John

I haven't said it was the fault of the small racing families

I just agree with John Robbo, whilst everyone sympathizes they won't lobby the government to help us and say to them

1. please change the intercode agreement to reflect correct market share,

2. please change the tax harmonization tax to reflect correct market share on gambling

3. the new POCT on corporate bookies, the horse lobby is already at work to hold our share to 13%. It will remain to be seen whether our Commercial Board has the mettle to call in the Government on its promises to treat the industry fairly and give us 22% of the Racing Codes share. Or are they just another group of YES MEN.

All I call for is equity and fairness in these funding arrangements so our industry can get on with its welfare/rehoming programs and provide a good sport for people to be involved in

Good post Sandro and I agree.
My point is still the same though that some people that post on here have been on social media wishing for all the horse industry to suffer thats MY point.
You know as well as anyone Im in both codes and I want to see greyhounds get their share as much as anyone else but when you have people that you can only call the lowest life of greyhound racing directly wishing the familys of the sport suffer they are the parasites of this industry.

Your Quote again Johno.
And another thing is that horse racing will always thrive and this report will not cause a ripple and it will only grow in years to come because it has leaders.
Look one for your Quote Yes i agree with you.Fact & you know why.

The Horse industry gets Millions handed to them.Fact
Are they suffering NO.Fact
Do they have political clout YES.Fact
Could of they used that political clout to help the Greys.YES Fact
Do they have Rich owners connected to the Political Clout.YES Fact
Im all Fact out at the moment but i think you may get my Drift then again.
Just Two more Questions Johnathon i'll make an easy for you YES or NO Answers. Did you Walk Down Macquarie Street with us ? & have you Joined the SFFP Greyhound Branch so we can get some of that political clout??

Keep The Dream Alive Greyhound Racing

Well said mate.

Fancy coming on a dog web site and bagging dog people........ just dumb

Would be better if we could get some well knowns on for a Comment .

I love all of those Facts Mick ... Now thats a FACT ..

Is there any talk of the SFFP forming a branch around the Sandown Cranbourne Warragul regions ..Mick

Just to set the scene, it is necessary after 50 years punting and attending tracks to agree with your last sentence: "Another home truth is all the greyhound people I know never have much good to say about each other and its the culture in greyhounds and whilst its like that nothing good will ever come from it".

That said, the climate on this thread is such that people tend to ignore the fact that the racing codes are normally split into two halves - the workers and the bosses - and you have to treat each half separately. Waller and colleagues adopt one attitude, V'Landys and above a different one.

V'Landys is by nature nasty and abrasive but gets applause from his masters because he has been able to screw more cash out of the system. For example, he termed the corporates as "parasites" but today they are OK because he won the right to charge them the full 1.5% on turnover (not on surpluses), so benefitting everyone, including the mighty RV, to the tune of many tens of millions of dollars annually.

In contrast, greyhound leaders have been weak, ineffectual and lacking in nous, even though they (CEO and Board) are in the same position, and with the same powers, as their opposite numbers at the gallops. The ICT, for example was signed off, after careful consideration, by the GRA Chairman and GBOTA and NCA chiefs, thereby committing the code to a 99 year life of poverty. To accept 13% was one thing, but to sign for 99 years displays sheer incompetence. Suicidal.

Yet it goes on and on. As I and others have mentioned, running extra races during the equine influenza period was fine, but donating cash to the gallops and trots while losing money for the dogs was ridiculous.

More recently, Grant's contemptuous "gift" to the dogs of only 10% of the tax equalisation funds was flawed in fact and reason, and used irrelevant evidence. That it was endorsed by the interim CEO, Paul Newson, was a disgrace.

The point is that the 10% should have been immediately challenged in court and Grant called to account. It wasn't. Nobody put the case, not Newson, not GBOTA, not anyone else (who else is there?)

I mention that partly because that failure to stick up for the code's or the individual's rights is coming up almost daily in the form of excessive, discriminatory and probably illegal rules and regulations being applied to greyhounds, or threatened. It's a long term pattern.

With half an excuse, this is why Grant inserted an open invitation in the brief to McHugh to consider shutting down the industry, and why government chose that option amongst the 80 or so others McHugh offered. Grant and Baird thought they could get away with it.

On this thread, that miserable situation emerges in the form of
sometimes unreasonable dislikes of the other codes, both subsidised by greyhound money. They won't help, of course, but they are understandable. It's what you do when someone has his foot on your throat.

The solution is manifold but the first thing that would help is for the industry to pick a case and prosecute it in court. A single victory for fairness will tell everyone that we are not to be trifled with. "Aux armes, citoyens".

(Sorry about that, but I am one eighth French and it worked for them).

Sorry Bruce, I studied Latin not French.(Either are a complete waste) This comes to mind for GRNSW. Nil Desperandum

The POCT has nothing to do with TAB turnover, it is corporate bookie related so for Perrotet to suggest he will just follow the %s of the intercode then where is the racing minister with the facts to set him straight????

National party sticking up for greyhounds...bull shit.

Now to tie this back to gallops & trots...well our former chairmen was the partner of the CEO of trots, we have been rorted twice in relation to distribution of money from new taxes & we cannot export to countries that the other two codes can. No leader of our industry has stuck up for us, & unfortunately any participants who have, have been targeted on all sides for their actions.
We have a weak representative body (but hardly any members to force change) & we have GRNSW it appears working against the wishes of participants and putting us at a disadvantage by employing people that either arent qualified for their roles, no nothing of the industry or dont want to be there long term.

We have copped a bum steer from all sides of govt, Labor first now Liberal/Nationals.
Its not horse folks fault but they certainly arent going into bat for us either.

I blame the politicians & thankfully theres one thing we can do about that.

I would say in NSW that Troy Grant would be the number one enemy of the greyhound industry. If people look up Mathew Dickerson on facebook (former Dubbo Mayor before forced council amalgamations) & like his page, follow his progress & share his posts then it will go a long way to get rid of Troy Grant, as Mathew is running against him at the next state election.
We obviously cant change this govts view on favouritism in the race codes but marginal seats like Barilaros, Paul Tooles & Troy Grants can be knocked over with a bit over help from everyone.

Cheers

Mick,
Another good post.

Bruce,
A lot better than your normal dribble.

Terry,

I take a similar but slightly different approach but the distinction is important.

Baird was challenged in the court of public opinion and lost - initially at least. The Auditor General also thumped him. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that he or his successors can be challenged again.

Grant is a horror. He has the worst body language of any pollie I have ever seen - which may have been why he got a message that he would never get past Inspector in the police (?). Equally, he was strongly criticised by the law fraternity and no doubt by the Attorney General who was forced to report to him as Police Minister (a previously unheard of system). For whatever reason, he clearly has a personal dislike of greyhounds. He did get his comeuppance but he is still around but is flawed and therefore has weaknesses which can be attacked.

So both leaders of the push suffered significant losses.

The problem then became Baird's last hurrah - setting up a tame Reform Panel to cook the greyhound's goose, so to speak, and then letting that flow on to the formation of the new GRNSW. That should have been attacked at the source but the industry representative failed miserably.

Newson was an enigma. He first did sensible things - independent reviews of live baiting and track design - but then change tack half way through by implying that halving the number of tracks was the only answer (showing a lack of commercial acumen), by supplying McHugh with a faulty GA document which he failed to check, and supporting Grant's 10% nonsense. That showed (a) that he did not examine the whole industry properly and (b) that he possibly knew he was soon on the way back to the civil service.

The overall flaw was to second an active public servant to run a commercial business. Square peg and round hole. Should never have happened but that's Grant for you. (Vic did and so all we get is waffle and kowtowing to erroneous reports from other public servants. Qld hired a management consultant to do the same job but still got nowhere. His replacement has now disappeared, too.

Were Perrotet to also use Grant's 10% figure he is also at fault. It has no basis in law, administration or economics.

All these items should have been challenged, but were not. Some administratively, some legally.

The McHugh report will never be scrutinised because its errors will only embarrass the government and there is not sufficient oomph to press the case (who would do it?). However, those errors can form some of the basis for any future appeals for fairer treatment on related matters.

Generally, it is a waste of time pointing this out to GRNSW or GWIC as they are simply firing someone else's bullets. Likewise Toole. You must go direct to Parliament/MPs and to the court of public opinion.

I have suggested how in detail on other threads.

PS: The McHugh brief is on the public record. It includes a specific paragraph asking McHugh to find whether the industry might be shut down. This was repeated on day one of the public hearings by the Counsel Assisting. He got the hint.

POCT is a different subject but its importance is overstated. It's effect on income will be minimal. Corporates have a bucket of room to absorb it or whatever.

And don't knock Latin and French - they make up half the language you are speaking.

You said: "I would say in NSW that Troy Grant would be the number one enemy of the greyhound industry. If people look up Mathew Dickerson on facebook (former Dubbo Mayor before forced council amalgamations) & like his page, follow his progress & share his posts then it will go a long way to get rid of Troy Grant, as Mathew is running against him at the next state election.
We obviously cant change this govts view on favouritism in the race codes but marginal seats like Barilaros, Paul Tooles & Troy Grants can be knocked over with a bit over help from everyone".

Quite right that types like Grant and Toole justify pressure to knock them over. However, the question of "change(ing) this govts view" is a another matter again. Consider the facts ...

1. A minority of Lib/Nats voted against the ban. In politics, that's a big deal as it can (and did) endanger their careers.
2. On many subjects, it is normal for some party members to have a different view to that of the majority, or that of the prominent leaders (you have it now in Canberra in respect to electricity, for example).
3. Those objecting will often tone down in order to maintain solidarity in public. A little like accepting the umpire's decision. That does not mean they agree with the decision.
4. Any and all of them will be influenced by grass roots reactions in their electorate. That does not guarantee they will change their mind or their vote but it gives them the opportunity to do so.
5. The current history is that government MPs mostly gave way to the boss's demands and so Baird/Grant's personal desires were realised. Again, that does not mean the others agreed with them.

6. Additionally, they may not have been properly informed about the subject, or simply accepted the (incorrect) headline points pounded out by various people, including the media. In turn, that would indicate the failure of the industry to push its position (including the absence of objections to the Reform Panel).

What I am saying is that the last match is over but there are more to play. Never assume that politicians can't change their minds - they do it all the time.

Providing a decent story is put up, there will be some who like it and some who dislike it, whether Lib, Nats or Labor. There is the additional advantage that SFF/Borsak has ahead of steam up.

So Ministers, or even Premiers, can be overturned if enough people put their hand up to object. It can happen. The march down Macquarie St did it. The Orange election did it. I have done it personally and got laws of the country amended.

Finally, there is an undercurrent here which supports rubbishing the Lib/Nats. Bad idea. They have quite a while to go and are at least a 50% chance of getting back in next year. Should they do that, they will remember who rubbished them. This has nothing to do with personal votes. It's purely a matter of good business.

Tell the Coalition my name n that I will be voting for the SFF Party ! Great Idea !

Johno, I had given up on your thread here, but just came across your reply/ quote...
NO,,,, I was not being a "smart arse" you indeed found one quote! (Good on you, I wish you posted more, I even found a couple others after a google search) from your MANY MANY MANY friends in the horse game....

Johno, I "used" to have plenty of time for your comments and insight into the greyhound game,,,,, but you have now "doubled down" on a greyhound site to state that those greyhound participants that are not happy with the NON ACTION of the other code, and your quote!
MAKES THEM LOWER THAN A SNAKES ARSE HOLE....
You go even further to state..... "Another home truth is all the greyhound people I know never have much good to say about each other"

Johno, I feel sorry for you mate..... I have MANY MANY MANY friends in the greyhound game that have nothing but good things to say about the people they deal with.....(Yes, I have met just as many knockers,,, but I simply dismiss them) I suggest that if "ALL THE GREYHOUND PEOPLE YOU KNOW NEVER HAVE MUCH GOOD TO SAY ABOUT EACH OTHER" that you just change games rather than get on a greyhound forum and knock greyhound people over the horses issues......

FURTHER: As for me knowing any horse racing family's.... YES, I am 3rd generation horses and fourth generation dogs.... My children and grand kids make it 6 generation dogs.... Johno,,,, I have had issues with a few in the game (and they will no doubt know who they are when reading this) But at least (to their credit) their issues are with me directly and they have NEVER aired them in public,,,,

You are making a TOSSER out of your self expecting people here on a greyhound forum to feel sorry for the horses.... I again state I don't wish any harm on them.... But will I be standing up for them... NOPE.

The issue is vocal minorities being more organised, computer-literate, politically savvy, and united than the racing codes (as well as being loose with the facts to boot).

They pick the weakest link, regardless of code (jumps, live baiting) and then go into their feeding frenzy.

Of course they do have some valid points. regulators have been sitting on their hands for years, not moving with the times, and becoming more removed from the grass-roots participants when wagering money came in. This has meant that some participants have been found out, and others have been burnt when the regulators over-reacted - blood for the feeding frenzy.

All ammunition for the antis regardless. And they know how to influence government.

The regulators of harness and greyhound racing, being government authorities, are limited in respect of their public position, which makes them impotent in respect of publicly defending the industry, and pawns of government positions.

Not so for thoroughbred racing, which is characterised by wealthy clubs, and the support of prominent people. They have the resources and know how to influence government.

So why would thoroughbreds support, in the case of greyhound racing, a fragmented group that is basically government controlled, that is without the support of similarly prominent people?

Yet there is a common opponent, and the codes have no mechanism or co-operation to fight the biggest problem; an unrepresentative vocal minority. Basically, all codes are inward looking.

If the codes got together in some form, there would be a substantial lobby group.

There is an obvious lack of leadership with the stomach to see and initiate action about the real threats to all codes; not helped by tunnel vision within codes about the superiority of their code over others.

I have no problem with healthy competition, but greyhound racing (and harness racing) seem to be hobbled by being controlled by government authorities that have no passion for the industry, or competencies/desire to protect their long-term future.

Not helped by leadership from participants, particularly greyhound racing, that is so fragmented and stifled by industry structure that it cannot be effective.

Whinging about other codes serves no purpose. Doing something about getting effective leadership within our industry is a start. Even political lobbying at local level does have an impact.

Just Two more Questions Johnathon i'll make an easy for you YES or NO Answers. Did you Walk Down Macquarie Street with us ? & have you Joined the SFFP Greyhound Branch so we can get some of that political clout??

HOORAY !!!!!!!.....That didn't take long

GOOD POST Bruce......Completely agree.

Go right to the source and ask the horse
He'll give you the answer that you'll endorse.
He's always on a steady course.
Talk to Mr. Ed.

People yakkity yak a streak and waste your time of day
But Mister Ed will never speak unless he has something to say.

A horse is a horse, of course, of course,
And this one'll talk 'til his voice is hoarse.
You never heard of a talking horse?

Well listen to this.

I am Mister Johnathon.