Shooters and Fishers Missing the Mark
Mr Pickin of the Shooters and Fishers Party completely ‘misses the mark’ in his contribution on dog racing in Tasmania.
To describe the Premier’s decision as ‘bowing to fringe activists’ is demonstrably ludicrous and factually incorrect.
A robust EMRS poll taken shortly after the announcement showed that 74% of Tasmanians support the phase out; a huge majority by any measure. Only 14 per cent opposed it (the rest were don’t knows). This result is unsurprising to those who noted the outcome of a big statewide poll by the same company in 2023 which showed very high public disapproval of dog racing.
In the most recent election high-profile candidates who opposed dog racing recorded thumping wins. The sport’s most vocal parliamentary supporter recorded a dismal vote.
On the objective evidence it’s the Premier who is ‘standing with ordinary Tasmanians’ not the SFF.
To assert that phasing out dog racing will ‘devastate’ rural communities is also nonsensical. For proof of that look no further than Saul Eslake’s definitive analysis of May this year which demonstrated that any benefits from dog racing activity are highly exaggerated at best. He described the taxpayer subsidy of the activity as ‘throwing good money after bad’. He further pointed to ABS Census figures indicating that there are very few full-time jobs associated with this form of sport.
It is entirely understandable that participants in the industry are disappointed but those who promulgate fanciful figures and exaggerations are not being good friends to them.
Lastly ‘Tradition’ is a very poor defence when public sentiment so definitively shifts.
In a democracy politicians who note these shifts and respond to them should surely be applauded.
Thank you Premier Rockliff.
Hobart Not Highrise Opposes the Proposed AFL Stadium
What right has the Tasmanian government to cast aside the expert Tasmanian Planning Commission’s (TPC) advice that clearly details the many reasons why the proposed AFL stadium at Macquarie Point should not go ahead? Ignoring this advice sends a clear message to every elected member on Councils, boards etc that they can just ignore expert advice and do what they like. This should not happen and the state government should be setting the example.
The TPC’s expertise is drawn from it’s Commissioners and delegates who bring diverse professional backgrounds to their roles. They have extensive experience in strategic land use planning, regulatory policy, environmental management, legal matters, governance (public and commercial), town planning, local government, state government and private consultancy.
Hobart Not Highrise trusts the TPC. And what right has Treasurer Eric Abetz to call the TPC’s work ‘subjective assessments’?
Saul Eslake’s finance report in August 2024 shows that Tasmania’s net debt, already high would increase by about $500 million a year by 2034/35. Another report by Nicholas Gruen in January 2025 states that the project was ‘displaying the hallmarks of mismanagement’ and that the stadium was ‘on the wrong site’, was selected by just the AFL and the government, was divisive, that the tourism benefits were exaggerated and that the overall effect on the waterfront had not been assessed properly.
Hobart Not Highrise believes that there is not enough space around the site to allow for the entry and more importantly the exit of more than 20,000 patrons. All successful stadia in Australia that we are aware of have huge parklands around them so there is space for the patrons to exit. Imagine 20,000 people flooding into Evans Street! Dark Mofo has a huge number of patrons but they arrive in a procession at night when normal traffic is closed for the parade.
In September 2025 the TPC delivered its final assessment stating that the stadium would be a financial catastrophe, overbearing, unexceptional and not iconic. Also that: “Proceeding with the Project will give rise to irrevocable and unacceptable adverse impacts on Hobart’s spatial and landscape character, urban form and historic cultural heritage.”
The government has ignored the planning schemes, discredited the experts and attempted to pass special laws to enable the stadium. The Labour Party’s ‘me too’ attitude is in thrall of the AFL whereas the Tasmanian parliament is far superior to a single sporting code despite its popularity.
The current funding model has some funds from the Commonwealth, a paltry sum from the AFL (smaller than the CEO’s bonus!) and the rest from the people of Tasmania. Our government says its cap is $375m but the fact that the rest will come from borrowings by the Macquarie Point Development Corporation is just a ruse to pretend that the government is not on the hook for the total. Worse! they are also on the hook for any overrun. With projects of this scale the only way to have no overrun is if the contingency baked into the plan is huge and in this instance we do not believe that this is the case.
Don’t blame the AFL. They came to Hobart, presented a plan and the government just accepted it. However given the rising tide of opposition the AFL should now be prepared to re-negotiate.
According to the government’s own figures the stadium will create 203 full-time-equivalent jobs, less than 0.1% of Tasmania’s total employment.
An alternative stadium, Maq 2.0, was rejected outright by the government. One aspect was extremely attractive: the government’s spend was capped and any cost overrun was at the risk of the proponent. We cannot believe that those in power didn’t see this as a fantastic ‘get out of jail free card’ and embrace it. Even if they didn’t like that proposal they could have sought interest from other parties for a PPP (Public Private Partnership) where the proponents made their money from ancillary development and the government got a stadium for a fixed cost.
Supporting expert planning advice is crucial to reduce uncertainty, to avoid costly revisions and delays and to use this wealth of experience in navigating complex planning processes. Professional advice ensures plans are viable, legally sound and aligned with local policies, maximising the chances of a successful and agreeable outcome. The TPC’s expert planning advice is: ‘Do not build this stadium’.
Hobart Not Highrise calls on all state politicians to vote against this proposed stadium.
– Brian Corr, New Town
Wage Justice Anyone?
Percentage wage rises create inequality. A low-paid public servant may get $70K per year; a high-paid one $200K. A 3% rise gives the low-paid $2,100 per year extra and the high-paid $6,000. The low-paid stays poor; the high-paid moves up a tax bracket – much of that $46,000 goes to Canberra.
Flat rises with percentage cuts would reduce inequality. Public servants are about to strike for better conditions. Along with improved capacity to pay their bills and less stress at work could wage justice be offered too?
– Bob Elliston, Great Bay
TAFE Fee Hikes
The TAFE fee hiking demonstrates to thousands of dollars demonstrates how little the government cares about creativity, especially in the times of now with the AI age and to the fore.
Political influence is rife where nothing tertiary in the public sector, including TAFE. Tasmania is behind the mainland in percentage of the population holding university degrees.
As a student I asked fellow students why they vote for the major parties, they would reply because their parents did and voting for the minor parties is considered by some a wasted vote.
– Karl McBeath, West Hobart
Greyhound Racing Transparency
Until recently Australians could trace every racing greyhound by name or earbrand across the country through a single online system managed by the NSW Greyhound Welfare & Integrity Commission (GWIC). That transparency has now been dismantled.
GWIC has confirmed that “greyhound records that had an end-of-life event will no longer appear on the eTrac Public Portal.” In other words all dead greyhounds have been deleted from the public record.
For Tasmanians this matters. Many greyhounds bred or raced here are sent interstate and the public relies on national data to ensure they are tracked and treated humanely. When those records vanish so does any accountability for their welfare.
Public funding supports greyhound racing in this state. Tasmanians therefore have every right to expect honesty and transparency from an industry that trades on public trust.
When the data disappears so do the dogs. It’s time for the greyhound industry and the governments that enable it to stop hiding the truth.
– Jan Davis
Tasmanian Times (TT) is a community-based news and current affairs service covering the island state of Tasmania. It exists to provide a diverse presentation of Tasmanian issues. TT creates and supports independent media content utilising the best of modern technologies and tried-and-true practices of public-interest journalism.
Support us in expanding our coverage and developing new content by and for Tasmanians.
New initiatives on the way include … what our contributors and readers suggest! Please get in touch with your suggestions.
