Dear Mr Bryce,

Thank you for your email regarding the draft Code of Practice for the Keeping of Racing Greyhounds. I apologise for the delay in responding to your email.

The Andrews Labor Government has been the strongest supporter of the greyhound racing industry in this country and this continues to be the case.

We have absolutely no plans to ban greyhound racing in Victoria and any suggestions that we are trying to ban the industry - either directly or by stealth are false.

The Government is committed to supporting a strong and sustainable greyhound racing industry with robust and improved animal welfare outcomes.

Since the live baiting incidents came to light in February 2015, we have been working closely with Greyhound Racing Victoria to improve animal welfare standards.

The industry is thriving in Victoria and it has made enormous strides to reform over the past two years.

The development of this draft code is in direct response to a recommendation by the Chief Veterinary Officer, Dr Charles Milne, in his 2015 report: Investigation into animal welfare and cruelty in the Victorian greyhound industry.

Recommendation 1.1 stated: That the Code of Practice for the Operation of Greyhound Establishments be comprehensively revised to include animal welfare standards that reflect contemporary community expectations and industry best practice.

The draft code has been developed in consultation with GRV and a range of industry participants and key stakeholders.

The draft code is now open for public comment and Government strongly encourages anyone who wishes to have their say to put forward a submission.

The Government is expecting to make changes to the draft code based on the feedback we receive through this process. The Government will not be making any changes that threaten the viability of the industry.

We have also been advised that Greyhound Racing Victoria will be consulting with its participants and seeking their feedback to provide to Government.

We are aiming to improve animal welfare outcomes to ensure that the greyhound racing industry has a strong and sustainable future in Victoria.

I encourage you to participate in the consultation process if you have not already done so. The public comment period will close on 14th August 2017.

To make a submission go to EXTERNAL LINK

Kind regards,
Liam Attoe | Electorate Officer
Office of the Hon. James Merlino MP, State Member for Monbulk
Deputy Premier | Minister for Education | Minister for Emergency Services
1635 Burwood Highway, Belgrave Vic 3160
____________________________________________________________
T: (03) 9754 5401 | F: (03) 9754 5427| E: [email protected] EXTERNAL LINK facebook.com/JamesMerlinoMP twitter.com/JamesMerlinoMP

I email my local member a lot re the dogs and ideas, he passes things onto the racing minister which means you get a line directly to those that actually make the decisions to put the ideas forward to, so well done Peter on doing something and making the waves needed, better than putting others down and not actually having ideas to put forward as some tend to do.

Its the weight of submissions now that will make that difference down in VIC, everyone needs to make a submission its really important, as they go by how many letters support certain ideas...
grv is even holding workshops to help people put submissions together I read on the grv site

Depending on the feedback to the draft code, there seems to be 2 possible government responses.

1. If feedback goes through every requirement of the 80 odd pages, the obvious ones will be dropped (eg no greyhounds transported in boots of cars). And perhaps transitioning requirements for property improvements. The result will still be an oppressive code with standards way above those for other dogs.

It will still be a targeted approach to greyhound racing where the only reason for the higher standards is to satisfy those wanting industry closure.

It seems the government takes the approach that the code, in whatever form, will ensure continuity of greyhound racing - but its up to the feedback to change the draft. And if participants can't make that happen, then its not our fault.

We get the Star Trek outcome "Its life Jim, but not as we know it".

2. The other approach is for the whole basis to change, which is more likely to be a better outcome for the industry.

This would require a government approach that if standards are justified, they must apply to all dogs/animals. And the code should state the standards/outcomes, not the processes.

This would leave racing specific processes and racing best practice standards under the control of the Racing Minister.

I favour getting the whole basis changed, by the discrediting the approach, and then the content.

I expect that the Nationals and Shooters Fishers Farmers Party may be more receptive to a stronger approach, if the Racing Minister doesn't listen.

Perhaps questions to pose:
Why is the content based on anti-greyhound racing input?
Why is the content disrespectful to the industry (comments re greyhound in boots of cars)?
Why higher welfare standards for greyhounds than other dogs?
Why is the draft process specific, when no other code is process specific?
Why are racing industry-specific processes no longer controlled by the Racing Minister?

Code Of Practice - Greyhound Racing Industry

Hi Peter

I appreciated you taking the time to write to me.

I understand your concerns regarding the draft code. My family are also involved in the greyhound racing industry, my father, uncle, brother and cousins own a few at the moment. My grandfather Roy Symes was an owner trainer and had great success with Hua in the late 80s!

The Government is a strong supporter of the greyhound racing industry and has no intention of banning it either directly or indirectly.

As you will be aware the industry was dealt a blow with the revelation of a minority of people in the industry engaging in live baiting. The government has been working with the code to improve animal welfare standards and commissioned two reports, one from the racing integrity commissioner, Sal Perna, and one from the chief veterinary officer, Dr Charles Milne. One of those reports was commissioned by the Minister for Racing and the other by the Minister for Agriculture.

These reports were tabled in the Parliament in June 2015. There were 68 recommendations in all. A number of these were recommendations for GRV and participants in the code to implement. Others were for the government, and we are certainly responding to and have accepted all of the recommendations that were made to us.

Recommendation 1 in the Milne report was for a new code of practice for greyhound racing. A draft is out for consultation looking at looking at the minimum standards of staffing, accommodation, management, breeding and care required for the physical and behavioural needs of a racing greyhound throughout its lifecycle.
This is what I know has upset some in the industry but I really wish to emphasis the term DRAFT. I will be making a brief submission pointing out the areas of concern for owners and trainers and I would encourage you to also forward you views.
The Department of Agriculture had originally planned a long consultation period but after they released the draft code and the industry has started to respond, the Government has asked that the duration be shortened - The consultation process opened on the 14th of June 2017 and close on the 14th of August 2017. After which time they will provide their feedback on the draft code to the Ministers I am speaking directly with Jaala Pulford and Martin Pakula also they are both supporters of the industry and certainly have no intention of going down the NSW liberal/national path in their mistreatment of the industry.

It is through people like you getting involved in this process that we can ensure that fair, reasonable and realistic guidelines are put in place.

Kind regards,
Jaclyn
Jaclyn Symes
Member for Northern Victoria
Government Whip
49A High Street WALLAN 3756
[email protected]
PH: 5783 2000
Twitter: @JaclynSymes

Get off your backside & respond in a mature fashion for the good of the sport.

The more Victorians that do that, the stronger your voice will be heard in all the right areas.

You have till the 14th of August.

Consequently, the industry is being asked to comment on matters in fourth place in the pecking order ...

The initial investigation and actions (ie bans etc).
The two reviews by Milne and Perna.
The reactions of government - terrible stuff, we must fix this.
The bureaucrats doing the bidding of government.

It is the initial comments by Milne and Perna that are the problem and which must be challenged. Otherwise you will get no more than "pro forma" responses (as another post suggested) and the bureaucrats will rule the roost.

Politicians will react to headlines and anti-racing noise, not the wishes of participants. Bureaucrats will do no more than write long diatribes (they get points for extra words) to keep their masters happy.

The industry must challenge the source - unfortunately because it has none of the public on side. GRV should have been doing this but they ignored their responsibility to promote and advance the industry and instead relied on waffle. Still do.

The only thing that worked in NSW was the march down Macquarie St with support from the Shooters. From there on, the Alliance was ineffective, or even compliant. Disgraceful. And it is still waffling re Canberra.

So live baiting means total upgrades of facilities, staffing and a whole lot of other rubbish??

Realise that mate, just quoting their reason for all this change. How is this going to stop the odd one out from live baiting??

Other organisations have popped up from time to time and then virtually disappeared but they were never effective anyway - mostly because they were not professionally organised and also relied on elected trainers to carry them forward.

If I have a broken leg I don't want a plumber but an experienced doctor.

In general, trainers are not qualified to head up an industry organisation. Even if they were, few would have to time to devote to it.

I would be horrified to go to lawyers but I get the idea. What the industry needs to cover is negotiations/marketing/public relations/knowledge of how government works/business nous. Legal opinion can be bought if essential.

Desirably, it would be national, not least because it would give it some serious influence.

Another reason is that the industry's problems do not just affect trainers but the many other people who provide goods and services to it, to say nothing of customers (which GRV GRNSW and others have forgotten about).

Incidentally the gallops mob you refer to are usually big time businessmen themselves. IE they have lots of spare cash.

There are five or six thousand trainers in NSW and Victoria alone. Probably double that for suppliers and other supporters. At subs of $100 pa each you could set up a really effective office - one which returns policy dividends to the members.

They key principle is that such an organisation can lead the discussions rather than just being asked to comment on what has already been decided (have you ever known an authority to change its mind following "consultation"?).

EXTERNAL LINK

They are amateurs combatting a highly organised bureaucracy and government. They will always lose - look at the silly nonsense going on over a pan of water in the kennels.

Your legal firm (in trouble I might add) and a hundred like it will work for good money only.

We might need lawyers once in a while but we need professional leadership all the time.

The industry members, associations, and the sport itself have no respect.

Never has.

"Again I invite you to compare the Australian Trainers Association for Thoroughbreds with the Greyhound Industry."

One has professionalism and money and therefore power, the other doesn't.
One has no restrictions on breeding, incentives, prize money distribution, nor support from certain sectors. The other has.

Unfortunately Peter, the problems that need to be sorted out with Greyhounds does not just affect trainers.

Think bigger.