Thursday, 28 August 2025

Bills

Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Steve Dimopoulos:

That this bill be now read a second time.

Sam GROTH (Nepean) (10:08): On behalf of the Liberals and Nationals I rise to make a contribution on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. On this side of the house we also recognise the value of the Formula One Australian Grand Prix to Victoria, economically, culturally and symbolically. But that support does not mean a blank cheque should be written for government when it comes to extra regulation, and there are certain parts of this bill we have serious reservations about, including the proposal to extend the race period from seven to 21 days. On this side we are going to have a balanced approach to the way we approach this bill. As I said, we acknowledge the grand prix is one of Melbourne’s great international events, but we also need to make sure we are standing up for the everyday users of Albert Park – the joggers, the rowers, the golfers, the school students that come through there, the commuters who use it as a thoroughfare to get to work and the local businesses whose lives are disrupted by this event each year. On this side we believe they are just as entitled to consideration from government departments, from the government and from the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC) as both the departments and the race organisers.

Before we get into the details of the bill I think it is worth revisiting a little bit of history on the grand prix here in Melbourne. I know everyone on that side will stand and speak about what a great this event this is, but let us not forget how the event came to Melbourne. I think it is important that it was the vision and determination of a Liberal government that brought the Formula One Grand Prix here to Melbourne.

Luba Grigorovitch interjected.

Sam GROTH: It was former Premier Jeffrey Kennett. We can argue about this one, but it was. I am amazed it has become controversial this early on. I did not even get 2 minutes into my speech. We do not like history in this chamber. In the early 1990s Adelaide’s contract to host the grand prix was approaching its end. South Australia had hosted the event from 1985, but questions were growing about the event’s long-term viability in that city. It was former Premier Jeffrey Kennett, I am not afraid to say it, who saw an opportunity. He recognised that Melbourne with its world-class sporting infrastructure, its cultural vibrancy and its international reputation could and should host the Formula One. They moved decisively and in 1993 secured a contract with Formula One management, led by Bernie Ecclestone, to bring the race to Melbourne from 1996 onwards.

Gabrielle Williams interjected.

Sam GROTH: Come on, do not take it there. We are talking about a bipartisan event we all love. We do not need to go to the gutter, Minister. There were protests in Albert Park at the time about disruptions to the parklands, and there were many critics who said the event would never be embraced in this city. I think we can all stand here and say that has certainly not been the case. The first Melbourne race in 1996 was an incredible success. Crowds flocked to Albert Park. The world’s cameras broadcast Melbourne’s skyline, the lake and the vibrancy of the city, as they still do today. The grand prix immediately embedded itself as a fixture of Melbourne’s major event calendar, and I will say I am glad it still remains a part of that calendar. Personally I am a big supporter of this event, and for those that do not know – unfortunately it was during the 2020 year – I was actually the ambassador for that event prior to coming into this place. How is this? I was an ambassador for the event. I will say one of the perks of being an ambassador for the event is that you get to ride around in a two-seat Formula One car, and unfortunately for me, I did not fit. I was very upset. I had to do a lap in the safety car instead. I was incredibly disappointed, I must say, that the event was cancelled during those COVID years, but I am glad to see it is back. Melbourne has hosted the race every year beside those –

Luba Grigorovitch interjected.

Sam GROTH: It is a nice thing to have some personal attachment. I will say it is great to see the crowds back exceeding 450,000, and this race does deliver billions of dollars in economic benefit. It fills our hotels and restaurants, has cemented its place in the calendar and again will be race 1 as we come into to next year. I think it is also important to mention that Liberal governments have delivered many of Victoria’s major events.

Gabrielle Williams interjected.

Sam GROTH: Why can’t we make this bipartisan? I would say major events in this state have been for a long time, and if you speak to all of these –

Luba Grigorovitch: All thanks to you guys?

Sam GROTH: I literally just said ‘bipartisan’. It has been all sides of this house that have supported major events for a long period of time, and I think it is important that we acknowledge that. Starting with the grand prix, which came here, and the Australian Open, for a long time there has been investment into Melbourne and Olympic Parks by both sides of this house. The Spring Racing Carnival is another event that has had support from both sides of the house, including the Liberals. It was the Kennett government who started our cultural major events program through the 1990s and also delivered the expansion of the arts centre. We can sit here and chirp, but it has been a bipartisan approach. I know members on the other side will take credit for every part of that, but I am happy to stand here and say that our major events calendar has had input from all sides of the house and needs to continue to have all sides, all political parties, supporting the future of that.

The grand prix is not just a race. We know it is a big driver of Victoria’s economy. It contributed a huge amount to gross state product and returned $3 for every $1 investment by the current government, and I give them credit for that. But that should not diminish concerns about the growing reliance of the event on taxpayer subsidies and payments from the government in terms of the loss of the event, and I have raised this directly with the minister, with the minister’s staff and the department and with the Australian Grand Prix Corporation, who I thank for being involved in the briefings on this. They know that is a concern that I have continued to raise since I have held this portfolio, since I came into this place, that we should be better leveraging our major events 365 days a year to make sure the burden on the taxpayers of Victoria is reduced as much as possible.

We have seen in recent years that tax burden, or the payment from government, continue to go up to subsidise the grand prix. It sat at $102 million last year, just over $100 million the year before and $78 million the year before that. It has gone up dramatically in recent years. Even though the event has expanded, you would hope with the expanding numbers and ticket sales coming through the gate that there would be more reliance on bringing down that burden on the Victorian taxpayer and on government payments.

The grand prix supports more than 1600 full-time equivalent jobs across construction, hospitality, tourism, transport and event logistics and fills our hotel rooms, and it carries immense intangible benefits. It sends Melbourne and Victoria out to the world. We have seen how, with things like Drive to Survive bringing in a whole new audience, it gives an opportunity to sell Melbourne. These, I say, are all positive things. I am not going to stand up here and bag everything that goes on. I think that would be wrong to do.

Things like securing the long-term certainty of the race are great – it is another good thing for Melbourne – but I think we also need to look at some of the provisions that have been put into the extension of that contract. I refer to an article in the Age from 18 November 2023, written by Chip Le Grand, which goes into some of those contract negotiations. The article states:

Under a previously undisclosed provision within Victoria’s contract extension to keep the Australian Grand Prix, the state has agreed to meet the cost of new or substantially refurbished corporate hospitality facilities …

That will be a $350 million-plus investment in the new pit building. To get that extension – tickets to the Paddock Club previously have sat around $6000 per head and contributed $12 million to the bottom line of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation – the expanded Paddock Club is due to be completed and the contractual change will come into force. But it also means that $30 million of the revenue will go back now to Liberty Media and leave an even bigger hole to be filled by the government when it comes to the cost being imposed on the Victorian taxpayer.

We know the new terms were reached by the former Premier Daniel Andrews after he personally took over the negotiations from the then AGPC chairman Paul Little and chief executive Andrew Westacott. He sidelined the people he had put in place to make these negotiations to do it himself, and I think there are many people that question whether signing the most profitable part of the race away to a company that makes upwards of $12 billion a year, in Liberty Media, is in the best interests of Victorians. It also rescinded a long-term commercial right enjoyed by the Australian Grand Prix, a revenue stream that contributed to 16 per cent of total sales take. It is going to be interesting over time to see what the long-term effect of giving up that revenue source is going to be.

When it comes to the grand prix – and this may be because of having to plug that $30 million black hole because of the Paddock Club – once again this year we will see a surge in ticketing prices for the event. We understand the huge numbers coming through with international visitation and interstate visitation, but we also want to make sure – just as events like the Australian Open have done with some of their ground pass tickets, their after-5 access and other pieces for children – that these events still remain incredibly accessible to Victorians. This also needs to remain a Victorian event for Victorians, even though it is showcasing us on the global scale. When you look at the ticket prices and some of the increases this year alone, a four-day general admission ticket rose by 24 per cent, and over the past five years the general admission ticket has risen by over 100 per cent. I think there would be some Victorians who want to have access to the race, who are big fans of F1 and motorsport, and who want to make sure this event is still accessible to them whilst understanding that global major events ticket pricing is continuing to rise. I would encourage the government to work with the AGPC to find a way to make the event continually accessible for Victorians as well as those people coming in from interstate. For example, with some of the ticketing prices, the Fangio Grandstand has seen a $245 increase since 2024. I am happy to table some of these numbers for the house.

In the end, more people through the gates is fantastic, but please do everything you can to make it accessible. It is something we would encourage the government to do. The fact that we also support the grand prix does not mean we accept every piece of regulation that the government attaches to it, and I think I have been very clear with the minister’s office, the department and the AGPC about some of our concerns around this bill. I will go through a quick overview before I touch on some of those.

The bill proposes a suite of amendments to the act, and they include extending the race period from seven to up to 21 days; allowing the AGPC to host non-motorsport events with ministerial approval; and introducing public access areas which can be declared, varied or closed by the AGPC with ministerial approval. The bill doubles the contribution to Parks Victoria from $100,000 to $200,000. There is an updating of the definition of ‘grand prix insignia’ and a strengthening of the protections around that, and the bill also shifts acting appointments to the AGPC board from the Governor in Council to the minister. And there are some other minor governance and consequential amendments.

On this side, the opposition will support some of these changes, such as updating the provisions. We think the increase in the Parks Victoria contribution is a good thing. But as I have raised in some of the briefings, I would hope that goes back to remediating the site for those community groups, for the users of the park. We want to make sure it is not just a payment for necessarily staffing or for bureaucrats. We want to make sure it is having a direct impact back on Albert Park.

But the thing that we are struggling with is clause 22, which is the tripling of, or up to a tripling of, that race period. Clause 22 increases the maximum race period from seven to up to 21 days, and this would allow the AGPC to take exclusive control of Albert Park for three weeks each year. I look forward to the member for Albert Park making a contribution on what her local community may be feeling about this, because the feelings and the contributions coming back to this side of the house have been fairly strong from some of those groups – and I will go into some of those soon. But look, this is not a minor administrative change; it represents a profound shift in how Albert Park will be managed for decades.

I understand the race is growing, and I have had this conversation with both the AGPC and the department. The race period has been seven days for decades. Construction and dismantle works have always extended beyond those seven days, but the formal lockout of the community has been limited. I know the bill says up to three weeks, but I think we all know that that will probably be used as much as needed, and I think the concern of those communities is it will be the 21 days. It might not seem like much, but the impact on local users would be immense. For three weeks each year the sailing and rowing clubs will be locked out of the lake. The golfers will lose their course for an extended period of time, more than they already do. Schools will possibly lose classrooms. There are sporting facilities they will lose. Commuters – this is probably one that I am not sure has been mentioned – would also be forced onto things like the busy Queens Road to make their possible cycling commute in amongst traffic. So while this provision is being used as a safety measure, I think there are other safety measures that may not quite have been taken into consideration. And of course residents will also be denied access to their local park.

The government has argued that the extension is necessary for safety, and we have had considerable conversations on this matter. They cite WorkSafe concerns that cranes operate on public roads while pedestrians and cyclists pass nearby, that fans trespass into construction zones for selfies and that vandalism has occurred. It is true, no doubt; it is a huge operation. We are talking about putting a racetrack onto a park. This is a public park that has to be built on each year to be able to facilitate this race. There are trucks and there are contractors that move into the park. It is the largest temporary street circuit in the world. So there is no dispute on this side of the house that safety is important, but for us, the striking thing is the absence of the evidence that has been provided. We have made repeated requests to the government and to the AGPC about providing concrete examples of accidents that have happened during the existing seven-day race period that have caused serious harm to members of the public. Instead we have had incidents cited involving trespassing, vandalism and unauthorised gatherings. These problems exist regardless of whether the declared period is seven or 21 days, because I am pretty sure those vandals do not check the Government Gazette to find out when it is closed and trespassers do not respect legislative definitions.

We still remain totally unconvinced of the necessity or benefit related to the extension of the race period, and on this side of the house we do not believe in regulation for the sake of regulation and we do not believe in locking out communities for the convenience of a corporation or the government. So I encourage the minister’s office and the department to come up with some of those things. We have asked again. We are going to have 10 days before this heads to the Council, but if we cannot get the concrete evidence of the safety, necessity and the related benefits, we will seek to work with the crossbench in the other place to remove the proposed extension from the bill. So I give you notice that it is the intention of this side of the house to work to have that clause amended back to seven days unless we can get that concrete evidence.

The bill also expands the AGPC’s legal power at the expense of community access without providing the evidence that it makes anyone safer. As I mentioned, for many residents it will actually make their lives less safe. To use an example, I was contacted by Wendy Pakes. Wendy is a local resident who cycles through Albert Park each day as she commutes to her workplace in Carlton. She is in her 60s. She has explained that during the current build and dismantle period, when sections of the park are closed, she is forced to divert onto major roads. In her words:

My usually pleasant and safe ride becomes one of dodging cars on major roads, at peak period. As a woman in my 60s, I already take about 20 minutes longer for my commute to avoid traffic.

Wendy also went on to say:

I am horrified at the suggestion that the AGPC wants to extend the time of park closure to three weeks. This is a public park. The amenity of the park should not be reduced to gratify large corporate organisations.

For Wendy the extension is not a safety measure; it is completely the opposite. It forces her into heavier traffic for a longer period of time, and it exposes her to greater danger. I think there is a little bit of irony in the bill that, justified on public safety grounds, it may in practice make things more dangerous for the very people that it displaces.

I have also had a lot of community consultation and feedback from sporting clubs. The Albert Park Women’s Golf Club wrote:

Our club has been playing at the park for over 72 years. The effects of the Grand Prix already have a negative impact on our enjoyment of our sport. These amendments … make it worse.

The golf course is currently closed to us for three to four weeks to facilitate the build of infrastructure prior to the race and then its removal after the race. But the negative effects of this work are felt before and well after these closure dates.

Not only are the club is concerned about the inconvenience and about wellbeing, but they believe it will significantly and negatively impact their physical, financial and general wellbeing:

These concerns go far beyond inconvenience – they affect our physical health, financial well-being … social connections, and the long-term sustainability of Albert Park as a … shared public asset.

We have also had concerns from rowing and sailing clubs facing the prospect of losing the lake for three weeks at their peak season. I have a letter from the Albert Sailing Club, which I am happy to quote from. They have sought special arrangements in regard to accessing their clubrooms and parking. For 20-plus years they have been dealing with the lockout for a seven-day period, but the extension actually means that the club will suffer firm financial loss. They talk about the number of race days which they lose being incredibly more significant, so it is hard for them to quantify the financial figures lost. They can try to do it based on previous years. Previously they have been locked out for one weekend and five days total from using their facility. They will now lose up to three weekends and a number of race days during what is a fantastic time for Melbourne in that time of year with the weather, but access to the lake for an extended period of time would possibly disadvantage them in terms of gaining members and keeping members within that period during a time when they want to use it.

I also had feedback from the Lord Somers Camp and Power House. I was reached out to by a financial member and volunteer, someone who has been there for a long period of time. They have been with Lord Somers Camp for 14 years, and they said:

[QUOTE AWAITING VERIFICATION]

The bill creates concerns about access to Power House, which is primarily a community-based hub for a range of community programs, including the one I lead. It will also have potential impact on not-for-profit organisations, social enterprises and other revenue, and despite early conversations I understand have taken place with the government and the AGPC, I personally feel the Parliament needs to explore a more balanced outcome.

I think this is the feedback that seems to be coming through. I know the government opened up consultation for a couple of weeks, and I am sure they have, through Engage Victoria, read a lot of this feedback. It seems very, very consistent from the groups within that area – not everyone – that they accept to a degree that the grand prix is here to stay, absolutely, but they just want to feel like they are not losing access to their community facilities, which remain so important to them.

Residents and commuters are equally affected. Thousands use Albert Park each week to walk, to jog, to cycle and to walk their dogs. For three weeks those ordinary activities will be denied. Save Albert Park in their briefing described Albert Park as inner Melbourne’s lung and lifeblood and argued that the government is treating it as nothing more than a racetrack and a corporate entertainment venue, and that is a feeling and perception they say is growing amongst residents. They feel that their park is being corporatised and their access subordinated to the convenience of AGPC and global companies. We can say that feedback was sought, but many of those community groups said that the two-week consultation period just was not enough for them to be able to speak to all of their members and actually weigh up what some of the financial implications and physical implications would be for those groups. ‘Probably not enough consultation’ is the feedback for the government in terms of what they are going to try to do to mitigate some of those circumstances.

The bill also introduces public access areas, supposedly to allow some of the parts of Albert Park to remain open during the race period. On paper it sounds like a bit of a safeguard to this provision, but in reality the safeguards are weak. AGPC can revoke or close public access areas with ministerial approval or for up to three days in an emergency simply by publishing a notice on a website. Critically, failure to publish online does not invalidate the closure. So while they are required to publish the closure, this does not actually mean, if they do not, that the closures do not happen. That means a resident could turn up at the park only to find the gate locked with no warning. There is no statutory requirement for signage, SMS alerts or direct tenant notification. We do not believe that is transparent. It is administrative convenience dressed up as public access.

This is something I have been strong on for quite some time and I have not been backwards in coming forwards on. We support the idea of AGPC hosting non-motorsport activities and events to leverage something like the Australian Grand Prix and the staff that they have. At the moment they are operating a four-day race period for the Formula One and a three-day race period for the MotoGP. The staff that they have and the expertise they have within that organisation – and I would say in a lot of our major sport organisations and major event organisations in Victoria – could be further utilised. A very good example was given to me when I met recently, with the member for Polwarth, with people from the Cadel Evans road race. That is an event which receives some assistance from this government in terms of marketing and putting on staff and trying to activate that event each year. But there is an example of something that could possibly lean on some of the staff or the expertise within AGPC – they are already being paid; they are already on the books – to possibly try and reduce the burden on this government and on the taxpayer when it comes to a small event of that size. So I absolutely encourage the government to do everything it can to use the expertise in an organisation like the AGPC or any other organisations that may be available to it to offer support to some of those events in Victoria that are currently needing to be propped up. Anywhere we can try to find savings to maximise those events I think is a very, very good thing.

But I will also say if AGPC decides to go out and run other events outside of motorsport, we need to be cautious, because the commitment to the grand prix each year has become in excess of $100 million in the budget on top of what the race revenue is, and we need to make sure that we do not further increase the burden on taxpayers by running extra events. So while we encourage those extra events to go ahead, we need to make sure there is proper oversight of those events and that they are truly commercial. We spruik the economic benefit to the state of people that spend when they come here for these events, but it has also got to reduce the burden on the budget. The economic benefit is fantastic for those local businesses – for our hotels, for our tourism and hospitality operators – but it also needs to reduce the burden on the budget. So we want to make sure that we see proper oversight, because we need to make sure that does reduce rather than increase that burden. I encourage the minister to do everything he can to make sure that when those events are put into the calendar and the AGPC does come forward with an idea it is going to actually reduce the burden on the taxpayer.

I have mentioned briefly the Parks Victoria contribution rising from $100,000 to $200,000 – it is welcome, but it is modest. We need to make sure, as the permanent tenant, Parks Victoria has that site and continues to remediate it and get the community assets in the park back to a state to be available for the community as quickly as possible, especially considering we are investing – well, the state is investing – $350 million in that new pit building. We want to make sure that is also available as a public access point and delivers benefit to the people of Albert Park.

I just want to touch quickly on the human rights and charter issues. The statement of compatibility acknowledges the bill limits the charter right to freedom of movement. For up to 21 days now each year residents will be barred from a Crown land park reserved for public recreation. I know the government says it is justified on safety grounds, but as I have already mentioned, I believe it is hard to justify on safety grounds unless you can provide the evidence – and not anecdotal evidence of a near-miss of a forklift but actual evidence as to why this is needed. I continue to press the government and the department to try to get us that evidence before this bill goes to the Council. I cannot more strongly urge it: please get us that evidence.

There are some other small amendments. The bill allows the minister rather than the Governor in Council to appoint acting members and an acting chairperson of the board. While it is administratively efficient – it centralises power – we want to make sure that this does not increase the risk of politicisation of appointments and reduce the proper oversight in terms of those positions.

As I have said, we will not be opposing this bill here in the Assembly. We support the grand prix and we support some of the provisions. It does fix some of the issues that have been raised by AGPC and that have been raised by me in this portfolio over the last three years or so. I am a big grand prix fan, as are many of us on this side. Do not get us wrong; we love this event. But as I have said, we have grave concerns over the extension of the race period. We need that evidence on safety incidents. For us it looks like regulation for the sake of regulation and it risks harming community access and making life for some of those residents, like Wendy Pakes, less safe. And she is just one that reached out; I am sure it is the same for many.

I am sure I will get some barbs here as I say it – the grand prix is a Liberal legacy. It is something that this side of the house brought to Victoria. You can try to own it as much as you want – it was the Liberals who brought the event here. We will continue to support it. We will continue to make sure we defend it. We will continue to make sure it is done in the right way. And actually, while I have 1 minute, I was going to wrap up, but I just want to raise – and I am sure the government has done its research on this – that this year the Las Vegas Grand Prix is going to happen from 20 to 22 November. For context in terms of the race period lockdown: in the lead-up to the Las Vegas Grand Prix the strip sees overnight closures for weeks ahead while barriers and lighting go in, similar to what we do here. But come race week – understanding that the Las Vegas race period starts on a Thursday and finishes on a Saturday and is a little bit different to other weeks – their first full shutdown happens early on the Wednesday morning, from midnight to 6 am. Then from Thursday to Saturday the strip is locked down each night from 7 pm till around 2 to 4 am the next morning. So the overnight prep is done weeks before, but the full strip closures do not actually happen until literally days before the race. If it can be done in other areas, such as Las Vegas, which is incredibly busy, I encourage the government to look at how it can be done here in Victoria as well.

Anthony CIANFLONE (Pascoe Vale) (10:38): Just a slight indulgence if I may: I want to extend my prayers, thoughts and condolences to all members of Victoria Police, particularly following the tragic deaths of Detective Leading Senior Constable Neal Thompson, Senior Constable Vadim De Waart and the entire Porepunkah community. I note the member for Ovens Valley is here too, so from my community to his, our thoughts and prayers are with you as they are with our Victoria Police members across Fawkner and Brunswick stations in my community. I would like to also extend the prayers and thoughts of my community to the Stonehaven community in Geelong following the terrible bus crash involving 28 primary school students.

I rise to speak in support of the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025, and in doing so I would like to firstly commend the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, Minister Dimopoulos, and his team for bringing this bill to the chamber. I also commend the local member for the area, the member for Albert Park, for her work, particularly on the community side of things. And I am very pleased to say that I am the lead speaker on this side of the house. I have got pole position on this side of the house when it comes to speaking on this bill. I just want to acknowledge and commend the member for Nepean for taking his full 30 minutes as well on the bill. He completed the racetrack, he completed all the laps of the circuit, but I do not know if he came up as a McLaren finisher. I think he was more of a Haas finisher, bringing up the back of the line there. But he did a good job completing his full 58 laps.

Of course Victoria is the major events, tourism and cultural capital of Australia and the world and, as highlighted just in yesterday’s Herald Sun, according to a national study for the Seasonal Experiences Index, Melbourne and regional Victoria remain among the top places for tourism this winter, with more international and interstate tourists continuing to visit Victoria, and Victoria experienced a 14 per cent growth in visitors in this period. It was the Mornington Peninsula, the member for Nepean’s community, which experienced the highest levels of visitation with increases of 33 per cent, and that was driven by growth in spa and wellness experiences of 42 per cent and 34 per cent respectively. That also follows off the back of us as a government recently releasing a wellness tourism strategy just last week. The study also named Melbourne and Victoria as the standout locations for winter tourism, well ahead of Surfers Paradise, Cairns, Sydney, Port Douglas and the Blue Mountains.

This of course is no accident. Our tourism and visitor economy continues to grow and burgeon because of our ongoing investments into more events and experiences that continue to attract more people throughout the year that are anchored by of course the Australian Grand Prix – this very event that we are talking about through this bill – the Australian Open and the Melbourne flower and garden show as well. I just want to acknowledge the Melbourne flower and garden show and the nursery and garden industry, who are here in the building this week. They run the Southern Hemisphere’s largest premier horticulture event, third in the world only behind Chelsea and Hampton in the UK, with 100,000 visitors annually coming here to Melbourne every year since the event’s inception in 1995. The sector employs 24,000 people. It is worth $2.5 billion to the state’s economy, and I just want to acknowledge Craig Taberner, the CEO of Nursery & Garden Industry Victoria, and David Reid from the association as well, who is from my community. Of course it is also events through the National Gallery of Victoria, the AFL Grand Final weekend, the Spring Racing Carnival, the Boxing Day Test and so much more that continue to grow and support our visitor economy.

As highlighted by Minister Dimopoulos, as of March 2025 our visitor economy is now worth $40 billion. It is one of our biggest economic drivers, with 288,000 jobs associated. The international travellers spend has hit $9.3 billion, with record hotel bookings and nights recently in July off the back of the Wallabies and British Lions event, the Lego Star Wars event, Melbourne Winter Masterpieces, French Impressionism at the NGV, the Frida Kahlo exhibition and the international ballet at Hamer Hall, which I took my daughters to go and see recently. It was absolutely sensational, I have got to say – very impressive. And that all led to a 94.7 per cent hotel occupancy rate across the CBD, with 25,000 hotel rooms booked. It was the busiest ever June as well, with 870,700 hotel rooms booked across greater Melbourne and the busiest hotel season from the start of the year up until July. The Tourism Research Australia statistics of June 2025 also show and confirm Melbourne and Victoria as the top overnight destinations for interstate tourists, with 861,000 visitors, well outperforming Sydney. This, again, is because of our events calendar but also because of the infrastructure we have helped deliver and support over the years.

There have been record visits via Melbourne Airport, with 11.9 million international visitors over the 2024–25 financial year, 8.3 per cent growth, and January alone experienced 3.3 million visitors through the gates, which included 600,000 internationals. New flights have been secured from Hong Kong through Shenzhen Airlines as well. New hotels have opened in the last 12 months – the 1 Hotel, Melbourne Place, Lanson Place Parliament Gardens and the Adina in Pentridge, Coburg, of course. The total hotel room capacity is now at 65,500 across Victoria.

Of course a key anchor to that burgeoning visitor economy remains the Australian Grand Prix. The Australian Grands Prix Act 1994 has been in force for over 30 years. It empowers the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to hold the Formula One Grand Prix at Albert Park and the Australian Motorcycle Grand Prix, the MotoGP, at Phillip Island. These annual events have been features of our major events calendar of course since 1996 and 97 respectively. The grand prix provides a significant contribution to the Victorian visitor economy, driving visitation spend and contributing to the vibrancy and livability of Victoria and promoting Melbourne and Victoria to a global audience. This year’s event holds the record for the highest attendance weekend sporting event ever staged in Melbourne as of 2025. The grand prix increased Victoria’s gross state product by $323.9 million. It contributed at least $268 million to our economy, and it generated an estimated $3.08 in economic impact for the state for every dollar we invested as a government. It supports an estimated 1600 annual full-time equivalent direct jobs through roles such as event construction and hospitality.

This year record crowds – 465,000 fans – came to the event, which is a massive increase on the pre-COVID levels of 2019, of just 140,000 fans. It is a tremendous growth, and we have secured it here up until 2037.

The original Australian Grand Prix Act was created in 1994 and ensuring that it remains fit for purpose is essential. As the event grows in popularity the Australian Grand Prix Corporation is now setting up and dismantling the event outside of that seven-day race period, and as far as I am aware and understand, it is the biggest demountable racetrack precinct in the world. This means more construction workers and vehicles are operating in public areas beyond the race period as the event expands in terms of visitation experiences, and that potentially puts pedestrians, cyclists and other vulnerable road users at risk.

The proposed changes in this bill include extending the race period for parts of Albert Park from seven days up to 21 days while protecting public access, allowing essential works to be completed in a controlled environment to create a safer and more secure park during the race period; increasing the annual payment to Parks Victoria, supporting the maintenance and upkeep of Albert Park, from 100,000 to $200,000; and providing the opportunity to increase that compensation through regulation. It enables the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to host non-motorsport events, potentially bringing new and more exciting events to Victoria. It requires the AGPC to provide six months advance notice of a new proposed non-motorsport associated event, subject to ministerial approval. Other corporate intellectual property updates are also provided for in the legislation, including the capacity for the minister to appoint an acting chairperson. To help inform the implementation of the bill, a community consultation process is also going to be underway to help ensure Albert Park users and members of the local community are informed about these proposed amendments and how they can be best implemented. People can go to the engage.vic.gov.au website to have their say or reach out to their local member for Albert Park, I am sure.

Along with this bill we are also investing to deliver a new, modern and fit-for-purpose pit building for the grand prix to secure its future, with 14 garages and community access to spaces for sport and recreation outside the race period. Of course we are working to preserve and enhance the Australian F1 experience through this bill and through the investments that we are making. Again, I commend the member for Albert Park for her efforts throughout all of this process.

I acknowledge as well some of the concerns that were raised by the member for Nepean, noting that the opposition will not be opposing the bill but potentially will move amendments in the upper house. He referred to clause 22, around that seven-day to 21-day notice. My message to the member for Nepean is that this bill essentially is about safety – the safety of the community living in and around the precinct. He wanted to cite examples as to why we need to expand these provisions to make things safer. The first thing I would say to the member for Nepean is: why should it take a death or something serious to happen for safety to be improved? Point 2, which he appears to have forgotten, is that there already has been a death at Albert Park. In 2001 a race steward was killed in very tragic circumstances, and learnings were implemented from that following the coroner’s report so that we can make sure it can never happen again. We need to do the same through this bill to make safety the priority for the community now as well.

I commend the member for Nepean in some respects too. He did not talk down our state’s tourism economy like he usually does through his contributions, because he usually does sound like the shadow minister for tourism for Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and New South Wales. He wanted to talk about contract negotiations around the grand prix. He went to the LIV Golf experience in Adelaide, let us not forget. He said to the media that he would negotiate to bring that event here to Victoria, and the very next day the South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas announced a contract extension of the LIV Golf tournament to 2031.

Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (10:48): I will say it again, and I will say it any time I get the chance to talk about motorsport in this place: in Mildura we put food on your plate and champions on racetracks. Obviously the name of the bill is the Australian Grand Prix Amendment Bill 2025, but my electorate is, let us say, the centre of Australia when it comes to producing motorsport champions – although we have not been able to produce a grand prix driver. The one thing we lack is a road track, and I will get to government investment in motorsport on a broader level a little bit later on.

Let me begin by first saying what all Victorians know, and the member for Nepean pointed it out: the Australian Grand Prix is one of the jewels in our sporting calendar.

Members interjecting.

Jade BENHAM: There is a bit of conversation happening over there. It is quite distracting – no, it is not.

I am a huge motorsport fan. In fact the member for Frankston and I co-chair the parliamentary friends of the Australian Grand Prix and motorsport. That is how much of an enthusiast I am. The grand prix does indeed place Melbourne and Victoria on the world stage. We heard from the member for Nepean about how much it does for the state’s economy and that it is a legacy of the coalition government. But make no mistake, the road to Albert Park runs through Mildura. Do not think about that too hard. It is a metaphor. But let me talk about the pedigree that Mildura has produced. I could go back further, but I will go back to the 1980s. We could have a little pop quiz – you might know of a race car driver. V8s are more my discipline, motorbikes. I prefer two wheels to four wheels. But if we are going to talk about motorsport with four wheels, I do prefer a V8 supercar over Formula One but still enjoy the grand prix. Fun fact: in a former life I worked at the Australian Grand Prix as a –

A member interjected.

Jade BENHAM: I was not a grid girl, no. I was a cook for the security staff – fun fact. But I did it because I got a pass for the entire weekend of the grand prix, so it was worth cooking a few burgers for the security team. Going back to the Mildura pedigree in motorsport, a driver called Larry Perkins you may have heard of. How many Bathurst championships has he won? He has won six: three with the great Peter Brock, one with Russell Ingall and one with Gregg Hansford. Laz still actually lives out near Murrayville and farms out there. His son Jack is an enduro racer. I had the opportunity to catch up last week with Cam Waters, who is currently racing on the Tickford Racing team.

Gabrielle Williams interjected.

Jade BENHAM: You have had a moment with him? He gives most of the ladies that reaction – a bit short for me, but he is lovely. I will take a moment to shout out to Cam. He has just announced that he is going to be a father with his partner Brooke, so that is lovely. Surprisingly – because these motorsport enthusiasts are Mr Intensity – Cam has a little side hustle, a business in distilling whisky.

Gabrielle Williams interjected.

Jade BENHAM: Yes indeed. The Minister for Public and Active Transport might like to join me in my office later this afternoon. She can sample some Waters Whisky or buy it at waterswhisky.com – shameless plug. It is delightful. We had a little session with Cam and his cousin Josh. Josh is a four-time Australian Superbike champion, Mildura boy – runs a small business in Mildura still. He is racing at Phillip Island next weekend, in fact. I will take my husband there; as a wonderful birthday and Father’s Day gift I will take him to watch who I want to watch on the Superbike. What a lucky husband.

Toby Hederics – let us talk about Toby. This is my kind of racing. He is an enduro motorcycle rider. He can do incredible things on a motorcycle. Toby last year – it might have been the year before – qualified for the Dakar Rally by being the fastest rookie at the Rallye du Maroc in Morocco. A ripping bloke from, again, a motorsport family, he ended up finishing as the second place rookie in the Dakar Rally earlier this year. Honestly, what kind of goal do you set after that? Rick and Todd Kelly are another couple of champions. Rick I think won one Supercars Championship. No, he won Bathurst twice – won the championship. He finished second another time when he was racing with his brother on the team, so there you go. Rick – again, the business acumen of these drivers – is currently constructing Trentham Waters, which is an amazing Palm Springs-style resort, so you will have to come and visit. I invite everyone, when it is finished eventually, to come and visit this amazing resort, but it is being built on the New South Wales side, because he could not get the planning permits and get around the red tape on the Victorian side. That should be open soon.

Darren Morgan is another one; he was a four-time Top Fuel racing champion. Phil Lamattina – let me tell you something about Phil Lamattina. He has won two Top Fuel racing championships. Who in this chamber has beaten two-time Top Fuel racer Phil Lamattina on a drag strip? The member for Mildura has beaten him twice in a Ford Ranger, and I will hang on to that for as long as I live, probably. And Leigh Adams was a world-class speedway rider who represented Australia all over the world in speedway and lives in Mildura, again, which is fabulous.

As you can see, motorsport is in Victoria’s DNA, and in fact I would say it runs stronger through Mildura than it does through Albert Park for the 21 days around the grand prix. However, if the government is serious about supporting motorsport in this state, then it has to look beyond the CBD and beyond Albert Park. Champions like the ones I have just mentioned that come out of the Sunraysia region need support. Local clubs, grassroots clubs and members need support, and they need investment. Josh Waters has won – I will not say five, but he could win five this year, and he is 56 points ahead, touch wood. I am Italian, I am very superstitious – touch wood. He has won four. We do not have a road track in Mildura. This is a guy that has got two kids, a beautiful wife and runs a small business. Every time he needs to go and test a bike or practice, he has got to go to Sydney. It does not make sense. Like I said, we have not produced any Formula One racers – we do not have a road track. That is the kind of investment that I am talking about: if this government is serious about motorsport in Victoria and serious about growing it and growing that legacy, start investing in local clubs at grassroots levels so we can get juniors involved, and new juniors that may not have the pedigree like the Kelly brothers or like the Waters family, so that we can keep producing generation after generation of champions like those I have just spoken about.

The grand prix matters – everyone in this place knows that. As the member for Nepean said earlier, we are not opposing this bill. We are concerned about the length of time, but we are not opposing it. The event and motorsport, like I have said, are worth protecting and promoting, but this bill is overreach. It locks out locals – again, those grassroots community members, the sports clubs, the rowing clubs, the runners and the walkers – and it has happened without evidence, without consultation and without accountability. So those of us on this side will always support the grand prix. I personally will always support motorsport, because, like I said earlier, I am a motorsport enthusiast. I do not really mind what discipline it is, but I do much prefer the big, chunky ones – the V8s and motorcycles. Like I have said, I can tell you that from Larry Perkins’s six Bathurst triumphs to Josh Waters’s four – (Time expired)

Jackson TAYLOR (Bayswater) (10:59): It is a great pleasure to rise and speak on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025 and of course great to follow the member – lots of passion for motorsport and lots of passion for her local community and passion for the Australian Grand Prix. These seem to be some key themes moving through this place today when debating this very important bill, a bill which talks to the strength of Melbourne as not just Australia’s sporting capital but indeed the sporting capital of the world, and that is something that we are all very proud of here in Melbourne. We are absolutely the place to be – I have seen that on a numberplate before. There are a whole range of other things that make Melbourne what it is, but certainly our events calendar is indeed one of them. And of course it is always a great pleasure to first thank and acknowledge some of the people who have worked incredibly hard – all the people in the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC), all the staff at the minister’s office and all the people who do the hard work at the department level.

I know that Minister Dimopoulos as well, who is a little bit under the weather this week – yes, I know you are not supposed to mention their name; he is a great guy, though – will be watching every single minute of this, and he will be shaking his head.

Vicki Ward: He will be if you’re on your feet. How could he not?

Jackson TAYLOR: Yes, 100 per cent. I tell you what, Minister, he will be shaking his head at this horrible, lacklustre contribution I am making and will continue to make. I just want to do him proud.

Jade Benham interjected.

Jackson TAYLOR: I do not yield. He will be disappointed. I can only try my best and live up to the fine work by the member for Mildura in her previous contribution. But I give a big thankyou to everyone involved and a big thankyou to everyone who makes the grand prix the great success it is. No doubt I will continue to spend many more minutes talking about the great race that it is.

It was great to hear the member for Pascoe Vale before talking about his passion for the race, his involvement in motorsport more broadly and of course talking a bit about some of the detail of the impact that it has on Melbourne’s and Victoria’s economy, because it has a significant impact. It was great to hear the member for Pascoe Vale reflect on that, and I am looking forward to hearing the member for Albert Park make a fantastic contribution on this bill as well. I know the member for Albert Park is a fantastic representative of her local community and has made a number of representations when it comes to this bill on behalf of her community.

I was talking to the member for Bundoora before as well, and he told me this was the second race that stops a nation. I thought, how true – it absolutely is. It has come a very, very long way. I remember going to the grand prix in the days of Mark Webber. I was a huge F1 fan, less so these days with this job.

John Mullahy interjected.

Jackson TAYLOR: I do like Piastri, member for Glen Waverley. He is very unassuming – very chill. He is very good on the Instagram reels.

John Mullahy: I spoke to his dad last weekend.

Jackson TAYLOR: Did you really? Very good. Hansard is going to be like ‘Didn’t hear any of that,’ but they are going to try their best. It will just say ‘asterisk inaudible asterisk’. Fantastic. I like this guy – very good. No, Oscar Piastri – great guy. He has one of the closest leads at the half-time break of the year. I was flipping through Instagram on F1, looking at all the half-time leads over the past few years, and I tell you what, between Piastri and Norris it is going to be absolutely phenomenal in the McLarens. It is great to see McLaren back up and about, because McLaren have been nowhere to be found for many, many years. It is great to see an Australian in a winning car for once; it seems like Oscar Piastri has finally got a car that does not come second, like Webber unfortunately did back in the day with Sebastian Vettel. I still remember ‘multi 21’ – multi 21 broke my heart. I was watching that race. Seb Vettel won the world championship that year, and I think Webber came second or third. It was his best finish for the year, but this would have made a huge difference in this race. Red Bull Racing team said, ‘Multi 21, Seb,’ which was code for ‘Don’t take over the lead. This is your teammate. Let him get the victory. This is the agreed strategy at this point.’ But Sebastian Vettel ended up breaking the hearts of millions of Australians at that race. I cannot quite remember which one it was; it was not the Australian Grand Prix. There might possibly have been respectful protests if it had occurred in Australia.

My love for the grand prix has gone many, many years back, and it is great to see many Australians pick up a love for the sport as well. There are so many people that I did not even think of that would be fans of F1 who have watched the Drive to Survive Netflix series.

A member interjected.

Jackson TAYLOR: A fantastic show – seven seasons in. I tell you what, there are so many people who now are F1 fanatics. They are turning up to coffee catch-ups with me wearing McLaren paraphernalia or Ferrari paraphernalia. It is absolutely wild; it is next level. But it is fantastic to see. It is such an exciting sport, and it is also a sport that has come a long way in terms of safety. Of course there is never any chance you want to take, and it is really great to see that the sport itself puts the safety of its drivers and all the people who work in pit lane and everybody in the sport first and foremost. It is great to see that safety has taken many leaps forward, certainly since the 1970s and 80s, and certainly in the time that I have been watching, especially with the halos, which have been a significant development in terms of safety – particularly for drivers in collisions, which we certainly see less than we used to. We see them, and we are always in shock and awe and we are always hoping that they are okay. I am really glad to see that safety has certainly come a long way and been developed to look after drivers.

Of course we know that, as I said before, Melbourne is certainly the sporting capital not just of Australia but of the world. We have every single event. We have got the Melbourne Cricket Club – we have got the G. I love Melburnians, and I love Australians. The Melbourne Cricket Ground was too long, then we called it the MCG, and then we decided, ‘No, that’s too long. We’re just going to call it the G.’ Soon we are just going to call it the ‘Guh’ at some point – terrible joke, terrible joke, terrible joke. But it is one of the world’s finest stadiums. People from all over the world come here and marvel at it, and they are in awe. The member for Malvern has just walked in, grin on his face. He is in awe as well. Member for Malvern, are you are a fan of the G?

Michael O’Brien: The what?

Jackson TAYLOR: The G, the Melbourne Cricket Ground, the MCG. Have you been to an Ashes test at the G?

Michael O’Brien: I have been to many Ashes tests at the MCG.

Jackson TAYLOR: Fantastic. I tell you what, the Ashes – fantastic. We can look forward to some fantastic – are the Ashes back this year at the G?

Michael O’Brien: This year.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Juliana Addison): Through the Chair.

Jackson TAYLOR: Through the Chair – thank you very much, Acting Speaker. How dare I. Yes, fantastic. I am looking forward to the cricket this year. It is going to be an absolute banger.

Michael O’Brien interjected.

Jackson TAYLOR: Yes, Scotty Boland. He is going to lift. He is up and about. And I tell you what, it is not just the G. Obviously we have got AFL and we have got the NRL. I am less of a fan of the NRL; I do not quite understand it. It does not matter how many games I watch, I will never understand the rules. I am trying, and I am going to keep trying, I promise. We have got the tennis, the Australian Open – absolutely fantastic. How good is the Australian Open? Next level. It is great to see so many people up and about at Melbourne Park, coming down, enjoying the sport, enjoying the tennis, enjoying all that Melbourne has to offer.

What else have we got? We have got the spring carnival, which is fantastic. As the member for Bundoora was saying, the grand prix is the second race that stops the nation; of course the first race that stops the nation is the Melbourne Cup. Fantastic – the first Tuesday of November. It is the only time of the year I will put a little bet on. I have done well in previous years – last year not so well. But I am happy to say goodbye to $20 for the once-a-year occasion, as a lot of Victorians do.

Locally as well we know that we have lots of great events right across this state, as many members I am sure will pick up here today on this piece of legislation. We even had the Wiggles in Knox, and I think that is a pretty major event. The Wiggles were at Knox, at Caribbean Gardens. Everyone has been to Caribbean Gardens, no? Caribbean Gardens is fantastic. I am sure nobody ever bought a pirated DVD from the Caribbean Gardens; nobody ever did that. If you should not steal a car, then you should not steal a DVD. We are going back, and I used to love those ads in the movies. But it is very true. That is why we are all on streaming services now, because it is accessible, it is easy, it is nice, it is chill and we can all do it within reason. Caribbean Gardens – we had the Wiggles, and that was fantastic, and now with a two-year-old it is all ‘Hot potato this, hot potato that’.

This bill is to amend the Australian Grands Prix Act 1994 to extend the maximum duration – you see how I did that, member for Glen Waverley and member for Mulgrave? – that the race period can be declared for, facilitate public access to parts of Albert Park during the race period, update the definition of ‘grand prix insignia’ and provide for acting appointments to the AGPC board – this is serious stuff, everyone, so please listen up. It provides increased payments to the committee of management of Albert Park –

Paul Edbrooke interjected.

Jackson TAYLOR: Thank you, member for Frankston. Hansard definitely picked that one up, much to my dismay. And it enables the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to host non-motorsport events approved by the minister. It is a fantastic bill, and I am proud to be a Melburnian, proud to be Victorian. Get around the Australian Grand Prix, get around Oscar Piastri. Come on, McLaren. Go well.

Rachel WESTAWAY (Prahran) (11:09): My goodness, what a wideranging debate this has been. Let me bring it back to the grand prix – I am sorry, everyone. I rise today to speak on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025, a piece of legislation that, whilst ostensibly supporting Victorian motorsports, raises significant concerns about community consultation, proportionate regulation and the balance between commercial interests and community access to our precious public parklands. As the member for Prahran, the grand prix butts up adjacent to my electorate, so it affects the people along Queens Road and those that live on St Kilda Road that utilise the Albert Park Lake precinct and the grand prix track on a regular basis, so it is something that I am really passionate to be speaking about today. We are not opposing this, but we believe that there should be better community consultation in regard to this, and this is where the government has fallen down. My constituents have not been informed and have not had the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the extension of the time in which the grand prix is set up and activities would take place.

Let me begin by acknowledging the reality for the people of Prahran. As I said before, we live next to Albert Park. For one week each year our neighbourhood transforms into a global motorsport venue. Do not get me wrong, I love motorsports. I love the grand prix. I have been to the Monaco Grand Prix. I have been very fortunate to attend that. I have gone to the grand prix in Victoria many times. I love the grand prix. I love fast cars – not chap laps down Chapel Street, but I love fast cars and sports cars. The streets fill with visitors, the noise level soars and the access to our local park becomes restricted. This is the reality that we have learned to live with, and many of my constituents have made their peace with hosting this event. Some volunteer, others open their homes to visitors with Airbnb and many have simply adapted their routines around race week. But there is a difference between accepting a week-long disruption and being asked to accept three weeks of park closure with minimal consultation and, to be frank, questionable justification.

This brings me to what can only be described as a failure in democratic process. Just weeks ago Port Phillip deputy mayor Bryan Mears stood on a milk crate in Albert Park and told 100 concerned residents that he was very disappointed not to have received prior notice regarding the proposed 21-day closure of the Albert Park Reserve. If a deputy mayor – an elected representative whose ward includes this very park – was caught off guard, what does that say about consultation with ordinary residents? The thousands of residents in my electorate of Prahran who live on Queens Road and St Kilda Road were kept completely in the dark. These are people who use Albert Park daily. They walk their dogs around the lake at dawn. They jog the circuit paths after work. They take their children to play and to sporting activities on weekends. My own children have done sailing lessons around Albert Park Lake with their local primary school. Yet they discovered this proposal not through genuine community consultation but through media reports and hastily organised community rallies. This is not consultation, this is a notification after the fact. The brief feedback period that followed was little more than a token gesture to tick the democratic box at F1 lightning speed.

The proposed extension of the race period from seven to up to 21 days presents considerable challenges for local sports clubs, particularly rowing and sailing clubs, which depend on uninterrupted access to the lake and do not have the capacity to rehome to a nearby location. Let me paint a picture of what this actually means. Albert Park hosts a diverse range of sporting activities that serve our community year round. The rowing and sailing clubs provide water sports opportunities, but they are just part of the broader sporting ecosystem. The Albert Park Golf Course, a public facility that provides affordable golf to thousands of Melburnians – my son Fletch, who is just 17 years old, goes to the driving range and absolutely loves it – faces significant disruption. Cricket and soccer clubs that use the park’s ovals will further be displaced. Basketball courts that serve local schools and community groups will be inaccessible. Tennis facilities that host junior development programs will also be locked away. Rowing and sailing clubs will be off water for three weeks at the height of their season. The Albert Park College rowing program looks unlikely to be able to compete in the schools Head of the River. Schools using pavilions as classrooms will have three weeks mid-term disruption. We are talking about denying access to diverse sporting facilities during peak seasons – and that is March, when the weather is perfect, when school programs are in full swing and when community participation across all sports is at its highest.

Albert Park is a vital route for many riders travelling from beachside suburbs to the inner city and comprises as well part of the route for many recreational rides. For three weeks thousands of cyclists will be forced onto busy streets, creating safety risks and disrupting established transport patterns that they may rely on for their daily commutes.

The government argues this extension is necessary for safety reasons, but where is the evidence? Despite multiple briefings and requests for information, the government has failed to provide documentation of any reported accidents involving the public that would justify this dramatic extension. The risk appears speculative and disproportionate. We are being asked to accept a tripling of disruption based on a theoretical concern rather than a demonstrated need. If safety is genuinely the concern, there are targeted measures that could address specific risks without imposing a blanket 21-day closure. Enhanced fencing, improved signage and additional security during the set-up and breakdown periods – these are proportionate responses to safety concerns in my view.

This bill also permits the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to host non-motorsport events with ministerial approval. Now that we have advocated for the corporation to increase profitability and reduce government contribution, that makes fiscal sense, but there must be some oversight over these events to ensure that they do not add to the government deficits. What exactly are these events going to be? Are we talking about rock concerts? Are we talking about another Big Day Out over Albert Park Lake? What about music festivals that bring thousands more visitors to the area? And what about the rights of residential neighbours? The bill provides no detail, no parameters and has had no community input in terms of requirements. These are some of my concerns. My constituents have learned to live and manage with one major disruption per year. Now they are being asked to potentially accept multiple large-scale events with no consultation and no detail about their nature, scale or impact. This is a blank cheque for disruption dressed up as revenue diversification. If the Australian Grand Prix Corporation wants to run concerts, festivals or other major events in our neighbourhood park, the community deserves to know what we are up for. Will these be 50,000-person music events, corporate events, international conferences? The bill’s silence on this matter is deeply concerning.

Let me be clear about my position: we understand the grand prix brings economic activity to Melbourne; however, this should not come at the cost of reasonable community access to public parkland or proper democratic consultation. We also recognise the Australian Grand Prix Corporation’s effort to diversify its revenue streams. Reducing government dependence may have merit, but this too requires proper oversight, community consideration and transparency about what we are actually agreeing to host in our neighbourhoods. The fundamental issue is that Albert Park is not just an event venue, it is a community asset that serves residents 365 days a year – minus one week at present but proposed to be three weeks. The people of Prahran live with the impacts of major events and they deserve genuine consideration and consultation and not just gestures. Whilst we will not oppose this bill outright, we cannot ignore the legitimate concerns raised by the community. The legislation lacks proportionality and fails to deliver adequate justification for such a dramatic expansion of exclusion periods.

In the Legislative Council we will reserve our position; without clear evidence of safety incidents that justify this extension and without proper parameters around these mysterious non-motorsport events, we may seek amendments to remove or modify the race period extension and add proper oversight mechanisms for additional events. But if we are to ask the community to accept extended disruptions and potentially multiple major events per year, we must also deliver meaningful improvements to my constituents. The sorts of meaningful improvements that I am talking about – how about footbridges over Queens Road? We have them there during the time of the grand prix, and then they are dismantled. But wouldn’t it be great if people that live on Queens Road could actually cross over the footbridge and have it stay there all the time, or better still, go underground for access. But at this point in time, this infrastructure simply has not been discussed.

The other thing that I would like to raise – and it is just an idea – is that for the for the grand final we have the fantastic grand final parade around Bourke Street Mall. We celebrate these fabulous tourism events. I argue against chap laps, and I have brought it up in the media several times, the danger of them, but for sporting enthusiasts, how about having vintage grand prix cars actually going down Toorak Road and Chapel Street? These are some of the innovative things that we could actually see as investments and something that promotes the grand prix but gives back to the community as a fun activity that is free and that local families could actually afford to attend. Because we have heard about the ticket pricing, we have heard about the lack of access for everyday Australians, who cannot afford to go to the grand prix, so I would like to see better investment.

Paul EDBROOKE (Frankston) (11:19): It is a pleasure to rise this morning and speak on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. Following on from the member for Prahran, I think there are some good ideas there. We see, outside Cranbourne every year, a huge gathering of people going down to the Phillip Island grand prix for MotoGP, and certainly people’s interest would be spiked I think if we had vintage or other cars as a family event in streets as well. I think that level of thinking, that innovation, is something that we definitely need to encourage.

Speaking from an economic point of view, the grand prix provides a significant contribution to the Victorian visitor economy, and that is the spend on the actual grand prix itself. It contributes to the vibrancy and the livability of Victoria – hotels, pubs, restaurants. It is worth about $323.9 million to our gross state product, and that cannot be underestimated. What we are seeing today is a balancing act where this bill seeks to modernise a system that was put in place many, many years ago – I believe probably about 30 years ago – to ensure that we can keep a super-famous race going. In fact I think it is second only to Silverstone in participation.

This bill actually covers one of my favourite races, which is not the grand prix but MotoGP at the island. I am a big fan of MotoGP and love seeing the engineering and mechanics of those bikes just pushed absolutely to the limit and seeing those riders too. Unlike with cars, every movement of their body causes some kind of effect, whether it is gyroscopic or a physical effect on the track. It is amazing to see in real life, so I am a huge fan and a huge fan of car racing as well. That is why I support this bill.

I think this bill from an economic perspective stacks up. Although there have been, I admit, some issues that have been brought up by the opposition, that does not mean that there has not been consultation, and it does not mean that maybe people just agreed with the outcomes of that consultation. There will always be people who argue for and against things, and I think it is our responsibility to hear from both of those groups, but it does not mean that at the end of the day you do not have to decide on one way or another.

Just going through the economics of this event, as I said, it is worth about $323 million to our gross state product. In 2025 it generated 1631 full-time equivalent jobs. It generated an estimated $3 in direct economic impact to Victoria for every dollar invested by the Victorian government – that is a very good return – and it attracted an Albert Park record attendance of 465,498 people in 2025. Hotel occupancy in Melbourne for the Friday was 93 per cent, for the Saturday it was 94 per cent and for the Sunday 90 per cent. For the first time we had the F1 Melbourne Fan Festival, a new free family-friendly event at Melbourne Park, and we ensured that more people could be part of the excitement this year.

Additionally, the event is only broadcast live to some of the state’s key trading partners and tourism partners, such as China, India and Japan, and that broadcast viewership is approximately 78 million. That is 78 million people that see Melbourne on the big stage, on their TV screens in Japan, in China. These are people that will come and visit Melbourne as an international and internationally acclaimed city. That is 78 million people possibly planning their next holiday to Melbourne, so those economic benefits just go on and on. We have seen that through other events here in Melbourne, being the events capital, which I will go into in a second.

So why would we have people pontificating today, telling us they are supporting the bill but they might put some amendments up in the upper house, yet they are in some ways, from what I have heard, opposing factors that are not actually in the parameters of the bill as well? What I got from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition’s contribution today was that he wants the F1 to be smaller, and it cannot continue to run at its size. Again, go back to the economics of this – $323.9 million, plus all those force multipliers as far as tourism and whatnot. I think it speaks for itself. I think people that know this race know that it is important that we keep it in Melbourne, and to do that we actually have to match some of the international expectations as well.

So this legislation today – as I said, the act has been in force for over 30 years, and it covers the grand prix and the MotoGP. These events grow, they change and they evolve, and there is a good reason for that. As with all legislation, the act needs to fit the contemporary needs of the grand prix. With its growth in popularity comes a complexity that we have heard members speak about today, and there is a balance that needs to be struck there to maintain that safe operation and to keep the event in line with the needs of the community as well.

The act currently allows for seven days for that race period, and while that might have been adequate 30 years ago, it is certainly not adequate now.

Seeing what goes into making that race what it is, it is quite amazing to fit that into that period. Even seeing what goes on down at Phillip Island for that community to prepare for that race – let alone the racetrack and all the infrastructure that goes into it – is amazing.

Bigger attendances obviously mean larger footprints and larger safety mitigation strategies, so the extended or the maximum extended time for the race period, I think, is critical to keep this race going. Pedestrians and cyclists are certainly concerned. It is something – and I think others have spoken about it – that is certainly mitigated in this bill, the safety factors and the exposure to workers with growing infrastructure builds and also dismantling that infrastructure as well. The bill also establishes a mechanism to enable the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to allow access to Albert Park during the race period, and that ensures that the public continues to have as much access to the park as possible for as long as it is safe to do so, and it is intended that the amendments will be made to the act to facilitate operation of public access areas as well.

The bill also reduces the time for which a designated access period can be declared under the act to compensate for a potentially increased race period, and that designated access period allows the AGPC to control small parcels of land for storage and other matters as appropriate. I think the reduction will avoid inconsistencies between the race period and the designated access period. Certainly, I think we have heard some fans of the race today, but this is part of a suite where Melbourne and Victoria is the major events capital of the nation. A recent independent study commissioned by Visit Victoria found the major events calendar contributed $3.3 billion in value to our economy, up from $2.5 billion the year before, and it generated more than 15,500 jobs every year. Under our government, the Allan Labor government, that pipeline just keeps getting bigger and better and includes recent announcements that we have heard from the sports minister of a multiyear deal for Melbourne to host NFL regular season games from 2026; a two-year deal to host the Australian Open golf; the NBA x NBL series, which is the first time an NBA team, and that is the New Orleans Pelicans, will play on Australian soil; the Rugby World Cup in 2027; A Beautiful Noise, the Neil Diamond musical’s Australian premiere; and also Westwood at the National Gallery of Victoria. So that is that is around $40 billion of investment in major events in Victoria’s economy, and it eclipses the 2024 tourism target more than a year ahead of schedule. That is something I think we should be celebrating.

Of course, as other people in this chamber have said today, there is a balance to be struck as far as the community concerns. There is, and I cannot talk to them today. I have not spoken to many people in that community, but certainly I know the local member has been listening. I know the government has been listening. But as for the economic advantage that this gives Victoria, it cannot be overstated. When people go to talk events down and talk Victoria down, it does have an effect on our economy. It is one that we cannot measure, but we know it occurs. It is hard to measure that, but we know that it does occur. People flock to these events, and we should be taking advantage of that as a Victorian government and supporting that on the international stage as we do, and I definitely commend this bill to the house.

Gabrielle DE VIETRI (Richmond) (11:29): I rise for the Greens to oppose the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. At its core, this bill takes more of Albert Park from the public for longer, concentrates more decision-making power in the Australian Grand Prix Corporation and asks the community to simply trust that access will somehow be protected while the park is fenced off for three times longer than it currently is. The government calls this a safety fix and a tidy-up; I call it a land and access grab on precious public land. What does this bill do? First of all, it extends the race period – that is the time that Albert Park can be declared off limits – from seven days to up to 21 days. It also lets the corporation carve out public access areas during that period at its discretion and tightens control over the site, and it expands the corporation’s remit so that it can run non-motorsport events not just at Albert Park but anywhere in Victoria under ministerial approval. These are not my words; they are the government’s own second-reading and introduction explanations.

Finally, it does double the annual payment to Parks Victoria, but even so, that new amount falls far short of what is actually needed by Parks Victoria. Let us be clear about the real-world effect here. A three-week lockout is triple the current maximum exclusion period. The government says access can be protected via designated public access zones, but all of that is controlled by the corporation and the minister. There is no guaranteed right of access to the lake or the perimeter path in that period, and the bill explicitly contemplates longer, broader restrictions. The statement of compatibility openly acknowledges that public access will be further limited for the sake of the event.

The community knows what that means. The City of Port Phillip, speaking for thousands of locals who walk, run, ride and walk their dogs around the lake, warn that the extended closure would significantly restrict recreation and sports and that the non-motorsport provision is poorly defined. They have asked the government to slow down and spell out what this actually means for the residents and the clubs. Sporting clubs are already at the end of their tether. The Albert Park community sports association has said very plainly:

[QUOTES AWAITING VERIFICATION]

Albert Park is first and foremost a community sports precinct, and each expansion of the event footprint displaces volunteers and players who keep local sport alive.

As their president put it when these plans first surfaced:

This is primarily a park, not a corporate paddock for sale.

Sailing and rowing clubs, school programs and weekend competitions will lose precious time at the height of their seasons. Schools using pavilions as classrooms face multiweek disruptions. Even in an ordinary year access is constricted for weeks before and after the race by road closures and construction traffic. This bill entrenches and extends that disruption. This is not a balance; it is shifting the entire risk and inconvenience to the public so that the build can run in a sealed construction zone of the corporation’s choosing. Let us be clear: the current bill increases that hard lockout from seven to 21 days. But there is already a soft lockout. Community and sporting clubs are already restricted to areas of the park for a longer four-month period every single year, so I listened with great interest to the contribution from the member for Nepean, who also talked about the adverse impacts the extended time periods will have on the community. The Greens of course are always happy to talk to any member in this place about better outcomes for the community.

Those impacts on the community spread to impacts on education as well. The South Melbourne Park Primary School community is appalled that while a third of a billion dollars was gifted earlier this year to the grand prix – an overseas private corporation – the primary school that shares Albert Park is left in the slow lane begging for essential funds. One of those upgrades is a simple pedestrian crossing that would let their children safely cross the road to school. The school council president Katrina Walker has outlined how seven years of campaigning for modest funding has yielded nothing. She said:

The recent announcement of $350 million to be spent on redeveloping the Albert Park Pit Lane complex is galling and worse is the fact that the state government secretly ripped $2.4 billion from state schools.

My colleague in the other place asked the Minister for Education in May when essential funding for upgrades at the South Melbourne Park Primary School would be provided. Three months later, and now 2½ months overdue, that question still remains unanswered.

The government’s rationale for this bill is safety. We all agree that safety matters, and if safety during bump in and bump out is a problem, then the government should set strict caps on construction vehicle movements, limit the event footprint, reduce the number of temporary structures and stop the relentless festivalisation of this race.

Do not punish the community because these events keep consuming more and more of the park. Even the consultation materials admit the change is being sought because works already happen well outside the existing seven-day period. That is an event management issue, not a licence to close the park. There is more scope creep baked into this bill. It lets the corporation host non-motorsport events anywhere in Victoria and potentially in the park with ministerial approval. The minister’s own speech says it is to reduce reliance on government funding. That is a policy choice to turn a park racing authority into a general events promoter with all the incentives to monetise public land. The City of Port Phillip has already raised concerns about the lack of detail here. The government’s implicit call – ‘Trust us, we’ll protect the access’ – is just not good enough. Put hard, enforceable limits in the act, not promises in a media release.

On money, the bill doubles the legislated payment from the corporation to Parks Victoria from a measly $100,000 to another measly $200,000. I am glad the government finally admits that the current figure is hopelessly out of date and insufficient. Section 41 of the 1994 act literally capped it at $100,000. But in context $200,000 is merely a rounding error. The corporation’s own annual reports show Victorian taxpayer contributions topping $100.6 million in 2023 alone, and the government announced this year $350 million, more than a third of $1 billion, for pit building and precinct updates. $200,000 a year is not cost recovery. It is a token fee while the Victorian public carries the burden. We should be replacing this token annual payment with a transparent formula that is tied to the real costs borne by Parks Victoria, tenants and Victorian taxpayers and establish a dedicated community fund for grassroots sport, biodiversity and pathway upgrades administered jointly with the council and the park users.

Meanwhile, clubs and residents point out that basic park improvements lag. The government’s media talking points boast that in 2025 the race drew more than 465,000 people and that it is locked in until 2037. If that is true, then an honest resettlement with the community is overdue: genuine shared governance, guaranteed access windows and a dedicated fund that actually offsets the disruption to grassroots sport and the park ecology, not a symbolic cheque to the landlord. There are environmental costs as well. Save Albert Park has documented the long-term impacts of tearing up the park to accommodate a racetrack, from tree loss to treeless safety runoffs to chronic constraints on landscaping. Recent reports around the new pit building point to further tree removals. Parks are our urban lungs. They are not empty staging areas waiting to be hired out.

Let us talk about governance and power. This bill lets the minister appoint acting corporation board members and the chair. It grows the corporation’s scope and locks in longer closures. But where is the matching increase in community oversight? Where is the requirement to publish a community access plan that is binding, measurable and enforceable? Where is the independent monitoring of noise, traffic and ecology during the race period? Where are the compensation triggers for displaced tenants beyond those who were there in 1994? Even the government’s own statement of compatibility notes that small businesses and clubs can be forced to scale back or shut up for 21 days. If you are going to expand the corporation’s powers, expand the community’s too. Publish a credible, peer-reviewed cost–benefit analysis that includes the public subsidy, environmental externalities and the opportunity cost of locking up a flagship urban park. The government says the event contributes to hundreds of millions in gross state product, and that has been contested for decades. Put the full ledger on the table for the public to see – full transparency and accountability.

We all know that Melbourne can host big events without treating public parks as blank canvases for private fences extracting private profit from the public purse. The Greens want a vibrant major events calendar and thriving community sport.

We also want honesty about who pays and who is displaced. Right now this bill asks the public to swallow a longer lockout, give a foreign-owned corporation more power over a key public asset, accept a token payment and applaud the promise that access will be protected. The people of Albert Park, Middle Park, Port Melbourne and South Melbourne and the clubs and schools that use this precinct all year deserve better than ‘Trust us’. They deserve binding safeguards, real compensation and a government that puts the community first. On that test this bill fails. We will oppose it, and we urge the government to withdraw and return with a community-led plan that fits the park, not just the race.

Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (11:41): I would like to start my contribution by addressing some of the comments that were just made by the member opposite me. Firstly, there may be some doom and gloom on that side about the grand prix and how bad it may be for Victoria, but the reality is it increases tourism every single year. It sees people flock from all over the world to our great state to enjoy not only the grand prix but a whole festival of events, one that I believe – and I know the minister does as well – can be expanded. That is exactly what goes to the heart of this bill and to the changes that we are trying to make. On that note I want to thank Minister Dimopoulos and of course the Allan Labor government for everything that we have done not only for the Australian Grand Prix but for all of the events in Melbourne.

As we know, Melbourne is the events capital. We have got festivals, we have got the Australian Open, we have got the Spring Racing Carnival and we are the home of the AFL and the NBL. We have got the food and wine festival, the international comedy festival, of course the Melbourne Fashion Festival, which many around this chamber like to go to, and then the grand prix, which we are talking about today. I think it is probably well known that the Formula One Australian Grand Prix provides a significant contribution to the Victorian visitor economy, driving visitation and spending, contributing to the vibrancy and livability of Victoria and promoting Melbourne and Victoria to a global audience. It is truly one of the biggest jewels in Victoria’s major events crown, and because of the Allan Labor government the grand prix will remain here until at least 2037 – something that should absolutely be celebrated.

Fans flock to Melbourne from around the world for our grand prix, filling local hotels, restaurants, pubs and businesses, and we intend to keep it that way because that is a good thing for Victoria and for our economy. The F1 Australian Grand Prix helps brand Melbourne and Victoria not only as a sporting and major events capital but as a city that is leading the world – and it is. That is something that I and our government are very proud of.

I need to give a shout-out not only to our wonderful minister in this space, Minister Dimopoulos, and his team, but also to the Premier for the work that she has done. I should also thank Hollywood, and I do so because I have got some friends from San Francisco, Luke and Jodie. Their daughter, who is at university, came to them earlier this year and said, ‘Dad, I’ve been watching Drive to Survive, and I want to go to Australia. We have always wanted to do it. I want to go to Australia and be part of the grand prix this year in March.’ They ended up not only coming to Melbourne, Victoria. They booked a three-week holiday. They spent two weeks here in Melbourne, went around our region, spent plenty of money, booked into plenty of hotels, went to the grand prix and then also visited Queensland on their way back. Again, this is identifying the fact that because of the grand prix we have higher visitation numbers and more people who not only enjoy the grand prix but are also able to come along and enjoy the best that Australia and of course our wonderful city have to offer.

The grand prix has changed a lot since the first race back in 1996, and attendance continues to grow – from 314,900 in 2014 to over 465,000 in 2025. The event now has the second-highest attendance on the F1 calendar after Silverstone, and the Australian Grand Prix Corporation constructs the equivalent of more than half an MCG’s worth of temporary seating. We are the best city in the world, and we are the best at hosting events. I know that we can become number one in this space as well. The 2025 grand prix event increased Victoria’s gross state product by $323.9 million.

It generated 1631 full-time equivalent jobs, it generated an estimated $3.08 in direct economic impact to Victoria for every dollar that was invested by the Victorian government, and it attracted an Albert Park record attendance of 465,498 people. Of the four Australian drivers who are currently competing across the four global formula categories, all four of them are from Melbourne – again, something to be celebrated.

2025 was the first time that we had the F1 Melbourne Fan Festival, which was a new free family-friendly event at Melbourne Park ensuring that more people could be part of the fun, the activity and the enjoyment of it all. Additionally, the event is broadcast live to some of Victoria’s key trading partners and tourism markets such as China, India and Japan. Broadcast viewership was approximately 78.5 million people around the globe. That is an additional 78.5 million people looking at Melbourne, looking at Victoria, seeing what we have to offer and considering it for a potential holiday.

The Australian Grands Prix Act 1994 has been in force for over 30 years. It empowers the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to hold the F1 grand prix at Albert Park and the Australian Motorcycle Grand Prix at Phillip Island. These events have been annual features of the Victorian major events calendar since 1996 and 1997 respectively, but as we know, things do change over time. It is called evolution. As with all legislation, it is important to ensure that the Australian Grands Prix Act remains fit for purpose and reflects contemporary needs.

With the grand prix continuing to grow in popularity and complexity, this bill makes a number of amendments to the act to ensure that arrangements continue to support the grand prix and the community. The act currently allows for the declaration of a race period not exceeding seven days. While this may have been adequate 30 years ago, the grand prix has grown significantly. Therefore the infrastructure required has also grown with it, and the time needed to build and dismantle race infrastructure has naturally increased. Bigger attendance at the grand prix naturally requires a bigger event footprint and more infrastructure. Consequently, the bill proposes to increase exclusive access to Albert Park to up to 21 days. This is simply evolution and makes sense. The extension to maximise the duration of the race period is critical as pedestrians and cyclists would otherwise be subjected to increasing safety risks through exposure to workers and vehicles undertaking the growing infrastructure build and dismantle. This is something that needs to occur if we want to remain the best in the world.

Talking about the best in the world, I was very fortunate to attend the Singapore Grand Prix, and I can say that they know how to attract people. They have a number of non-motorsport events around the week of the Singapore Grand Prix, which naturally increases both tourism and economic spend into Singapore. They have moved with the times, and they host events such as the Milken Institute conference and the Temasek annual meeting the week prior, along with a number of other events. These conferences and events, combined with the Singapore Grand Prix, attract huge crowds and a huge following who not only come for the race but come there for work. It is good for the entire region, it is good for tourism, it is good for their economy. I raise this because the amendments in this bill allow us to do, if we as a state want to, something similar, which one would assume would have a direct economic benefit for Victoria and for our great state. We have already got an absolutely incredible event, but what is the harm in making it even better?

Everybody in this place would absolutely agree with the fact that we know that we have got the world’s best city. We have incredible events here in Melbourne, and we can make this Australian Grand Prix even better. It is something that on this side of the chamber we are very proud of and very much want to see grow and continue. These amendments to the bill are necessary, and I hope that we get the full support of everyone across the chamber.

Martin CAMERON (Morwell) (11:49): I rise to talk on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025 legislation report. I am happy to let the member for Kororoit know that we are not opposing this bill. Like most members in the chamber – I am not sure about the ones that normally sit behind me – we are incredibly proud of the Australian Grand Prix, and this year it will be highlighted when the Oscar show hits town. Currently we have a Melburnian that is leading the F1 championship table, and I think when he comes back to his home town most Victorians and Australians will be behind him hoping that he can seal the deal and we get a win. We hope that he is a world champion in the very, very near future.

The purpose of the bill today is to amend the Australian Grands Prix Act 1994 to extend the maximum race period from seven to 21 days; allow the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC) to host minister-approved, non-motorsport events; broaden powers regarding public access areas, including closures for safety and emergency reasons; increase the Australian Grand Prix Corporation’s financial contribution to Parks Victoria from $100,000 to $200,000; provide for acting appointments and expanded control; and make other consequential amendments. What we do know is when you have world-class facilities and you are putting on a world-class show, as the F1 is when it comes to town, you do need to make sure that it does run smoothly.

In saying that, we do also need to pick up the local people that are going to be impacted in and around the area. We are on the outside sort of looking in a bit, and I think it looks like the member for Albert Park will be on her feet next. I am sure that she will be able to explain exactly how the locals are feeling about it. I think because it has been here for so long, most would understand the necessity of sometimes making some alterations and amendments to a bill to make sure that we do have this world-class operation that comes to town and this world-class Formula One race that everyone can enjoy, not only here in Victoria but right around the world – because if you watch it on television, the actual overhead shots of Albert Park, I do not think anyone can claim that they do not highlight how wonderful Victoria is and how wonderful Victoria looks when the cars are going around. I am sure the member for Albert Park will be able to explain it much better than I and probably most members standing up in the chamber can, because she has her feet and her ears on the ground, knowing what is going on.

As I said, there will be merchandise galore with Oscar – it is going to be a circus when it comes to town. You can just see it. It is going to be fantastic that we have got a Melburnian standing up, punching above his weight on a world stage. It will be fantastic.

The Australian Grand Prix at Albert Park is among Victoria’s largest annual sporting events, with significant tourism and economic benefits. My colleague the member for Mildura loves her motorsport. It does not matter what type of motorsport it is, she is right across it. If you heard her contribution on how passionate she is about the industry, that does extrapolate out to most people in regional Victoria. I think you have only got to go into your local areas and see your car clubs, whether they are vintage car clubs or hot rod clubs or whatever, to see the passion. You can talk to people and know who they are, but the underlying tone of people that are passionate about motorsport I think is going to come to the fore.

Current laws at the moment limit the declared area – the track and associated facilities – to a seven-day race period. The bill triples this to 21. Of course when you are doing something like this you are going to get certain people in the area and certain groups that will push back. It does not matter what you are doing, but for us to be on the world’s stage, we need to make sure that we do listen to those people that have concerns and that we take their concerns on board, because there can be unintended consequences. Just thinking here on my feet – when the timber industry shut down in Gippsland the unintended consequence of it flowing onto white paper manufacturing was something that was not thought of.

So we need to do our due diligence in here to make sure that extending it from seven to 21 days does not have impacts on the people that live and breathe in Albert Park on a daily basis.

The bill empowers the AGPC to declare public access areas by gazette, but closures of these areas can be done by website notice only, with failure to publish not invalidating a declaration. The bill permits running non-motorsport events with ministerial approval, which is aimed at reducing the overall government contribution to the corporation.

As I said, in bringing these amendments, most people outside the area of Albert Park, the people that live there, would have limited concerns with this going through, hence we are not opposing it. But we do need to make sure that we have those checks and balances to make sure that we are getting it right and getting it right the first time that we are doing this.

Also, being from regional Victoria, we had a major world-class event which was obviously – and I like the smirk on your face, Acting Speaker Addison – due to take place, the Commonwealth Games, with infrastructure and builds that were going to be upgrades to our sporting facilities and also builds for athletes villages. While we are happy and very proud of our Formula One Grand Prix here in Melbourne and Victoria, I do think of people down in the Latrobe Valley where there were designated areas. People were going to be hosting sporting teams coming from around the globe and had just about signed on the dotted line to host them there, but actually it fell over and, as we know, will no longer go ahead.

One of the other great things that we have is a world-class organisation and event down in Traralgon in the Latrobe Valley, the AGL Loy Yang Traralgon Junior International tennis. What a wonderful job the member for Nepean did leading off on the bill here. He has played down there and hopefully in the near future will be coming back to re-engage with the tennis community down there. But to Susie Grumley and Graham ‘Woofa’ Charlton, who run the proceedings down there – it has been going for three decades – this is a wonderful tournament that is on the world stage. It runs just before another great event down here in Melbourne, the Australian Open. A lot of juniors that move through and have won the event there have gone on in the very same year to win the junior Australian Open here in Melbourne. At the moment we are looking for funding to do some upgrades to the facility to make sure that it is on a world-class stage. I know it is only minor compared to the money needed to make sure the Formula One event runs properly, but if we in regional Victoria are going to have these events on a continued basis, we need to make sure that there is funding going into these regional world-class events for tennis, and especially the one in Traralgon, the junior international tennis down there. But as we said from the start, on this side we do not oppose the bill, and we are looking forward to Oscar hitting the town.

Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (11:59): I would like to start out by saying and expressing just how much Albert Park is loved by locals, and not exclusively by locals but of course by all who visit the park. I think it is important to acknowledge that, and that has only been reinforced through the many conversations that I have had with so many people in the local community. I should say and point out I am a local as well. I live about 7 minutes drive from the park or maybe a 20 minute walk.

A member: In a Formula One?

Nina TAYLOR: No, no. I do want to draw that out through the discussion, because I think it is really important when we are looking at that balance and striking that balance when it comes to the Formula One.

Of course there is a natural water source there that is treasured by community and beautiful birdlife, and actually the birdlife is an aspect that I love most of all. I should note that I will not be able to transact all matters in 10 minutes, but I will seek to do as much as I can. Many people love walking, whether it is with or without a dog or with friends. It can be a social event. The fabulous Albert park run, led by Joanne and Scott, draws hundreds of people week after week, getting fit and enjoying the scenery. Of course there are the sailing and rowing clubs that adore the lake as well, and Albert Park College provide a fantastic program and they really do take advantage of those wonderful water sports, which are truly availed of in our local area.

I should also do a shout-out to the Albert Park community sports and recreation association. They are also incredible advocates on behalf of all the community sports clubs. They are unrelenting for all the right reasons. I work very closely with them, and I respect the integrity with which they transact everything that they do in terms of pushing community sport for all the right reasons. Also, there are the golf clubs and the driving range, respectfully, having had conversations there that are actually ongoing – it is not only with regard to this bill. I know that for many of course there are the physical aspects, but there are the social aspects, the discipline of sport and just enjoying being outdoors and also seeing children – and adults as well – not glued to computer screens. So we can see there are so many wonderful reasons for enjoying the beautiful Albert Park.

I do want to also acknowledge the schools that are on the park. We have Mac.Robertson Girls’ High. We also have South Melbourne Park Primary School and St Kilda Park Primary School. No doubt South Melbourne Park Primary School are the ones that would have the closest interaction, if you like, for want of a better word, when it comes to the impacts of the Formula One Grand Prix. I do want to also acknowledge the incredible way not only the schools but also the community do adapt to what is a major event, and I think that is truly to be commended.

I also want to commend the nuance and the very constructive approach that community have taken with regard to raising not only why they love their sports but how they anticipate that they will interact with the grand prix and also their actual experience with the interaction of the grand prix. That has been incredibly important, because it has greatly helped me, not as an individual but as an advocate for community, in being able to assert the various matters and the queries that they have put forward, as I said, in a very constructive way. The minister’s office has heard from me many times. I must say I have transacted as much and, to be honest, anything and everything that has been raised to me by community members almost every day, because it is important. That is my job – fighting for community and making sure that through the process of debate on this bill their needs and concerns are taken into account and that we mitigate the impact of the grand prix on the way that they are able to enjoy engaging with the beautiful Albert Park.

There are a couple of points that I want to dive in on in a deeper way, and one is the matter of safety. This certainly is one of the underpinning elements of the legislation that is before us, and I have pushed on that matter in a very assertive way because I think it is fair and reasonable, certainly when we are in the chamber, to transact such matters with integrity.

I have been informed that actually WorkSafe Victoria have raised concerns, and so safety is not merely a light matter to be dismissed, but rather there have been legitimate concerns raised. Certainly, when I am advocating on behalf of my community on the issue of safety, of course safety is another issue that I have to take very seriously, so to merely dismiss it and see it as spin, as I think some may have tried to suggest. But I am not in any way criticising people raising the issue on all sides of that, because it is underpinning certainly the changes that are being brought before the chamber. I just want to reassure those here and also my community that making sure that the safety concerns raised are founded on actual and legitimate concerns is absolutely paramount. That is why I have very much prosecuted that matter very carefully, because it is highly significant in the debate that we are having today. As I was saying, WorkSafe have raised matters, and I am sure more of that will be discussed in due course.

I just do take a little bit of exception to the Greens political party I think being rather opportunistic. I cannot recall them ever being strident advocates for community sport, and to suddenly be caring about such matters in that way will not be effective. I can see the political angle that they are seeking to work with it, but I just do not give it credence. I think particularly, as we know – do they block housing? Yes. Do they deliver schools? No. Do they deliver anything? I just want to put that little caveat that when strident, opportunistic arguments are put forward that are without accountability of any kind, certainly questions might be raised, and I am raising those questions here and now. Particularly what triggered that, in part, was the discussion about South Melbourne Park Primary School. I certainly have been working very closely with principal Nicole Arnold and the school council not only on matters that might pertain to the grand prix but bigger and broader educational matters pertaining to the school and the infrastructure, so I felt that that was a rather superficial assessment of the matters at hand. I think that the principal and the school council are absolutely incredible advocates on behalf of their school. They care deeply about the students. So I want to give them a shout-out for the work that they do every day – I mean, teachers around the state are doing incredible work. But I just felt that matter was superficial at best as it was discussed in the chamber, when in fact I do liaise carefully with that school and I am really grateful for the advocacy that they put forward on behalf of the students, who they care so deeply about.

There are a couple more points that I do want to make. Something I think just needs to be taken into account with legislation versus the ongoing functionality of the park. If the bill is given assent as drafted, the public access areas for the 2026 race have not yet been determined, and the Australian Grand Prix Corporation and the minister will continue to consider the appropriate public access. The point of me raising that is that is why the incredibly constructive and helpful advocacy on behalf of community has been extremely useful and will continue to be so. I am certainly here for the community, and certainly we should continue to be working together, but of course the minister and the grand prix have to take heed of that – they absolutely have to. I just want to reassure about that with regard to the levers that might be being put in place with the legislation versus the ongoing and continual work with community. That is what is paramount to me as the local member.

I think I am just about out of time, but I have sought to prosecute some of the key matters. I thank the incredible advocates that we have locally for their advocacy. Let us continue to work together.

Richard RIORDAN (Polwarth) (12:09): I rise this afternoon to speak on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. As Liberals on this side, of course we are very proud of the fact that the reason we have this bill in the Parliament today is because in fact it was a Liberal government, a proactive Liberal government, that brought this event to the state. I think many of us remember that at the time those opposite and those who recently contributed were trying to stop it. But it was an event that came to Melbourne and to Victoria, and it has been one of the must-not-miss events on the Australian sporting calendar and very, very important to the visitor economy here in the state of Victoria.

Major events and particularly major sporting events in the state of Victoria are critical to our economy, and as the member for Polwarth, of course my electorate includes the Great Ocean Road. The whole Great Ocean Road, from Torquay all the way through to the wonderful Port Campbell and a little bit further along, is in the seat of Polwarth. An electorate like mine benefits greatly from events such as the grand prix, because it brings visitors to our state, it brings rewards to the economy and of course we really rely in our part of the world on the before and after visits, where people who have made the effort to come and watch world-class sporting events such as the grand prix then journey on further and spend some time out in rural and regional Victoria.

To list some of the events that we host in the electorate of Polwarth, we can talk about probably the most famous, the Bells Beach surfing event. It is comparable, really, to the grand prix in the sense that it is elite sportspeople in their field out competing in Victoria and bringing a worldwide audience – people from around the world who want to watch and understand what is going on. It is very important to our economy. In recent times we had the Elite 16 Beach Pro Tour volleyball event on the foreshore at Torquay, another stunning event that brought visitors into our economy and into our region and brought the spotlight of the world. Regularly now we have got the Cadel Evans bike ride. Acting Speaker Walters, I do not know whether you are a bike rider; I am certainly not. But it is certainly an event that brings a whole raft of people into our economy and into our region who really follow the cycling circuit, and that is something we are very proud of. Another big event that we have is of course the Pier to Pub community fundraiser in Lorne. That really works out, and it brings some of the most elite swimmers into the region. That is something we are very proud of in the area. Up to many thousands of people hit the water in the middle of January, and it of course brings a lot of attention and excitement to the region. Other cycling events, the Melbourne to Warrnambool and Amy’s Gran Fondo, come to the region – all sorts of major events, and major events are really an important driver to the economy.

It is something that this Parliament needs to take into account and be mindful of when we are talking about making amendments to the grand prix. I guess the concern that the opposition has is that we fear that the local community in and around the grand prix circuit have not been engaged with as well as they could have. There have been concerns raised that it was a good opportunity perhaps for the government to ensure that there be some permanent legacy for having the grand prix there for the local community – a walkover pedestrian access permanently installed across Queens Road, for example, might be one thing the government could have built into the allowed improvements for the area. But the main concern around this is the government’s exclusion day period, which I think is moving from seven to 21 days, and what the rationale and reason for that is. While it is not a reason to oppose this bill or to stop this bill, like many things this government proposes and seeks to do, there is not a lot of clarity around it.

It is like, for example, in my own portfolio, the Big Housing Build. The government, this government in particular, goes to some extraordinary lengths sometimes to keep its rationale hidden and away from public scrutiny. For example, in the Big Housing Build we have a situation where the government are going to pull down 10,000 homes, and they are prepared to go to the Supreme Court and spend millions and millions of dollars to hide the rationale as to why they are going to redevelop rather than to let it be clear what the benefits –

Michaela Settle: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, on relevance, I am not sure where housing connects with the grand prix. Could you ask the member to come back.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Iwan Walters): This has been a wideranging debate, and I have been listening carefully to the member for Polwarth’s contribution. I will rule on the point of order, member for Polwarth. There is no point of order, but I do encourage the member for Polwarth to remain germane to the bill.

Richard RIORDAN: For the benefit of the member for Eureka, there are probably some public housing towers that will have a fine view of the grand prix, and it is important that those people have a full understanding of when they will not have a view of the grand prix. And so, you know, there is a link in the public housing tower connection.

Getting back to that, the concern we have is that the local community around the grand prix have been left in the dark. Reasonable questions put by the opposition as to what the need is for the extra 14 days you would think are pretty straightforward types of questions, but this government, as in the case of the public housing towers, goes to quite deep lengths to make sure that they do not fully operate in a transparent way so the community understands the rationale. I think it is reasonable that the opposition raised the concerns of locals in the community, as the Labor Party is in fact supposed to represent the Albert Park region and yet has turned a deaf ear. So we take the responsibility of raising that genuine community concern before the Parliament and of course continue to offer, as we will when the bill goes to the upper house, the government an opportunity to explain more fully what the extra 14 days will deliver.

The grand prix and major events are an important driver for our state. The opposition agrees that we need to continue to progress and develop this event, and from time to time legislation like this may have to come forward to ensure that Victoria puts its best foot forward and continues to provide that world-class event not only to Victorians but to Australia more generally. It provides a wonderful eye to the world for us every March when it comes forward. There are other elements around that space at Albert Park that from time to time we have to balance the event uses of, of course, but we also have to make sure that the local community maintains its amenity and has reasonable access for as much time as possible to the various facilities within that Albert Park precinct, so we support that.

In finishing up my contribution this afternoon, I just wish to just reflect back on the amazing amount of events that we do have in the state and the importance to our local economies of hosting those events. And I would like to say that from time to time in regional Victoria – and I know my colleague the member for Eildon is also at the table today – our large regional events could be better supported by the state government. One of the issues that we have and that I touched on earlier is that the various cycling events – and I know the member for Eildon has also got an economy that is very reliant these days on the cycling economy – actually get pretty poorly funded and supported in providing the necessary road infrastructure that makes the weekend cycling craze and cycling events as safe as they could be. While we support making the grand prix safe for visitors and participants alike, it is also important that if we are going to have a regional events economy, we make sure that the safety of people in regional Victoria is also considered.

I draw your attention to some upcoming cycling events in my own electorate, where roads are blocked off. We have an issue on the Great Ocean Road where a couple of communities, Wye River and Kennett River, will actually be cut off all day. The community there says, ‘Well, okay, we accept that we’re going to have to shut down the Great Ocean Road to domestic traffic’. But there is not a clear plan if a medical emergency or some other accident occurs in these communities where people live. What is the action plan to ensure that people can exit the community safely and without delay? There were a couple of examples in recent years where people with quite serious illnesses found themselves trapped for many, many hours in the community, unable to get away. I think the government has an obligation to, while providing safety and security for the grand prix, apply that same thinking to opportunities at events in rural and regional Victoria.

Steve McGHIE (Melton) (12:19): I rise today to speak in strong support of the bill before the house, which amends the Australian Grands Prix Act 1994. Of course the amendments are both practical and forward-looking. They recognise the immense popularity of our Formula One in Australia and worldwide, and they ensure the Australian Grand Prix continues to deliver benefits for the Victorian economy and also for local communities and for the millions of fans who make this event a fixture of our sporting calendar.

But before the member for Polwarth leaves the chamber, I was not aware that Polwarth was the event capital of Victoria until today, so thanks for enlightening me. I must spend more time down there if that is the case and see some of these major events down at Polwarth. I should reassure the member for Polwarth that in any event, if there is an emergency, that is what warning devices are for on emergency vehicles, and they are not allowed to be obstructed from attending to emergencies. So I can assure you and your community that I know from a paramedic’s point of view they will get to those people when they need to get to those people, and the people that run the events will also assist emergency services workers in doing their job.

I want to thank the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events for bringing this forward and delivering many, many major events for Victoria, which of course we should remind those opposite about, who were quite negative about this state and not being able to attract major events. They said the sky was going to fall in. Well, guess what – how wrong were they? Let me just rattle off a few of the events that we have that are coming up: a multiyear deal for Melbourne to host NFL regular season games from next year; a two-year deal to host the Australian Open golf; the NBA x NBL series where for the first time an NBA team, the New Orleans Pelicans, will play on Australian soil; of course the wonderful Rugby World Cup in 2027, which we all look forward to, and the mighty Wallabies are on their way back; and of course next year the great Neil Diamond musical A Beautiful Noise, and that will be a fantastic event also. But those are just a few, let alone our normal regular major events, which I will come to later.

I do want to touch on a bit of a personal reflection, and that is that I will admit that when the grand prix first moved from Adelaide to Melbourne back in 1997, I was very sceptical. There were two reasons: one was Jeff Kennett, and I did protest against the grand prix being brought to Melbourne and in particular being brought to Albert Park. I did not think it was a great idea having it at Albert Park.

Members interjecting.

Steve McGHIE: Well, I can assure everyone I have never been to the grand prix at all, except for the grand prix dinner this year on the Friday night, because I was asked by a minister to attend. But I have never been to the grand prix – it is not my cup of tea. But in the early years I was against it being at Albert Park. I thought it would have been better off located at Sandown, but I have changed my mind. It is an entrenched major event here, and I think Albert Park is the best location for it. It is easier for spectators to get to, and, as we will come to, many, many hundreds of thousands of people attend that race.

It has become synonymous with this city. It is a pillar of Melbourne’s identity as the sporting capital of Australia and indeed one of the great sporting capitals of the world, with of course the magnificent AFL Grand Final, the wonderful Spring Racing Carnival – I cannot wait for it to come up shortly – the Australian Open and many, many other major sporting events. Bells Beach and things like that have been referred to – the surfing championships and the great road races that we have. I know in the beautiful town of Buninyong, in the seat of Eureka, we had the Australian road racing championships for 21 years – yes, for 21 years. It has now gone off to Perth, unfortunately, and I hope it is a failure in Perth so it can come back to beautiful Buninyong, but anyway, that is another issue.

The timing of these amendments could not be more significant. Formula One is undergoing a period of unprecedented global growth. From Miami to Singapore, from Las Vegas to Jeddah, new circuits are entering the calendar and of course putting a lot of pressure on the current circuits around the world. Netflix’s Drive to Survive has opened the sport to a younger generation, which is fantastic, and a more diverse audience are now flocking to the races in numbers never, ever seen before, and sponsorship, broadcasting rights and tourism revenues are all at all-time highs.

It is not just a sport anymore, it is a global entertainment juggernaut, and Melbourne’s grand prix has made it that way, has complemented it so much.

For this year’s grand prix I went for the first time to the Friday night dinner. I noticed there were a number of opposition members there on the Friday night. I do not know if it was a freebie, but there were plenty of opposition members at the Friday night dinner. I did not see the member for Hawthorn there, but there were a number of others. I know the member for Malvern and the member for Eildon were there. It was a very good night. Going into the event, there were about 100,000 spectators coming out in all their clobber and clothing and things like that, which was amazing. I think someone said that ticket prices for just one particular stand are $245 a session, and I was thinking: wow. That is dedication if people are going over four days, and then they are dressed up to the nines in their gear. It is fantastic to see. But my first opportunity to attend the grand prix was at the dinner this year, which was a very good dinner, I should say.

Of course all the evidence speaks for itself. In 2025 we witnessed the most attended Australian Grand Prix in history. Over 465,000 people poured into Albert Park across the four days. That makes a massive statement in regard to the growth of this race and how it is entrenched in Melbourne now. Looking ahead, the momentum is only building. In 2026 the Australian Grand Prix will unveil a brand new stand, the Piastri stand. I think it was the member for Morwell who raised something about Oscar and how wonderful it is that he is leading the championship and what a great driver he is as a young Melbourne boy. But I have got to make reference to some other drivers in this type of sport. We talk about Oscar Piastri, a Brighton boy. There is James Wharton, who is an F3 driver. He is from Bundoora. I know Brooksy, Minister Brooks, would be quite happy about that local lad and F3 driver. Aiva Anagnostiadis is an F1 Academy –

Brad Rowswell: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I have a high regard for the member for Melton, but to casually refer to a minister of the Crown as ‘Brooksy’ is unparliamentary, and I would encourage you to encourage the member for Melton –

The ACTING SPEAKER (Iwan Walters): I believe the member for Melton corrected himself.

Steve McGHIE: I did. That is what I call him outside of the chamber all the time, and it is very hard to forget that. I should say that he owes me four bottles of wine for a bet that we had recently, but anyway, I will collect that shortly.

I cannot forget at the grand prix dinner a young woman, Joanne Ciconte, who is a F1 Academy driver also – what a great ambassador for the sport and a great inspiration for the younger generation engaging in this type of sport. But it will be fantastic to see the new stand open next year and people going into the track with the Piastri stand there.

The bill extends the maximum race period from seven days to 21 days. There have been enough people that have spoken on that. As I said, nearly half a million people went to the race this year. The bill also guarantees access to parts of Albert Park during the extended period – those community spaces. It legislates for public access, so that is important. It also increases the payments to Parks Victoria, and this is another important step. Hosting the grand prix places additional responsibility on Parks Victoria, so both before and after the event the bill increases their funding, ensuring that they can maintain the park to a high standard, supporting both the event and the broader community. It also enables the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to host non-motorsport events, which is important because it means that they can diversify. It allows them to generate new revenue, which is really important, which will reduce the financial burden on the Victorian government and taxpayers of course. It also modernises the governance provisions, allowing acting appointments to the AGPC board.

This is a really good bill. Again, I commend the minister for bringing this bill to the house. There will be many, many financial benefits out of this bill. The grand prix increases Victoria’s gross state product by $323.9 million, and it delivers an estimated $3.08 per dollar spent in economic impact. It is a really important bill, and I commend it to the house.

Brad ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (12:29): I also rise to address the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. We will not be opposing this bill, as has been made clear by previous speakers, and e will not be opposing this bill for a number of reasons. Firstly, we on this side of the house have a very strong connection to the Australian Grand Prix. As soon as I mention the name of the former Premier who instigated it, I wait for government members to have a view on the matter. But the opposition – the coalition; the Liberals and Nationals – do have a stake in the Australian Grand Prix because it was a former Liberal–National government, under the leadership of the then Premier, Jeffrey Gibb Kennett, that brought the Australian Grand Prix to Victoria. And let us be frank: if the Australian Grand Prix was still being hosted by South Australia it would have left Australian shores many, many moons ago. It was only because of the vision and the instigation of the then Liberal Premier, Jeffrey Kennett, that we are still having a worthwhile conversation about the purpose and the impact of the Australian Grand Prix on our community today.

The government argues that the bill has been introduced for safety reasons. It argues the extension of the race period from seven to 21 days is there for safety reasons. We understand that, but we also contend that the government has not actually indicated in any great detail what those specific safety reasons are, so we await the government’s response on that specifically. Hopefully, in between this debate in the Assembly and the subsequent debate in the other place in the coming weeks, the government will be more forthcoming with that information.

We support the grand prix. We have a history of supporting the grand prix. We are very pleased that the grand prix has seen a significant rise in attendance from just over 324,000 fans in 2019 to more than 465,000 fans in 2025. That is 43 per cent growth. On this side of the chamber we are champions of Victorians and champions of Victoria, and for that reason any growth in attendance at the grand prix is good for everyone. We think that is a good thing. We think, as the Australian Grand Prix Corporation has contended, the rise in attendance is driving greater operational and infrastructure requirements, and due to that growth the Australian Grand Prix Corporation must undertake more of the critical event build and dismantle activities outside of the official race period. This is what the Australian Grand Prix Corporation is contending. We do not disagree with that and we understand it. But this is the bottom line: we think that the Formula One is something that frankly needs to be jealously guarded. We know that our northern neighbours in New South Wales mounted a strong and unsuccessful bid to steal the grand prix from Melbourne, and if they had got it, we would struggle here in Victoria to get it back. That is just the reality.

We know that France no longer has a grand prix race. We know that just in the weekend ahead there will be the very last Dutch grand prix, despite them having world champions like Max Verstappen. We know that the Barcelona race is moving to Madrid. We know the famous spa circuit is only going to host a race every second year after 2026, and we know that this year was the last race at the famous Imola circuit. So the bottom line is this: Formula One as an organisation will remove races from the calendar.

So I again contend that the Formula One race here in Melbourne must be fiercely and jealously guarded. That does not mean that we on this side of the house contend that a blank cheque should simply be written to the grand prix corporation, and we understand the economic pressures that the Australian Grand Prix Corporation is under. As reported in the Age on 18 November 2023 by Chip Le Grand:

Liberty Media, the $12.4 billion, Colorado-based company that owns Formula 1, pulled off a stunning cash grab in its grand prix contract negotiations with the Victorian government by securing all revenue from the event’s most exclusive ticket sales.

Under a previously undisclosed provision within Victoria’s contract extension to keep the Australian Grand Prix, the state has agreed to meet the cost of new or substantially refurbished corporate hospitality facilities at the Albert Park track but will forgo all revenue generated within those plush walls.

Tickets to the Paddock Club – Albert Park’s $6000 per head answer to the Flemington Birdcage – this year contributed $12 million to the bottom line of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC). In 2026, when an expanded Paddock Club is due to be completed and the contractual change comes into force, trackside largesse worth an estimated $30 million will flow directly to F1.

We understand that the Australian Grand Prix Corporation is under significant economic pressure from the Formula One organisation – we get that. We get that at minimal to no notice the Formula One organisation will change their mind, will realign guardrails, will move goalposts. Equally, we cannot be writing a blank cheque, because any Victorian taxpayer money that is put into the grand prix is in fact that – it is Victorian taxpayer money. It needs to be accounted for in a way that is appropriate and respectful of those hardworking Victorians that contribute their hard-earned taxpayer dollars to the Victorian government coffers, which provide a sustainable resource for events like the Australian Grand Prix. But we are also appreciative of the fact that we must jealously guard this race for the larger and broader economic benefit that it brings our state.

I was also concerned to read in the Age newspaper on 26 August 2025:

… the Australian Grand Prix Corporation released the prices for the F1 season opener, with a four-day general admission ticket rising to $385, a 24 per cent increase from last year.

I think that one of the great strengths of motorsport racing and the grand prix in this state since it was returned here by the former coalition government under the leadership of Jeffrey Kennett all those years ago is that motorsport in this state and in fact in this country has been accessible to punters, because it has been at a price point where Victorians who are interested in it can attend. I am concerned that there has been this massive price increase of 24 per cent from last year, and I think it is incumbent upon the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to demonstrate why that massive cost increase has in fact been the case, because over the last five years a general admission four-day pass has risen from $189 to $385, a 103.7 per cent increase. I am concerned by that, and I think we need to do better.

I will end where I began. We will not be opposing this bill. We support the Australian Grand Prix. We do so because it was a former coalition government that brought the Australian Grand Prix to our shores and to our city all those years ago. That visionary leadership of the great then Victorian Liberal Premier Jeffrey Gibb Kennett must be acknowledged. Credit must be given, and if credit will not be given from the government benches, it will certainly be given from the opposition benches.

Eden FOSTER (Mulgrave) (12:39): I am proud to stand here today and speak in favour of the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. Victoria is a state that has built its reputation on being the sporting and major events capital of the world. From the AFL Grand Final to the Boxing Day test, the Australian Open and the Melbourne Cup, we host events that not only capture national attention but draw visitors and investment from right across the globe. These events are part of who we are as Victorians. They showcase our city, boost our economy and bring our communities together. Among these world-class occasions, the Australian Grand Prix stands out as one of the most important weekends in the calendar. It is without doubt one of the single biggest annual events held in Victoria, attracting global television audiences in the millions and drawing fans from every corner of the world to Melbourne. For four days Albert Park becomes the beating heart of international motorsport, with the eyes of the world firmly fixed on our city. This bill is about ensuring that we keep delivering the grand prix at the highest possible standard. The legislation makes modest but important changes that will help the Australian Grand Prix Corporation continue its work to make this event such a success. I want to take this opportunity to thank the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events for his leadership on this legislation and for his continued commitment to strengthening Victoria’s position as the home of major events.

In 2025 the grand prix increased Victoria’s gross state product by $323.9 million, generated an estimated $3.08 in economic impact for the state for every dollar invested by the Victorian government and supported an estimated 1631 annual full-time equivalent jobs through roles such as event construction and hospitality. I would like to also acknowledge the amazing work that this government has done to make sure that the event stays in Melbourne until at least 2037. As much as Sydney might want it, we are not giving it up, and we do it better than they ever could. The main aspect of this bill is that it extends the maximum amount of time that the race period can be declared under the act to allow for more time to set up and disassemble the necessary infrastructure needed for this important event.

Since the Australian grand prix returned to Melbourne in 1996, the popularity of the race has only grown, with larger crowds and more support categories, such as the Formula Two and Formula Three, needing more infrastructure and resources for the event to go ahead smoothly. The Australian Grand Prix Corporation has made it clear that it needs more time to set up for the grand prix, as critical components are built weeks before. The race period, as defined in this act, refers to the time period in which the Australian Grand Prix Corporation manages and controls most of Albert Park to prepare and run the grand prix. This period is in place for just seven days, and the changes in this bill will increase that time to 21 days.

Many people who do not watch the Formula One might not know this, but fans attend the event from Thursday before the race day, and there are support categories, such as the Supercars and the Formula Two, that run from then leading up to the main race. This means that, in actuality, there is less than a week for the grand prix corporation to set up an event that has hundreds of thousands attending. It is just not sustainable for the amount of temporary infrastructure that is used in this event to be set up in only a few days without compromising cost or safety. These changes will apply for next year’s event if this legislation passes Parliament. They are sensible and they allow us to make sure that the Australian Grand Prix is the best race in the Formula One calendar.

Another change that this bill implements is that it enables the AGPC to host non-motorsports events to increase its ability to generate revenue to help reduce the Victorian government contribution. The amendments require applications from the Australian Grand Prix Corporation to host non-motorsport events to be provided six months in advance of the proposed event and contain essential operations and security information. The minister must consider any effects on the committee of management and tenants of Albert Park if an event is proposed to be held there. This bill also increases the legislated payment to the committee of management for Albert Park, Parks Victoria, in recognition of the increased footprint of the grand prix and the additional work required from it to help stage the event, including tenant liaison and park maintenance and upkeep.

The annual payment will rise from $100,000 to $200,000. In addition, the bill allows this compensation to be increased through the regulations. Finally, this bill updates the terminology used in the act, such as gendered language, makes changes relating to grand prix insignia and modernises governance settings.

I would like to use the last few minutes that I have to touch on an adjacent topic while I am speaking on this bill, and that is the great space that is Sandown raceway in Springvale in my electorate. I am very proud to have the raceway, which provides similar benefits to my local community and local economy. Although not to the same scale as the grand prix, Sandown is an icon in its own right – a venue with deep history and a place where many Victorians have made memories, whether it be through motorsport, community gatherings or other events. The reality is that motorsport is an expensive sport to get involved in and that many people who want to participate do not have the ability to do so. That is why I find it so valuable that we have accessible locations where Victorians can enjoy high-quality motorsport practically in their own backyards. Sandown does not just host elite-level racing, it also provides a space where grassroots participation and community engagement can flourish. I had the pleasure to tour the Sandown raceway site with Motorsport Australia officials recently, and it is such a wonderful facility in the heart of my community – a real hub of activity.

Did you know that Sandown could have been a contender for the grand prix but was not deemed good enough by the Kennett government? I grew up in earshot of the Sandown raceway, so I could hear every Sunday the cars going around on race day. I could hear them training. It was fantastic. My mum might not have liked it that often, but it reminded me of just how brilliant my electorate is and how brilliant the area where I grew up in was and still is. Unfortunately, and I would have been in my early teens at the time, the late Ron Walker made some comments about Sandown that if it was to be the place for the grand prix, then for those arriving by helicopter – because often it draws in people from around the world – it was probably not the best site; the aerial view was probably not the best. I would tell Ron Walker if I could that he is so wrong, because my electorate and that Sandown area in Springvale is an amazing space; whether it be on foot or perhaps from the air, it is an amazing space. So it was a missed opportunity. The grand prix could have been at Sandown. It is not too late. Albert Park is a great space, and the member for Albert Park is a great ambassador for the grand prix there too. But I will still think of Sandown Raceway as an alternative to Albert Park, in the near future perhaps – maybe down the track, no pun intended.

Anyway, I move on. In the modern day social groups are losing membership, and this is a global issue which I am sure everyone in this chamber has seen firsthand in their communities. Whether it is sports groups, social clubs or religious institutions, membership of social organisations is falling, and that is why it is events like this that bring people together. They help people connect, they bring in fans and they bring in people from all over the world to form connections over sport. We are a sporting city, and we will continue to support major events in this city.

Again I would like to thank the minister for the work on this bill and reinforce my support for this legislation and the amazing event that is the Australian Grand Prix, whether it be in Albert Park or whether they decides to bring it down to Sandown. I commend this bill to the house.

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn) (12:49): I am very pleased to rise and speak on the Australian Grands Prix Amendment Bill 2025. It has been mentioned previously but it is worth mentioning again that this event was secured for Victoria through the good work of the Honourable Jeffrey Gibb Kennett, then Premier, who came to office restoring the hope and optimism of this state after the malaise of the Cain–Kirner later years. Whilst there were certainly some good things done under that government in the early years, by the early 1990s it had clearly lost its way, and it was the good work of the Kennett government to secure this event, which we need to hold on to. I think it is a common view across the chamber and throughout the community that it is important. It is a marquee event in Victoria’s calendar of major events. It is a global event. It gives Victoria and Melbourne in particular the chance to shine on the international stage, and it is important to recognise and honour in a genuine way the concerns and respond to the concerns of locals in the Albert Park community in particular and the broader concerns of some Victorians about the race. But the overwhelming view of Victorians is that we strongly support this event and want to see it remain here for many years.

The comments I want to make on the bill this afternoon just touch briefly on matters around the ability to extend the designated race area and the designated race period, and like others before me, I think they are sensible changes which the Australian Grand Prix Corporation needs to make in order to make sure that we can continue to hold the event and that we can grow the event and build ticket sales and other sources of revenue over the years ahead. Whilst you have a contract with Liberty Media, I think it is known across the world that Liberty Media is a very skilful negotiating entity and a very powerful entity, and you have to work hard to retain the events that it agrees to contract out. So we will do our bit as proud Victorians to make sure that none of our competitor states or any other jurisdiction can compete for the event. As long as those designations and declarations around the race period and the race area and public access zones are done sensitively, so people’s rights are respected but the grand prix corporation is able to deliver on its objectives and discharge its functions, they are strongly supported, and I encourage that.

What I really wanted to talk about are the challenges that lie ahead for the grand prix corporation where the expansion of its activities is concerned. Just very briefly, in terms of its latest published financial data, we have a corporation which in relation to the Formula One grand prix itself turns over, according to its 2024 figures, around $116 million. Most of that was ticket sales of a bit over $90 million. The total expenses for the 2024 year were around about $220 million, from memory, which meant that there was a government investment, or a taxpayer subsidy, depending on which view of the world you want to take – it is all public money – of about $102 million. Now, if that is what is required to make sure that the event is successful and we retain it, with all of the direct and indirect benefits that flow from that – and there clearly are many hundreds of millions of dollars by way of indirect benefits – then that is a good thing.

But what I wanted to talk about in particular are two things. The first thing is that with an event of this nature it is important in the same way that the International Olympic Committee protects its insignia and its intellectual property, so too does the Australian Grand Prix Corporation. So those changes in the bill which relate to the expansion of its activities and functions beyond motorsport events and Formula One events, so designated, mean that necessarily the insignia requirements, conditions and prohibitions and those which relate to intellectual property will, you have to assume, I think quite reasonably, extend now beyond the area and the events themselves to any other activity that the grand prix corporation chooses to hold, subject to securing the approval of the minister.

I can understand the arguments for why it wants to do that, and we are supportive of that. But the point I want to make is that there does need to be a recognition in government and in the corporation and in its partners that there is a risk and that there does need to be a recognition in government and in the corporation and in its partners that there is a risk, as the grand prix corporation extends its functions into those activities that are not directly related to or constitute motorsport events or Formula One events, of what I will loosely call crowding out, where the corporation can conduct activities with all of the protections that will necessarily surround its intellectual property and the insignia relating to the event and extend that in a way which runs the risk of pushing out other activity that may already occur or that we might want otherwise to occur in the economy. There is that risk of crowding out, which I think needs to be taken very seriously. I know the grand prix corporation is led by a former member of this house, Mr Martin Pakula, who I rate and respect enormously, and Travis Auld. They are both two very good operators, and I am very happy to acknowledge their abilities and that they will manage that.

The other point I want to make relates to what I would call the investment mandate and the portfolio strategy that now will need, in my view, to apply to how those activities are conducted, because the extension of the grand prix corporation’s activities beyond motorsport events and Formula One activities means that there is always this tension about what core business is, and core business for the corporation is delivering these two global events. If it is going to extend and use its balance sheet, which has an enormous value, and its reputation to conduct other major events, it will not be long before those other events constitute a very significant part of its operating results. So if you think about it, just in terms of the Formula One, you have a turnover in terms of revenue of about $116 million, as I said earlier. If you are conducting an ever-expanding suite of commercial activities that are non-motorsport activities or non-Formula One activities, they will before long constitute a very significant part of the grand prix corporation’s operating activities.

What I would hope that the government would do is ensure that, working with the grand prix corporation, there is a clear understanding of what the investment strategy and the portfolio activities of the grand prix corporation are going to be in the years ahead, because we want these two events, in particular the two grands prix – the motorsport and the Formula One grand prix – to be always successful year in and year out. But if, for example, the grand prix corporation is going to be holding concerts, exhibitions and other major events that will see it turning over many tens of millions of dollars in the years ahead, that will start to constitute a fairly significant impact on its commercial activities for the better, we would hope and assume, but it does mean that it is going to face increasing pressure to ensure that those activities (1) do not crowd out other activity, because what is the point of that? And one thing that is missing from the bill is any kind of explicit nexus between what those other activities might be. So you have got a corporation that has been very successful, in my view; you have now got a bill which is saying that subject to ministerial approval you can engage in whatever other activities you want. Now, I do not suggest for a moment the grand prix corporation is going to be reckless or cavalier in that decision, but it means that it can conduct any type of activity with the possibility that it starts to intrude upon and crowd out those activities.

So the point I would finish on is I think it is very important for the government and the corporation to ensure that there is a clear understanding, even if it is not set out in the bill itself, that those extra activities – what I would call the extracurricular activities – bear some connection and are not just an attempt to drive revenue at the risk of deterring investment in other parts of the Victorian economy or operating unfairly on organisations that for a long time conducted activities at the time of the grand prix corporation and that there is always an understanding that any other activities that go beyond motorsport and Formula One activities are, in practice – even if it is not set out explicitly – connected to its core business mission. Otherwise, we do not oppose the bill.

Sitting suspended 12:59 pm until 2:02 pm.

Business interrupted under standing orders.