Month: January 2020

At Karaka 2020: the industry’s ex-jockeys now trainers who would love to see a rise in NZ prizemoney: From top left Stephen McKee (one trial ride), Graham Richardson (one race win), Lance O’Sullivan (Champion Jockey), Bob Vance (Outstanding Jockey) and at right Grant Cooksley (outstanding Jockey)

by Brian de Lore
Published 31 January 2020

When Racing Minister Winston Peters made his speech to open the Karaka Yearling Sales last Sunday at 10.50 AM, it was a typically hot and humid Auckland summer’s morning in rising temperatures.

But within seconds of commencement of that speech, The Optimist blog was the focus of the Minister’s attention and the heat went up to furnace temperatures.

However well researched you are as a blogger, if you generate an opinion from that research and then put your name to it and publish it, your readership can form into categories ranging from avid fans to ardent enemies.

Only a day or two before in a conversation with Cambridge Stud owner Brendan Lindsay, it was suggested The Optimist had been a bit tough on the Minister in recent times in suggesting he had dropped the ball and was missing in action; citing the examples of Winston’s recent appearance at Trentham and his commitment to attend the Karaka Millions meeting and open Karaka 2020. The feedback was good.

We all know that the Hon. Winston Peters is not only Minister of Racing, but is deputy Prime Minister and often acting PM, and has three more significant portfolios above racing in Foreign Affairs, State-Owned Enterprises and Disarmament and Arms Control. The average Kiwi might suggest racing is trailing in a long last in priority – another one we have to concede.

On the other hand, sometimes the bird won’t fly unless you ruffle the feathers. The Optimist has no intended agenda other than to point out the glaring problems of the racing industry, and by doing so hopefully generate a groundswell of support to make changes for the betterment of the participants, to keep it sustainable and to achieve change in the fastest possible time – I make no apology for that – but neither am I pretending I have all the answers.

…the only bad publicity you can get is the publication of your obituary…

Going on the old saying that the only bad publicity you can get is the publication of your obituary, I decided that the best course of action would be try and get the Minister back on the phone after a hiatus of nine months. However unlikely the chances seemed, it was worth a shot, and enlisting the help of NZ-First list MP Clayton Mitchell, on Wednesday of this past week, the agreement finally came in the form of a text.

From the outset, any sign of dropping the ball was gone; the demeanour coming down the phone line was saying I had been watching the wrong footy match, and here was a focused Winston Peters crashing through a pack of DIA forwards for a try under the goalposts and a seven-pointer.

The Minister on the phone exuded an air of positivity. I firstly asked about that meeting: “One of the things I talked to John Messara about was the question of industry involvement in its future management and when I said that we are setting out to ensure they control their own destiny – I meant exactly that.

“And there are parts of the legislation that we have looked hard at for a month now – in treating a range of those issues so to remove the possibility of a conflict with the industry’s sanctuary involvement going into the future. The secret is not to duplicate, though, what happened post-2003 with that legislation, because it’s clear that – the way it was constructed – it did not have the skills of the industry foremost in the provisions going forward – we have to fix that up.

“…the biggest legislation fix is the ministerial report summating what Messara said because there are points in there, which I can say, this draft does not reflect – and we’re going back to that original report”

“And we’re going to ensure that the biggest legislation fix is the ministerial report summating what Messara said,” continued Winston, “because there are points in there, which I can say, this draft does not reflect – and we’re going back to that original report.”

Suggesting to Winston this promise would be music to the industry’s ears, I then ventured into the controversy on the Intellectual Property.

“Now what happens is that the IP – the legislation improperly reflects what we were seeking. We’re not seeking to take anything from any industry at all. That’s another thing we want to fix up.

“The third one was on the clubs and venues going forward,” said Winston. Again, we are saying to the industry, it’s over to you to decide about the continuance and viability of race tracks and clubs, but amalgamation or combining with other race clubs will see them in a far more helpful situation where they don’t have to rely on central core funding for operational support.”

What can you do to ensure that we have strong industry representation on the board of TAB NZ, I asked.  

“There is a range of structures to go in to ensure that the industry stays in control, but it requires the industry to appoint and nominate their best – and not just your mate. We want the best of them at the top, allied to Tabcorp – not just my mate ‘let’s put him on’ – that’s no good.

“All I can do is put a structure in place and put a criterion alongside it to ensure we do get the best people” – Winston Peters

“All I can do is put a structure in place and put a criterion alongside it to ensure we do get the best people,” the Minister emphasised strongly. “So that’s what’s being worked on – in fact, I have a team working on this and the amendments as we speak, and we hope to have that ready for the closure time of submissions on February 11^th. When we have all the submissions in, then we can quickly dossier it in, and as John Messara said, it’s a matter of the correct messaging and tweaking the words to reflect the spirit and the objectives of his report in the first place, and I agree with him entirely.

“I’m here to listen,” retorted Winston to my suggesting the feeling was that thoroughbred racing code felt they had needed more consultation on these issues. “I’m not here to ram something down people’s throats and if they think that the drafting does not reflect their intent, then we’re here to listen to them and ensure that it does.”

When I remarked to Winston that the issue of who owned the TAB had raised its head once again, he said: “Here we are in 2020 and the industry doesn’t know the answer as to who owns the TAB. Is it foremost in my mind, but I wouldn’t want to report on it now because it makes far more sense for me to wait and see all the submissions and then address that issue.”

My next question on the codes brought this response: “I have just been through the annual report for the dogs; we have trotting in a serious plight and that’s two out of three. I’ve also got to ensure the integrity unit is bolstered as well, and all these things have to be balanced out. What I’m seeking to do is have, by the end of this budget round, and to get through parliament, all the structures that we can go forward on in the spirit of the Messara Report which after all, is very similar to the McCarthy Report of 1965.

“…spend $42 million getting this betting system going – this is an appalling situation to inherit.” – Winston Peters

“In 2008 racing had something like $130 million in reserve and then they spend $42 million getting this betting system going – this is an appalling situation to inherit. However, looking at what can be done alongside other breeding industries in New Zealand such as cattle and sheep – I just want the same kudos for the racing industry.

“All I can do is ensure that we have the legislative structure and the criteria in it to bring out the very best of the industry and have it central to any decision making, but I do not want to see another situation which I encountered in 2005 when I became the Racing Minister – and had a good hard look at who was giving all the advice, and I was alarmed at that time, and I was still alarmed when I came in again in 2017.

“We’ve gone back to first principles and that’s why I got the Messara Report done, and I’m going to nurse this through parliament – and get it through I will.”

“We’ve gone back to first principles and that’s why I got the Messara Report done, and I’m going to nurse this through parliament – and get it through I will.”

On the subject of the submissions and how much weight they carry, Winston responded thus: You have to see the submissions first, you never know who might have a really bad idea. And I’m bound to follow the process and give them the respect they deserve.

“I wouldn’t advise you to tell your readership to trust the process entirely,” he continued. “You should more properly say that it’s the international examples of success they should go by, and the present powers that be, will respect and listen and draft what has to come, and clearly understand what we need to do.

“We’ve got an industry that is barely $1.6 billion and has been there for 12 years at the same level according to what I have read, while Ireland for the gallops alone is an industry worth $3.2 billion – that’s what we are setting out to do.

” …serious pathway in the future for many young people who all they want to do is work with horses…” – Winston Peters

“We’re going to do an exercise on what the industry is actually worth, and then make sure that the political system understands that racing is a huge employment creator and it’s a huge provincial boost to economic welfare and is a serious pathway in the future for many young people, who all they want to do is work with horses bearing in mind that the number one person is the owner, and then the punter.”

Winston concluded by saying: “I meant what I said at the Karaka Sales opening; there’s never been a better time to buy into the industry than right now; I’m very confident to where we are going in the future, and if all things go well in the 2020 election as we intend them to, we can do so much more.”

Postscript Interview with John Messara AM during his four-day visit to attend the Karaka Sales this past week:

John Messara Q&A

Racing Minister Winston Peters has reassured the industry this week that it will get the legislative change to fix the problems by the end of June. What would be the impact of getting this second Bill through in an acceptable form?

The first thing that would happen upon the passing of the Bill is a sense of relief, then confidence would return among thoroughbred industry stakeholders who have been so resilient for so long, and who will respond quickly when they see the legislation deliver genuine major reform. 

Once the Bill is passed into law, what in your view should happen immediately afterwards?

I believe that a ‘war cabinet’ of pragmatic industry leaders should be established to execute the major financial imperatives, beginning with the process leading to the possible joint venturing of the TAB operations.

What else would you do as a matter of priority?

The next thing would be to execute the new governance arrangements, including the selection of new boards based on the NSW model, so that the detailed reform process can begin. If all that was seen to be done, I think there would be a mini-boom in the industry, led by New Zealand and Australian investors, followed by Asian investment.

Arrowfield Stud was the leading vendor on aggregate at the recent Magic Millions Gold Coast Sale, and you were an observer this week for Book One of our National Yearling Sale at Karaka. How would you compare the two sales?

My team at Arrowfield and I are always analysing yearling sale statistics, and this year’s comparison of the Magic Millions with Karaka Book One shows how far the New Zealand industry has fallen.

Only three of the top 25 sale prices this year at Karaka and Magic Millions combined were achieved at Karaka – and none of the top15. Also, only two of the top 25 yearling sale prices at Karaka and Magic Millions have been achieved by the progeny of a New Zealand-based sire – and none of the top 18.

Then, looking at the dams: only three of the top 25 yearling sale prices registered so far this year have been paid for the progeny of New Zealand-bred mares – and none of the top six.

Looking at the first day of Book 2 at Karaka, a $34,000 average simply doesn’t represent a return for most breeders and vendors, including the private, small-scale operations that have produced many of New Zealand’s very best horses in the past.

This is not a failure of the sales company which has worked tirelessly to sustain and enhance the Karaka Sale. The reason for these results is that New Zealand breeders have not had the encouragement or the returns on their investment required to upgrade the national gene pool over the last twenty years of industry decline. However, I believe this can change quite quickly.

How do we turn that decline around even with the advent of acceptable legislation?

I expect that in anticipation of a racing industry upturn, breeders and owners would start to re-invest in mares, stallions and young horses soon after appropriate legislation is passed. Overseas investors will also look again at New Zealand as an attractive place to set up a breeding or racing operation. This will start the process, which would then feed on itself as the reforms take effect.
Remember, historically, NZ has been a great horse racing and breeding nation, and the National Yearling Sale was the No. 1 sale in Australasia.

 I recall the late Colin Hayes lobbying the then Australian Prime Minister, Bob Hawke in 1985, to amend the Australian Tax Act to “enable Australia to compete with NZ” in racing and breeding. I have a vivid memory of this as I was the person who wrote and presented the submission to Treasury! This and other reforms in Australia set that industry on the path to major recovery and success.  

In an ideal world that would begin in July with everything you have outlined above, how long will it take for the financial benefits to impact on the industry?

I believe that the joint venturing of the TAB (which I emphasise does not require the sale of the TAB in any shape or form), the sale of surplus property and the suite of other changes including those introduced in the first Act, will have a positive and immediate impact on industry morale, and ultimately viability. The industry’s leadership should be able to negotiate and execute much of this, including increased prizemoney, within a two-year time-frame from the passing of the second Act, underpinning the upturn ; and then the upgrading of tracks and facilities etc. would begin in earnest.
Back in July 2018 when I delivered my Report to the Minister, I was excited by the future ahead of the New Zealand industry, because the necessary reforms were clear to me and my colleagues, and so achievable. Today, I am encouraged after chatting with Mr. Peters’ last week that he will make it all happen and after that we’ll be relying on the work of those appointed to leadership roles.

Prioritising the problems with the Minister’s legislation and delivering a united racing industry rebuttal

by Brian de Lore
Published 17 January 2020

The racing industry currently faces the biggest challenge of its existence because it has only until February 11^th (25 days from the day I write this blog) to unite in every sense of the word and issue the strongest possible objection to the most draconian aspects of the Racing Reform Bill No.2.

The keyword is ‘unite’ because, without an agreed and united approach, it’s unlikely a fragmented ‘herding cats’ response to the issues will produce the desired effect and prevent racing from sinking further into the mire from its already ignominious position of frailty – to an irreversible decline.

Club committees proposing to write submissions that defend only their district, club or racecourse, will be hindering the possibility of change rather than helping it. Self-interest above the national interest will do nothing more than squander this small window of opportunity to change or snuff out the legislation because only the weight of a united document with an unequivocal rejection of the main injustices will achieve a positive result.

The codes together must unite unilaterally and lead a charge to rebut this legislation and demand that racing is allowed to control its own destiny

The codes together must unite unilaterally and lead a charge to rebut this legislation and demand that racing is allowed to control its own destiny rather than have it forever in the dubious and possibly nepotistic hands of an unknown incumbent Minister of the future and his unknown government. Why would anyone even consider this outcome for racing?

The Magna Carta (Great Charter) was famously introduced in the Middle Ages with 63 grievances against the then rule of King John of England, which challenged his autocracy and was seen as a cornerstone document for a practical solution to the crisis. Racing is in crisis and needs its own Magna Carta to challenge the proposed 64 instances of Ministerial domination in the second Racing Bill.  

Can you believe the autocracy proposed by Winston Peters is outdoing King John’s autocracy of 800 years ago? The core principles of the Magna Carta are now echoed in documents such as the US Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – racing is entitled to its basic right of self-determination and ownership of its intellectual property (IP).  

The document contains so many issues unacceptable to all racing’s stakeholders

The legislation is long and complicated and to read all of it, and absorb all of it, will bring side-effects remedied only with Panadol x 2, a cup of tea, and a lie-down. The document contains so many issues unacceptable to all racing’s stakeholders, it’s hard to know where to begin but, nevertheless, here’s how The Optimist views the most critical issues:

1. Clause 46  gives the Minister the sole right to appoint the seven members of the TAB board and appoint the Chairperson. That edict is completely unacceptable as it leaves the codes in the worst-case scenario with zero representation and opens the door for Sport to infiltrate and take a bigger share of the pie. It’s contrary to the recommendation in the Messara Review, which said automatic code appointees and a panel for appointing remaining members.
   
   
2. Clause 81 gives the TAB NZ exclusive rights to the IP (Intellectual Property) associated with racing betting information, racing betting systems, and any audio or visual content derived from a NZ race. These items are the rightful property of the clubs and codes and should be managed by them and not the possibility of seven non-racing people appointed by the Minister. Clause 81 is straight-out theft.
   
   
3. Clause 63 replaces Section 16 of the old Racing Act 2003 which, provided a formula for the distribution of funds for prizemoney and the running of the three codes. Contrary to the Messara recommendation, no formula now exists in this legislation, but it allows for the writing of a regulation that can be changed by the Minister at any time (just as the Minister may be changed at any time) – no guarantees, and it provides the Minister with an easy path to water down money the racing codes receive in favour of sport. Total Ministerial control of the distribution of money to the codes is not acceptable.
   
   
4. Clauses 8, 45, 46, 47 and 48 of the new Bill all give TAB NZ too much power which conflicts with the Messara Review recommendation of devolving the power to the codes to run themselves. Under this arrangement and taking into account Clause 46 mentioned above, racing is exposed to the possibility of coming under the control of seven non-racing, political or nepotistic appointees to run racing’s business.
   
   
5. Clause 45 (4) requires the Minister to approve any partnering arrangement made by the TAB. Because a partnering/outsourcing arrangement could provide the single biggest financial windfall for NZ racing, you cannot have the power of veto available to a Minister that does not understand the business of wagering. Commercial business decisions such as this are not the domain of politicians and bureaucrats.

The five points above and much of the rest of the proposed legislation is not about reform; it’s about total control by the Minister with Marxist-type bureaucratic regulatory conditions for an industry that simply needs to get government out of its life, as the now Minister Winston Peters promised would happen.

the base-power for industry decision-making is not devolving down to the codes as the Messara Review recommended

Points one and four above are a double-edged sword. You don’t have to go as far as playing the devil’s advocate in analysing those clauses to realise that the result will be that racing will be run by people fundamentally unacceptable to the stakeholders of the industry. And because the power-base for industry decision-making is not devolving down to the codes as Messara recommended in his review, points one and four together place the codes in a very weak position.

Point Two above addresses Clause 81, which concerns the Intellectual Property rights (IP). Placing the IP in the hands of TAB NZ is straight out theft. No question it belongs to the clubs, and you could make a case for the owners, and nothing but full control by each of the codes should be acceptable.

How this has come about is interesting. The Messara Review said the IP should be assigned to the clubs and the codes, but in the Final Report by MAC (Ministerial Advisory Committee) which went to the Minister at the end of June last year, it said the following:

Legislation required

• If agreement can’t be reached between the domestic betting operator and the three racing codes for the assignment of IP, the Minister may be required to approve the drafting of legislation (Bill No. 2) to allow for the domestic betting operator to have the exclusive right to use all intellectual property generated domestically, to maximise revenue for the racing industry

The agreement wasn’t reached because it was never negotiated

The agreement wasn’t reached because it was never negotiated, and DIA has just written this MAC/RITA recommendation into the legislation. When I questioned RITA Chair Dean McKenzie weeks ago about the reasons for assigning the IP to TAB NZ he said it was because the betting operators wanted to deal with only one NZ body and not three codes. How can you accept that as a reason?

The clubs in particular should be ropable about the IP, and it may be a good point to raise at the coming series of industry conversation meetings with Dean McKenzie starting next week.

Point three is Clause 63 which in the old Act is Section 16. The Messara Review presented a formula to deal with the old Section 16 and although in MAC’s Final Report to the Minister, they say they supported the recommendation principle, the legislation says otherwise. In fact, the legislation sits on the fence in failing to determine any formula and leaves the serious matter of distribution of funds for stakes money completely open-ended and subject of a regulation not yet written.

How could that arrangement be satisfactory to any of the codes? Stake money is for what every owner races to pay the training bill, and with no guarantee of a formula to divide it, and Sport NZ lurking in the shadows, the lack of certainty is yet another worrying aspect of this very flaw-ridden document.

…outsourcing or partnering the TAB to provide the industry with a substantial up-front payment and save the industry somewhere between $50 million and $70 million a year in costs

Point five on the prospect of outsourcing or partnering the TAB to provide the industry with a substantial up-front payment and save the industry somewhere between $50 million and $70 million a year in costs, has never seriously been contemplated. Current and previous ministers, opposition shadow ministers, and MAC/RITA appear conjoined at the hip in their lack of enthusiasm to outsource.

The following quote from MAC’s Final Report contains more written enthusiasm that can be found elsewhere:  “The committee considers that the potential to outsource, or not, all or some of the commercial activities of TAB NZ needs more analysis. We have set up a sub-committee, the Racing Industry Outsourcing Evaluation Committee (RIOEC), to do this. 

“…outsourcing is not a foregone conclusion. Our terms of reference for the RIOEC included considering the option of retaining these services in New Zealand, as well as considering any joint venture opportunities.”

In the same report it also says:

“The legislation required

• Make legislative provision for outsourcing the NZRB’s commercial activities, or providing for variations on this proposal (Bill No. 2)
• Allow for TAB NZ to have the exclusive right to use all intellectual property generated domestically by the racing industry to maximise revenue for the racing industry (Bill No. 2)”

And further on in the document, it says: “What the RIEOC has to protect against, at all costs, is some future ‘shock’ or ‘event’ not clearly covered in the outsourcing agreement, or the non-performance of the outsourcing partner, which would result in the New Zealand racing industry being left with little control over its destiny and a declining revenue base for both racing and sports.”

Excuse me, RIEOC; can you please wake-up to yourself! It’s us that’s going down the drain, not them!

Excuse me, RIEOC; can you please wake-up to yourself! It’s us that’s going down the drain, not them!

Reading this document on and on, as one learned person told me, has the effect of making you lose the will to live. RIEOC is clearly made up of nerds who have no conception of the racing industry, and their input in this process of reviewing the reviewer is an exercise in time-wasting futility.

If you are having trouble sleeping at night, try reading this: file:///C:/Users/User/OneDrive/Documents/NZRB-RITA/Final-Report-of-MAC-on-the-Review-of-the-New-Zealand-Racing-Industry.pdf

Finally, look at the example of the New Zealand Rugby Union, who have no Minister to govern them, despite the level of betting, and self-ownership of all their own IP property, and deal with it themselves commercially.

NZ Rugby board has a sensible means of appointing its board members

They appoint rugby people as directors using a similar mechanism that John Messara has recommended for racing. Cricket does the same.

The point to be made here is that rugby and cricket appoint rugby and cricket people to make good decisions on rugby and cricket. If racing went back to geographical representation and appointed racing people to make good racing decisions, we would all be far better off than having the bureaucrats making incompetent decisions on racing’s behalf and thinking they know best.

The legislation is not acceptable. Rise up against it, and sign the Racing Magna Carta – someone has to start this decree and get everyone to sign it. Who is it?

by Brian de Lore
Published 10^th January 2020

Whatever degree of decline you thought racing was in before December 5^th, the entire future landscape of the racing industry changed for the worse on that date upon the release of the proposed legislation after its rubber-stamping by both Cabinet and Racing Minister Winston Peters.

What this 100-page document is essentially saying is that racing is not capable of running itself, so here’s a Marxist left-wing decree that dismisses the majority of the recommendations of the Messara Review and negates the serious part of devolving control to the codes, and firmly grips the testicles of all three codes in a bureaucratic-DIA-operated vice.

Winston: …positive reform and increased prizemoney – Yeah right!

The message communicated to the racing people of New Zealand by our now Minister Winston Peters, both pre-election and for a year post-election, was that we would get positive reform, increased stakes money, and return to self-determination with racing people running racing.

For a time, Peters and Racing were deeply in love. They became engaged to be married when the coalition government was formed in October 2017, and the relationship was developing marvellously until he met a new girl on the block named Rita. Now he’s in love with Dia, and as Princess DIAna once said, “three in a relationship becomes a little crowded.”

Hardly surprising was it to learn that the engagement between Peters and Racing is now off, and a kiss and make-up reconciliation is looking unlikely. Peters isn’t speaking to Racing (failure to respond to any of The Optimist’s last nine texts is proof enough) and Dia is now the Minister’s sweetheart despite being not so attractive plus a pro-1917-Russian Revolutionist, Marxist supporting and bourgeoisie hating gender-neutral dunce. There’s no accounting for taste, but it is what it is!

The latest speculation is that Winston’s are now firmly gripped in a DIA operated vice on the workbench, but that can’t be confirmed. What can be confirmed, as it is a matter of public record, is that Winston not only whispered sweet nothings in Racing’s ear but loudly declared his love and devotion to Racing when he made his speech to launch the Messara Review at Claudelands on August 30, 2018.

“We all know that so much of the legislation governing your industry was written, not for the industry’s benefit, but for the convenience of politicians and bureaucrats – you all know that, and all of us are to blame for allowing that to happen.”

In that speech, Winston said: “We all know that so much of the legislation governing your industry was written, not for the industry’s benefit, but for the convenience of politicians and bureaucrats – you all know that, and all of us are to blame for allowing that to happen.”

It just goes to show you that when you are in love, you will say anything to get your wicked way. Winston’s quote retrospectively is a reminder of famous 19^th-century writer Nathaniel Hawthorne who once said, “No man, for any considerable period, can wear one face to himself and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which may be the truth.”

What we do know is the quote from Winston above from Claudelands is taken verbatim from his speech, but the legislation says the opposite. It is a document written by the bureaucrats for the politicians and the bureaucrats, and the only thing it will do for racing is retard it. We all lose unless this legislation is drastically changed or thrown out – racing loses the opportunity to distance itself from government control, and Winston loses all chance of keeping the racing vote.

In the Minister’s speech on the Messara Review launch, he also said:

• “Tonight we set before you a liferaft of reform – it’s reform or die, there’s no off-course substitute.
• It wasn’t an exercise in ghost-writing for a ministerial office wish-list. What you have in these recommendations is a clear view of what needs to be done.
• We didn’t commission this report from an expert to strip it of its value.
• The status quo has an inevitable outcome – a sad, not happy one at that.
• As John Messara said in his introductory video, we have a chance to turn racing’s ominous present and future around.”

It all sounded brilliant at the time, especially the bit about not commissioning an expert to do the report only to strip it of its value. But that’s exactly what’s happened – the expert discarded with advice taken from non-experts and the legislation written by the DIA with no industry knowledge. If adopted, racing will be exposed to further TAB board infiltration by sporting bodies looking for cash and the protestant groups – some of which would like to see racing banned altogether.

Let’s say, Jacinda wins the October election and Labour can govern alone, and she appoints as Racing Minister, a left-leaning, religiously motivated, animal rights sympathiser with beliefs fundamentally opposed to gambling. We know these people exist – they are out there waiting in the wings, Jacinda’s wings.

People appointed to the TAB board are entirely the decision of the Minister of Racing under this proposed legislation – how could we possibly take that risk. In NSW under their legislation, Part 2, Clause 5 says: “Racing NSW does not represent the Crown and is not subject to direction or control by or on behalf of the Government.” Also, they have a selection panel for board appointees, and all the Minister has to do under the NSW system is approve the appointments.

You can’t call what this New Zealand legislation is saying as ‘reform.’ It is ‘regression’

You can’t call what this New Zealand legislation is saying as ‘reform.’ It is ‘regression,’ and that will be Winston’s legacy to racing if it gets passed into law. The truest thing the Minister ever said to The Optimist in all our conversations was that he knew a whole lot more about politics than he did about racing.

The Messara Review launch in its entirety from August 2018 is viewable on the Youtube video link below. Also listed at the bottom of this blog is a table containing 64 occasions within the proposed legislation in which the Minister has the power to intervene and make the final decision. Where is the Ministerial accountability in this episode of unfortunate events – it will be a disaster if racing rolls over and allows this legislation to proceed. If it does, then kiss the game goodbye, and if you are young enough, head for Australia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHeCTwClVcA&t=970s

The word on the streets is that the three codes are united in their opposition to it, apart from Section 16 which,  is about the distribution of the profits to each code for stakes. Unless they make a strong, combined,  and unanimous protests to stop it, the writing will be on the wall. The Minister has to be convinced to stop listening to bad advice, dump DIA and resume his love affair with Racing, and be accountable for past promises.

It’s an election year, and it’s hard to fathom why the Racing Minister wouldn’t keep faith with racing people and fix it. The socialists in the DIA are unlikely to vote for NZ First but nor will racing unless the Minister intervenes and simply does what he promised to do.  

RACING INDUSTRY BILL, December 2019

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

MINISTER OR GOVERNMENT “CONTROL NUMBER”	CLAUSE OF THE BILL	DESCRIPTION OF THE MINISTER’S ROLE
1	Clause 5 (3)	Interpretation. Minister recommends to Governor-General, for Order in Council, to add or remove names in the list of recognised industry organisations.
2	Cl. 9	Minister must receive a statement of intent and present the statement to the House of Representatives.
3	Cl 10	Minister must receive from each racing code a business plan and present the plan to the House.
4	Cl 12 (1)	If requested by the codes, Minister appoints a body to assume the role or functions of the codes.
5	Cl 12 (2)	Minister may set appointment process for the directors of a code if the Minister determines this is necessary.
6	Cl 13	Minister may appoint a Commissioner to resolve significant disagreement between any of the codes.
7	Cl 14	Minister recommends to Governor-General; for Order in Council to make regulations to impose a levy following appointment of a Commissioner.
8	Cl 17	Minister recommends to Governor-General; for Order in Council, to specify the date on which restrictions on transferring racing club land shall cease to apply.
9	Cl 25 (2)	Minister recommends to Governor-General, for Order in Council, to approve proposal to transfer a code’s surplus land.
10	Cl 25 (3)	Minister may request a transfer proposal of surplus land.
11	Cl 25 (6)	Minister recommends to Governor-General, for Order in Council, to amend a transfer proposal;
12	Cl 26	Minister must have regard to certain matters and appoint a reviewer before recommending a transfer order. [there are 6 lengthy sub-clauses setting out a complicated procedure]
13	Cl 26 (2)	Minister must appoint a reviewer before determining whether to make an order.
14	Cl 26 (4)	Minister must receive advice from the reviewer about making payments in terms of a transfer order.
15	Cl 26 (5)	Minister determines the apportionment of reviewer’s costs for transfer order.
16	Cl 27 (7)	Minister authorises “a person” to instruct the Registrar – General of Land to register the code as the owner of a surplus venue and record an entry on the title.
17	Cl 30	Minister must receive a copy of new or amended racing rules.
18	Cl 31	Minister must approve the rules for racing.
19	Cl 35	Minister must receive a report, as required, on the operation and effectiveness of the racing integrity system.
20	Cl 36	Minister appoints up to 7 members of the Racing Integrity Board.
21	CL 37	Minister must approve a budget in accordance with the Racing Integrity Board business plan.
22	Cl 38	Minister recommends to Governor-General, for Order in Council, regulations setting out the annual funding by the TAB of the Racing Integrity Board.
23	Cl 39	Minister must receive before the start of a racing year a Racing Integrity Board statement of intent for that year and each of the 2 subsequent years and present a copy to the House.
24	Cl 40	Minister must receive a copy of the Racing Integrity Board business plan for that year and present a copy to the House.
25	Cl 45	Minister must approve any partnering arrangement by the TAB.
26	Cl 46 (1)(6)	Minister appoints up to 7 members, and casual vacancies, of the “governing body” of TAB NZ
27	Cl 46 (3)	Minister appoints a chairperson of TAB NZ from amongst the 7 members.
28	Cl 46 (5)	Minister must notify the appointments to TAB NZ in the Gazette.
29	Cl 52(1)	Minister must receive a copy of the TAB NZ statement of intent.
30	Cl 52(4)	Minister must present a copy of the statement of intent to the House.
31	Cl 53	Minister must receive a copy of the TAB NZ business plan.
32	Cl 53	Minister must present a copy of the business plan to the House.
33	Cl54	Minister must receive a copy of the TAB NZ annual report and financial statements
34	Cl54	Minister must present a copy of the TAB NZ annual report and financial statements to the House.
35	Cl 61	Minister recommends to the Governor-General regulations describing the method to be used by the TAB for distributing to the codes surpluses from various sources.
36	Cl 63 (1)	Minister recommends to the Governor-General regulations prescribing the method to determine payments to the codes and Sport & Recreation NZ of betting profits.
37	Cl 63 (4)	Minister must consult with Minister for Sport and Recreation before making a recommendation under sub-clause (1).
38	Cl 64(2)	Minister must receive a copy of the TAB NZ rules and any amendments.
39	Cl 64(3)	The TAB NZ rules must be notified in the Gazette.
40	Cl 65	Minister must approve the promotion, conduct or control of a race meeting by the TAB NZ.
41	Cl 77(1)	Minister must receive a copy of the TAB betting rules, and amendments, for race betting and sports betting. and must present these to the House
42	Cl 77(2)	Minister must present a copy of the rules or amended rules to the House.
43	Cl 91	Minister may recommend to the Governor-General, who by Order in Council, may make regulations relating to gambling harm and minimisation, including requirements for the design, layout and furnishing of a TAB venue.
44	Cl 92	Minister may recommend to the Governor-General, who by Order in Council,  may make regulations controlling admission to and exclusion from TAB venues
45	Cl 93	Minister may recommend to the Governor-General, who by Order in Council, may make regulations for exclusion of problem gamblers from TAB venues and racecourses.
46	Cl 99	The Department [currently Internal Affairs] is the designated authority to implement betting information and consumption charges.
47	Cl 100	The Department has power to delegate any functions or powers as the designated authority.
48	Cl 103	Minister must set the rates of betting information charges.
49	Cl 102	The Bill sets out a range of items that must form a betting information use agreement, including the payment of sums received direct to the designated authority, ie, the Dept of Internal Affairs.
50	Cl 104	Designated authority has power to enforce betting information use agreements.
51	Cl 105	Sums received from consumption charges are paid to the designated authority.
52	Cl 106	Minister must set rates of consumption charges.
53	Cl 108 (1)	Minister must take into account various matters before setting the rates of betting information use and consumption charges.
54	Cl 108 (2)	Minister must publish a statement of reasons why the betting information use and consumption charges are fair and reasonable.
55	Cl 109	Minister must review, at least every 5 years, the rates of betting information use and consumption charges.
56	Cl 112	Minister may exempt offshore betting operator from certain requirements.
57	Cl 119	Minister recommends to the Governor-General the financial and other information the offshore betting operator must provide to the “designated authority”, ie, the Dept. of Internal Affairs.
58	Cl 123	Minister recommends to the Governor-General regulations for a variety of matters including terms and conditions for TAB commercial agreements, the process for transferring surplus venues, administration of Racing Integrity Board, appointment of judicial committees, the minimum amounts payable to sporting organisations etc.
59	Schedule 1, Part 1, Clause 5	Minister appoints establishment board of up to 5 members for transition of racing integrity system under the old Act to the new system established under the new Act.
60	Schedule 3, Clause 2	Minister appoints a deputy chairperson of TAB NZ
61	Schedule 3, Clause 3	Minister may remove from office any TAB NZ member.
62	Schedule 3, Clause 5	Minister determines remuneration of TAB NZ members.
63	Schedule 4, Clause 2	Minister consults with TAB NZ on terms of reference for a performance and efficiency audit.
64	Schedule 4, Clause 3	Minister must consult with TAB NZ on appointment of the auditor for the performance and efficiency audit.

E & OE

John Aubrey

5 January 2020.