THE WEDNESDAY WHINGE has a new look but won’t be dispensing with the theme and focus on the THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY side of what is happening in racing. The Whinge will continue to provide an opportunity for The Cynics to Have Their Say. Thanks again for your support for the most read column on this website and one of the most read on racing websites in the country. Our popularity continues to grow despite the bagging it cops from some high profile officials, especially in Queensland, who cannot cope with constructive criticism of any kind. We encourage supporters – and critics – to continue to contribute but plan to restrict the Whinge to less than 10 of the best items each week. Our message to those who continually bag us is simple: IF YOU DON’T LIKE WHAT YOU READ, THEN DON’T REVISIT THE WHINGE.
BOB BENTLEY AND WAYNE MILNER SPEAK OUT AGAINST DIXON HIERARCHY
IN the wake of the MacSporran Commission of Inquiry findings which led to the Labor Government removing the Boards of Racing Queensland there has been a strong backlash against the Kevin Dixon hierarchy.
Despite all the bleating from Dixon’s ‘mates’ and ‘spin doctors’ in the mainstream racing media, especially The Courier-Mail, plenty of stakeholders could not care less about claims of ‘political square-ups’. All they want are appointments running the industry who have their best interests at heart and show no favoritism to those who support them.
Here is an interesting response to the current state of play in Queensland racing from two former high profile members of the Bob Bentley Board that paints a gloomy financial picture of the financial plight confronting the industry after the era of ‘Little King Kev’ – and it’s a far different and more alarming one to that his media mates would have us believe exists.
‘INDUSTRY CAN JUDGE RQ AUDIT INVOLVING TAB DEAL, MAGIC MILLIONS & TOOWOOMBA’ .gif)
FORMER RQ CHAIRMAN BOB BENTLEY reveals some concerning financial facts and poses some interesting questions in the wake of the demise of his successor Kevin Dixon:
‘THE Auditor-General will have some interesting conclusions when the audit of RQL is handed down and all decisions are out in the open for industry judgment, especially the 30-year Tatts deal, the unnecessary and disgraceful contribution to Magic Millions and the unseemly desperate decision to prop up Bob Frappell and the Toowoomba Turf Club.
The deal with Tatts that Dixon has locked the Queensland industry into for 30 years has failed at the first hurdle to produce continuing revenues anywhere near industry expectations.
A letter was recently published on your website setting out the dire performance of RQL to the 31st of October 2014 and a predicted loss of $9 million – now for the next installment.
The performance for the next four months to the end of February has been received from within and the result is showing no improvement with a $9 million-plus loss still looming.
The financial outcomes have been building over a period of time and the industry should have been informed and measures taken by Kevin Dixon and the All Codes Board, not a wall of silence and spin, when reasonable questions have been asked.
The only decision that appears to have been made is ‘stick your head in the sand’ and try to blame others, and above all, hope all the problems go away.
The following is evidence of the likely outcome that must by reason of poor returns and the aftermath of bad decision making put the prizemoney levels currently being expended under severe pressure.
TOTAL WAGERING REVENUE SHORTFALL AGAINST BUDGET OF $7,670,770
THE attractiveness of the Queensland racing product continues to deteriorate as can be seen from the imbalance of race fees paid to other states for use of their product where deductions from RQL revenue have reached $17,417,407 or an increase over budget of 21.4%. Conversely income received from other states using the Queensland product has fallen $2,660,850 or 18.9% against budget.
This by any measure of the imagination is a two-edged sword with a combined hit of $6,716 million against budget.
The reasons are many, including poor programming, suspect integrity and a non commercial approach to resource allocation by Dixon and his Board and administration.
There is an old adage ‘if you want to be popular, buy a dog’. Kevin Dixon's desire to be popular through giving the industry unsustainable prizemoney increases, non commercial capital commitments, such as Toowoomba, has come home to roost. There is no logical explanation for the resources lavished on Toowoomba. If there is, I would like to understand the decision-making process and see this made public.
As a way of illustration consider the following:
Toowoomba statistics highlighting the worst performance of any TAB club.
Racing meetings between 1/7/2014 and 17/1/2015
TOTAL TURNOVER $8,361,566
TOTAL PRIZEMONEY $2,462,000
AVERAGE TURNOVER PER MEETING $420,504
AVERAGE PRIZEMONEY PER MEETING $123,100
AVERAGE RETURN PER $ OF PRIZEMONEY 3.4 cents
Turnover is not revenue:
The revenue received from all betting types is averaged out at 6 cents in the dollar, so it can be seen that the return from paying $2,462,000 in prizemoney to the Toowoomba Turf Club amounts to a revenue return to the industry [RQL] of $501,660. Even if the turnover was increased by 17.5% to $10 million to cover corporates and other parties using the product to a gross turnover of $10 million, the return would only be $600,000 or 4.1 cents per dollar of prizemoney paid.
To return to my point above why would you allocate scarce resources in this quantum to Toowoomba, let alone rip up the synthetic track and replace it with another when the turnover on the synthetic track was in excess of what is currently being achieved?
The capital cost of the new track at Toowoomba was, according to the Board papers of RQL, just short of $8 million.
Toowoomba performance needs to be compared with other program decisions made:
DEAGON 14/9 2014
Turnover $178,000
Prizemoney $42,000
RETURN $10,680
Return per $ of Prizemoney 4.2 cents
KILCOY - FOUR MEETINGS
Turnover $1,226,000
Prizemoney $306,000
RETURN $73,560
Return per $ of prizemoney 4.1 cents
‘MICKEY MOUSE’ COULD HAVE ACHIEVED THE SAME RESULT AT RQ’
THOSE reading this article might say that Kevin Dixon and the All Codes Board raised prizemoney and that is a wonderful achievement. Many, however, would say that ‘Mickey Mouse’ could have achieved the same result. The increases were not achieved through responsible financial management or increases in revenue achieved through producing a better product.
Let us consider the facts:
PRIZEMONEY was raised on the back of a one-off $15 million up-front payment by Tatts as a reward for signing the new 30-year wagering contract and $1 million donation to the breeders for the QTIS Scheme from the LNP.
COSTS have increased along with staff numbers and the integrity of the product has failed.
WAGERING on the Queensland product as a quality product has declined alarmingly as set out above to an imbalance of $6.716 million.
There has been a list of decisions made that must be considered as being non commercial and certainly not in the best interests of the Racing industry in Queensland.
To name a few:
INCREASING the Stradbroke Handicap prizemoney to $2 million at a time when the finances of RQL are running rivers of red ink. The same field would have contested for $1 million.
A SUBSTANTIAL contribution, as yet unquantified, to the private empire of Gerry Harvey’s ‘ Magic Millions’. This is on top of $600,000 already being provided.
THE REVAMP of the Winter Carnival has produced arguably the worst winter carnival on record.
THE DECISION to close Eagle Farm without having the necessary financial and Government approvals in place.
FAILING to adequately resource the integrity arm of racing in Queensland.
THE PORK-BARRELING of support to Toowoomba that clearly is a basket case.
FAILURE to adequately inform the racing industry of their financial and product performance. The biggest myth, hoisted on the Racing Industry supported by media propaganda, is that Kevin Dixon resurrected the Queensland racing industry. Clearly it is just propaganda and cannot be supported by fact or evidence.
I would argue that the administration of the racing industry prior to Kevin Dixon taking control was accountable, transparent and commercially responsible and operated an integrity system that was efficient and independent.
I grant that my former Board was not popular but I pose the question: How can a regulator be popular if it is doing its job without fear or favor?’
‘AT NO STAGE DID I RESORT TO THE DUMMY SPITTING ANTICS OF DIXON’ 
AND this one from WAYNE MILNER, a long-time racing supporter and BENTLEY BOARD MEMBER:
‘FOR the past three years, I have remained on the side lines of racing in Queensland, since being forced to resign from the Board of Racing Queensland. Please make no mistake the removal (sacking) of all the directors from Racing Queensland in 2012 was at the direction of Kevin Dixon and the LNP Government.
Throughout this time I have remained close to several key industry participants, both within Queensland and interstate. However, at no time did I resort to the ‘dummy spitting’ antics and excuses that I have witnessed from the now disposed Chairman of Racing Queensland, Kevin Dixon.
I had intended to again remain silent, however the Dixon piece in The Courier-Mail on Friday, June 5, has now forced me to have my say in relation to a number of matters that Kevin Dixon has stated both in The Courier Mail and on Radio.
Board Fees
DIXON’S claim that the ‘previous Board members received an annual salary of about $80,000’ is false and I, as a Board member, did not receive an annual salary of $80,000. Furthermore the current RQ financials indicate Board fees of circa $300,000, which covered 10 Board members.
It is not surprising the financial numbers at RQ are in disarray, when the former Chair declares that the current Board was paid an ‘average of $14,000’. (10 x ‘an average’ $14,000.00 hardly equates to $300,000!).
Love of the Industry
DIXON’S statement that ‘we didn’t do it for financial gain, we did it because we love the industry’ also indicates that the previous Board was in it ‘for the money’ and not for the concern for the industry.
I will let my history in racing speak for itself in relation for my love/passion for the racing industry:
President Queensland Racehorse Owners Association
Chairman Australian Thoroughbred Owners Council
Chairman Brisbane Turf Club
Board Member Brisbane Racing Club
Owner and Breeder.
All positions were voluntary and I met all travel expenses to attend numerous interstate meetings on behalf of Queensland Owners.
“Accumulation of Assets and Making Profits”
THIS comment directed at our Board defies belief that a person of Dixon’s academic qualifications would make such an outlandish and foolish statement.
Having been self-employed for the past 27 years, I know only too well that to maintain a sustainable business, adherence to business RULE 101 must be the cornerstone. That is ‘to make profits and accumulate assets’.
The financial business of racing is not a difficult one to manage. Within reason, income numbers through historical data, is generally easily accessed and relatively consistent. The skill is managing the variable expenses of racing, wages, prize money, bonus schemes and integrity.
I am proud of the achievements of the financial stability our Board provided compared to the Kevin Dixon-led Board and I find his comments errant and uncommercial.
Deferred Income
DIXON laid claim to the effect that the financial numbers for FY14/15, would be skewed as the May/June expenses would be high due to the Winter Carnival prize money and the offsetting income from increased gambling during this period would not be received until the September quarter.
Whilst I understand the logic of this, is it not a fact that Racing Queensland would be in receipt of the 13/14 Winter Carnival income in this financial year? Surely there is not an expectation that the income of two (2) Winter Carnivals (2014 and 2015), be included in this 14/15 financial year, to balance the books?
It is now time to close the chapter on the Dixon experiment and look to move this industry, for which I have enormous passion, forward.’
KEY EXECUTIVE STAFF AT RQ SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO REAPPLY FOR THEIR JOBS 
BRETT WINTEC, a regular critic of the recently departed RQ Board, has also weighed into the debate:
‘NOW that the Board of RQL has been dismissed with a promise of a fresh new start, it’s time the Government undertook an extensive review of the existing executive staff at RQL.
From my perspective the Board cannot be blamed for everything that has occurred to date. The executive staff must be held accountable for many of the poor decisions initiated by the control body in recent years.
To highlight my concerns I have provided a basic overview of key positions and my views on their failings:
· Chief Executive Officer
· Live Baiting fiasco speaks for itself and many others in the Integrity arm should also be fighting for their survival. This said many in the Industry also blame this individual for the Eagle Farm fiasco, where the track was closed and work commenced prior to all relevant approvals being in place. This is, and will continue to have dire consequences for the industry and is something that was completely avoidable.
· Chief Financial Officer
o Made outlandish accusations to the White Commission, many of which were completely dismissed on day one of the Commission and others that have now been investigated by ASIC and proven to have no basis. There is plenty of scuttlebutt in the industry that this information was sensationalized to ensure sufficient rumor existed to justify the calling of the Inquiry. There is current scuttlebutt doing the rounds that the previous regime is considering taking legal action against this individual for his part in the White inquiry.
· Is reported to have provided information to KPMG highlighting forecast million dollar loses in the current and next financial years, on the back of such a great windfall from the TAB. How does a highly paid CFO put forward budgets of this nature on the eve of the new financial year? Surely when the racing program is advertised some three + months in advance the budgets would be developed and finalized before this stage?
· General Manager Racing Operations
o This individual should be held accountable for the wagering outcomes produced by the 3-codes of racing. Therefore, this individual is presumably the person who recommended amendments to the thoroughbred racing schedule, which has seen TAB turnover continue to decline on Queensland thoroughbred race meetings. How can SKY2 meetings be scheduled in place of Tuesday SKY1 meetings without impacting wagering? I note that Victoria has achieved 5% wagering growth on their product. I understand that Queensland’s wagering has declined by well in excess of this number.
o Can anyone explain how this individual has recommended the race dates that are currently being conducted by RQL? By way of example, Toowoomba was conducted on Friday on their “INNER TRACK”, with field limits of just 8 horses. Below is the impact on wagering on this PRIME Friday.
§ Tattsbet screen highlights wagering of $420,395 on the 9 races. By way of comparison the Muswellbrook meeting on the same day delivered wagering of $456,659 on just 8 races.
§ The allocation of Friday status to this crap meeting is a constant reminder of RQL’s hatred towards Mackay. Mackay had a $50,000 two year old race last week and was allocated a Thursday date. By way of wagering comparison Mackay turned over more money ($425,344) on their 7 races on Thursday. Imagine what they could have achieved on Friday, both from a wagering and crowd perspective.
Unfortunately, I for one have no confidence in the individuals currently holding down these positions and believe that upon the appointment of a new Board, that all key staff should be made reapply for their positions to ensure there is exactly what the Government has promised, A FRESH START.’
‘DID STEVE AUSTIN HAVE A DIXON SUPPORT AGENDA DURING HIS INTERVIEW’? 
STEVE AUSTIN of the ABC won the much-awaited interview with new Racing Minister Bill Byrne but it disappointed many of the readers who have contributed to the Whinge. They believed that Austin had an agenda and was more interested in defending rather than questioning the job done by the Dixon Board.
Here’s what a couple of listeners had to say:
‘MR PARKER’ of the SUNSHINE COAST wrote:
‘THE interview with Racing Minister Bill Byrne on our ABC this week was interesting.
Did any of your other readers catch the off-hand comment from the Minister: ‘other matters found by MacSporran are being referred to appropriate agencies’?
A strong rumor has been circulating in the racing industry that MacSporran was told of a number of issues outside the Commission's remit involving some of the racing industry's more flamboyant and prominent personalities.
Steve Austin missed an opportunity to press the Minister to expand on his comment, but Mr Austin seemed so focused on what appeared to be pre-briefing notes to push a rather one-sided argument that he missed what could have been a journalistic coup.
It was a shame that no mention was made of the length of the Eagle Farm closure. As a metropolitan racing committeeman commented recently, ‘Kevin Dixon has done something in two years that Bob Bentley could not do in 20 – he has CLOSED Eagle Farm!’
‘WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THOSE HARD-HITTING ABC JOURNALISTIC INTERVIEWS’? 
AND this one from DUDLEY MARSHALL of GOLD COAST:
‘I WAS extremely disappointed in the Steve Austin interview with (Queensland) Racing Minister, Bill Byrne last week.
It appeared to be more of the usual ‘poor Kevin Dixon’, as opposed to the hard-hitting interview we expect from ABC journalists.
For example, Austin went on about Dixon’s demise and continually painted him as a thoroughbred man.
Could someone please explain to Austin that Dixon was the Chair of the All Codes Board which oversaw the greyhound industry and as the Chair, was the man responsible for the greyhound industry’s public image, success, welfare and sustainability!
Austin then decided it was fair play to attack the previous Board (Bentley Board) with questions/statements such as ‘you would not appoint members of the previous Board’.
Why not Mr Austin?
The Minister acknowledged that members of the Dixon Board (s) could apply to be part of the new Administration, so what is the impediment to members of the Bentley Board seeking a position? At least they have been investigated and cleared via the White Inquiry and an ASIC investigation. Can Dixon or any of the current Board, lay claim to such a rigorous investigation of their corporate performance?
If Austin had been on his game he should have focused his investigative journalism on the KPMG report (as advised by the Premier) of an anticipated loss by this administration of circa $10 million, this financial year.
Is the loss real or a political stunt? How did it occur despite reported increases from the TATTS deal? Additionally, despite the reported windfall of circa $15 million in the 14/15 financial year, by this current Board from The TATTS deal, why the Dixon Board determined in their wisdom not to invest a single additional dollar in the Integrity or Welfare areas of racing.
Sadly it was an opportunity lost!’
‘ARE MEMBERS OF THE KEVIN DIXON BOARD VICTIMS OF THEIR OWN NIGHTMARES’? 
ROB JENKINSON of BRISBANE poses this interesting question:
‘MEMBERS of the former Kevin Dixon-led RQ Control body board could be forgiven for believing that they are victims of their own nightmares, with the news that the next control body board will have its members selected on merit.
Commissioner MacSporran had this to say about the abilities of the former control body in Section 271 in part: ‘It has been concluded that the examples quoted are consistent with the failures one would expect to see when the overall system of regulation is fundamentally flawed.’
The nightmare will come from the realization that the Bentley Board have now been rigorously tested by the independent governance body ASIC.
No members of the former Board, or indeed its executive, have been found wanting on any issue. In fact, the White Inquiry commented about the functions of the Bentley-led RQL in section 4.1.4 chapter 4 In part: ‘it must be observed at the outset that the Commissions inquiries support a conclusion that throughout the relevant period, the relevant, entities including QRL and RQL, conducted the majority of their control body functions competently’.
During the ABC interview on 12th June with Steve Austin, the Racing Minister would not rule out a return of the Bentley Board. But Austin failed to ask the same question about the outgoing board being qualified for reappointment.
If the definition of success is to go from failure to failure with growing enthusiasm then the recent interviews on our ABC and Radio TAB would seem to be a high mark. The point lost to each of the interviewers was the simple fact that the RQ Board was responsible for Greyhound, Thoroughbred and Harness Racing and because they are responsible for all three codes that lack of responsibility led to their dismissal.’
‘BLAME FOR EAGLE FARM REDEVELOPMENT DEBACLE LIES AT THE FEET OF THE LNP’ 
ALBERT WILLIAMS, of REDCLIFFE, a regular contributor, weighs into the RQ debate:
‘THE Courier-Mail Turf Editor never ceases to amaze me when it comes to apportioning the blame for all things that are wrong with racing in Queensland.
After standing solidly behind his mates in the Kevin Dixon Board, despite their failings which are becoming obvious by the day, Nathan Exelby now wants to lay the blame for every problem at the feet of the Labor Government.
Nathan, we all know you and you predecessor Bart Sinclair are dirty because your ‘mates’ were shown the door and you no longer have the ‘inside mail not to mention input’ into things that are happening at RQ.
But it’s a bit rich to blame the delay in the Eagle Farm redevelopment funding on the new Government. After all it was your mates in the LNP Government – specifically former Treasurer Tim Nicholls and his remote control Racing Minister Steve ‘furlong in front’ Dickson who made all the promises in April last year – then failed to deliver.
Perhaps you should ask Mr Nicholls if the reason for him not signing off on the major funding for this project had anything to do with electorate constituents – who are not racing people – protesting in the lead up to the election at the proposed residential development at Eagle Farm.
It doesn’t matter which Government is in power the wheels of the Public Service grind slowly. It took the LNP over a year to do nothing and you wrote nothing. Labor has only been there a few months and you are expecting everything to happen overnight.
As new Racing Minister Bill Byrne stated – he could not believe why the funding for the Townsville redevelopment was not signed off on by the LNP before the election. He did so immediately and that project is now underway. It was different for RQ and the LNP when it involved Toowoomba.
Eagle Farm is a far bigger project and so is the grandstand redevelopment at Albion Park – apart from the fact that it has become a political football with the influence that Kevin Seymour has on both sides of Government.
Rather than keep whining why not accept that Kevin Dixon and his cronies are gone – the same key doesn’t open the RQ trough any more – and clubs like Toowoomba don’t have an open cheque book to do as they please, when they please, at the expense of every other stakeholder in the industry.
Eagle Farm will get the go-ahead and unfortunately – in the minds of many racing folk – so will Albion Park. Wouldn’t it be better to close that joint down, sell it for real estate and move the trots and dogs to Deagon like the Bentley Board wanted to do before the LNP won Government. Then again we couldn’t have that happening. It might affect the real estate investments of some influential people who find it easy to jump political ship when the time is opportune.
The Courier-Mail should start being a bit more objective if that is possible where racing and politics is concerned and realize that Exelby comment pieces are just propaganda on behalf of the Dixon hierarchy (now gone and soon forgotten) and alarmist diatribe designed to destabilize the industry while a new ‘independent’ Board is being put in place to run racing in Queensland. No-one takes any notice of them.’
NATIONAL STEWARDING BODY MUST NOT BE INFLUENCED BY MESSARA OR V’LANDYS 
PAUL JENKINS of MELBOURNE writes:
‘I WAS interested to read where the collaboration between stewards from NSW and Victoria on the cobalt issue could lead to a national policing body.
What a terrific initiative – with one proviso – it isn’t influenced in any way by officials from Racing NSW who are running the newly-named Racing Australia.
If this is going to work effectively there has to be a ‘hands off’ policy from the start from John Messara and more particularly his errand boy, Peter V’landys. We have all seen how the latter seems to interfere in the stewarding process in NSW – or at least has too much to say on issues where there should be a separation of powers.
Certain events that have occurred in the three eastern states have highlighted the need to separate stewards’ control from that of the commercial operations running racing. This has been a problem in Queensland for some time where a new broom is being put through the joint.
Just imagine if racing in Australia had a national stewards’ panel which could operate at the major meetings where the best horses, jockeys and trainers are competing. It makes common sense.
And let’s forget about who’s got the ‘biggest you know what’ when it comes to chairing that national panel. Realistically speaking Ray Murrihy is on his way to the retirement farm. There is only one choice – Terry Bailey from Melbourne. In fact most punters would agree that even if ‘Razor’ is still around, TB is the one they would prefer to run the show.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: HERE is a column item by CHRIS ROOTS in the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD that obviously prompted the above contribution to the Whinge:
THE successful collaboration between Racing NSW and Racing Victoria stewards in the cobalt saga could be a forerunner to a national body controlling stewards in every state.
Racing Australia is set to discuss bringing all stewards under its control after recent reports in Victoria and Queensland on the live-baiting scandal in greyhound racing. Both have suggested a model that separates the powers of commercial operations and integrity.
Make no mistake, Racing Australia, which took over the stud book and racing services centre earlier in the year, is making the jump from toothless tiger to powerful organisation within the sport.
If stewards were under one national body, it would lead to the rules being more uniform around the country and greater collaboration between lawmakers.
It would also give the opportunity for the stewards' panel for racing's biggest group 1 days to have the best available stipes. That would mirror what happens with jockeys and trainers, who followed the major carnivals.
If the stewards came under one roof, the question of who would be the boss would loom as another battle for NSW and Victoria to have.
SKY CHANNEL IS STRUGGLING TO PROVIDE A PREIMUM PRODUCT FOR GALLOPS 
ALAN GEORGE of MELBOURNE sent this email:
‘IT was a long time coming but at last a high profile racing journalist in Australia who is prepared to take SKY Channel to task over the job it does.
Chris Roots, writing for Fairfax Media, called a spade a shovel when he declared that Sky was struggling to provide a premium product for gallops punters. Might I suggest that is an understatement?
In fact their coverage on the newly-named Sky Central is nothing short of pathetic as is the timing of races which seems to conspire against them – although I thought they had some input into this.
The sooner the race clubs in Victoria agree to the Seven West deal the better. And wasn’t it good news to read that Seven had an outlet ready to provide wall-to-wall coverage as TABCORP proceeds with its threat to black that out on Sky.
As hard as they try the TVN coverage was panels in front of the best that Sky can offer. How many stay at home punters are sick to the teeth with wanting to see premium coverage that was promised on Sky that has failed to eventuate?
As someone wrote last week – punters are the innocent pawns in this broadcast tug of war and more importantly the only way Sky will ever be No 1 in race coverage in this country is with a monopoly.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: HERE is another item by CHRIS ROOTS (he has been busy) in the FAIRFAX MEDIA relating to the above issue:
SKY Racing continues to struggle to provide a premium product for punters on thoroughbred racing. Since the demise of TVN, punters have been continually disappointed by the coverage of the mounting yard and the racing.
Instead of focusing on the top-end product, Sky is often forced on Saturdays to go from the aftermath of a group 1 race straight to another venue. The premium channel should give premium coverage and, at the moment, many believe it is far from that.
TVN had a template for its coverage, which informed punters and, at least to some extent, drove wagering. Sky, being owned by the country's biggest wagering company Tabcorp, should have that at the centre of its coverage. Instead, it has attempted to reinvent the wheel in many ways. The schedule of races often works against good television coverage, as races from the major meetings are programmed only five to 10 minutes apart.
The TAB controls the raceday clock, which had long been a bugbear of TVN, so surely it should schedule race programs to give itself the best chance to give quality coverage. The fact that Racing Victoria has decided to hand its broadcast rights to Seven West gives Tabcorp the chance to focus on its partners and improve its coverage. It needs to.
PLEA FOR UNDERSTANDING OF THE ‘REAL FACTS’FROM PASSIONATE GREYHOUND OWNER 
WE received this email from BRENTON WILSON, of BRISBANE, obviously a very passionate greyhound owner and although it is lengthy we felt he deserved his say on the woes that have befallen that code and the impact it has had on many good people:
‘I haven’t been a greyhound participant for 30-40 years. I only got into the game as an owner with my wife just over 10 years ago. A friend of my wife’s was a greyhound trainer who lived at Chermside, and had two block kennels in her yard. I liked to have a punt, and we could never afford a horse, so we thought it would be a nice hobby to own a greyhound and have a bit of fun.
We had some average dogs to start with but we made sure they found homes when they finished racing, and I know for a fact they are alive to this day. About five years in our trainer wanted to stop training, so we decided to get our training licenses. It was a huge learning curve, and luckily I had a background in athletics coaching, so we treated the greyhounds like athletes. We had several winners in quick succession and we were thinking: How good is this? Good and bad luck followed over the years, as it does with anyone involved in the racing game. But now my wife and I have to put up with the darkness of the live baiting
Over the years I have grown to acknowledge the inconsistencies of racing, and how greyhounds are treated by the other two codes and State Governments as a punch-line, yet they seem happy to siphon off millions of dollars of greyhound turnover for their own excess. You would think anyone who takes money from you would be a little more accommodating, but it is more of a reflectance of the smug arrogance of the thoroughbred and harness industries. It doesn’t matter which side of politics is in power, both sides seem to perpetrate fraud and a restraint of trade on the greyhound industry.
I have always had this sense of duty and trying to correct wrongs. At the 2012 elections I went to both sides of politics and outlined areas and policies where I believed greyhound racing in Queensland could be improved. Many other greyhound participants over the years have done the same. Yet time and time again, political lackeys are appointed by the Government of the day, and not one new policy or idea is developed to improve greyhound racing.
Over the past five years there have been thousands of emails sent to RQL with regards to concerns about the industry, yet you either received a token reply or none at all, such were the regimes in place.
So when I hear the MacSporran Report and the Premier report about greyhounds not managing their own integrity, my question is: “When in the past five years did we have this power?”
Thoroughbred people have been made Chairman, CEO etc of RQL. They have been the ones making the decisions, and they certainly have been ignoring the greyhound community and not engaging with them.
The greyhound industry has had no say whatsoever into any appointments at RQL. We have not been engaged, had no plan put forward for the future of the industry, just been ignored. I was of the understanding that RQL was supposed to be the Head Body of all racing codes, well all except for greyhound racing.
In the MacSporran report, it is quoted that although there is no evidence to support widespread animal cruelty, it would be naïve to think that there isn’t. The word ‘widespread’ in the dictionary means: Distributed over a wide region, or occurring in many places or among many persons or individuals:
Currently, only 23 greyhound trainers out of over 900 have been warned off from the sport. This is 2.4% of greyhound trainers, which doesn’t include owners and other participants in the industry.
I’m sorry but 2.4% is not widespread, and I’ll bet in six to 12 months, some other persons may be caught up in this investigation of live baiting. I am not naïve. But more likely it will be 3% or 4%, this is not widespread and goes to the core of my argument.
The past four to five months of attacks on the greyhound industry has been a systematic attack of Class Warfare. The general public has this view that greyhound participants are made up of low social economic persons, and may not have a tertiary education background. The attacks are no different to the ones we see on A Current Affair or other media outlets, where they target a low socio economic suburb somewhere in Australia, and make them look like fools.
The media has prayed on greyhound’s participants’ lack of experience in the media, taken comments out of context, and portrayed the industry in an inflammatory and sensationalized manner.
To highlight this fact, I have some facts of my own, which seem to get no mention whatsoever in the media or from people who think they know what has occurred:
Animal Liberation had several cameras out on several properties, not just that of Mr Noble. The Golden View Property; the one directly across from Noble’s, Postman’s Ridge etc. etc. The only footage found to have any issue was Mr Noble’s.
The arrogant whinging of Racing Board members and what percentage of turnover they make, what they conveniently forget is that prior to the current dismissed board, Thoroughbreds only turned over an average of between 72% to 74.5%, and were propped up by greyhounds from 1% to 1.5% annually. That’s $1.3m to $2m per annum. Harness on the other hand have only been turning over 11% on average, and have been propped up by Greyhound Turnover as well, to approximately 3.5%.
The comment was made by the current Premier of Queensland that greyhounds can no longer be trusted to manage their integrity etc. When over the past five years of RQL have greyhounds had a say in anything to do with anything into how the sport is run in Queensland? Greyhound participants have been dictated to for the past five years, and had no say in the direction of the sport. For several years the QGBOTA which is supposed to be the peak industry body for participants in Queensland has been ignored by RQL, where they couldn’t even get a meeting.
Like others participants, I have tried before elections to get meetings with both sides of politics and to discuss issues within the sport, but we have been ignored. I sat with the previous Liberal Treasurer prior to the 2012 election and raised several issues including integrity and concerns within the industry, but it was a token meeting, and I was completely ignored as were several other participants. To say the industry has turned a blind eye is offensive. We may not have had specific details but there were concerns within the industry that the integrity of the sport was being compromised by some participants.
The Bastion of Journalistic Integrity, the Courier-Iseeeverythingwithoneeyeshut, has made several unsubstantiated claims, taken comments out of context and painted the sport in the worst light possible, while the sport remains voiceless. The latest was a piece by Mr Robert Craddock who referenced his opinion to ban greyhound racing on the group Grey2K in America. The Animal Liberation Group in Australia also strongly talks about this, again with no context or truth in their statements. Mr Craddock said that they have banned Greyhound Racing in 39 States in America. Well if he had done any research, he would have found that they were in a majority of States in America where Greyhound Racing never existed, or had been closed down for several years. Politicians are easy to persuade when those decisions don’t impact on any individual. In those States in America where Greyhounds are thriving like Florida, Arizona, Arkansas, Alabama, Iowa, Texas and West Virginia, they are going strong. Don’t also forget that in Britain, Scotland, Ireland, Macau and some European Countries Greyhound racing also has a strong following.
With regards to Animal Liberation, I don’t have a problem with them reporting issues, but they are only interested in one thing, that is they are anti-gambling and they will say whatever they can, just like Grey2K in America. None of their statements regarding the greyhound industry are factual, mostly exaggerated to form the worse opinion. Let’s look at them:
Greyhounds don’t like to race: Anytime anyone thinks this is true, give me a call, you can see my greyhounds, they love the competitive nature, and can’t wait to be a part of it. There has also been several University studies that state clearly that Greyhounds enjoy the competitive spark that racing provides, and that they need it;
Lead Lives of deprivation: My dogs, like many others, are walked every morning; they free gallop every second day, they are let out several times a day to interact with other greyhounds;
Industry on the decline: Over the past five years Greyhounds have continued to increase their market share across Australia, whilst the other two codes have seen no real growth;
Governments paying taxpayers money for greyhound racing: Everyone knows this is a lie. All money is raised through a percentage of betting turnover and the sport is funded this way. In every state greyhounds actually prop up the other codes, from their percentage of turnover. Greyhounds are turning over $3billion annually, so much for a code on the decline;
Nine out of every 10 dogs are killed after racing: This is the biggest lie of all. Just because the State bodies don’t keep records of what happens to greyhounds after racing, does not mean the worst case scenario. I have three retired greyhounds at home, we had to put one down at 10 years of age due to severe arthritis a couple of years ago, others we have found homes for. No dog we have raced has ever been euthanized after racing. I know a couple of trainers who have 8 and 13 retired greyhounds on their properties. There is no doubt that some people take the easy option to euthanize, but the numbers being bandied around are inflammatory, as is most of the Animal Liberations’ argument, because telling the truth won’t give them any traction.
They talk about 18,000 to 20,000 greyhounds being killed every year, yet there aren’t that many born in Australia. If that was the case there would be no greyhound racing.
The greyhound industry just like the other two racing codes have serious integrity issues that need to be addressed. But it is no worse than that of society and its responsibilities. In 2014 the RSCPA in Queensland recorded over 15,000 complaints, the highest in recorded history, in Australia over 500,000 dogs and cats are euthanized each year, and this does not include other pets discarded by society. Cats are the biggest killers of wildlife in Australia bar none. When taken into context of the issues in the greyhound industry, and those that confront society in general, society ignores its own issues, yet chastises through misinformation and blatant lies that of the greyhound industry. In one report a large German shepherd was chained to a tree in the bush and left there to die, this wasn’t an abhorrent greyhound trainer, it was a member of the general public. Yet individuals in society get away with these sort of acts without being caught, nor are the resources made available to catch them. Yes, live baiting is an emotive issue, but the media are selective in what they want the general public to see.
The MacSporran Report highlighted a whole lot of alleged issues in the greyhound industry, such as a participant who has a special drill who drills into the greyhound skull, or the sticking of a match up a greyhound’s backside to get it to run faster. How can something like this be published, when there is no evidence available? How can anyone take any of the animal activists seriously when their entire life is closing down the greyhound industry? These are the same people who have sent mail to innocent greyhound participants with a white powder in the envelope and have thrown dead possums, hares and chooks over innocent greyhound trainer’s fences. If the whole greyhound industry is like the 2.4% found guilty, does that automatically mean that all Animal Liberation members are like the radicals who sent the white powder in the mail and throw dead animals over the fence of innocent greyhound participants?
It’s sad how the media will take unsubstantiated false claims from people never involved in the industry, with no evidence whatsoever, and will make edited claims out of context to insinuate incidences that have never occurred. Yet when real issues where innocent greyhound participants have been assaulted, sent white powder, and dead animals thrown on their properties, the media, Police, Mr MacSporran and the Government turn a blind eye.
What message does that send the wider community, when people who call themselves Animal Activists are allowed to get away with these type of activities in the community, who are they going to target next?
I don’t have a problem with Animal Activists, but they like any organization have a small percentage of radicals who will take the law into their own hands. Is the greyhound industry any different?
‘V’LANDYS JOINS DICKSON AT THE TOP OF THE RACING DAYDREAM BELIEVER LIST’ 
BRIAN ADAMS of BRISBANE writes:
‘NOT since Steve Dickson, the greatest Ministerial misfit ever to oversee Queensland racing, declared this state would finish ‘a furlong in front’ of NSW and Victoria under an LNP Government, has there been a bigger daydream believer.
Not to be outdone, Racing NSW CEO, Peter V’landys, the man for all seasons in racing in this country, is trying to convince a disbelieving world that he can recruit US Triple Crown winner, American Pharoah, to that non-event The Championships. It’s finger down the throat stuff.
Rather than me try and tell you all about what happened last weekend, here is how the Hong Kong-based Racing Bitch, recorded the V’landys’ ‘junket’ to the States:
SO the ‘glitter twins’ of NSW racing – that sweetheart Peter ‘Toffee Tongue’ McGauran, aka Chief Executive of that most inappropriately named racing entity, Racing Australia, and his big bro-in-arms Peter Vlundies, who needs little introduction, were at Belmont to watch American Pharoah add his name to US racing history by winning the Belmont Stakes and complete the American Triple Crown last weekend. And yes, on the goodwill mission were also ATC Chief Executive Darren Pearce and TABCORP Executive Craig Nugent.
Without begrudging this esteemed quartet of a HUGELY well-deserved junket, after all they have and continue to deliver- every working day- we wonder aloud what else it could have been described as? A goodwill mission to spread the word about The Championships, perhaps? Or perhaps ‘recruiting’ American Pharoah (surely they must be dreaming?) to compete in the Queen Elizabeth? Or perhaps even getting a bunch of ‘B Grade’ American nags over to give The Championships an ‘international’ flavor? Or just an opportunity to make the most of some first class pointy end seats on a Dreamliner and have an all expenses bonding session?
Does it matter which of these options the arrow on the roulette wheel fell on? The bottom line was the question posed by a prominent racing identity over a beer on Wednesday: What was the CEO of Racing NSW doing at Belmont when one of the biggest scandals to hit NSW racing since the infamous jockey tapes was centre stage in every media outlet in NSW, if not all over Australia?
There’s not much I can add, except to say that this is the same Peter V’Landys that criticized the Queensland Government for sacking his ‘mate’ Kevin Dixon and the All Codes Board. It’s about time he worried about what’s happening in his own backyard!’
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in the above e-mails should not be interpreted as those of JOHN LINGARD, the owner-editor of the letsgohorseracing web-site. That is why he has added an ‘EDITOR’S NOTE’. Every endeavor is made to verify the authenticity of contributors. We welcome any reasonable and constructive responses from parties or individuals.
