❓ Mr. Marshall questions the government's commitment to Peel Thunder's survival in the WAFL, given support for other clubs. Mr. Carpenter affirms regional football support and highlights ongoing efforts to prevent Peel Thunder's removal from the league.
AnsweredQoN 973Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the decision by the seven metropolitan West Australian Football League presidents to axe Peel Thunder Football Club from the competition. (1) Given the Government’s support for other local WAFL clubs, such as the proposed rent reduction for West Perth Football Club at Arena Joondalup and a new home ground for East Perth and Subiaco Football Clubs, what will the Government do to ensure the survival of Peel Thunder? (2) Is the minister committed to the growth of football in the regional areas of Western Australia, or will football, particularly in the Peel area, join the growing list of other regional services and activities being neglected or axed by the Gallop Government? Mr CARPENTER
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(1) Given the Government’s support for other local WAFL clubs, such as the proposed rent reduction for West Perth Football Club at Arena Joondalup and a new home ground for East Perth and Subiaco Football Clubs, what will the Government do to ensure the survival of Peel Thunder? (2) Is the minister committed to the growth of football in the regional areas of Western Australia, or will football, particularly in the Peel area, join the growing list of other regional services and activities being neglected or axed by the Gallop Government? Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(2) Is the minister committed to the growth of football in the regional areas of Western Australia, or will football, particularly in the Peel area, join the growing list of other regional services and activities being neglected or axed by the Gallop Government? Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(1) Given the Government’s support for other local WAFL clubs, such as the proposed rent reduction for West Perth Football Club at Arena Joondalup and a new home ground for East Perth and Subiaco Football Clubs, what will the Government do to ensure the survival of Peel Thunder? (2) Is the minister committed to the growth of football in the regional areas of Western Australia, or will football, particularly in the Peel area, join the growing list of other regional services and activities being neglected or axed by the Gallop Government? Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(2) Is the minister committed to the growth of football in the regional areas of Western Australia, or will football, particularly in the Peel area, join the growing list of other regional services and activities being neglected or axed by the Gallop Government? Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Mr CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
I thank the member for the question. (1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
(1)-(2) The answer to the member’s second question is that we are strongly committed to seeing football develop in the regions. As the member knows, a lot of the football development trust money, which effectively is a subsidy from the State, goes into developing football talent in the regions and so on. The crux of the member’s question is in relation to the future of Peel Thunder Football Club and what, if anything, the State Government can do about it. As the member knows, and as I have told the House before, the Government already has made its position very clear, and I think it is the bipartisan position of both sides of Parliament; that is, it would like Peel Thunder to maintain its position in the West Australian Football League competition. The reality that confronts us is that the constitution of the West Australian Football Commission allows the presidents of the league clubs a decision on whether Peel Thunder’s licence will be renewed. As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
As the member for Dawesville has said, seven of the eight presidents of the traditional league clubs have voted for that licence to be discontinued, despite meetings I had with them and with the West Australian Football Commission beseeching them not to take that position. However, they have taken that position. Since last week’s or this week’s vote on that, I have spoken to the chairman of the council of presidents of the WAFL, Mr Terry Dean of South Fremantle Football Club, and Dr Neale Fong, the Chairman of the West Australian Football Commission, to see whether the decision is a fait accompli. It is not. As the member for Dawesville would know from his days in sport, “it ain’t over till it’s over.” Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Peel Thunder has indicated that it will take this matter to court, which is one possible complication to the desired outcome of the other eight clubs. The history of clubs being excluded from competitions and legally challenging that exclusion is very strong in Peel’s favour. We have seen it most recently with the Rabbitohs in the National Rugby League. It successfully appealed its exclusion and returned to the competition. If I were the other eight clubs, I would not bet on the outcome of any court action by Peel Thunder. The problem for the Thunder is finding the funds for the court action. There is no intention for the State to fund that action. Members would not expect us to fund one side against another. Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Another issue that is still on the table is that the West Australian Football Commission is still providing an incentive for a possible amalgamation of two clubs, so that the competition can be reduced from nine to eight clubs. That incentive package is worth $400 000, and discussions are continuing about which clubs might be enticed into a merger. We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
We on this side of the House hope that Peel Thunder Football Club can maintain its position in the WA Football League. The story is a long way from over yet. There is a chance of legal action, as well as the possibility of the incentive package being a possible lure for two of the traditional clubs to merge.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.