Disclaimer and Usage Terms of StreamingOpinions expressed and statements made during a Council meeting are those of the individuals making them and not those...
Set comments to sort by “new” to see them in the right order.
Cr Adams has to recuse herself from discussing a matter due to a declarable conflict of interest. She has “received hospitality from the Brisbane Racing Club.”
Crs Allan and Marx make the same declaration. The LNP retains a quorum.
The item in question is about the Stafford Bowls Club redevelopment, which has been granted to BRC (a company involved in the gambling-adjacent industry that is horse racing, not something wholesome like motorsports or cycling, or even the Olympic style of equestrian sports) without going through the tender process.
Cr Owen accuses Labor of having a candidate (for Marchant Ward) of owning a race horse, in an effort to suggest that Labor are hypocrites for not supporting Brisbane Racing Club.
Cr Cassidy says “ah, defamation! Defamation!” He says it’s not true.
Unclear to me what the truth behind this actually is. I suspect the Labor candidate does not own the horse, or Cr Cassidy would not have responded as he did. But I cannot believe the LNP would make such a blatant lie, so I suspect that the truth might be something like “the horse is owned by the Labor candidate’s spouse” or “the Labor candidate recently sold the horse”. I could be wrong though, maybe it is a straight-up lie.
Cr Johnston points out that Cr Hammond, the local councillor for the Stafford area, is not present. Another LNP councillor tries to “um actually” her by saying that Cr Hammond was present via videolink earlier, but this allows Cr Johnston to double down by pointing out that Cr Hammond is not present and not an apology, but just “shirking her responsibility” and avoiding facing her residents.
The Lord Mayor points out that the lease is being transferred to BRC with all the same conditions, and that Labor was supportive of the lease with those same terms (including the poker machines) when it was given to Crushers Leagues Club.
Cr Adams has to recuse herself from discussing a matter due to a declarable conflict of interest. She has “received hospitality from the Brisbane Racing Club.”
Crs Allan and Marx make the same declaration. The LNP retains a quorum.
The item in question is about the Stafford Bowls Club redevelopment, which has been granted to BRC (a company involved in the gambling-adjacent industry that is horse racing, not something wholesome like motorsports or cycling, or even the Olympic style of equestrian sports) without going through the tender process.
Cr Owen accuses Labor of having a candidate (for Marchant Ward) of owning a race horse, in an effort to suggest that Labor are hypocrites for not supporting Brisbane Racing Club.
Cr Cassidy says “ah, defamation! Defamation!” He says it’s not true.
Unclear to me what the truth behind this actually is. I suspect the Labor candidate does not own the horse, or Cr Cassidy would not have responded as he did. But I cannot believe the LNP would make such a blatant lie, so I suspect that the truth might be something like “the horse is owned by the Labor candidate’s spouse” or “the Labor candidate recently sold the horse”. I could be wrong though, maybe it is a straight-up lie.
Cr Johnston points out that Cr Hammond, the local councillor for the Stafford area, is not present. Another LNP councillor tries to “um actually” her by saying that Cr Hammond was present via videolink earlier, but this allows Cr Johnston to double down by pointing out that Cr Hammond is not present and not an apology, but just “shirking her responsibility” and avoiding facing her residents.
The Lord Mayor points out that the lease is being transferred to BRC with all the same conditions, and that Labor was supportive of the lease with those same terms (including the poker machines) when it was given to Crushers Leagues Club.