000 12,000
Act for Kids carnival partner ,,, 10,000 10,000
Charlie Pratt leukaemia fundraiser 2,000 18,000 20,000
...........
2012
,,, ,,,
Community Race Club Contribution Scheme -St George 10,000 10,000
,,
Community Race Club Contribution Scheme- KilcoY 5,000 5,900
Kristy Banks Fundraiser 10,000 10,000
Autism "lnsi.d.e...origin" Fundraiser ..
2,000 2,000
Montrose Access carnival partner 10,000 i0,000
Ronald McDonald House 1,000 2,000
Bart Sinclair Testimonial
..........
2,000 2,000
Steve Kernohan Fundraiser 4,500 4,500
Bernborough Club 850 850
Right Roya),,Affair .... 450 450
St Joseph’s College Rugby ........... 480 480
Broth e r).u n!_o_.r._R ugby League 520 520
St Rita’s i50 150
National Breast Cancer Foundation 1,950 1,950
Clayfield College fundraiser 480 480
...... .......
Mater Foundation 420 420
Brighton Roosters Rugby Club 1,110
, ,, !,110
Red Kite 630 630
,,
Chicks in Pink 480 48O
2011
,,,
Brisbane Festival "Symphony/Opera under the Stars"-free venue hire 10,000 . o,ooo
Our Lady He.lp. of Christians Primary School- landscapi.n...g 5,000 5,000
Central QId Flood Relief Fundraiser- event management i0,000 10,000
Hendra State School- assist install water tanks
.,.
I0,000 10,000_..

BRC SUBMISSIONS ON RED TAPE REDUCTION PROPOSALS
1,1 Removing the regulatow approval for approved managers of low risk venues
BRC supports Option I - accept the proposal (remove requirement that certain tow risk venues retain
approved managers).
This proposal should be extended to include low risk venues. Low risk venues will still need a
suitably qualified manager to manage the sale and service of alcohol; however it is suggested low
risk venues should not be required to complete the application for regulatory approval of the
approved manager. This is beneficial, as removing this application requirement means that low risk
venues would not be required to pay the application fee and would not need to complete the
associated paperwork.
1,2 Persons trained in Responsible Management of Licensed Venues (RMLV) taken to be trained in
Responsible Service of Alcohol (RSA)
BRC supports Option I - accept the proposal (accept that persons trained in RMLV are trained in
RSA).
This is a commonsense approach to consolidate two courses with overlapping contents into a single
course (with one expiry date). It represents significant cost savings (time and money) for the
industry, as clubs will not be required to train their employees twice (one for RSA and one for
RMLV). For employees, the proposal removes confusion on the validity of the two courses (as
currently one may expire before the other).
:I.4 Re-examining liquor trading hours, lock-outs and drink safe precincts
BRC supports maintaining the status quo, with an end to the current moratorium on applications j:or
post-midnight trading outside o, f entertainment precincts.
The lifting of the moratorium on applications for late night trading (12 am to 5 am) will remove
unnecessary regulation and also promote industry growth and innovation. Community clubs need
regulatory flexibility to trade in the night economy in response to a range of factors, including the
changing nature of society, demographic make-up of patrons and increased competition. Unless
clubs are allowed to adjust trading hours in response to these and other circumstances, there is a
risk they may become irrelevant, as patrons may go elsewhere for their recreation. The moratorium
is a regressive measure that is incompatible with free market enterprise and community need.
1.5 Remove regional boundaries under the club gaming machine entitlement reallocation scheme
BRC supports Option ~ = accept the proposal (remove the regional boundaries inherent to the club
reallocatlon scheme).
The rationale for establishing regional allocation of entitlements is sound in theory (i.e. to prevent
the concentration of gaming machines in one area) but it is not practical as it does not facilitate
demand and supply because buyers and sellers are often located in different regions. The effect is a
situation where there are sellers but no buyers and vice versa, which creates profound business
uncertainty.
It is also important to note that community clubs are already required to prepare a Community

Impact Statement (ClS) when applying for an additional 20 or more gaming machines, so community
and social costs are already considered before a dub is eligible to seek additional entitlements;
meaning regional allocations provide additional and unnecessary barriers to clubs with gaming. The
scheme is market based but the regional allocation of entitlements is contrary to market based
principles which should determine demand and supply.
1.6 Amending the "high risk" glassing classification
BRC supports removing the "high risk" glassing provisions while retaining the discretion for the chiej ~
executive to place conditions on licences regarding the removal oJ: regular glass,
The current laws on venue classification are arbitrary, as a single glassing incident or an
unacceptable level of violence during a 12 month period (that may take place despite the best
efforts of the venue to prevent it) places a venue in the "high risk" category. There is little or no
avenue for redress and this has unreasonable commercial consequences for venues, including
negative impacts on their reputation and insurance. The reform proposal recognises the efforts put
in by venues to prevent the glassing or violent incident. OLGR already has the authority to place
additional conditions on licensees.
1.8 Review laws relating to additional club premises (greenfield sites and amalgamations)
BRC supports Option i - accept the proposal (review laws related to additional club premises).
This proposal will facilitate the establishment of new community clubs in greenfield sites by
removing significant barriers, in particular the cap of 280 gaming machines, irrespective of the
number of club venues and higher taxes due to the combined revenue of club venues under
amalgamation. Removing these barriers will put community clubs on a level playing field with
hotels, which are not restricted by such barriers when establishing venues in a new site. Without
these incentives, the community clubs industry will continue to decline, with the consequent loss of
vital and irreplaceable community infrastructure.
1.9 Reducing State-imposed event costs
BRC supports Option 1 - accept the proposal (review requirements for major events).
The current requirements by OLGR to complete event management plans etc. are onerous and
costly. For example, BRC is compelled to provide seven (7) such plans for any racecourse crowd
over 5,000 persons. BRC recommends that a single event management plan setting out different
crowd levels be submitted on an annual basis.
2.:1 Streamlining gaming administration provisions
BRC supports Option 1 - accept the proposal (streamline gaming administration provisions into one
Act).
Consolidation of the gaming laws is a practical solution because duplication across the gaming Acts is
resulting in inefficiencies, inconsistencies and confusion for venues. A single gaming administration
law will consolidate the common administrative matters, such as licensing, compliance and appeals,
that are currently contained in seven gaming laws in one law for general administration of gaming
(i.e. Gaming Administration Act). Specific provisions relating to a particular industry can then be
placed in their respective laws. The separation of the administrative and licensing functions will

therefore greatly assist venues to understand and implement the regulatory framework and reduce
the regulatory burden on the industry.
2.2 Ceasing involvement of liquor inspectors in fire safety regulation
BRC supports Option 1 - accept the proposal (remove fire safety provisions under the Liquor Act).
Fire safety issues are best placed under the respective fire safety laws, rather than in the Liquor Act,
because the former provides a framework for minimum fire safety standards. The Liquor Act only
duplicates the requirements, which results in confusion on what the exact requirements are for
licensed premises in regards to fire safety. It is important to note that most other interstate
regulators are not involved in regulating fire safety in licensed premises because this is a specialised
area of operation.
2.3 Reviewing liquor and gaming subordinate legislation
BRC supports that u review be undertaken with respect to expiring liquor and gaming subordinate
legislation. Because a review is required by the SIA, no options are put forth but input into the review
is sought.
Subordinate lesislation provides clarity and specific detail on many aspects of the principal Acts.
Therefore, the industry must be given appropriate time and opportunity to provide comprehensive
input into liquor and gaming subordinate regulations to ensure they remain contemporary and
relevant. This is a comprehensive review on its own and requires a separate submission. It is
reiterated that no regulation should expire or be repealed without an appropriate level of
consultation with the industry.
2.4 Reviewing the disciplinary provision under the Liquor Act
BRC supports a review o~f section 137 of the Liquor Act to determine whether a legisletive
amendment or other step is required to clerify the intent of the disciplinary action provision. Input
into the review is requested from industry and the public. Because a review is proposed, no options
ere put forth.
There should be no ground to take disciplinary action against a venue in relation to events that could
not have been foreseen and therefore could not have been prevented by the licensee. In other
words, venues should only be accountable for what is within their reasonable powers. The laws
must focus on whether a licensee has met its obligations of responsible service, rather than on
events that are beyond the control of a licensee.
2.5 Noise controls over liquor licensed premises
It is proposed thet noise restrictions under the Liquor Act and the enforcement of noise restrictions be
reviewed. Because ~ review is proposed, no options ere put forth.
Noise control is a contentious matter and any review must recognise first occupancy rights (i.e. the
venue was there first before the residents). In addition, the nature of activity should determine the
noise level; hence, some activities such as live music demand greater decibel limits. This should be
on a case by case basis and not based on any arbitrary limits. The bottom-line should be an explicit
recognition that licensed venues are public spaces and need to be able to offer exciting and engaging
entertainment for the benefit of their patrons.

2.6 Providing local governments with a greater say in licensing decisions
BRC supports Option 2 -reject the proposal (do not provide local government with a greater say in
licensing decisions).
The involvement of local government should be extremely limited. There is argument to say that
one exception is for local government to be the regulatory body for noise issues.
3.2 Reviewing gaming machine maximum bet
BRC supports Option ~ -increase maximum bet to $:ZO on dub and hotel gaming machines.
Increasing the maximum bet to :~:[0 is strongly recommended and necessary in view of the annual
increases in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and that there has not been an increase to the maximum
bet limit since .1.995. Hence, the current maximum bet limit of 55 (which has remained unchanged
for :[8 years) has a significantly diminished commercial value in today’s dollars.
This is in contrast to other gambling offers that have no max bet limits (e.g. horse racing, keno,
lotteries, etc) and online (internet based) poker machine / game offers, where the maximum bet
limits are significantly higher in comparison and are unregulated. An increased maximum bet limit
of ~:[0 not only realigns the diminished value issue, but it also provides greater convenience for
’professional’ recreationat players and Queensland clubs will also become competitive with QId
casinos and NSW venues (for example), which currently have the ~:[0 maximum bet limit.
3.3 Reviewing cash input restrictions on gaming machines
BRC supports Option 1 - li~ing the prohibition to aflow the use o] any Australian banknote in aft
Queensland gaming machines, and increase the cash input limit at clubs and hotels.
Lifting the prohibition to allow the use of any Australian banknote in al! Queensland gamin8
machines, and increasing the cash input limit to at least 5250 would increase player convenience,
reduce the current cash handling expenses and place venues on par with gaming venues in New
South Wales and Victoria. Of all the Eastern states, Queensland is the only jurisdiction that does not
allow the use of 550 notes and has the lowest specified cash input limit of all Australian jurisdictions.
These changes will have tangible benefits to the ongoing financial viability of venues.
3,4 Reviewing hours of operation
BRC supports Option ~ - Ill-ring the prohibition on gaming be]ore .1.0am for those dubs that can
demonstrate community need and have adopted voluntary pro-commitment.
By way of example, Gallopers (Home of the Hamilton Bowls Club) has a predominantly older bowls
membership base who often start their competitions early. Clubs with bowling facilities, such as
Gallopers, present a special case because many of their elderly players who rely upon their family
members and friends to drop them at the club on their wayto work and hence, they are often seen
queuing at the entrance of clubs prior to opening. Gallopers also offers corporate breakfasts, host
community and charity events (e.8. community breakfasts) and organize bingo for their older
clientele.
Gallopers is also close to Australia Trade Coast where many workers are shift workers and appreciate

early opening times. Accordingly, for shift workers their ’dinner’ is effectively their breakfast and
they want to enjoy a few drinks to end their working ’day’. Community clubs respond to these trends
by acting as social outlets and meeting places, which are safe, familiar and friendly, and offer the
suite of services that people desire when they need them.
3,5 Moratorium on extended liquor trading hours
BRC supports Option 3 - Aflow the moratorium to end and consider a strategy to transJ~orm the night
time economy to encourage a broader range oj~ locations and a broader range oJ~ consumers.
The rationale for extended tradng hours is on the basis we now live in a 24/7 economy. Australians
expect availability to most things due to convenience and proven need. There is growing evidence
that more and more people are working non-traditional hours in recognition of the convenience that
comes with it (e.g. to avoid peak-time transport congestion, to fit in with family commitments etc.).
3,6 Restrictive trading on days of cultural significance
BRC supports removing the trading hour restrictions to aflow normal trading on Anzac Day
Observance of days of national, religious or cultural significance is a matter for the individual. The
individual may choose to observe these days or may decide to engage in some other activity,
Racecourses provide a wonderful opportunity for people to gather and celebrate Anzac Day in a truly
Australian manner, i.e. a day at the races,
Conclusion
We commend the initiative of Government to reduce red tape and also inviting stakeholder
submissions on how to do so. Please call with any questions.
Yours faithfully
CHIEF EXECUTIVE