Rosehill survives the vote, but will McGauran survive as ATC chairman?
Some have put their names to the campaign, others have operated via the dark arts of behind-the-scenes backstabbing and whispering, wanting others to do the knifing.
That anti-V'landys block was vehemently opposed to the sale of Rosehill from the day it was first clumsily mooted by NSW Premier Chris Minns in late 2023.
When others with huge influence in the industry joined the no campaign, it was all over.
One of them was Chris Waller, the champion trainer of Winx, whose powerful stable is based at Rosehill and is backed by the nation's top owners.
Once Waller and Gai were against it, it was dead as a dodo.
The writing was truly on the wall when the final vote was delayed three times at the insistence of Racing NSW.
Behind the scenes, officials scrambled to put a coherent plan together and came up with a doozy as they started throwing inducements like confetti at members.
As of April 30 this year, all financial members were to be given free memberships for five years (usually costing $500) plus a $1000 food-and-beverage voucher each year.
But even giving each member what basically amounted to a bribe of $7500 in contra was still not enough.
Now that the sale won't go ahead, the ATC, and racing in general, are in a precarious situation.
The huge price to be paid by the state government, which would then on-sell the land to developers, is predicated on an immediate sale because tunnelling for the 24 kilometre underground Metro line from Parramatta to the CBD is under way, and near Rosehill.
If a Metro station is to be built at Rosehill, a decision is needed now, and it will only be built if 25,000 units and townhouses are on the site of the racetrack.
So, if Rosehill is to be sold for housing in the future with no Metro station, estimates put the value of the land at about a fifth of today's price, or $1 billion.
Members also ignored the fact the ATC has been living beyond its means.
The club posted a $2.4 million operating loss in the 2023-24 financial year and a loss of $9.9 million the year before. It also owes Racing NSW about $50 million.
That's despite the fact the club owns Rosehill, Warwick Farm and Canterbury freeholds, and leases Randwick from the state government for the peppercorn rent of only $1 a year and has a contract until the year 2107.
Loading
Wagering revenue is under extreme pressure in racing as it faces threats from other sports. Gambling on rugby league and NBA basketball, for instance, has boomed and shows no sign of slowing down.
A sale would have guaranteed racing's future for generations, with facilities modernised and prizemoney retained at the current record levels.
In 2016, the year before V'landys created The Everest, which has reinvigorated racing, total prizemoney across all races in NSW stood at $196 million. In 2024, it was $410 million.
There has been incredible growth, but it will fall into a deep hole – and fast – as racing will have to go it alone.
After this, no state government for a generation will help the club fix run-down facilities at Rosehill, Warwick Farm or Canterbury.
And members who voted no must start attending racing at Rosehill again.
The racing public simply doesn't turn up, despite the number of races Winx won there or the number of Slipper winners TJ Smith trained there back in the day.
Ironically, attendance has been hurt by the government's closure of Rosehill train station.
Only 12,111 people attended the Golden Slipper meeting this year, despite enormous promotion from the ATC and Racing NSW.
The governing bodies also heavily back the $10 million Golden Eagle each spring, throwing everything at it, only for Rosehill to resemble a wasteland on the day, with a few thousand attending last year.
In the 2023-24 racing season, fewer than 100,000 attended the 25 meetings, a figure down more than 90,000 from a decade ago.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Perth Now
35 minutes ago
- Perth Now
Game on for state election 'referendum' on AFL stadium
Opponents of a billion-dollar waterfront stadium proposal that would play home to a Tasmanian AFL team vow to step up campaigning if a snap election is called. They will be met with the voices of Tasmanian AFL legends - such as the Riewoldts, Matthew Richardson and Brendon Gale - in an election one analyst describes as a "referendum" on the project. Tasmanian politics was up-ended this week by the successful vote of no confidence in Premier Jeremy Rockliff. Unless the Liberal party opts to remove Mr Rockliff and negotiate a new deal with crossbenchers, an election is set to be called no earlier than Tuesday. It will be the first winter campaign on the island state for more than two decades and the fourth in seven years. Senior Liberal figures including senator Jonno Duniam are calling the prospect of a snap election "nuts". "I would have thought every effort should be put into not going to an election ... the people that lose out most in all this - forget the parliamentarians - it's the people of Tassie," he told ABC Radio. Analysts tip an unpredictable campaign given the nature of the political turmoil, with fresh candidates from the federal election in May adding another dimension. Ex-federal Liberal MP Bridget Archer is viewed as a likely candidate in Bass should Mr Rockliff hang on. Anti-salmon independent Peter George, who ran Julie Collins close in the safe federal seat of Franklin, told AAP he was considering his options. Opposition leader Dean Winter moved the no-confidence motion due to the state budget, which included ballooning deficits and debt forecasts, as well as proposals to privatise state assets. However, it's the stadium that looms as the biggest issue. Veteran political campaigner Brad Stansfield, who has worked on the Liberals' last four election wins, said it would be issue No.1. "At the last election ... we mostly kept it hidden from the campaign," he said on his FontCast podcast. "This campaign is going to be the referendum on the AFL stadium that we haven't yet had. It is coming like a steam train." The roofed Macquarie Point stadium is a condition of the AFL licence, with the state government responsible for delivery and cost overruns. But recent polls suggest Tasmanians are not sold on the need for a new stadium. Labor and the Liberals support the stadium, but Mr Stansfield said Mr Rockliff would be the one who paid the electoral price. "If you don't like the stadium, you will vote against the Liberals," he said. Roland Browne, spokesperson for the anti-stadium Our Place group, told AAP they would campaign if there is an election. Firebrand senator Jacqui Lambie, independent federal MP Andrew Wilkie and acclaimed author Richard Flanagan are among well-known Tasmanians to front their cause. Mr Browne said he foresaw a scenario where one or both of the major parties would join the Greens in opposing the project. "Everybody wants the AFL teams. But the stadium is a millstone," he told AAP. Stadium supporters hope the Devils, who have employed favourite son Brendon Gale as its chief executive, can win over stadium opponents. Senator Duniam said while the state government was copping flack for its struggles to complete the project, the AFL should look to amend the deal or its timelines. "There's one party to this debacle which seems to keeping pretty quiet for the most part and that's the AFL," he said. "How about the AFL actually look at what's going on here because of what they've asked us to do?"
The Advertiser
8 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Judge blocks Trump's Harvard international students ban
A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump from barring US entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. Under a two-page temporary restraining order granted to Harvard, US District Judge Allison Burroughs on Thirsday enjoined Trump's proclamation from taking effect pending further litigation of the matter amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League school and Republican president. The judge ruled Trump's directive prohibiting foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard for the next six months would cause "immediate and irreparable injury" before the courts have a chance to review the case. Burroughs in May had blocked Trump from implementing a separate order prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. Harvard on Thursday amended its lawsuit to challenge the new directive, claiming Trump is violating Burroughs' decision. "The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing. Burroughs' order on Thursday also continued a separate temporary restraining order she issued on May 23 against the administration's restriction on international student enrolment at Harvard. Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied. "Harvard's behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire US student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the US to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the US State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. "The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because non-citizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States — just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multi-front attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump from barring US entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. Under a two-page temporary restraining order granted to Harvard, US District Judge Allison Burroughs on Thirsday enjoined Trump's proclamation from taking effect pending further litigation of the matter amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League school and Republican president. The judge ruled Trump's directive prohibiting foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard for the next six months would cause "immediate and irreparable injury" before the courts have a chance to review the case. Burroughs in May had blocked Trump from implementing a separate order prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. Harvard on Thursday amended its lawsuit to challenge the new directive, claiming Trump is violating Burroughs' decision. "The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing. Burroughs' order on Thursday also continued a separate temporary restraining order she issued on May 23 against the administration's restriction on international student enrolment at Harvard. Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied. "Harvard's behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire US student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the US to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the US State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. "The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because non-citizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States — just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multi-front attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump from barring US entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. Under a two-page temporary restraining order granted to Harvard, US District Judge Allison Burroughs on Thirsday enjoined Trump's proclamation from taking effect pending further litigation of the matter amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League school and Republican president. The judge ruled Trump's directive prohibiting foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard for the next six months would cause "immediate and irreparable injury" before the courts have a chance to review the case. Burroughs in May had blocked Trump from implementing a separate order prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. Harvard on Thursday amended its lawsuit to challenge the new directive, claiming Trump is violating Burroughs' decision. "The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing. Burroughs' order on Thursday also continued a separate temporary restraining order she issued on May 23 against the administration's restriction on international student enrolment at Harvard. Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied. "Harvard's behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire US student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the US to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the US State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. "The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because non-citizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States — just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multi-front attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump from barring US entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. Under a two-page temporary restraining order granted to Harvard, US District Judge Allison Burroughs on Thirsday enjoined Trump's proclamation from taking effect pending further litigation of the matter amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League school and Republican president. The judge ruled Trump's directive prohibiting foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard for the next six months would cause "immediate and irreparable injury" before the courts have a chance to review the case. Burroughs in May had blocked Trump from implementing a separate order prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. Harvard on Thursday amended its lawsuit to challenge the new directive, claiming Trump is violating Burroughs' decision. "The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing. Burroughs' order on Thursday also continued a separate temporary restraining order she issued on May 23 against the administration's restriction on international student enrolment at Harvard. Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied. "Harvard's behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire US student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the US to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the US State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. "The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because non-citizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States — just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multi-front attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students.
SBS Australia
10 hours ago
- SBS Australia
Your guide to what is open over the King's Birthday long weekend
King Charles' birthday is being celebrated on 9 June. His actual birthday is on 14 November. Some stores will have varied trading hours. King Charles' actual birthday might not be until 14 November but many Australians will be preparing to mark a public holiday for the King's Birthday on 9 June. In the Australian Capital Territory, NSW, Tasmania, South Australia and the Northern Territory, and Victoria the public holiday falls on every second Monday in June. However, Queensland observes the monarch's birthday on the first Monday of October. Western Australia usually celebrates at the end of September. It marks WA Day in June. Unlike Christmas Day and Good Friday, most shops are open on the King's Birthday public holiday but may operate on different hours. While schools and universities will be closed, pubs, cafes and restaurants are allowed to stay open on the public holiday. However, some smaller venues may choose to close. Public transport is also expected to be running as usual however may operate on a different timetable. It's recommended to check your state or territories' public transport website to check for any changes. Woolworths stores in South Australia will be closed. However the retailer's stores in NSW, the ACT, Victoria, Queensland, the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Tasmania will be open. Similarly, Coles stores in NSW, the ACT, Victoria, Queensland, the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Tasmania will be open. Stores in South Australia will mostly be closed, however some regional stores may remain open. Aldi and IGA stores have varied opening hours across the country and shoppers should check their nearest store for information.
