THIS website continues to listen to what our readers have to say and has introduced a ‘Wednesday Whinge’ where you can express your feelings on racing industry issues of the past week. Try to keep them objective. Just e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..
OUR theme – THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY side of what has happened in racing over the past week continues in the Wednesday Whinge which feedback suggests is what our readers prefer. It gives us an opportunity to provide some of the racing news that is now harder to access or simply isn’t run in the mainstream media because of space restrictions. That doesn’t mean we are steering clear of allowing our readers their weekly whinge on racing topics. This week the key topics of discussion are Queensland Racing Commission of Inquiry; the debate over running feature races last during the Spring Carnival; the Scobie Breasley Medal win by Michael Rodd; reaction to a controversial inquiry outcome in Townsville and a host of other topics. We also continue our ‘News That You Might Have Missed During the Week’ section which has proved popular with readers.
STATEMENTS TO THE COMMISSION OF INQUIRY CAN BE READ ON ITS WEBSITE
AS the date draws nearer for the public hearings at the Queensland Racing Commission of Inquiry, there is increasing interest in proceedings from readers.
KL of GOLD COAST wrote: 
‘WHAT’S the story with these statements from various people to the Racing Commission of Inquiry (in Queensland) that are appearing now on a regular basis in the political section of The Australian?
Did they fall off the back of a truck or is the Commission making these available to the media although we are not reading anything about this in the major daily, The Courier-Mail?
There are plenty of us in racing awaiting with interest the public hearings of the Commission and we are especially keen to hear what some of the key witnesses such as the former RQ Chairman Bob Bentley, one of his first lieutenants, Bill Ludwig and the major administrators who took an early payout soon after the Government changed, have to say.
Can you provide us with an update as to what is happening in this area?’
EDITOR’S NOTE: THERE is nothing exclusive about what MICHAEL McKENNA is writing in THE AUSTRALIAN, except that he is providing information to the racing industry that one would have thought would be forthcoming from THE COURIER-MAIL.
STATEMENTS from a big list of identities involved in the three codes of racing are available on the inquiry website by simply logging into www.racinginquiry.qld.gov.au then going to ‘documents’ and ‘statements.’
ONLY STATEMENTS PUBLISHED ARE THOSE WHO WILL APPEAR AT PUBLIC HEARINGS
THE Racing Commission of Inquiry does, however, provide the following NOTICE REGARDING PUBLICATION OF STATEMENTS, which reads:
The Commission has decided to publish all witness statements it has received on its website, for access by the public at large, subject to confidentiality claimed in accordance with Practice Guideline No. 01 and the protection of witnesses’ personal details.
The intention had been to publish the statements only to persons with leave to appear, pending the commencement of formal public hearings. However, such hearings will not commence for several more weeks and the Commission wishes to ensure that the matters set out in the statements are available for scrutiny and response by other witnesses and members of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts. The publication of the statements now is part of the conduct of an open inquiry and is intended, in effect, as the start of the process of holding public hearings.
All persons accessing the statements, including members of the press, should note that the publication of the statements does not in any way indicate that their contents have been accepted by the Commissioner as true or even as relevant to the inquiry. The Commission continues to gather evidence and will receive further statements, which will be added to those now published and may well contradict or disprove any allegations presently made. It will also receive submissions in due course as to any matters alleged which are irrelevant or should be given little or no weight. In short, nothing in the statements should be taken as proved unless and until it is the subject of findings in the Commissioner’s ultimate report. Any public comment in relation to the contents of the statements must, responsibly, make this clear.
AMONG THE LIST OF KEY FIGURES WO HAVE MADE LENGTHY STATEMENTS 
SOME of those key figures who have made lengthy statements of interest include:
Former RQ Chairman Bob Bentley and the members of his Board; current RQ Chairman Kevin Dixon; the four former high profile RQ staff members who received ‘golden handshakes’ in Malcolm Tuttle, Jamie Orchard, Paul Brennan and Shara Reid; former Queensland Treasurer Andrew Fraser; former Racing Ministers Tim Mulherin and Peter Lawlor; harness racing supremo Kevin Seymour; Bill Andrews and Kerry Watson, who lost RQ Board seats in controversial circumstances during the Bentley era; key RQ identities including Adam Carter (one-time acting CEO), former CEO Jeremy Turner and Wade Birch (Chief Steward); and Racing Department boss during the Labor era, Michael Kelly.
One lengthy statement that makes very interesting reading and includes some quite incredible allegations against RQ and the Toowoomba Turf Club is that of Anthony Burke, the former director of the Downs club whose enforced departure in controversial circumstances has been well documented.
The Commission will hold public sittings commencing in the week of September 16, which are expected to continue for three to four weeks. The industry looks forward to the questioning of key witnesses during that period.
For those who want to watch and listen to proceedings from the comfort of their home or office the public sittings will be ‘live streamed.’ Simply log in to the Commission website, www.racinginquiry.qld.gov.au then go to ‘hearings’ and ‘live streaming.’
As far as the racing public is concerned the transparency of this Commission of Inquiry is a refreshing approach. The ‘live streaming’ of proceedings and availability of ‘witness statements’ for all to read is to be commended.
CRITIC OF BILL LUDWIG HAD THIS TO SAY ABOUT HIS INQUIRY STATEMENT 
PERCY S of BRISBANE isn’t a fan of BILL LUDWIG and wrote this e-mail:
‘I noticed with interest and anger a story that the your website ran (from The Australian) concerning an explanation by union leader Bill Ludwig for the massive payouts that four high profile staff at Racing Queensland received a couple of days after the Government changed.
(1) It is interesting that Mr Ludwig joined the RQ Board when it could be argued a number of his Union members were ‘held out to dry in the midday sun’ shortly after the last Racing Inquiry.
(2) I am not suggesting for one moment that an honorable gentleman of Mr Ludwig’s standing would earn a seat on the Racing Board at the expense of any Union Member(s).
(3) Further, the Ludwig ‘knockers’ who hammered him over using Union funds to pay for legal expenses in a failed court case (involving Bill Carter) could be argued to be out of order. I believe it was only in the order of $200,000 – not a great deal of money to a Union the size Mr Ludwig controls.
(4) Mr Ludwig’s selective memory at the present racing hearing which is outlined in the article you have just posted is nothing special in isolation – advanced years and all that sort of thing.
(5) To be fair a lot of racing folk could argue the point that without Mr Ludwig’s influence with the Government of the day, the racing industry would be far worse off.
When you apply the civil standard of proof, “On the Balance of Probabilities”, to The Ludwig method of operation, I believe that the present probe into Racing Queensland’s operation will be a reason for any person to be struck down with a severe case of ‘selective memory’.
The question I would like answered is: “Will I live long enough to achieve my one goal left in life?” Standing with an empty bladder alongside the grave sites of one or two of Mr Ludwig’s fellow travelers?’
EDITOR’S NOTE: I fear you will have to stand in line to fulfill the wish in your final statement Percy. I know of a few who will be bustling for positions where one former Board member – who should never have been elected to start with – is concerned and I am not referring to the Chairman.
KNEE-JERK REACTION TO INNOVATIVE IDEAS IN RACING ARE HARD TO ACCEPT 
CHARLIE B of MELBOURNE sent this e-mail:
‘WHY is it whenever someone in racing comes up with an innovative idea there is a knee-jerk reaction from either the stake-holders or the media?
Now it seems the Melbourne Racing Club is prepared to reverse its policy of staging major races as the last event on the card at Caulfield.
Saturday was a great example of how the program can build to a crescendo with an air of expectation on and off the course for the comeback appearance of Atlantic Jewel.
Some influential trainers, including Mark Kavanagh, expressed concern that the track could be cut up by the last. What if there was a downpour two races before the feature in the middle of the day – couldn’t the same thing happen?
And every horse has to encounter the conditions on the day – so it’s the luck of the draw or fate that determines the outcomes – or perhaps more to the point the weather.
If every time someone in racing comes up with an innovative idea then changes it because of some knee-jerk reaction the sport will continue to remain in a rut. If they are not prepared to gamble on something new then racing will continue to mark time.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: WHILST I can see some merit in the MRC idea of running the main race last, if they are simply doing it to appease a television network with coverage, then it loses my support immediately. TV and SKY have too much say in the timing of races as it stands. Shane Anderson also put forward an interesting theory on RSN that the turnover on the last race on the card is traditionally outstanding. By making the main race the last would official be detracting from the overall turnover on the day?
HERE’S a story on the above topic by PATRICK BARLEY in this week’s MELBOURNE AGE: 
THE Melbourne Racing Club is prepared to change its controversial policy of staging major races as the last event on the card at Caulfield.
Club chairman Mike Symons said on Sunday the policy was not set in stone.
Leading racing figures, including trainer Mark Kavanagh, had met Symons and expressed concern at the concept.
Symons told the group the club was prepared to be very flexible on the last race policy.
''The horse comes ahead of any wagering consideration. We must be flexible and if the conditions arise that a major race needs to be moved, so be it,'' he said.
Symons added his club would monitor weather forecasts on the eve and on the day of acceptances and if those reports were of concern the group 1 event could be brought back to earlier in the day.
He said he was only speaking for the Melbourne Racing Club and its policy remained doing the best for trainers and owners in the search for a successful outcome.
Symons also hinted that a long odds-on favourite for a group 1 event could also be a reason to hold the event earlier.
''Then you are in a wagering situation and you have the favourite in the last race of the day that completely stifles betting, so there again this situation of being flexible is paramount,'' he said.
On Saturday, the club staged the Memsie Stakes as the last race, prompting Mark Kavanagh - the trainer of champion mare and Memsie winner Atlantic Jewel - to query the wisdom of the race being so late in the day.
WIN BY MICHAEL RODD IN SCOBIE BREASLEY MEDAL PROVED SOMEWHAT OF A SURPRISE 
THE win by Michael Rodd in the Scobie Breasley Medal has posed more questions than answers in quite a few racing circles.
MAL Mc of MELBOURNE wrote:
‘MY friends and I are still trying to work out how Michael Rodd won the Scobie Breasley Medal.
It had to be the upset of the decade. He finished sixth in the Melbourne premiership behind Glen Boss who bolted in with the title.
The RV stewards decide the Medal winner on the basis of three, two and one points allocated for all the metropolitan meetings in Victoria.
Rodd reportedly polled 42 votes to win the Breasley Medal by two from Dwayne Dunn. He rode 40 winners for the 2012-season and they must have been bottlers.
Boss rode 25 more winners, so one must assume that in the eyes of the stewards, some of his must have been terrible.
The only plus side for Rodd was that his winning percentage of just over 17 per cent was the best of the top 10 jockeys but that shouldn’t enter into the equation when it comes to ‘top rides.’
I won’t even mention the number of feature races that Boss won compared to Rodd last season.
Somehow he managed to secure nine maximum vote rides, four sets of two votes and seven single votes – so obviously the stewards’ were besotted with his winning performances.
Perhaps Bossy did a little bit too much celebrating for the liking of the stewards when he won races and that cost him votes.
Whatever, in the opinion of most, the outcome of the Scobie Breasley Medal was not a fair indication of who was the best rider during the season.
But that’s how the stewards saw it and like happens in many cases they have the final say. This was just one of them.’
And this one from BLAKE D of ADELAIDE:
‘HOW many points would they have given Michael Rodd for his ride on Atlantic Jewel in the Memsie Stakes?
The mare might have bolted in but he gave it a sore back in the opinion of some. She travelled three and four wide throughout at her first start for 70 weeks which wasn’t exactly at easy comeback run.
Might I argue that an ape could have sat on her back and she would still have won last Saturday?
There are plenty of people just shaking their heads at the Scobie Breasley Medal outcome. How jockeys like Glen Boss and Luke Nolen failed to figure beggar’s belief.
Rodd might have the best average from last season but the strike rate probably had more to do with the fact he had far less rides than some of the other top jocks.
I am not suggesting anything untoward but his strike rate on favorites is disgusting. Perhaps that is something that didn’t come into the criteria for awarding points for top rides.
I guess we’ll just have to put the Medal win down to one of those mysteries of racing.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: When it comes to the integrity of racing I am the first to rap the stewards’ panel in Victoria. I think they are the best in the land. But how Michael Rodd could win the Scobie Breasley Medal ahead of Glen Boss or Dwayne Dunn astounds me. The only explanation is that the stewards were unanimous in their votes on specific days which would have given him a major points advantage.
TOM WATERHOUSE LOSS IN DEFAMATION CASE A GOOD NEWS STORY FOR MANY 
ALAN Y of SYDNEY sent this e-mail of bookmaker TOM WATERHOUSE:
‘IT was news that struggled to attract media attention outside the Fairfax publications but to many of us was one of the best stories of the week.
Bookmaker Tom Waterhouse lost his defamation case against Sydney Morning Herald columnist Peter FitzSimons.
Good to see there is still some sanity in the legal process. They agreed that FitzSimons had the right to express his opinion about Waterhouse when it comes to his ‘in your face’ sports betting advertising.
One can only hope now that his business has been sold to one of the big betting agencies in Europe that after this football season ends we won’t be subjected to his presence on our TV sets during our Friday night watching the game entertainment.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: I read with interest not long after controversy erupted over the reported $50 million sponsorship deal between Tom Waterhouse and the NRL some interesting comments by Michael Sullivan, CEO of Sportingbet. Sullivan accused Waterhouse of ‘acting irresponsibly’ via his onscreen appearances during Channel Nine’s NRL coverage and told Fairfax Media ‘it makes me sick in the guts when he comes on TV. The frequency of his appearances is what’s also driving people mad and Channel Nine has a lot to answer for.’ I couldn’t agree more.
HERE’S the story on the outcome of the court action which was published in the SYDNEY MORNING HERALD: 
FAIRFAX Media and columnist Peter FitzSimons have won a defamation case brought by prominent bookmaker Tom Waterhouse.
Mr Waterhouse sued over an article that appeared in FitzSimons’ The Fitz Files column on September 8 last year, detailing an email from TomWaterhouse.com to those on the Australian Rugby Union’s database.
The email offered those who backed the Wallabies over the Springboks money back if the Australian side lost.
FitzSimons published a response in his column, which read: “Hi Tom, Any chance you’d get out of my face? People like me who handed over our details to the ARU did NOT do so to be harassed with brain-dead offers like yours, let alone have our kids exposed to it.
“And what about a little truth in advertising? What about you add to your spiel, ‘I’m prepared to take a little hit, just once, just to get you on the gambling hook, in the hope that I can then shake you down for decades to come!’
“Do NOT send me your awful offal again. And shame on the ARU for serving up its dwindling supporter base to the likes of you. It is acting well outside its charter to serve the interests of the game, and will face an outright revolt if it continues. Be told. Mr FitzSimons, to you.”
In pleadings filed to the NSW District Court, Mr Waterhouse alleged the article contained several defamatory imputations, including that he “harassed persons who handed over details to the ARU”, “exposed the children of people who handed over their details to the ARU to harassment and gambling” and that he was not “a genuine supporter of the Wallabies but uses them as a means to make money from gambling”.
In court on Wednesday, Judge Michael Finnane handed down a judgment in favor of Fairfax Media, by consent from both parties. The judge set aside existing costs orders and made no other orders concerning costs.
PENALTY IMPOSED DRAWS CRITICISM FOR STEWARDS AFTER TOWNSVILLE DUST-UP 
WE have received several protest e-mails and telephone calls at letsgohorseracing about the outcome – or more to the point the harsh penalty imposed on one party – following a controversial stewards’ inquiry in Townsville.
Our colleague in the north Terry Butts was reluctant to report on the events that led up to the inquiry, largely because he felt too close to those involved. Apart from writing his column, Silks & Saddles for the North Queensland Register, Butts is also a licensed trainer who didn’t want to be seen to be taking sides.
But the response from industry stakeholders to the six month disqualification imposed on stablehand Shane Colahan, the partner of top trainer Olivia Cairns, prompted Butts to report the incident this week.
That has caused him some grief with one of the parties involved (trainer Bill Kenning) which is unfortunate as all he did was outline and support the general industry feeling that the penalty was ‘over the top.’
We cannot run e-mails received for legal reasons but questions were asked how Colahan could receive a six month disqualification whilst others allegedly involved in the fracas escaped penalty free.
Of greater concern is the major allegation from those who have contacted us that a steward who participated in the inquiry works with one of those involved in the drama and some believe he should have been stood aside to avoid any perceived conflict of interest.
According to our reports these concerns were raised with the steward in question who supposedly told the inquiry that what he did in his private time was his business and had nothing to do with this inquiry. Perhaps Chief Steward Wade Birch should remind him what ‘denial of natural justice’ means.
The problem between the Cairns and Kenning stables has, according to our informants, being festering for some time and was even brought to the attention of the Townsville Turf Club committee.
It is our opinion – despite reading the final two paragraphs of the stewards’ report which conveniently address concerns raised in the Butts column (it appeared on Tuesday morning yet the Stewards’ Report on the Inquiry which was apparently concluded last Friday didn’t appear until yesterday afternoon on the RQ website).
RQ STEWARDS’ REPORT ON A FIGHT WHERE ONLY ONE WAS SEEN TO BE AT FAULT 
FOR those who have missed it – or can’t be bothered playing ‘hide and seek’ and searching for the Stewards’ Report on the impossible to navigate RQ website – here are the findings of the inquiry which was heard by Rion Hitchener, Ray Smith and Daryl Griffiths.
Racing Queensland stewards today concluded an inquiry into an incident alleged to have occurred during trackwork at the Townsville Turf Club on the morning of Wednesday 17 July 2013, involving trainers William Kenning, John Robbins, and stablehand Mr Shane Colahan.
Stewards commenced the inquiry on 18 July 2013, however on that day stewards acceded to a request from Mr Robbins to have the matter adjourned as he became ill during the course of the hearing.
The inquiry was continued on 5 August 2013. Evidence over the two days of hearing was taken from stablehands Ms Julie Bell, Mr Ray Fitzgerald, Mr Bond Robbins, Ms Reegan Jackson, Trainer Mr Kerry Baumann, Jockeys Mr Frank Edwards, Mr Jamie Long, Ms Emma Ljung, Townsville Turf Club officials Mr Michael Charge and Ms Darlene McKenzie, and farrier Mr Shane Raymont. Stewards adjourned the Inquiry until 30 August 2013 to enable them to give full consideration to the large volume of evidence taken during the inquiry.
The inquiry resumed on 30 August 2013 and, after carefully considering the evidence, stewards issued a charge against Mr Shane Colahan under AR175(q) which reads:
“The Principal Racing Authority or the Stewards may penalize any person who in their opinion is guilty of any misconduct, improper conduct or unseemly behavior".
The particulars of the charge were that Mr Shane Colahan, a licensed stablehand with Racing Queensland, on the morning of 17 July 2013 at the Townsville Turf Club, at approximately 7:45am, in the area of the tie-up stalls did improperly conduct himself by physically assaulting trainer W. Kenning by striking him on a number of occasions in the area of the head.
Mr Colahan pleaded guilty to the charge and, after considering his submissions in relation to penalty, his plea and relevant penalty precedents, stewards disqualified Mr Colahan for a period of six (6) months, effective immediately.
Mr Colahan was advised of his appeal rights.
Stewards ruled that based on the evidence presented at the Inquiry, they were not satisfied that the conduct of Mr Kenning had breached any of the Australian Rules of Racing and therefore no charges were issued against him. However, Mr Kenning was reminded of his obligations to conduct himself in a professional manner at all times.
Stewards also gave careful consideration to the actions of Mr Robbins in relation to this incident. Due to the differing versions of events tendered by a number of witnesses at the inquiry, stewards were unable to determine whether the actions of Mr Robbins in attempting to break up the altercation between Mr Colahan and Mr Kenning had fallen below what would be considered acceptable of a licensed trainer. Accordingly, stewards afforded Mr Robbins the benefit of the doubt in respect of his role in the incident and therefore no charges were issued against him.
BITS AND PIECES
BIG BOOKIE BURNT BY PLUNGE AND FAR FROM HAPPY WHEN CLERK WRITES WRONG BET ON TICKET 
WE have decided to run the following e-mail although there is no confirmation of the facts in the stewards’ report from the Gold Coast but because it sends the right message to punters.
If what we are being told is correct full marks to the Saturday stewards’ panel at the GCTC under the chairmanship of Ian Brown and Betting Supervisor Ray See for protecting the interests of the punters.
It also sends the message that is not only the punters who need to check the information on their betting tickets is right but also the bookmakers (and their staff) who write them.
TM of GOLD COAST sent this interesting e-mail:
'Don’t know if you are aware but one of the best known bookies in Queensland got burnt very badly on a plunge runner at the Gold Coast last Saturday – all through a mistake.
Story goes a punter tried to have a four figure bet on the horse at double figure odds. The bookie told his clerk to bet him to lose $1,000. In a misunderstanding the clerk wrote the ticket for $1,000 on the horse.
When the punter returned to collect his big win all hell broke loose. Reports suggest the bookie stuttered and stammered and ran around the ring like a headless chook complaining to anyone who would listen. But no-one really cared.
I am told that the betting supervisor was called in and that stewards adjudicated in favor of the punter because that was the amount written on the ticket. The bookie reluctantly paid up and the story goes promptly sacked the clerk who was responsible for ‘the mistake’.
As I say it’s just a story but from what I witnessed in the ring the whole affair had an element of truth to it and the bookie in question looked far from happy for the rest of the day. It couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: AS I said in the introduction if this did occur (there was a plunge winner at the Gold Coast), then full marks to the stewards for enforcing a payout in accordance with the ticket. Knowing old relationships one wonders if it would have resulted in the same outcome way back when. The only downside is that the incident should have rated a mention in the stewards’ report but I can’t find any on the day in question. It was one of those feel-good stories that every punter loves to read especially when it involves a bleating bookie.
GET ON THE ELECTION NOW WITH TATTSBET AFTER THE OTHERS HAVE PAID OUT 
BILLY M of BRISBANE wrote:
‘I heard one of these blokes from TattsBet on the radio on Monday morning promoting how they were now betting on the outcome of Saturday’s election.
Little wonder no-one wants to bet with Tatts. The big corporates have already paid out on the election result.
And to think that racing in Queensland is being subjected to a Tattersalls monopoly when it comes to the new TAB agreement that is currently being negotiated.
What a farce that joint is.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: I take the point you are making Billy but there are still a number of betting options on the election that some punters might want to bet on – like how many seats will be lost by the Government or won by the Opposition. I am told however that in these betting options there isn’t much value in what TattsBet is offering compared to the interstate TABs.
EVEN THE ‘MANURE MAN’ REPORTEDLY LAID OFF AT THE BRISBANE RACES 
‘PLEASE don’t use my name with this e-mail as I am one of the survivors on the casual staff purge at the Brisbane Racing Club.
AN indication of how tough times are in racing can be gauged from last weekend’s meeting at Doomben.
Only a few years ago there would be over 60 casual employees working at Eagle Farm and Doomben Saturday meetings.
Last Saturday at Doomben that number was reduced to 19. Even the services of the guy who picks up the ‘horse crap’ in the parade areas was dispensed with and his work has now been delegated to someone else.
If times are that tough financially for the biggest race club in Queensland how bad must some of the smaller clubs be travelling?
Or perhaps as some of the casual staff suggested last Saturday perhaps the big kahuna at the BRC should take a wage cut if the club is travelling that badly.’
PAYTEEVEE WILL NEED TO ‘GROW A LEG’ TO WIN CAIRNS AMATEUR CUP AFTER THIS EFFORT 
THE third race had hardly been run – and the odds-on favorite beaten – at Mackay yesterday (Tuesday) when the mobile started ringing.
Punters were more than a shade irate with the ride on Payteevee which just happens to be the favorite for the Amateur Cup this weekend in Cairns – and on that effort should be more like ten to one.
Well before we start jumping to conclusions there is the need to check that the sectionals didn’t affect his performance; the horse didn’t have a headache or get out of the wrong side of his stable; and all those other excuses that are offered by the apologists in the racing media.
We decided instead to await the release of the stewards’ report on the meeting. There was no way they wouldn’t have something to say about the defeat of another hot favorite at a TAB meeting in Queensland. But as of last night that report had not been posted on the RQ website.
NEWS ITEMS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE MISSED FROM THE PAST WEEK
NEW DEAL WILL SEE SHOW RELOCATED TO GOLD COAST TURF CLUB LAND 
THE Gold Coast Show will have a new home next year after the Show Society and the Gold Coast Turf Club agreed on a plan to develop a new showground and facilities at racing’s Bundall precinct.
Minister for Tourism, Major Events, Small Business and the Commonwealth Games Jann Stuckey was delighted that both parties reached an amicable arrangement for a new-look event at brand new premises.
“A master plan for the new showgrounds, prepared by international urban design consultants Populous, featured a multi-million dollar exhibition hall, show ring, woodchop arena and extensive infrastructure,” Ms Stuckey said.
“The Newman Government has funded the master planning process in recognition that this is a major cultural and economic event for the Gold Coast.
“The need for a new home for the show was created after the current show site had to be vacated to make way for athletes’ accommodation for the Commonwealth Games.
“The Gold Coast is the big winner, with the community getting two newly-developed precincts at the athlete’s village and the new showgrounds, which will add to the social and economic vibrancy of our city.”
The Show Society and Turf Club are now working towards project completion in time for the 2014 show, to be held on Friday August 29.
Gold Coast Turf Club Chairman Brett Cook welcomed the Show Society’s support for the master plan. “This is a landmark decision, not just for those involved, but the Gold Coast as a whole as our Bundall precinct is ideal as the new, permanent home for the show.
“Minister Stuckey’s decision to fund the master planning process, that has been undertaken in close cooperation with the show society in recent months, has produced a great outcome.
“Construction of new show facilities would be very compatible with the turf club’s current redevelopment, which is scheduled for completion in November.”
Construction of the new show facilities is due to begin early in the new year with works to be completed in time for the 2014 Gold Coast Show.
ANOTHER BIG SEASON OF RACING PREDICTED BY HONG KONG JOCKEY CLUB BOSS 
SPEAKING at a pre-season press briefing at Sha Tin Racecourse, the Hong Kong Jockey Club’s Chief Executive Officer Winfried Engelbrecht-Bresges reflected on a successful 2012/13 season for Hong Kong racing and outlined the Club’s continuing investment in facilities moving forward.
Outlining the status of the sport, Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges said: “Hong Kong racing is a major global brand with two internationally renowned racecourses. Sha Tin is one of the leading racecourses in the world and Happy Valley is arguably the world’s most iconic night time racecourse. Our racing continues to attract locals and tourists to Hong Kong’s favourite pastime. We also attract some of the best horsemen and horses in the world – some of those are based here and others come for our world class racing and competitive environment.”
With a record HK$94 billion turnover on racing last season, attendances in excess of two million people, the highest for nine years, and an increase of 8.7 per cent in betting duty to HK$11 billion this year, the trends are positive.
Season 2013/14 is the final year of the latest phase of the Racecourse Master Plan. Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges outlined his thoughts on the success and the progress: “Enhancing racecourse facilities is only the hardware and the ongoing Racecourse Master Plan project is one side of our ‘Four Components’ Strategy. Of equal importance has been the software side, allowing us successfully to position racing as social entertainment and make good use of technology.”
“The Racecourse Master Plan project is a clear indication of our commitment to taking on the challenges we face and sustaining the growth in horse racing in Hong Kong. The comprehensiveness and complexity of the project, as well as the successes it has achieved, have set the benchmark for other countries.”
However, Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges stressed that the gaming and entertainment industry is more competitive than ever and the Club is well aware of the need to innovate and to connect with its customers. The ibu and the Race Simulator App, which has now had almost 400,000 downloads, are examples of how racing can present itself to those new audiences in an exciting way using technology with which they are familiar.
Sha Tin has undergone extensive renovations, including a state-of-the-art new Members Betting Hall. In addition, the Pak Sing Restaurant has gone through a major revamp, turning it into a more comfortable and stylish location for the public. The Shatin Gallery is the first tailored venue for less experienced customers, with the aim of nurturing their racing interest.
Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges said, in summary: “Overall, I am cautiously optimistic about the coming season, but competition, particularly from Macau, remains intense. In 2012, total visitors from Hong Kong to Macau amounted to 7 million people. It should be noted that recent rounds of casino investment in Macau focus not only on the VIP segment, but also on mass public casino halls and other resort-type entertainment offerings. This highlights the importance of the Club’s investment in the public areas at our racecourses to match the offerings provided by our competitors.”
The hosting of the Asian Racing Conference in Hong Kong next May will bring 1,000 racing industry leaders from all around the world to discuss issues important to the sport’s long term development. Mr Engelbrecht-Bresges acknowledged this as a significant opportunity to reinforce Hong Kong’s presence at the forefront of world racing and for the Hong Kong Jockey Club to share with those ARC participants the results of the efforts to revitalise horse racing and make it a sustainable business.
DEBATE ON CORPORATE BOOKIES BETWEEN JOHN SCHRECK AND GILES THOMPSON
WE have had several requests to reproduce a debate on corporate bookmakers in the FAIRFAX MEDIA recently between JOHN SCHRECK, the former high profile Racing NSW Chief Steward and GILES THOMPSON, the CEO of Betfair Australia.
JOHN SCHRECK wrote: 
I would like to begin this with a small confession.
Soon after I finished working overseas, I thought there might be something I could do which may have been of use within the sport of horse racing.
I had several meetings with senior people from Betfair, hoping and believing I could assist that organization. We got to the stage where I was told a contract was being drawn up. Then nothing. So I thought a call was in order. It became one of those ''don't call us we will call you'' things.
Betting exchanges are, in my opinion, a cancer and in time will prove to be one of the many things that will threaten the racing industry.
Any decent punter knows that it is possible to lay a horse for hundreds of thousands of dollars on exchanges, not just in Australia but in places close to our north. And regrettably they can be and are being laid to lose.
Betting organizations simply manage the transactions of a person who deposits with them a bank of money that is made available at attractive betting odds on the internet.
Let us call the depositor of the bank the layer and the punter the bettor. An exchange operator does not risk his own money. Neither the layer nor the bettor contributes to the cost of organizing and supervising the race meeting.
Ask yourself how much the exchange operator, the layer and bettor contribute to the cost of the construction or maintenance of the racetracks, legal costs, the cost of breeding and training the horses that perform for their collective benefit, the huge cost of supervising the races and the participants. What contribution is made to assist with problem gamblers?
The exchange operator, layer and bettor are not under any compulsion to abide by the rules of racing. What probity check is the exchange operator subject to from either racing or civil authorities? Do gangsters have access to exchanges where they can lay horses? Do exchange operators require layers or bettors to undergo probity checks before accepting their deposits and then acting as a middleman in betting transactions involving very large amounts of money?
Remember, the layer, whose identity is hidden from the supervisors of the sport, lays out large amounts of hard cash in the near certain belief that a fancied horse cannot win.
Remember always this layer is unidentifiable and hides behind the exchange operator. I hope not, but he could be a jockey or an associate of a jockey who believes that his horse, although fancied by the public, has no chance of winning and often for some very legitimate reason.
This layer could be in a position to assist the horse to lose. He could have a close connection with a trainer, rider or stablehand and therefore be privy to some undisclosed information relating to say, a late fitness problem. Remember the rumor mill on Derby Day in Sydney just gone.
The layer could have a criminal record in relation to corrupt practices. He could even be a person warned off or disqualified by racing authorities.
Fixing the outcome of a match surely requires a considerable degree of collusion; probably involving players on both sides. But some sports are obviously in the hands of individuals.
In horse racing it would be extremely profitable to know which horses are going to lose. Bookmakers are always happy to attract bets on what they regard as a no-hoper and these horses are usually outsiders anyway. We all know corrupt actions designed to affect the outcome of a sporting event or a horse race, are completely unfair to the innocent punter and also, I must say, to the bookmaker. The responsibility for preventing such actions lies with the administrators. That is why so much money is spent regulating and controlling horse racing and endeavouring to present it in the best possible light.
I have never tried to say racing is perfect; inexcusable things do happen on racetracks. But society is not exactly squeaky clean either. There has always been and there always will be a natural inconsistency in horse racing. Unpredictability , I believe, is a wonderful feature of all sports.
Too many people believe racing is institutionally bent. Therefore any system which means people can profit from a horse being beaten is a serious problem for racing. Surely it is not right to be allowed to anonymously bet against a fancied runner or to profit from laying losers.
There are many people in racing and in other sports and around the edges who do not adequately comprehend the utter need for public confidence in betting operations.
The love of money is the root of all evil.
AND the response from GILES THOMPSON, the boss of BETFAIR AUSTRALIA: 
RACING administrators and wagering operators must work hand in glove to promote racing to the widest possible audience.
That’s why it was disappointing to see the re-emergence of unfounded and outdated arguments against exchange betting in this paper last week in a piece by former chief steward John Schreck.
Suggestions made by Schreck that Betfair doesn’t pay its way to the industry and that exchange betting harms the integrity of the sport mirror the alarmist attitude of a vocal few when Betfair first sought a licence to operate in Australia almost a decade ago.
Betfair is a strong and proud contributor to the racing industry and plays a crucial role in protecting its integrity.
Betfair is committed to paying its fair share to racing bodies under race-fields legislation and in the case of NSW racing, it pays the prescribed turnover fee (which equates to about 50 per cent of Betfair’s revenue derived from the sport) directly to Racing NSW.
We contribute even more through the sponsorship of racing clubs and carnivals across Australia – and would love to do more but are restricted by exclusive arrangements in place with TABs.
We are acutely aware that for customers to wager on any sport or racing code, they must have confidence in its integrity.
That’s why Betfair employs a team of integrity analysts that works directly with stewards and integrity officials in racing and sport. Betfair only accepts bets from customers whose identity is proven through a verification process similar to those accompanying a bank account, and records a complete audit trail of the activity of all our customers.
At the completion of his term as chief steward, Schreck’s Victorian counterpart, Des Gleeson, said: “Betfair is here to stay, there is no question about that. Having access to following the money trail is really beneficial to us.
“If something is unusual, Betfair will tell us. You can build up a data bank on people who are laying horses through Betfair, even to the point where they can tell us if more than one person is using a computer.”
To suggest, then, that the identity of a back or lay punter is “hidden from the supervisors of the sport” is not correct.
Betfair has the same two-way integrity relationship with every racing body in Australia and all major sports upon which markets are offered.
Schreck is right to say that the public must have confidence in betting operations and that anonymity can create a perception of impropriety, but it’s only cash-based betting that can hide the identity of punters.
Like consumers everywhere, racing’s customer – the punter – will not be denied lower prices and more flexible services. This phenomenon is not new or unique to wagering and Betfair is not the only challenger to the former monopoly wagering providers.
Customers are voting with their feet and abandoning pari-mutuel betting in favour of the better odds and greater betting flexibility in the online space.
Betting exchanges appeal to a customer segment that cannot be serviced by the traditional operators. Without a regulated, transparent betting exchange in the Australian marketplace, those customers will be lost to the industry.
Racing should embrace its consumers’ choices and work with all wagering operators not only to ensure integrity but to grow the wagering pie and reverse the trend of punters moving their punting dollar from racing to sport.
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.