It involves the ACT revenue and major issues of public administration which affect the whole ACT community, and to some extent the revenue base of nearly all Australian states and territories.
On Tuesday it was announced that the Victorian TAB was withdrawing its pooling arrangement with the ACT. Under that arrangement bets from the ACT, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory are put in one pool, the super pool. Winning dividends are declared from the large pool. For every $100 bet on a race $85 is returned to the punters, and 15 per cent goes to state and territory governments, the racing industry and operating costs.
About $5 billion a year goes into the pool.
Last year ACTTAB signed a deal with a company called VITAB to enable VITAB to set up a betting shop in Vanuatu aimed at attracting large Asian money. Under it, ACTTAB provided computer links and access to the super pool. In return VITAB paid about one and a half per cent of turnover to ACTTAB. VITAB also paid 85 per cent to punters and a couple of per cent to the Vanuatu Government, leaving some 12 per cent for operating and marketing costs.
The danger, first highlighted by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Tony de Domenico, was that the some of that 12 per cent could be used not only to induce Asian punters, but to induce Australian punters to bet with VITAB, tot he detriment of the ACT revenue.
VITAB promised not to take Australian bets. But how could it tell whether money from Singapore or Hong Kong agents was not coming from Australia? Clearly the Victorian TAB, which provides the lion’s share of the super pool thought there would be leakage. That is the primary reason it has cut the ACT off.
The ACT is now left with a tiny pool. Large and medium punters are bound to desert it because any large bet is likely to distort the pool and result in lower dividends.
There are many unanswered questions for the Minister for Sport, Wayne Berry. Who first approached the ACT with the VITAB proposal? How were they vetted? When did Victoria first notify the ACT that it might pull the pin (before or after Mr Berry waxed lyrical in the Assembly about the wonders of the VITAB deal)? Was the VITAB deal the sole province of Mr Berry or did the whole Cabinet approve? What are the contents of the VITAB contract, in particular is it contingent upon ACT TAB’s access to the super pool? Is the ACT liable for damages if it has to cut off VITAB in order to plead with the NSW TAB for pooling arrangements, given that NSW will not have a bar of VITAB? Why did not Mr Berry and the newly decorporatised TAB foresee that other Australian TAB’s would be horrified at the possibility of off-shore leakage of bets? If it had to go to Vanuatu to attract the Asian dollar, why didn’t ACTTAB set up an agency over which it would have better control?
In short, did some smart big Australian punters pull the wool over Mr Berry’s eyes to give themselves off-shore access to Australian TAB funds with higher returns to the detriment of Australian revenues?