Re "No it wasn't , it was the RSPCA and The Greens, and that was only because Mike the Liar needed the greens, otherwise it would have blown over, just like the trot's and horse affairs are now".

I think you mis-read the tea leaves. Baird did not need the Greens as he had a majority anyway - which is why he then rammed it through cabinet and then the parliament. RSPCA tacked on only after the first decision and then only because its NSW boss (Coleman) had a personal problem with greyhound racing (which, incidentally, is outside the RSPCA's charter - their coverage is restricted to welfare, not racing as such).

Then three things happened: the march on Macquarie St, lots of noise from radio jocks etc, and the Orange by-election. In each case it was the public that was won over, not necessarily because they loved greyhound racing but because they saw the gross injustice of it all.

The people beat Baird.

Unfortunately, Baird had the last laugh when he cooked the books by setting up the Reform Panel with three members who knew little or nothing about NSW greyhound racing, one who strongly opposed it in any form, plus Brenton Scott who has never said boo since.

So we still need the public.

How can I learn from that when you offer nothing but a throwaway line which means zero?

Agree with Mal, anytime I have cause to speak to others, they have no issue with racing greyhounds and almost to a person tell me how a past relative had dogs. If I mention that we are not able to use any skins they shake their heads in disbelief, not once has anyone stated an objection to racing, that argument is being carried by a minority with the power to persuade ie press and advisors to politicians,we will never sway them because of ideology and veganistic opposition to any animal industry. The challenge is to reconnect the greyhound with the wider public GAP is one measure,we need others.

Your last sentence is spot on - "The challenge is to reconnect the greyhound with the wider public GAP is one measure,we need others".

The key part of that is to raise the image of the greyhound so that it is no different to a foxie or retriever. GAP is providing lots of evidence that many folk never realised how amenable the greyhound is to rehoming (mostly). Many people, especially women, still react with horror at the sight of a greyhound because their history has been tarnished by stories of rabbit kills and the like, to say nothing about live hare coursing. They just need education. Do not underestimate that job.

Meanwhile, recognise that a ban on skins was no more than an extreme reaction to live baiting - a sniff of a carcase is a little brother and any skin a distant cousin. The progress is obvious. Time can change that attitude but only if history is replaced by modern practice.

No thanks - that's a job for experts.

Otherwise, re your previous post, there is no point is shooting the messenger. And, while I have no time for the family you mention, your accusations are all wild speculation. There is no such evidence.

The question is why did it need to stuff up breeding Bruce........according to your comments every one is cow towing to the greens, yet yesterday there was a bi-election in Preston(approx 5kms from Melb) where the greens were expected to get in..............they have already declared Labour the winner today even with the postal vote(estimated at 25%), yet to be counted.

My point is if they have already declared a Labour win without the postal vote count, how much of a hiding have the greens copped !

Please Bruce stop telling us the general public are with the greens - they are not. John Watts is 100% correct with all his comments not just with the last sentence.

Another fruit salad.

Re: "Please Bruce stop telling us the general public are with the greens - they are not."

1. Greens dislike greyhounds and greyhound racing for specific ideological reasons. Animals should not be "forced" to race, especially when betting is involved.

2. Much of the public - from available but scanty evidence - are broadly or sometimes specific background reasons averse to greyhounds. Such evidence might include newspaper stories, history of live hare coursing, killing rabbits, opposition to gambling, absence of good information about the breed and racing.

The Greens are a dead loss but should be a target of re-education.

The public is amenable to change providing they obtain the knowledge and appreciation of the breed and the sport. GAP shows what can be done but needs to be multiplied ten or a hundred times to achieve the result we want.

The two are quite different although there are some overlaps. And I have never said "the general public are with the greens". You just made that up.

Just for the record, Flannery was put in charge of a Climate Commission which was later disbanded by the Libs, despite Flannery's protests.

Not so sure about the Greens in Batman - they had a lot of self-made problems, which is perhaps understandable given the zany nature of their leader. But you still have to watch them carefully because they are different from one day to the next and from one state to the next.

So a few of us are going political on their arses. We may get somewhere, we may not, we are not going to die wondering, we are doing shit daily. Greyhound participants have been a soft target for to long, although this has been allowed to happen because of complacency and collusion.