INTERESTING observations by PETER MAIR, our Sydney contributor, on the court proceedings involving Racing NSW and the Australian Turf Club.
‘THE hearing of ‘the appeal’ in the RNSW v ATC dispute opened on Thursday morning before three judges on the bench.
As with the original proceedings it was turgid stuff — old ground was being ploughed over leaving lots of dust but, again, no point in lingering long in the court room.
That leaves open the question of why this lawyers-picnic has still not been rained-out — as it could-should have been at the outset.
The way was always open for the NSW Government to simply say it would act to resolve any confusion about the power of RNSW to put an administrator in control of the ATC (or, presumably, any other race-club).
The focus turns to why the NSW Government did not do this — and onto the possibility that the ‘long game’ is still about Rosehill.
Having so publicly ‘lost’ the plot (and the ATC vote) to sell Rosehill, it might be a bit rich for the Government to make an over-the-top, legislative power-play to compulsorily ‘reclaim land needed for a housing-highway’. As it could.
Public perceptions, of a comparable outcome, will be at least confused and be more politically palatable, if he current appeal is upheld leaving Racing NSW free to appoint an Administrator to the ATC. An Administrator who may on careful reflection on what’s best for racing as a whole, decide to sell Rosehill (to the Government). That looks like a good bet to me but I may be wrong.
TODAY’S headline in The Straight – COURT APPEAL WEIGHS LIMITS OF RACING NSW CONTROL – may not be correct.
The question on the table is:
……..whether the NSW racing legislation, as it stands, gives RNSW power to appoint an administrator to the ATC.
A court does not ‘rewrite’ legislation to reflect what it or anyone else may prefer .. it is up to the NSW Government to make clarifying changes to the law — if it wants to.
As is, the NSW Government is saying it does not want to clarify the law — it wants the appeal determined in acccord with the law as it stands.
So………… to some extent the court is, perhaps, a bit player in a political game.
