Criteria 1 My case study report will be on the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994. The major changes are in the Act itself on an area where there was no previous law. The Act also brought in other changes to other Acts such as the Environment Protection Act 1970, the Health Act 1958 or the Local Government Act 1989 in the respect of vehicle emissions in; or noise emanating from: the declared area in respect of a year during the race period. The main purpose of this Act is to establish an Australian Grand Prix Corporation and the holding of an annual Formula One Grand Prix at Albert Park. On 24 May 1995 the Magistrates' Court brought down a decision that found that the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994 failed to outlaw trespassing on site of the Grand Prix at Albert Park. The Australian Grand Prix retrospective Amendment Act 1995 was passed to close up the loophole. Criteria 2. The Australian Grand Prix Act 1994 was introduced to set up a Corporation and to have the Formula One Grand Prix at Albert Park for the Economical reasons such as, to try and get Victoria out of the red, to increase Tourism, to improve facility at Albert Park and to have more employment. The original
failed to fulfill the requirements of the Act because it did not specify a 12-month period in which areas of Albert Park would be then "declared" as sites. This resulted in a loophole and the charges were dropped against the demonstrators. The designated period mentioned of 1994 to 1995, could be viewed as meaning up to two years. The Australian Grand Prix retrospective Amendment Act 1995 purpose is to make further provisions in relation to the declared area under the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994. Criteria 3 There were many conflicting attitudes in making the Australian Grand Prix Act and in choosing of the site of where the Australian Grand Prix would be held; Mr. Kennett believes Albert Park to be the best site for the Grand Prix while Mr. John Brumby suggested the Docklands as being a more suitable site to host the Grand Prix. The Docklands have an established park since the 1980's and have a Central Business District so they believe it would be a better alternative site for the Grand Prix. The Docklands is also offering advantages that cannot be matched by Albert Park according to Ms Crooks. She says that the Australian Grand Prix at the Docklands fits with Mr. Kennett's Government policies for the area and for Tourism. Since Melbourne had won the right to stage the Formula One Grand Prix, there have been a number of orchestrated scare campaigns aimed at undermining the event and playing down the significant benefits it will bring to Victoria. With the environment, Mr. Kennett wants to cut down the old trees and plant new trees elsewhere, while The Save Albert Park group say that the new trees will take years before they have any substantial effect on the environment; The Save Albert Park group and the Environmentalists argued that there would be dramatic effects that would destroy the parkland. Some points that were made were: the chopping down of all the old trees; polluting the ozone and the impact on nature and the wild life that live in or near the Albert Park. Another point that was raised was that Mr. Kennett secretly signed a deal giving Melbourne preference to host the Grand Prix and that he did not consult the people of Melbourne if they wanted it. In December 1995 the Premier announced that Melbourne had won the right to hold the Australian Grand Prix at Albert Park. The Government also wanted the Grand Prix held at Albert Park mainly because it used to be a race track in the 1950's and to restore the Park, and improve the facilities. Many people believe the law had gone too far by passing a retrospective amendment Act on the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994. Mr. Kennett blames protesters for a $2 million blow out in security costs. Mr. Brumby say's the Melbourne Grand Prix should be bringing the community together rather than dividing people and putting Victorians against Victorians and the attempts by Government to fence off the entire Albert Park and to chainsaw and woodchip magnificent historic trees is unforgivable and inexcusable. There was also lack of public consultation, holding the race in a park and not on a track like Sandown. Thirty-five percent of Victoria believe it should go ahead, but somewhere else in Victoria. Law groups have attacked State Government legislation establishing the Grand Prix at Albert Park, which will prevent challenges to the Supreme Court. Criteria 4 There were many groups who tried to move or change the Australian Grand Prix Act; The Save Albert Park group was formed at the beginning of 1994. The group has worked tirelessly to try to influence the Parliament to reject the Australian Grand Prix bill that will bring the Grand Prix to Albert Park or to change the bill to have it elsewhere. They also say it will impose unacceptable health risks. They tied yellow ribbons on trees, they formed rallies to counteract the building of the Grand Prix at Albert Park, had petitions signed and also got well know individuals such as Pop-stars, to try and convince the public and parliament not to bring the Grand Prix to Albert Park. The Union had threatened to Black Ban Albert Park, which means no work or material's can be delivered to Albert Park by workers in the Union. Civil Rights group employed Barristers to find faults in the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994. Criteria 5. There were many demands for the law to be change. Mr. Kennett is ignoring the threats made by the Save Albert Park group, the Fire department and the Civil right's group and threats made by the Union, but he did give compensation of $1900 to people who had damage done to them or their houses if they made a claim for it. The government passed a retrospective amendment Act on the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994 to close up the loophole found by the Barristers employed by the Civil Rights group that also stopped the demonstrators from getting changed. The Save Albert Park Group vowed to continue there fight to have the event shifted. Criteria 6 With the proposed changes in the law, the economic values such as job opportunities will be far greater for the people who need work, and it will help get Victoria out of the red. However, the environmental values will propose pollution, and unacceptable heath risk for people who live near the Grand Prix and noise pollution. The Freedom of Information Act 1982 does not apply to a document, whether or not it was created before or after the commencement of the Australian Grand Prix Act 1994, which is ignoring the rights of people to information about the Grand Prix. Criteria 7 The law-making body has formed a Cooperation to consult people before the race period. The committee of management must, at the request of the Cooperation, give the Cooperation the name and address of each person that has the right of occupation of any part of Albert Park. Grand Prix organizers sought advice, from specialists, on the issues of noise, air pollution, and local health issues, tree removal, relocation and planting and the traffic management. No demands for changes were met, i.e. there is still no compensation and the freedom of information doesn't count for the Grand Prix. The law-making body was quick to change that loophole, but otherwise they were slow in responding if they had responded at all. Criteria 8 There have been many negatives and positive changes in the law caused by the effects of or on individuals' rights, society and the legal system. Individual Rights; despite anything in the freedom of Information Act 1982 individuals have no rights to view any of the documentations made by the Cooperation, and the right to sue and claim compensation, they also took the right away from the demonstrators to demonstrate on public land. Economic; economic benefits study confirm Melbourne received $82 million in economic benefits from the event. From the Australian Grand Prix new jobs will be created and tourist dollars will be flowing into the state and a significantly improved Albert Park for their enjoyment. Society; As a society we wanted the Grand Prix, but we had no real say in what the Grand Prix Act can do to us. The race also generated the equivalent of 31,000 part-time jobs. The legal system; Parliament had passed a retrospective amendment Act, meaning that the demonstrators who were arrested and found not guilty weren't charged because of the loophole but now with the retrospective amendment passed on the Australian Grand Prix Act they can now be changed.