https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Hansard/Pages/HansardResult.aspx#/docid/HANSARD-1820781676-76445

Robert Borsak in parliament today
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Hansard/Pages/HansardResult.aspx#/docid/HANSARD-1820781676-76490

Don't know why they are not coming up as external links but you can cut and paste.

GREYHOUND RACING INDUSTRY

The Hon. ROB ERT BORSAK ( 18:19 ): Tonight I remind the House of the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party's unwavering support for the greyhound racing industry , and that support will be maintained. If anyone thought that this issue could be swept under the carpet with an occasional announcement by the Deputy Premier as though he has the greyhound racing industry at heart , I for one will not be sold that pup. Since 2013, my colleague the Hon . Robert Brown and I have been championing the interest s of the greyhound racing industry. We were joined in that support with the election of our colleague the m ember for Orange, Philip Donato , in 2016.

This Liberal-National s G overnment tried and failed to shut do wn the industry. We all know how that played out, particularly in the by-election for the electorate of Orange. The de struction of the g reyhound r acing industry in New South Wales by this Liberal-National s Government continues despite the many promises mad e to the industry since 2017. It is death by a thousand cuts. The Government is once again trying to slowly strangle the industry with the imposition of a $500 puppy bond and other policies designed to close it down by stealth. There is no justification fo r such a bond. No attempt has been made to consider the economic outcome and disastrous effect on the industry of the imposition of such a bond or , indeed, to explain why it is necessary.

The c hairman of Greyhound Racing NSW , Morris I emma, and his g eneral counsel, Madeleine Love, are slowly bleeding dry the industry by i mposing increasing costs, like the $500 puppy bond, and circulating unsubstantiated information, including botched statistics on doping and euthanasia, which are no different from those circulated in 2016. I always suspected that this G overnment w ould have another crack at shutting down the greyhound industry. What I did not expect was another National s Minister doing the bidding of inner - city Liberals. Thankfully for the industry, the Ne w South Wales Greyhound, Breeders, Owners and Trainers Association and individual participants have always come to the table with maturity and professionalism, even under intolerable and problematic circumstances thrown at them by this Liberal-National s G o vernment.

In the short time that I have left, I want to raise two issues. The first relat es to the employment of Madeline Love as g eneral c ounsel for Greyhound Racing NSW. For those who might not be aware, Madeleine Love was employed by Paul Newson, the fo rmer c hief e xecutive o fficer of Greyhound Racing NSW, when he was trying to take the greyhound racing industry over a cliff. Following a request from a breeder regarding the $500 puppy bond, Madeline Love respond ed by stating:

The imposition of a bond is aimed at reducing over-breeding of greyhounds in NSW and reducing the number of greyhounds euthanised each year; factors which contributed to the high level of wastage identified by the Special Commission. Whilst the current system of tracking assists in identifying the level of wastage in the industry, it does not assist in minimising that wastage. In circumstances where 13,000 to 17,000 healthy greyhounds are killed each year in NSW, GRNSW considers that the imposition of a 'pup bond' is an important measure to promote the welfare for greyhounds across NSW.

The truth is that both Greyhounds Australasia and Greyhound Racing NSW state that there were approximately 7,392 greyhounds born in 2015 , 7,488 in 2014 , 6,414 in 2013 , and 6,888 in 2012 . A fter the breed ing regulations were implemented by Paul Newson, the breeding levels fell to nearly half in 2016. Despite repeated requests for Madeleine Love to substantiate her claim that 13,000 to 17,000 greyhounds are killed each year, which may then validate her argu ment about imposing a $500 puppy bond, no explanation has been forthcoming. Fabricating euthanasia statistics has been a tool used by the Government since it began this campaign. Imposing a $500 puppy bond to decrease the number of dogs being euthanised is outrageous and unaffordable. These statements are simply wrong. These are the same lie s that w ere used by this Liberal-National s G overnment in 2016.

The second issue relates to arsenic and cobalt. Making arsenic and cobalt prohibited substances, despite being found in a dog's natural diet, has caused an increase in doping allegations, and forced trainers with impeccable records over 30 years to sell up and to go away embarrassed and depressed. There is no evidence to support the banning of these substances. It is difficult to move forward if we have key people such as Madeleine Love within the greyhound industry actively scheming with u pper House Greens m ember Dr Mehreen Faruqi to shut it down by stealth.

F ormer Premier Morris I emma was charge d with moving the greyhound industry forward , not running a protection racket and do ing this G overnment ' s bidding. I will have much more to say over the next couple of months about this disgraceful attempt to destroy th e greyhound racing industry and the steady and systematic attack on key owners and breeders. T here is no doubt that the industry has been set up to fail , and we know who is doing what . The Shooters , Fishers and Farmers Party will not be shy in prosecuting and campaigning yet again for the industry, its participants, and rural communities. This is not over. [ Time expired .]

GREYHOUND RACING INDUSTRY

The Hon. ROBERT BORSAK ( 14:46 ): My question without notice is directed to the Hon. Niall Blair, representing the Minister for Racing. Is the Minister aware that cobalt is a substance rarely found in a dog's natural diet and feed supplements and that if a dog is deficient in cobalt it will die? Is the Minister also aware that dog owners, breeders and trainers are being deceitfully accused of doping based on unreasonably low levels used by Greyhounds Australasia to define doping? What science-based evidence does Greyhound Racing NSW have on the use of the 100 nanogram threshold to justify this policy?

The Hon. NIALL BLAIR (Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Regional Water, and Minister for Trade and Industry) ( 14:47 ): I thank the Hon. Robert Borsak for his question, which is directed to me representing the Minister for Racing in this Chamber. Recently the issue of cobalt in different racing circles has been in the media. However, the member has asked a very specific question regarding the greyhound industry and the scientific evidence that it relies upon to set the levels which it deems to be either inappropriate or appropriate. I do not have that detail with me in the Chamber today. It is a level of detail that would need to be referred to the agency for a detailed response via the Minister. Because of that I am happy to take the question on notice on behalf of Minister Toole, who will refer it to the relevant agency for the expert advice on the scientific evidence that it relies upon. Minister Toole will then come back to the member with a detailed response in the appropriate time frame.

Obviously makes a lot more sense that way.

SFFP have the video up on their facebook page.

Tell Borsak to tell Hansard. It is routine for corrections to be made.

EXTERNAL LINK

COBALT IS MAKING GOOD PEOPLE LOOK BAD❗️
STATEMENT ON COBALT TESTING IN GREYHOUNDS:
Derek A Major BVSc MACVSc CMAVA
I have been in Equine Veterinary Practice since 1989. In January, 2014 I was granted an Animal Care and Ethics Permit to perform cobalt excretion studies in horses, and I have been performing various trials on the urine and blood levels of cobalt in horses following routine administration of common vitamins and minerals. I have been involved in providing advice and evidence to horse trainers charged with breaching current cobalt regulations in Thoroughbred and Harness Racing.
I have no interest, financial or otherwise, in the sport of Greyhound racing. I am however deeply disturbed that the industry has followed the lead from horse racing and imposed a urinary threshold on cobalt in dogs. I believe that the horse threshold was developed on inadequate and flawed science.
I am a strong champion of animal welfare, and I fully appreciate regularity authorities concern to protect the welfare of dogs and horses. I would condemn any attempt to wilfully dose any animal with large doses of cobalt, for perceived performance advantage.
Cobalt is an essential trace nutrient in mammals. Its sole role is as a structural component of the Vitamin B12 (cobalamin) molecule, which is essential to red blood cell function.
I have 3 areas of concern:
1. Urine is the wrong test medium
Cobalt is one of a group of elements classified as heavy metals. This group includes iron, copper, zinc, arsenic, selenium and lead, among others. Some of these are essential to life, in varying quantities cobalt being one of them. Characteristic of heavy metals is the tendency to accumulate in a number of body tissues. High levels can lead to signs of toxicity. Cobalt intoxication has been reported in humans, and lead poisoning is recognised in many species.
When a horse or dog is exposed to a continued low level of cobalt levels in the blood plasma and red cells rises. Most of the cobalt in blood is bound to plasma protein, and ultimately is incorporated into the red blood cells, where it remains for the life of the cell around 120 days. This may account for 90% of the cobalt in blood, and is NOT measured in urine tests.
Urine testing simply measures the free ionised cobalt spilling over into the urine. Urine testing measures what was in the animal not what is in the animal.
Indeed, such simple factors as water intake and concentration of the urine can have a profound effect on urine cobalt levels. As a starting point it is essential to correct measured levels against urine creatinine or specific gravity.
The more appropriate test is that adopted.
2. Cobalt is not performance- enhancing
Interest in illicit cobalt use as a performance-enhancer in racing horses and dogs can be traced back to some speculative articles in the lay press from the sport of Cycling. It was proposed that cobalt in humans might stimulate erythropoietin (EPO), and lead to increased red cell production. This speculation comes from discussions in the scientific literature dating back to the 1940s and even 1930s, which referred to laboratory studies on rabbit and rat red blood cells.
Such studies as have been done in horses have failed to support this proposal, showing No increase in red cells and NO increase in haemopoietin, even after very large doses of cobalt.
Given the120 day life span of red blood cells any such effect would require dosing months before racing, and raceday urine testing would be irrelevant. Furthermore, given the massive reserves of red blood cells stored in the spleen it is highly questionable whether increasing the count would make the horse run faster or slower.
3. Uncontrolled Population Studies are Flawed
The horse urine level was set on the basis of statistical analysis of an uncontrolled population study. Without reliable knowledge of the total cobalt exposure of each individual in the study, the normal range cannot be defined. I understand a parallel approach has been adopted for Greyhound Racing. Total exposure includes native cobalt in the feed, water and environment, as well as legitimate vitamin and mineral supplements, in addition to any illicit administration.
4. Greyhound Racing does not need to invent a new scandal.
Having previously stated my disinterest I can only observe that Greyhound Racing in New South Wales is struggling to improve its reputation in the public eye. In my opinion Horse Racing has suffered a severe loss of reputation in recent years, and many trainers have been unfairly disadvantaged, on the basis of flawed and inadequate science. I would urge the Grey hound industry NOT to follow that path.
Association of Racing Commissioners
International. Cobalt in blood plasma is measured, and sanctions applied when the level exceeds 25ppm.
🔹🔹🔹LIKE & SHARE🔹🔹🔹
Much more to come on this subject, we have been busy #ProudProRacers, but we're awake to what is a silent killer of our sport, losing trainers for providing animal welfare is unacceptable and smacks of animal extremist input! 😡
The thresholds are too low, the testing never included dietary intake, nor did it allow for natural accumulation of the micro mineral. On top of all that, testing for cobalt needs to be done via blood, a simple occurrence of a small urine sample can be enough to push levels above 100 due to the high concentration.
Thresholds need to be set at a number that clearly shows misuse. 300+ would be a good start. This would allow for standard animal welfare practices to continue, especially with things like vitamin, mineral and electrolyte supplements... punishing good people for taking care of their dogs is wrong.
The bottom line is cobalt is NOT a DRUG, nor is it a performance enhancer! It's a naturally occurring essential micro-mineral.
#LearnTheFacts

The threshold for thoroughbreds and harness is also 100. It was lowered from the initial threshold of 200.

EXTERNAL LINK
GRNSW wishes to clarify a comment in recent correspondence from it to an industry participant on the issue of a pup bond which was subsequently quoted in Parliament by the Hon. Robert Borsak during Question Time on 22 May 2018.

In the relevant correspondence, GRNSW stated:
At this time, racing greyhounds in NSW are subject to tracking from whelping to retirement or death. Whilst this assists GRNSW in regulating the movement of greyhounds in NSW, it does not tackle a number of other issues identified by the Special Commission of Inquiry into the Greyhound Racing Industry in NSW (Special Commission), and in particular, the issue of wastage It was estimated that the industry was responsible for the deaths of somewhere between 13,000 and 17,000 healthy greyhounds a year (paragraph 11.46 of the report).

That figure is based on the findings off the Special Commission in its final report.

Later in the correspondence, the same wastage figures of 13,000 to 17,000 were referred to but were incorrectly attributed to NSW (and not all of Australia). However GRNSW later referred the participant to the final report of the Special Commission which clarified the number of registered greyhound pups born each year between 2009 and 2015 in NSW.

In fact, the Special Commissions report on wastage figures in NSW estimated that, on average, between 4,074 5,704 healthy greyhounds in NSW were killed every year in the 12 years prior to the Special Commission.

The fact remains that these figures are still shocking and unacceptable. GRNSW is firmly of the view that the imposition of a pup bond is an essential measure to control breeding and to ensure that the welfare for greyhounds across NSW is paramount. The pup bond is one of a number of important measures to reduce wastage proposed to be introduced by the new GRNSW leadership. These measures were recommended by the Greyhound Industry Reform Panel and approved by NSW Government in February 2017.

The measures include the establishment of the Greyhounds Welfare and Integrity Commission, significant enhancements to funding for the Greyhound as Pets adoption program, and in February this year, GRNSW introduced an improved Euthanasia Policy which requires participants to properly explore re-homing options for greyhounds before euthanasia is considered as an alternative.
GRNSW is wholly and unapologetically committed to drastically reducing the number of healthy greyhounds being killed in NSW every year and it has zero tolerance for unlawful euthanasia.

Im also curious as to why GRNSW are so obsessed with defending the puppy bond. It is not in their domain. It is the responsibility of GWIC. Is something happening behind the scenes they are not sharing with us?

Meanwhile and not to be out-done AA were hatching an illegal plan to destroy the industry late 2014 and withheld the illegally obtained evidence until about February 2015 and the Government went along for the ride. Sounds familiar??

This mob has to go before they do anymore damage to the industry.

they have our back when the others dont

It's really contempt for the facts. I am amazed that whoever writes these ridiculous comments at GRNSW is still going down the McHugh donkey track when they have been shown to be false.

I have lost count of the number of times I have written in various media that the figures are incorrect. At least some of those would be read by racing authorities (so I am often informed).

This suggests that some sort of order has gone out in GRNSW requiring that only data published by McHugh is to be used - without any verification or checking. That must be viewed as either incompetence or something much more serious.

Let's review the real facts ...

1. GA produced a "confidential" memo to CEOs stating that a large number of dogs could not be accounted for (due to incomplete records). The memo, while poorly worded and otherwise dumb, was never intended to be taken as a submission to McHugh.

2. Any numbers used were "estimates" only - for example, it assumed a certain average number of pups per litter.

3. That memo mentioned briefly that there were other reasons than euthanasia for the unexplained gap in numbers but it was not emphatic enough.

4. The memo was passed to the Commission by Newsom of GRNSW without further comment - ie GRNSW did not bother to verify the detailed numbers or the background. Nor did Baird, Grant, the Reform Panel or anyone else. Much later, I pointed out these failings to the Auditor General when he was addressing Baird's dubious advertising expenditure. (Baird had also grossly understated the number of countries which supported greyhound racing).

5. As of today, GRNSW is still basing its statements on the incorrect data published by McHugh. That itself is "shocking and unacceptable" when there is ample evidence that the figures are wrong.

6. Separately, the GRNSW statement then ventures in the unknown by insisting that the puppy bond is an "essential measure to control breeding". That overlaps with its apparent desire to limit overall breeding numbers (by unstated methods), and with earlier claims that "overbreeding" was the cause of all ills. (Victoria is doing likewise).
In either case, there is not the slightest proof that there is a direct linkage between the rate of breeding and the rate of euthanasia. Anyway, euthanasia is legal in NSW and GRNSW admits it can be "considered as an alternative", which contradicts its earlier remarks. In any event GRNSW has not shown that a puppy bond will help to "control breeding". Of course, it may well do when breeders shift their activities to other states which do not insist on a bond.

7. In total, GRNSW appears to have decided on an answer but it is still searching for a question. That could arise only because it has forgotten to pursue its responsibility to promote and develop the industry. It is now a cross between Big Brother and a policeman, neither of which it is good at.

It all adds weight to the need to develop tactics and strategies to counteract the nonsense put out by McHugh and the Baird dynasty (see other threads). To say nothing about the need to reform GA itself.

Fair enough for your first paragraph. However, the politics is a different matter.

What we are dealing with is an establishment with four parts; the government, the two racing authorities and, to a lesser extent, the GBOTA. GWIC we can leave to one side for now. The other three have an agenda which is primarily based on preserving their castles, or even making them bigger. The creation of a flourishing industry is secondary.

This is somewhat illogical because, were they able to build a great house, they would then be able to show the world how good they were. They would get applause, medals and more pay. By just dreaming up new rules and regulations they will achieve nothing much but they will keep their jobs.

They dont see or act positively because the system is dominated by bureaucracy, not by commercial motives and practices. Bureaucracy favours process over outcomes, a commercial organisation would do the reverse. That bureaucracy includes GRNSW, the department and Ministerial advisors, with the latter two groups tuned to what they think the voters will approve.

The twin forces of excessive regulation and declining income cannot achieve anything of value to industry or its participants but they will leave it open to the regulators to blame somebody else, saying well, we did all we could but they didnt listen. They being everyone else in the industry.

Over-riding all this is the status quo live baiting history, cruelty, crook data, convicted law breakers. Our job is to leapfrog that list and get to the real decision makers. That involves changing two cultures; first, government attitudes and second, participant attitudes (which, incidentally, was mainly what WDA/Newsom were aiming at).

OK, so we now construct a pro forma approach to a new deal by wiping out the nonsense emerging from the McHugh report and demanding a fresh approach from government ie go back to scratch and rebuild an industry based on all its good points.

How to ?

Borsak is worth his weight in gold but he cannot make laws. At best, he might be lucky enough to influence some of the detail but he will never be in charge. Nor will the Greens.

The effort must therefore be directed at the two who might hold the power. Lib/NP are in charge now and, as far as I can surmise, will probably squeak home next year. Labor are a rough chance but I suspect they lack the pizzazz and the vitality to overcome their current disadvantage. Foley is far from Superman.

So you concentrate your main effort on Lib/NP but keep Labor in the picture.

That effort must be directed strongly to the rank and file, given that Grant is anti and Toole is negative, and that some Lib/NP country MPs favoured greyhound racing last time. Gladys will also be more inclined to listen to the back bench than her predecessors did.

Vote any way you wish personally but dont let that influence the corporate effort. It has to go to the big guys. And, under no circumstances, attach yourself to the AWU or any union. There is enough dissention between and within the union ranks these days and it would certainly cruel your chances with the Libs ie nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Go and write it 1000 times so it sinks in !!!!!!!