Australian Rugby / RA

[mst]

The ASC checks are a tick and flick about a governance framework which isn't tested. Document based checks I believe.

https://www.ausport.gov.au/__data/a...datory_Sports_Governance_Principles_FINAL.pdf

Funny you bring this up. One of the current Super Rugby CEOs is the ex-ASC general manager of the participation and sustainable sports division.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Did the the KPMG, Federal Police, ACT Government & ASIC investigation of the Brumbies land deal, none of which have been made public get raised at the Senate hearing?

 

[jimmydubs]

Did the the KPMG, Federal Police, ACT Government & ASIC investigation of the Brumbies land deal, none of which have been made public get raised at the Senate hearing?

If not and you want it raised make a quick submission

 

[Slim 293]

If not and you want it raised make a quick submission

I think you just made Kenny's day........... Dog with a bone.

 

[Derpus]

Did the the KPMG, Federal Police, ACT Government & ASIC investigation of the Brumbies land deal, none of which have been made public get raised at the Senate hearing?

Whatever happened with that anyway. Sure sounded like were some brown paper bags exchanging hands in that clusterfuck.

 

[Brumby Runner]

The Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 provides that a House of Parliament may impose terms of imprisonment or substantial fines for individuals and corporations as a penalty for contempt. To date the Senate has not had occasion to use either of these penalties, preferring an educative and preventative approach. The Senate has accepted apologies and remedial action, and has encouraged government officials in particular to attend training courses on the rights and obligations of witnesses before parliamentary committees.

I have an inkling that a few journalists have been jailed for contempt in the past. Whether specifically for contempt of the Senate, or otherwise the HofRs, I cannot remember, but I'm sure Maxwell Newton might have been one, and didn't Derrin Hinch also end up in trouble for not naming his sources?

 

[barbarian]

Yeah, i suppose when the Senate has the power to redefine the governance, make up of ARU and future funding for the game just to name a few elements there is not much that can be done to the ARU.

Do they actually have those powers? They can make recommendations, sure, but I don't think they can actually force anyone's hand.

All this will end in, IMO, is a damning report which the ARU will dispute. It will fuel the anger of those in the West but in the end amount to nothing, because like a lot of things in Senate committees, the power to force actual change is very limited.
.

 

[Brumby Runner]

^^^^^ If it comes out as expected, it really should fuel the anger of all thinking rugby supporters in this country. Why have all the other franchises been affected by the inordinate amounts given to the Rebels when it has has had the detrimental outcome of very poor performances across the board and the ultimate demise of one of the more recently better performing sides?

A more equitable distribution of the money would have meant maybe the Tahs, Reds, Brumbies and Force could have had more successful seasons than the annus horribilis that has just occurred.

 

[James Pettifer]

^^^^^ If it comes out as expected, it really should fuel the anger of all thinking rugby supporters in this country. Why have all the other franchises been affected by the inordinate amounts given to the Rebels when it has has had the detrimental outcome of very poor performances across the board and the ultimate demise of one of the more recently better performing sides?

A more equitable distribution of the money would have meant maybe the Tahs, Reds, Brumbies and Force could have had more successful seasons than the annus horribilis that has just occurred.

More recently better performing sides? The Force had a relatively good 2017 winning 6 games out of 15. In 2016, they won 2 games (1 of which was the Sunwolves) and in 2015 they won 3 games. 11 games over the past 3 seasons is not what I would call "recently better performing".

For comparison the Rebels won 15 (1 draw) over the period (even with this years crap year). The Waratahs 23, the Reds 11 and the Brumbies 25.

I think you would also find that the distribution of the top ups would have more of an impact on the performance and the bulk of that money was definitely not going to the Rebels.

 

[mst]

Do they actually have those powers? They can make recommendations, sure, but I don't think they can actually force anyone's hand.

All this will end in, IMO, is a damning report which the ARU will dispute. It will fuel the anger of those in the West but in the end amount to nothing, because like a lot of things in Senate committees, the power to force actual change is very limited.
.

There is a general rule of thumb in government that they don't like business profiting or lining the pockets of private individuals from government funds for nothing and they don't like "public" monies going O/S to benefit other non- Australian entities without being controlled and approved. So if you look at the rules imposed around resources, property ownerships. Funds transfers ( international banking) to name a few they can and have dictated terms and conditions.

So out of the hearings yesterday you would note that the question about the SANZAAR board arrangements was clarified for a reason so was all the SANZAAR deals. Then did you notice the private entity involvement was questioned in particular where the $6Mil to Cox went.

It very conceivable that the report will recomend further reviews and action around the funding and governance Ti ensure the public funding goes to the amateur levels in Australia, not the professional levels, no government funding can be used for offshore deals (like Super Rugby) and governance changes and accountabilities including transparent reporting is mandated as part if it. All of this they can do.

If they do this or similar it will force the hand of all state and territory governments to follow suit to a degree.

It will be interesting if they think Twiggy group deserve some government support and if so (especially to help wa rugby) they won't want the ARU to deal with funding. So again it will force change.

The key fall out is not private entity will want to be involved while all this is in play.

I would guess the for the next session all the lawyers will have warned their clients that the only protection available is public interest immunity and it will be tested as public monies ate involved.

 

[BLR]

More recently better performing sides? The Force had a relatively good 2017 winning 6 games out of 15. In 2016, they won 2 games (1 of which was the Sunwolves) and in 2015 they won 3 games. 11 games over the past 3 seasons is not what I would call "recently better performing".

For comparison the Rebels won 15 (1 draw) over the period (even with this years crap year). The Waratahs 23, the Reds 11 and the Brumbies 25.

I think you would also find that the distribution of the top ups would have more of an impact on the performance and the bulk of that money was definitely not going to the Rebels.

What's your point? The Rebels also got double the funding of the Force and far more than the other teams.

 

[barbarian]

There is a general rule of thumb in government that they don't like business profiting or lining the pockets of private individuals from government funds for nothing and they don't like "public" monies going O/S to benefit other non- Australian entities without being controlled and approved. So if you look at the rules imposed around resources, property ownerships. Funds transfers ( international banking) to name a few they can and have dictated terms and conditions.

I'm not quite sure what you are talking about here. The only Federal cash the ARU receives is through the ASC, and that has pretty tight reporting mechanisms. So not sure how it's 'going O/S' or 'lining the pockets of private individuals' in any way.

It very conceivable that the report will recomend further reviews and action around the funding and governance Ti ensure the public funding goes to the amateur levels in Australia, not the professional levels, no government funding can be used for offshore deals (like Super Rugby) and governance changes and accountabilities including transparent reporting is mandated as part if it. All of this they can do.

I really don't think it is. The ASC funding is due to 7s Olympic status, and designed to fund high performance. I can't see how or why they would direct that to 'the amateur levels' of the game.

If they do this or similar it will force the hand of all state and territory governments to follow suit to a degree.

No it won't. The State deals are done by tourism agencies for content to drive visitation. The funding is provided for the purpose of holding big games, and has nothing to do with grassroots, or governance, or fairness.

The Senate inquiry won't change that at all.

It will be interesting if they think Twiggy group deserve some government support and if so (especially to help wa rugby) they won't want the ARU to deal with funding. So again it will force change.

The key fall out is not private entity will want to be involved while all this is in play.
.

Why would the cash-strapped Federal Government decide to fund Andrew Forrest in any way? I just don't understand your logic.

Of all the factors that would spook potential private partners of the ARU, a Senate enquiry is very low on the list. I think the ARU would be far more worried by crowd numbers, poor results etc. And no senators are ever going to help us with that.
.

 

[Derpus]

There is a general rule of thumb in government that they don't like business profiting or lining the pockets of private individuals from government funds for nothing and they don't like "public" monies going O/S to benefit other non- Australian entities without being controlled and approved. So if you look at the rules imposed around resources, property ownerships. Funds transfers ( international banking) to name a few they can and have dictated terms and conditions.

Bro.

Seriously.

You need to read the news if you think the Australian government is actually run with this rule in mind. To provide a single example, the NSW gov. just agreed to privatize the land titles office - thereby relinquishing control over 'property ownerships' as you say.

 

[Killer]

Bro.

Seriously.

You need to read the news if you think the Australian government is actually run with this rule in mind. To provide a single example, the NSW gov. just agreed to privatize the land titles office - thereby relinquishing control over 'property ownerships' as you say.

depends on whom this pocket lining is benefiting. In this case it is not benefiting Senator Reynolds or any of them so the ARU are potentially in trouble.

 

[Braveheart81]

It's interesting the different takes on this.

My take after listening to a fair bit of yesterday is that very little is likely to come out of this process beyond a report critical of the ARU.

 

[Killer]

It's interesting the different takes on this.

My take after listening to a fair bit of yesterday is that very little is likely to come out of this process beyond a report critical of the ARU.

yes, I have no idea. But what I do know is Senator Reynolds is very smart and I would think very motivated from a WA perspective so potentially she will take it wherever she can because it will benefit her hugely.

 

[Braveheart81]

yes, I have no idea. But what I do know is Senator Reynolds is very smart and I would think very motivated from a WA perspective so potentially she will take it wherever she can because it will benefit her hugely.

At the end of the day this committee only gets to provide a report that the government can then choose to act on or not.

She can't choose the outcome alone.

If it largely comes down to them saying that they should have cut the Rebels instead then how does that sit with Victorian MPs?

I really don't think much is likely to arise from this outside of a report critical of the ARU's actions.

 

[Killer]

At the end of the day this committee only gets to provide a report that the government can then choose to act on or not.

She can't choose the outcome alone.

If it largely comes down to them saying that they should have cut the Rebels instead then how does that sit with Victorian MPs?

I really don't think much is likely to arise from this outside of a report critical of the ARU's actions.

I would think the confidential documents will have a large bearing on this? will she be able to get them released? btw I have not been following this saga.

 

[Killer]

I would think the confidential documents will have a large bearing on this? will she be able to get them released? btw I have not been following this saga.

My only interest is in decreasing the power of the ARU in every possible way and thus empowering TF who can then drain the ARU swamp. I trust that TF will do what is best for Aus rugby, all of Aus.

 

[Slim 293]

TF will do what's best for TF.............