[Wednesday, 10 September 1997] 5953 Cups in the 1930S. He Trained with a Gentleman Called Mr Stewart
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
[Wednesday, 10 September 1997] 5953 Cups in the 1930s. He trained with a gentleman called Mr Stewart. They had three horses in the 1930s, Picaro, Tomito and Macadam, all of which won Perth Cups. I wish I could say I had the cups on my shelf, but alas they disappeared a long time ago. The green and gold colours appeared again in the 1970s - and many times over the intervening years - when my father won the Railway Stakes with the famous Star Glow. I cannot claim to be a racing tipster; I am not a gambler so I will leave that to some of my colleagues on both sides of the House. As I said earlier, the Opposition supports this Bill which will allow the Turf Club to borrow more than $20 000 and to sell real and personal property. Much discussion has occurred today and the Deputy Premier has been indulgent in allowing us to discuss a range of matters about the Turf Club. Mr Cowan: If I had had my way I would not have let you. Ms WARNOCK: The Deputy Premier tried to stop me but fortunately he relented. Many suggestions were made by both sides of the House including you, Mr Deputy Speaker, about what the racing industry should do about its problems. I therefore draw attention to an excellent report I read which was sent to me this week by someone in the South Australian racing industry. It is called “Ongoing Opportunities for Wagering in the Racing Industry” prepared by A. J. Windross, Chief Executive of the TAB of New South Wales, for a gambling conference held in March this year. The report ranges widely over problems in the racing industry which have been alluded to several times. In fact, the racing industry is in competition with many other codes and entertainments. The report refers to a number of strategies the racing industry can undertake. Many people today spoke about how the racing industry should be run by some sort of racing authority. This report suggests the industry needs a national lobby, as many other major industries - racing is certainly a major industry - have a national lobby. It should be very professional at the top level, and many of the speakers today supported that idea. This report recommends providing a decent amount of money rather than just handing back bits after tax. Many people involved in the racing business will agree with that. Today members heard much interesting and varied discussion about the method of taxing the racing industry. The report also suggests that market research should be undertaken on why some people wager regularly and why others go to the races only once a year. For instance, why do so many people go to Melbourne Cup day and Perth Cup day and are never seen again? What else can racing do to draw them back more frequently? Obviously, the racing industry should be responsive to what the punters want, even if that means reorganising race meetings so that people have many events on which to place their bets. There is also the question of how to sell the racing business, and the report refers to mystery bets and promoting bookies. We know the number of bookies is declining, but everybody agrees they are a colourful part of the racing industry and they should perhaps be promoted more. It suggests also that champion horses should be promoted. Even people who are far too young to have seen Phar Lap race will know of him because he was a champion. People these days do not seem to know as much about champion horses. Perhaps we need more promotion of famous horses such as that. Perhaps, also, courses could be run on how to win at gambling. Perhaps we should tell people how to gamble successfully, and promote the idea of horse ownership. The member for Dawesville spoke about the fun of owning a horse and having a part in it. My family has had a lot of experience of that, but my grandfather, the trainer, took it much more seriously than does the member for Dawesville. It is also suggested there should be tours of racing venues so that they become a tourism attraction and are co- promoted with other forms of gambling. There is a series of extremely interesting suggestions, and I sought the indulgence of the House to mention this report which I neglected to mention this morning during the second reading debate. Anyone interested in the future of the industry would be interested in that report. Question put and passed. Bill read a third time and passed. LOAN BILL Second Reading Resumed from 28 August. MR TRENORDEN (Avon) [3.52 pm]: I shall raise in this debate, as usual, a side issue but it is very important to me and it is related to funding. For some time I have been trying to raise the profile of a very impressive woman in my electorate, recognised on several occasions in awards in this State, who has been a long time contributor to state history. I speak of Jan Goodacre, a genealogist and author, who has been working for 30 years in this area and has seven books to her credit. She has worked for several years contributing entries for inclusion in the dictionaries of Western Australians compiled by another prominent Western Australian, Dr Rica Erickson. Since the time those dictionaries have been completed, Jan Goodacre has worked solely on putting together Aboriginal genealogies. 5954 [ASSEMBLY] These family trees form a huge database, are extensive and cover the whole State. The database comes from normal records of births, deaths and marriages, and missionary and other records that have been kept since white settlement. They are considerable records. They are capable of proving or disproving native title claims. Jan Goodacre has watched with interest as Aboriginal leaders have jostled for position in the race in recent days to recover Yagan’s head. In her professional opinion even a distant connection between them and Midgegooroo, let alone Yagan, is very tenuous because Yagan was a young man when he died and did not appear to have any descendants. A growing number of people in the Aboriginal community wish to be recognised in the ever increasing debate on the history of the Aboriginal people. It must be recognised, and has been recognised by the royal commission recently held in the federal arena with a great deal of publicity, that many Western Australian Aboriginal families have been dislocated in the past. We have heard some horrific stories, and I know of some in my own electorate, where women and children were moved from Northam, York and Toodyay to the Midlands area. I have heard of people who went to those areas to try to steal their women and children from camps. Many of these things are facts and are not debatable. The net result of that washing machine of activity is that many Aboriginal people do not know their ancestry. From my strong contact with Jan Goodacre over a number of years, I know that many hundreds of Aborigines have been to see her and have been astounded to find that the people they thought were their ancestors were no such thing. That can be proved by birth, death and marriage records. Many of the people involved in the Aboriginal debate now claiming a strong position in that debate, have no right to do so on the basis of their blood lines. Obviously, it is reasonable that people who have strong emotions and a desire to do something about Yagan’s head, should do so. I am talking of the head that was buried in the cemetery in the United Kingdom. However, it is important that distinctions be made. I advise members that a number of Aborigines in my area are very concerned that the people who brought Yagan’s head back to Western Australia have less blood line connection to Yagan than do many others. In the eyes of many Aborigines, they were doing it for recognition purposes. That becomes a very serious question. Many Australians regard Aborigines as one group of people. That is as logical as regarding Europeans as one race of people. They are not, and nor are the Aborigines of Western Australia a solid group. One has only to live among them to understand the deep tensions among families and groups in Western Australia, and those tensions have been present for as long as recorded history and as long as the living history of the people. That is not denied by Aboriginal people. To give fairness and equity to these arguments, we must be in a position to say that those acting on behalf of a group of Aboriginal people have the right to do so. There are two kinds of rights: One is moral, whereby I can fight and argue for Bosnia or Princess Diana. I have that right, but I do not have the second right, which is the blood right to which Earl Spencer referred in his address. Unfortunately, a growing number of people want recognition and want to be part of the major action in the Aboriginal community. Those people are claiming direct access to the information. One example is Robert Bropho. Under Aboriginal law he should be dead or very ill because he claimed some ownership of the situation that arose with the Swan River and the brewery. However, it is not his country and, under Aboriginal law, it should not be discussed by him. An elder in the Northam district told Jan Goodacre in recent times that Robert Bropho talks of the old fellow snake in the Swan River as though it is his, but it is not.