Dealing Monash Ratepayers a Dodgy Hand


What do you think?

Leave your comments by clicking on the Leave a Comment button above.

EM&U will publish your letters, emails etc.  We exist to empower the community to speak out. Name and contact details must be provided though not necessarily published.  Each author is responsible for their content and views do not always represent all involved with our group.


11 thoughts on “Dealing Monash Ratepayers a Dodgy Hand”

    1. Hi Bill. Which facts and figures are you concerned about? Do you have contradictory information to present from which we could all learn?


  1. As someone who has a medical condition/disability and involved in a support group I would like for you to know that I have found venues such as the Mulgrave Country Club convenient for us to meet. Also have you thought that we prefer not to be cooped up in a closed room, We may prefer to be at a venue where we could also have a meal just like anyone else. Thomas I know what you mean but why is there an assumption that only senior groups meet at these venues. There are many out there who are not seniors who organise support meet ups at these venues. As someone who has attended a support group not even once I have seen any attendees gamble. Because they are there for specific reasons not to gamble. No one has the right to make that type of judgement that I or any other support group member is there to gamble. Have a thought for those who are already isolated and always homebound, why should they be confined in a closed council meeting room!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Some years ago I used to be a member of a gliding club committee. We met monthly at a conveniently central pub to plan activities and deal with administrative matters. Many of us would come straight from work and have dinner before retiring to a small meeting room.
      This was not funded by anybody outside the gliding club (the pub may even have donated the room – I’m not sure) and it was before pokies were legal in Victoria. The point is, however, pubs and clubs do provide a community service for many diverse groups of whom some need a little community funding. It’s a bit of a stretch to suggest that council should refuse to support groups who find these facilities convenient for their business or social meetings.
      There are other ways to resist and limit gambling venues which may well cause less collateral damage. Councils have sought to impose controls on where pokies are installed but State regulations and VCAT have not been supportive. This is where Council’s efforts should go, not into attacking the patrons of the venues.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. 100 million per year back into the Victorian community when in monash alone people are losing about 114 million. I would not say the community is really gaining anything from the pokies. It sounds like tokenism to me, like maccas putting the option of apple on the menu and claiming to be healthy. Also you’re talking about community grants, you do realise that most senior groups that apply through the community grants process and are meeting in a council facility get the room hire for free? Wouldn’t it be better they meet at a free council facility than a free pokie venue?


  3. The Community Support Fund (CSF) was established by the Victorian Government to direct a portion of gaming revenue back to the community.

    Taxes on gaming machines in Victorian hotels contribute more than $100 million each year to the Fund. Funds from the Community Support Fund support a range of programs, which in turn support a wide variety of projects in the community.

    So I wonder if Cr oops Mayor Lake wants you to see the irony?

    The venues via their taxes, do support the community financially.



  4. Thomas you said “They make enough money from the pokies, why should council give them more?”

    What a strange comment! Council is not giving Pokies venues any money.
    It is the community groups that may get grants if they are lucky and from experience the grants are very small – only a few hundred dollars or reduced room hire in a council facility. The grants do not go to individuals to play the pokies! These pokies venues often offer free room hire so can’t imagine Council will be cheaper than that. I personally have accompanied Morning Melodies bus trips for seniors to such venues; the audience come, watch and leave again – in a bus – no playing of pokies. What about Tattslotto? TAB? Many rely on community raffles for money. Would you ban every group from community funding?

    I have personally obtained grants for many not-for-profit groups and had to itemise every single item of expenditure in order to provide a credible budget associated with the grant application. I can tell you substantiating a request for $25,000 is a hard laborious task. I have done this. But all Cr Lake had to do was ask for $25,000 of MONASH RATEPAYERS MONEY and Councillors (except Cr Davies and Cr Zographos) approved it, sadly without question. This money will be effectively a vehicle to support Cr Lake’s tenure as Chair of the Alliance for Gambling Reform – an entity that he manufactured mid-2015 to give himself another Board position; and to duplicate already existing services under its name. The request for $25,000 was not supported by an itemised budget of what this money is to be spent on! Even if 60% is returned to Monash as sponsorship of anti-gambling material (what a joke!) there is still 40% unaccounted for. And be mindful Cr Geoff Lake is happy to accept freebies to go to Sports Bet venues eg. the races (the VRC is a business that survives on betting, bookies and TAB!) Do you not see there is a serious disconnect here?

    Plus, and more importantly, I fear you are missing the point of this proposed exclusion from community funding. This funding criteria has been defined and specifically geared to funnel groups into using Cr Lake’s proposed dream library /community hub (a project lacking any need, business case, plan or budget) when it is built. Yet this building will cost upwards of $45 – 60 million. This is GAMBLING with our most valuable community asset, a 7114sq m piece of land in the centre of Glen Waverley. Do you realise that because of Cr Lake’s dream of “his” 5 storey library / hub at nearly 6 times the size of the existing library, Monash is expected to sell off and lose FOREVER its prime piece of land to a profit driven developer who will most likely erect a couple of high rise towers of 15+ storeys to cover and shade what now is the Central Car Park Site in our city’ centre?

    Some months BEFORE the “SHAM” community consultations regarding this site took place, this land was advertised for sale internationally by Knight Frank and advertised on the website – tenders on line.

    Now tell me who is playing us for fools and gambling with our assets?


  5. I think those kind of establishments prey on people of all ages, but especially older, vulnerable people. They go there for a community group, and stay and put their money through the pokies. I think it’s good that the council are choosing not support pokies in their efforts to lure people in. They make enough money from the pokies, why should council give them more? And wouldn’t it be cheaper for groups to hire council facilities? Council community rates are much cheaper than commercial venues.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s