Hangfire

RIDICULOUS. Just watched Race 2 at New Plymouth, poor Tony Lee called it wrong at the line. Not surprising with the rail out, and we who are watching on TV haven't got a clue either where the finishing line is?? No winning post in sight! Makes for bad viewing. Sort it out!!!

Thanks Aaron, yes going up now!

4pm and still no TAB Fixed odds for the Matamata gallop meeting tomorrow - VERY POOR PERFORMANCE.

Bruce is an expert form analyst, as a caller he can read the race, the individuals, and most importantly he has the ability to sum up for us how its unfolding. And he does it so effortlessly you'd think they were going around in slow motion. BIG FAN

No kidding. Stick to the topic or start your own

Here's my suggestion, 3 days of cancelled local racing in a row, how about extending/reinstating the TAB Bonus bets we've all forfeited through inattention due to lack of activity

Oh to have your money. Snitzel, I Am Invincible, Pierro

Planet Earth Calling. We already have a publisher, the products called RACEFORM, there's buyer demand, people are happy to pay and there's advertisers. Just need RITA's co-operation in supplying the form as I understand to make it happen. Shelf life - that's a slightly strange request. You'll never please everyone. Its for current published raceform, 3-4 days, its disposable. Stick with your ipad, phone or laptop. Call me Bizarre, I want to do both, do some research online, study and mark my Raceform, and then enjoy the racing with some online research on the day and much flicking of the pages. Each to their own.

Long history here beginning with The Informant and now Raceform, where the NZ Racing Board/RITA management have in their sheer arrogance objected to an independent publication as such and withheld their co-operation, thereby making production no easy task or rather impossible. Never mind that having the publication out there increases betting, grows the sport, and is in much demand. No such thing as working for the greater good unfortunately. Next we'll get the vague RITA communication to suggest that missing Raceform and printed betting form etc doesn't appear to have compromised revenue

Good afternoon, It’s been two weeks since we updated you on changes across the TAB in response to the significant impact COVID-19 has had on our business. Fortunately, in that time we have seen the resumption of NZ Harness racing, a full programme of domestic greyhound racing, and the reopening of our gaming business. And this week, an important milestone in securing racing’s future was achieved with the Select Committee Report on the Racing Industry Bill presented to the House of Parliament. We wanted to provide you with an update on these and some other developments which will be of interest to you. Racing Industry Bill The Transport and Infrastructure Select Committee have this week delivered their Report on the Racing Industry Bill to the House of Parliament, including some recommended changes. While nothing is confirmed until it is voted on, it is a positive signal to the racing industry that the Government has continued to prioritise the passing of the Bill especially in light of the significant amount of industry feedback to work through and the impact Covid19 has had on the ability of Parliament to operate. There are over 30 areas where the Committee have recommended changes and it will take us some time to work through and understand each of the different proposals. Our initial view of the Select Committee’s recommendations is that the overall direction and structure of the Bill remains the same as it was before the Committee and is still in line with the direction of the Messara Report. The TAB will be established as a pure betting, broadcasting and gaming entity, and the Codes will have greater roles and responsibilities for developing and promoting their sport. From our initial review of the Report, the key aspects of change the Select Committee has recommended includes: The establishment of Racing NZ as soon as the Bill becomes law. This is a formal consultative forum comprising the three Codes. It could carry out some of the functions of the Codes (if the Codes wish). Changes to the venue provisions of the Bill. The changes appear to require the Minister to have greater consideration of the community before deciding whether to vest a Club’s assets with the Code. Changes to the composition of the TAB NZ Board. The TAB is proposed to have three out of seven members appointed on recommendation of the Codes. A Selection Panel is proposed and the overall required skillset of the Board remains generally in line with what was in the Bill previously. Intellectual Property. The clause that gave TAB NZ exclusive use of racing industry intellectual property is proposed to be removed. This clause was viewed by almost all submitters (including RITA) as being too broad and encompassing, when the intention was for the clause to apply to negotiations with offshore bookmakers. Betting Information Use Charges (Racefields). There are some welcome changes to this aspect of the legislation which make it easier for the industry to require offshore bookmakers to pay for their use of New Zealand product. We will be working with the Codes to ensure we have a coordinated plan for this important revenue earner. The next stage of the process is that the Minister could also introduce any changes he wants to see included as part of the Second Reading. The Parliament then agrees to or rejects the amendments recommended by the Select Committee and the Minister. This will hopefully all happen prior to the end of this month. If all goes to plan, the Bill could come into effect by 1 August. TAB Transition Late last month we shared with you details of the changes across the TAB to enable it to emerge out of COVID-19 a leaner, more efficient business and focused on driving our core wagering, broadcasting and gaming offering to our customers. In parts of our business, such as oncourse betting, the trend for our customers is increasingly to bet on a device and on self service terminals. We have identified considerable savings for the whole industry by moving away from traditional tote services, however we know many of our clubs and some customers want to see a more gradual change. RITA is currently working with a group of major clubs and the Codes to explore options that enable some tote services remaining over the next 12 months or so, without compromising the savings RITA has committed to. There is broad agreement amongst the group that the status quo is not commercially tenable going forward and digital and self service solutions are the way of the future. The oncourse betting solution for clubs hosting meetings over the next six weeks are currently being prioritised given the lifting of attendance restrictions under Alert Level 1. Executive leadership team review As you are aware, in addition to major staff changes announced, the Board has recently undertaken a review of the TAB executive structure to ensure it is fit for purpose for the new TAB operating model, subsequent to the new legislation being passed. The Board has accepted the recommendations of the independent consultants we engaged to review the structure and we have advised our executive that we will undertake consultation on a proposed new structure later this month. The process is being led by myself with appropriate support and a Board Subcommittee providing additional oversight of this work. The Board expects to conclude the consultation process, consider feedback, and make final decisions in July. In respect of the appointment of a new Chief Executive, the Board intends to also revisit this in the coming weeks. Board extension Last week the Racing Minister Winston Peters announced that the terms for the directors of RITA have been extended to 30 June 2021, or the passage of the Bill. This allows the directors to continue contributing to work to help make the racing industry both more prosperous and sustainable. TAB performance In many cases the Board had to make some tough decisions as we focus on the essential parts of our business that generate the funding required to drive the industry. For the likes of Trackside Radio, printed newspaper form, and phonebet, the high cost of providing these in the current climate is simply not sustainable. It’s early days yet but pleasingly these changes don’t appear to have compromised revenue with turnover and gross betting revenue for domestic racing tracking ahead of budget, and close to or above pre COVID levels. TAB’s gaming business has also returned strongly with gaming turnover for the first few weeks above the pre lock-down weekly average. Right now, we are working with the codes on next year’s distributions and we hope to be able to give them a more accurate forecast in the next few days, prior to confirming a final budget at the end of the month. Once this is done they will be able to provide information on stakes for the new calendar which will be released early next month. Positive signs ahead While we are certainly not out of the woods yet, the progress of the Racing Bill, an early return (and full) programme of domestic racing and revenues returning, in some cases, to pre-Covid levels provide enough reasons to be optimistic that RITA and the wider industry can come out of this crisis with some confidence. Yours sincerely Dean McKenzie Poorly spun RITA, how bad do you think our memories are? It's only been a few months since the industry submissions on the new proposed racing legislation were heard. RITA were at odds with the unified codes, with the greater industry, and with much of the Messara Report. The all encompassing ownership of the 'Intellectual Property' was clearly sought by RITA. You'd only need to go to the races and talk to those in attendance to find a huge number don't access TAB betting through the website/app using on their mobile, and also they have no intention of adopting it. As for lining up to use a betting machine, sounds like a fun experience. And we haven't even commenced a return to racing yet so how can you possibly suggest "getting rid of Trackside Radio, printed newspaper form, and phonebet don’t appear to have compromised revenue with turnover and gross betting revenue for domestic racing tracking ahead of budget, and close to or above pre COVID levels."

Bit harsh! Incompetent - yes, Single handed - absolutely not

New job, new life. He's already forgotten, or trying hard to, the dogs breakfast he left behind for us. But this sounds like an ideal spot for John to drag out a few worthless years before retirement. http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=115084

Well done. Brilliant. There's no profit when the costs of business outweigh revenue - simple concept, says Dean McKenzie. The point is this is Dean this is the norm, this was the case well before Covid 19 reared its ugly head, this is why we're angry, finally. Someone flick Dean a copy of the Messara Report, I'm not sure he has read it. Don't try to reinvent the wheel Dean (and co), you're not that good. Get rid of the square wheel that's outdated and try the new one which was handed you on a plate and you were told to use.

Simply no respect comes from RITA/previously the NZ Racing Board, who obviously have always felt answerable to themselves only. Hence we all get the middle finger flicked our way - trainers, breeders, owners, NZTR, Harness, Greyhounds, John Messara, and even Winston Peters has been let down. Everyone's been so nice, for such a long long time, but look how far that has got us. And now we pray the runaway train has finally derailed, perhaps even insolvent. This our only realistic hope for a fresh start in actioning John Messara's recommendations. Time to bring out the mongrel. Where are you Peter V'landys when we need you.

Judging their performance RITA didn't inherit the lemon, it just got renamed, and continued (bad) business as usual.

Yep, looks like Bryce might be content to make a living owning and training slow racehorses. For his maiden that can't win he gets $630 for running 6th - 10th in the country. And if noms are really bad might even sneek the odd $1575 for running 4th

Oh, confusing, here I was thinking not all the lead in was shown. Didn't know Trackside 2 was also showing Rosehill. Listening to the presenters on Trackside 1 it was going to be interesting to see how Verry Elleegant went down in her prelim in the Tancred, and critical by James McDonald's thinking to her chance of success on the day. We missed that, flicked to a race at Townsville then came back to Rosehill when they were loading. I thought without local racing they could have done better concentrating on the two main meets at Rosehill and Bendigo on Trackside 1 as thats where the feature meets are presented on a Saturday.

Whatever happened to RITA's Shaun Brooks? Shaun's the former Chief Financial Officer for the New Zealand Racing Board/RITA, and a man who surely has had contributed much to the industry's declining economic position in recent years. Shaun tagged along with John Allen to the roadshow meets around the country and was employed as part of the senior management/leadership team since Oct 2015 up to sometime late in 2019 (I guess). Looking today, Shaun's disappeared off the RITA website and into obscurity, I can't recall a media release giving him a pat on the back and wishing him well as he explores new career opportunities and seeks to spend quality time with family.

RITA - The Board: Dean McKenzie, William (Bill) Birnie, Liz Dawson, Kristy McDonald, Anna Stove, Sir Peter Vela. Here's the latest published today from Brian Delore: Racing sends a strong message to Select Committee by Brian de Lore www.theoptimist.co.nz/ Published 21 February 2020 The oral submission hearings held on each of the past two Thursdays have sent a strong and impassioned message to the Transport and Infrastructure Select Committee, and that is: that the racing industry is far from happy with the Racing Bill legislation in its current form. And the process is far from complete with further submissions taking place in Auckland this coming Thursday before the Select Committee. Following that, and no doubt in consultation with Racing Minister Peters, the next phase of making the necessary alterations with a degree of rewriting to be done before a second parliamentary reading expected to be scheduled sometime in April. All going well, the legislation will then be up for its third and final reading in June, and hopefully in a narrative much more acceptable to racing’s participants than the government stranglehold theme of control currently on offer. The elephant in the room is now RITA which has continued its stance with a submission that says 80 to 90 percent of the legislation is okay by the Agency – a claim overwhelmingly in conflict with industry submissions which by and large are supportive of the recommendations of the Messara Review. Interestingly, the debate on the detail of the 123 clauses of the legislation has taken the heat off racing’s current dire financial position as we move into the second half of the 2019-20 season with the half-year result due to be announced in the next few weeks. The latest information I have is that RITA needs something like a 21 percent increase ($30 million) to meet the budget it forecast in the SOI, and after the first five months of the season was only two percent ahead of last year. And remember, the TAB received a windfall bonus of $17 million when the All Blacks got eliminated at the quarter-final stage of the World Cup. The failure of this Bill to address the issues of increased revenue streams and cost-cutting was an omission that didn’t go unnoticed by several oral submitters The failure of this Bill to address the issues of increased revenue streams and cost-cutting was an omission that didn’t go unnoticed by several oral submitters and, in particular, RACE Incorporated CEO Alasdair Robertson and Stan Alexander representing the Manawatu Racehorse Owners. The oral submission from RACE is reproduced at the bottom of this blog. Stan Alexander in his statement began by saying he had entered the racing industry only 15 years ago but obviously having a lengthy corporate background, he alluded to how much cash and property value the industry had only 15 years compared to its position today: He said: “…and now what we have is a betting platform with no tangible value as it sits there, but $35 million of debt. I am not concerned about individual clauses in the Bill, but I am concerned about how this Bill got to this stage. “When Cabinet approved in principle that the best approach was the Messara Report, and at the same time the Letter of Expectation from the Minister to the RITA board, it said that this Report was providing the best approach to New Zealand Racing to make it financially sustainable, internationally recognised and competitive. “… how is it we are sitting here now looking at a draft Bill that does not deliver those key factors which said Mr Messara would be the salvation for this industry.” – Stan Alexander “And as part of this close working relationship,” continued Alexander, “the Minister understands the DIA will attend the RITA board meetings as an observer. If that was the guiding principle of what was to happen, how is it we are sitting here now looking at a draft Bill that does not deliver those key factors which said Mr Messara would be the salvation for this industry.” Stan Alexander went on to quote Judge Clapham’s submission which also asked why the legislation did not reflect the Messara Review, and then also quoted a number of the Messara recommendation culminating with the failure of RITA to begin outsourcing negotiations. “It comes back to having confidence in what you are doing,” he continued. “It goes without saying that no industry, business enterprise or activity succeeds when confidence is eroded, and confidence has been eroded dramatically with the arrival of the proposed legislation which fails to deliver the expectations of the Minister and the industry – which has continued that eroding of confidence. “Clearly, over time, decisions made by NZRB have led to a massive decline in industry solvency. Mr Chairman, as I sit here today I honestly believe the industry is insolvent. We have no hard assets left, but we have a $35 million debt to a bank. Surely, any business sitting in that position – any director sitting that position in a commercial world – should be thinking pretty hard on what they should be doing and what is happening around them. “If we as an industry continue to operate without full accountability in a truly commercial environment, the same mistakes and decisions will continue.” “If we as an industry continue to operate without full accountability in a truly commercial environment, the same mistakes and decisions will continue. The proposed legislation does not reflect the truly commercial, competitive approach that the Messara Review envisaged. And I, for one, don’t have any confidence when I hear a comment like this. It came from the Chairman of RITA at a public meeting, ‘we are tracking along for the first six months in line with budget.’ Then came the caveat, which was, ‘but the next six months will be challenging.’ End of story, just that. So I say to myself, what does this mean while we are staring down the barrel of $35 million bank debt and no hardcore assets. “What would be the attitude of the bank when RITA has not commenced the outsourcing which was recommendation number seven – in other words, the bank would be saying to the RITA board, ‘are you exploring all your options.’ The bank won’t be at branch level; it won’t be at credit level, it will be at asset management level, and I’m sure some of you understand what that means. “RITA want exclusive rights to the I.P. and to delay outsourcing for another five to six years – I ask the question WHY? – Stan Alexander “RITA want exclusive rights to the I.P. and to delay outsourcing for another five to six years – I ask the question WHY? Debts within thoroughbred racing are increasing, the debts in the training sector to the trainers are increasing – those are symptomatic things of the total financial position of the total industry. Breeding is in decline, and it’s all reflecting a decline in confidence. “Ï say this, why don’t we ask Mr Messara to come back and discuss and clarify how, when, and why, etcetera. His credentials are such that we ignore them to our peril. “Finally, I just want to put up this scenario: We have a new TAB, it owns all the I.P. We have a banker overlooking them, and if things don’t improve then we have set up the perfect scenario for the bank to say ‘we are taking over and we will sell everything you have got’. “Mr Chairman, I don’t understand the industry, but I have a little understanding of the commercial reality of this world, and we have a very serious problem. Thank you. RACE Incorporated Oral Submission: Select Committee on Behalf of RACE Incorporated Racing Industry Bill No 2 Good morning, my name is Alasdair Robertson Chief Executive of RACE Incorporated. I am accompanied by Paul Humphries Chair of RACE Incorporated. RACE is an organization that comprises 5 Clubs being Manawatu, Rangitikei, Feilding, Marton and Wellington Racing Clubs. Depending on your chosen metric, RACE is NZ’s largest or second-largest club with in excess of 10% of total domestic turnover. The racing industry in New Zealand is at a watershed/tipping point in terms of its survival and sustainability. The racing industry in New Zealand is at a watershed/tipping point in terms of its survival and sustainability. The proposed Bill to go before the Select Committee is the last chance for the industry to be re-structured for survival and to maintain its economic contribution to employment of over 14,000 FTE and over $1.6 bn to the NZ economy. The importance of getting this right cannot be overstated. We are facing: Declining returns in real terms over time. Return to owners in New Zealand 22.9% or expressed another way -77.1% Foal crop reduction. In 1995 5,264. In 2017 3,448 (34.5%) There has been years of mismanagement and lack of performance from the NZRB The proposed Bill facilitates a situation where a business as a usual structure can continue. To put that in context and why the Codes need to be empowered to efficiently and economically run their industry as recommended by the Messara Review, in 2016 an analysis was done of the operating cost difference between the NZRB / RITA and its nearest comparison in Western Australia. This was found to be in excess of $50 million against a total thoroughbred prize money pool in New Zealand of $50 million at the time. We are competing in a global market with our largest competitor, and opportunity, in Australia exponentially bigger and stronger than we can ever be. Australia has 5.4 times the population of NZ but 13.2 times the amount of wagering turnover with an inherent propensity to spend of over 4 times that of New Zealand. To enable NZ to survive competition and to access the opportunities that exist, this Bill must empower the Codes and provide them with flexibility to meet the market head-on without bureaucratic constraints and parochial thinking. The Messara Review was commissioned at the behest of the Minister of Racing the Hon Winston Peters and was welcomed by the Industry. John Messara is the most respected racing administrator in Australian history and has presided over a boom in the racing industry not just within New South Wales but within Australia overall. In the last 20 years Australian turnover on thoroughbred racing has climbed from $8.6 billion to $19.5 billion AUD +126%, and prizemoney from $273 million to $603 million +120%. A number of key elements were critical to turning around the NZ industry in the Messara Review: Change the Governance structure such that NZRB is to become Wagering NZ with racing responsibilities devolved to the individual codes. Establish Racing NZ as a consultative forum to agree on issues Amend section 16 to a more equitable basis for fixed 10-year terms Begin negotiations for outsourcing of the TAB’s commercial activities Confirm the assignment of Intellectual Property by the clubs to the codes Introduce Racefields and Point Of Consumption legislation Repeal the betting levy Clarify vesting of club assets in the codes for the benefit of the industry Reduction in venues without the closure of any club Unfortunately, the proposed Bill does not honour the intent or detail of the Messara Review. The Bill is also significantly at odds with the Minister’s letter of expectation sent to RITA. It is important that the Committee realizes that the industry is struggling to survive and we need real dollars and not just a re-arranging of the deck chairs. So to turn to the Bill. I have confined my presentation to three key items. a. Industry Governance and appointment of Directors to the TAB The intention of the Messara Review was to confer broader powers on the codes to govern and administer their industry. Consistent with the Messara Review, Racing NZ was proposed as a consultative forum to agree all internal issues that needed group resolution. This would include outsourcing negotiations. The Messara Review proposed the devolution of Governance responsibilities to the Codes. The current Bill, however, proposes the dilution of control from the codes to the Minister and to Wagering NZ/TAB NZ. This is seen in: i. The governing body of TAB NZ consisting of up to 7 members appointed by the Minister (46) ii. TAB NZ is to determine the Racing Calendar for each betting year and issue betting licences (48) iii. TAB has exclusive rights within NZ and Australia to all intellectual property associated with all betting information etc (81) It is recommended that the Bill be amended to have a code body representative or adopt the nominations advisory panel mechanism used in the Racing Act 2003 (Pre Amendment) for the appointment of independent Directors. b. Intellectual Property Clubs and Codes have never surrendered their Intellectual Property 2. The MAC Report acknowledges ownership of IP in the Club. 3. Intellectual property can never be surrendered by the clubs and the codes. 4. To do so will disenfranchise and emasculate the clubs and codes permanently and empower a 3rd party to conduct themselves in any way they see fit. 5. The Codes and TAB NZ must collectively be able to negotiate all outsourcing and related matters that requires IP by having it assigned to the respective negotiating team. 6. The mechanism is that the Clubs vest their IP in the Codes who Licence the joint negotiating team of the Codes and TAB / Wagering NZ. 7. We have a supportive person in our Minister. However, that may not be the case in future and the loss of IP from the clubs and codes endangers our very existence and the potential sale or Joint Venturing of the TAB. It is recommended that Clause 81 be deleted to preserve the status quo in relation to the use of Racing’s intellectual property. c. Outsourcing structure or more accurately joint venture or partnership structure This Bill has been drafted by people who appear to crave control and do not understand the global wagering market. i. There needs to be a separation between TAB NZ and Government. An outsourcing decision is a commercial decision in the best interest of the industry. ii. This Bill has been drafted by people who appear to crave control and do not understand the global wagering market. iii. The codes and the TAB must have the ability to make a commercial decision regarding joint venture outsourcing. If there were any Government concerns over inappropriate periods or similar, a Ministerial caveat could be included for any decision relating to sale or contractual commitment beyond a specified term eg: 15 years etc. iv. Australia is forging ahead because the Codes operate as commercial negotiating entities with independence of Government. v. It is interesting that Tabcorp has been used as an example by RITA to say it follows the same commercial model as has been proposed in the Bill, and has professional Directors on its Board. vi. Nothing could be further from the truth in terms of the commercial model and demonstrates the lack of understanding within RITA and within the Bill. vii. Tabcorp is a commercial entity BUT is accountable to the Codes and the contractual agreement and licence negotiated by the codes. viii. This commercial tension is enabled by the retention of IP within the codes which is 180 degrees different from what is proposed. ix. What is proposed is to insert a 3rd independent party into the process that has no checks and balances on its direction or philosophy and has exclusive control over the Codes intellectual property. Most people do not understand the implications of this Bill. It threatens the Messara Review and could be likened to a monopoly without any of the suppliers having shares or any representation. Summary: Most people do not understand the implications of this Bill. It threatens the Messara Review and could be likened to a monopoly without any of the suppliers having shares or any representation. Thank you for the opportunity to present. P Humphries, Chairman A Robertson, Chief Executive

Time marches on and the old Racing Board is certainly not a 'dead horse' (Winston's description), simply re-branded as RITA and no more effective. Again they steer us down the wrong track. Little respect for the codes or John Messara's efforts, and how much invaluable time wasted. Thankfully, the Select Committee seem a lot more clued up than RITA.

Self governance? A nice start would be for them to listen to the codes who represent us industry participants. Here's the latest from Brian de Lore Racing under siege with this proposed legislation by Brian de Lore, Published 27 December 2019 Someone phoned Newstalk ZB talkback radio earlier this month and said, “Don’t be fooled into believing the elected government is running this country; it’s the bureaucrats, the bosses of the 45,000-odd public servants in about 35 government departments – they are the people really in control.” Numerous lunatics call talkback, but that remark resonated and is probably truer today than it’s ever been. Think about the control exerted by Treasury, the State Services Commission and Internal Affairs (DIA), and especially the DIA in racing’s case – evident with this latest legislation that will take us straight out of the frying pan and into the proverbial fire. … this legislation does not reflect the gravity of the circumstances racing finds itself in today. The very first thing to say about this legislation is that it does not reflect the gravity of the circumstances racing finds itself in today. It’s political rather than a fix-it document. Then, the structure is nothing like the vision Messara had in his Review. On page six he said: “…the current structure and regulatory hierarchy do not lend themselves to the necessary level of code accountability or to sound decision-making and this can lend itself to unnecessary government involvement in the industry.” The legislation currently provides far less devolution of power to the codes than the Messara Review recommended and far more government control, not less, that the Racing Act of 2003. Why would the authors want to give the Intellectual Property Rights to TAB NZ and not the codes – it’s the rightful property of the codes and morally belongs to the codes. To have the IP controlled by a government-appointed board will have serious long-term consequences for racing. The excuse given to The Optimist for such a move was that overseas betting operators wanted to deal with only one body, not three. That’s a lame-duck excuse if ever one was made, and is unacceptable on all levels. Racing Victoria, for example, has successfully negotiated 47 separate contracts on their IP. Worse still, the legislation is suggesting the Minister has sole discretion make the TAB board appointments as opposed to the Messara Review which recommended a Minister appointed panel of three to appoint four of the seven appointees, with the remaining three board members coming from the Chairs of each of the codes or their delegates. Are we not trying to get away from the system that gave us Nathan Guy, Glenda Hughes and John Allen, Minister? Are we not trying to get away from the system that gave us Nathan Guy, Glenda Hughes and John Allen, Minister? The National Party threw racing under the bus with those three, and then Winston promised us reform and self-governance and racing voted for it – read the NZ First Racing Policy. But now the Minister is dishing out the same stuff disguised as new legislation – hypocrisy!. The anti-racing codes theme in this legislation is even more blatant with its failure to finalise the formula for the distribution of funds – section 16 in the Racing Act of 2003. That very same Minister-appointed TAB board will decide after the regulation is written (not legislation but changeable regulation) on how the distribution is done, which gives no guarantee to any of the codes, or even if any the codes have board representatives. The bottom line is that control of racing will rest more with the TAB than the codes. The door is now ajar for sport to get a second foot in it, and gain greater representation and put both hands out for a bigger share of the pie. The possibility of more sport board members than racing ones is very real and would be a decision in the hands of any future unknown Minister – that’s a bad joke when you consider sport has contributed nothing to the set-up or running costs of the TAB but is now infiltrating with the assistance of the DIA. The Section-16 of the Act mentioned above has treated thoroughbred racing unfairly since 2003 when separate pools should have been established to give thoroughbreds it’s fair share of funding. Racing anticipated the Minister would correct that imbalance but instead, he’s opening the door for diminishing returns on percentage and control of our code by more non-racing people of the kind that have shafted the thoroughbred game over the past decade. Completely ignored from the Review was Messara’s concept of a Racing NZ, a body of code representatives that would not be established as a separate administrative body but would act as a consultive forum for the codes to garner a cooperative understanding on all matters common to all three codes, and liaise with Wagering NZ on those matters. Two-and-a-half years ago, Winston was saying he wanted racing to have self-determination Two-and-a-half years ago, Winston was saying he wanted racing to have self-determination with legislation that would distance it from government and be safe from a disinterested racing minister’s claws in 30 years. He engaged Messara to write the Review, and the blueprint to achieve that goal was delivered in that review 18 months ago. Then he appointed MAC, which became RITA, firstly to advise and then to enact the Messara Review and transition it into legislation. Littered through the last 25 years of racing are disinterested Ministers – another one is certain to be knocking on the door anytime soon. Racing should at all costs resist this legislation which on important issues gives the Minister carte blanche control. Rugby has become a mammoth betting medium but doesn’t have a Minister – why does racing even need one? The plan may have worked if Minister Peters had, firstly, stayed interested and not handed over the management of racing to his political scientist Chief-of-Staff, and secondly, had kept John Messara involved in an overseeing role to ensure his Review was faithfully represented in the contents of all the legislation and enacted in the parts that required no legislation. In retrospect, the failure of the Minister to follow up with Messara was a negative statement in itself. His approaching Messara and then accepting his offer to do it free-of-charge, receiving the Review in record time, and then cutting the umbilical cord without even a phone call of gratitude must be way outside the accepted protocols of a Minister of Foreign Affairs. Something else was going down. Someone or some people have been in Minister Peter’s ear, it seems, and advised him poorly. Why else would Peters not ever have picked up the phone and spoken to Messara since, and even before the time Messara delivered his Review on July 31st, 2018. Not one word has verbally passed between them since; yes, a couple of emails only, but that’s all despite the Review having been completed on a pro bono basis in record time by the foremost experienced and successful racing administrator Australian racing has known. If you sight an official press release saying they are following the Messara Review, it will be nothing more than the lip service racing has been getting for years. The claim may say 90 percent adoption of the Review but in reality, it’s only about 30 percent in its present form, and that 30 percent, which is described in the Bill’s explanatory note as ‘resolving historic property issues,’ is saying the closure of the designated clubs will have their assets transferred to the codes. The TAB will still have far too much control and will be made up of Racing Minister appointees Even if the clubs earmarked for the sword had previously been in support of the Messara Review for the overall good of the industry, which is doubtful in most cases, they would be furious now after reading the structural part of the legislation which is full of government control, ministerial intervention and is a step backwards from the Racing Act of 2003. The TAB will still have far too much control, will be made up of Racing Minister appointees, and in essence, that means nothing more than a continuation of the NZRB structure which has been a substantial cause of the decline that necessitated the Messara Review in the first place – Catch 22. The Messara Review clearly outlined a goal to double prizemoney, and to go about achieving that aim it listed 17 key recommendations. Messara alluded to previous reviews that had been completed and shelved, going back to the Reid Committee in 1965. He said on Page 45, “…McCarthy Commission recommendations are as relevant today in 2018 as they were in 1970.” The Minister himself blatted-on for a time about the owner being the most important person in racing, saying current prizemoney levels were unacceptable. The concept of doubling prizemoney may have appealed then, but the Minister has since gone missing on racing – how many race meetings did he attend in 2019, and passing on the racing portfolio to his office and no longer being available for comment has been to the detriment of this entire reform process. No one seems to be talking about the goal anymore. It’s about the process only, which to date has only been a bit of tweaking here and there to sustain current prizemoney levels. No talk about partnering the TAB despite that non-legislation required process offering the single biggest financial windfall of all the Messara Review recommendations. Could we have expected bureaucrats with no particular interest in racing to come up with legislation that was fit for purpose? The answer is a simple ‘NO’! Could we have expected bureaucrats with no particular interest in racing to come up with legislation that was fit for purpose? The answer is a simple ‘NO’! It was never going to happen, and we may all have guessed that outcome? From a good source, one particular bureaucrat involved in the process has voiced his contempt for the Messara Review and also described partnering/outsourcing the TAB as a ridiculous idea – that someone has zero knowledge of the industry and its problems but carries more weight in this process than anyone involved with racing knowledge. That’s the irony and the downfall of the whole, damn tragic business. Isn’t that the issue causing all this discontent? The total disconnect between the authors of the legislation and the racing industry itself – people with no conception of what it will take to fix racing’s problems empowered with writing the rules for it? A reliable source says RITA read the legislation for the first time only six days before we got it and immediately identified 50 plus issues in the narrative. What does that tell you? Rumours abound the Minister will make a racing reappearance at Trentham on Wellington Cup Day. If you see him, then voice your concerns. This shoddy document isn’t legislation until it passes through Select Committee and goes on to a third reading and is again supported. Everyone in thoroughbred racing and the other two codes has a small window of opportunity to help stop it or get it changed – make it count and get your submissions in by February 11th. Finally, be aware this is racing’s final chance for a positive correction. Racing is under siege from animal activists, anti-gambling lobbyists, left-wingers of every description, greedy sports organisations, the greenies, vegans, government departments and especially the DIA, a group called the Coalition for the protection of Racehorses, and a plethora of other internet-driven groups equally endowed in ignorance. The protestants are gathering their troops and the Empire needs to strike back. In the immortal words of Obi Wan Kenobi, “May the force be with you, always.” Shown below, some of the poor racing-code serving DIA written legislation: 61 Regulations for amounts of distribution to codes (1) The Governor-General may, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the Minister, make regulations prescribing the method to be used for determining the amounts that may be distributed by TAB NZ to the racing codes from any surpluses referred to in section 69(2) or 74(2) or any other source, whether capital or income. (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the amount must not be less than the total of the surpluses referred to in section 69(2) or 74(2) for that racing year less the total amount credited to reserves for that year from those surpluses. Compare: 2003 No 3 s 16 62 Distribution to codes TAB NZ may, during or as soon as practicable after the end of a racing year, pay to the racing codes the amount determined in accordance with regulations made under section 61 to be distributed among the codes for that year. (3) Unless a majority of the racing codes otherwise agrees in writing, the amount referred to in subsection (1) must be distributed among the racing codes in the same proportions that the Board considers are the proportions to which the codes contributed to the New Zealand turnover of the Board for that racing year. (4) In subsection (3), New Zealand turnover of the Board means the total gross amount received by the Board from racing betting placed in New Zealand on races run in New Zealand. 81 Protection of intellectual property rights (1) TAB NZ has exclusive rights within New Zealand and Australia to all intellectual property associated with all racing betting information, racing betting system (or systems), and any audio or visual content derived from a New Zealand race. (2) In subsection (1), intellectual property means all patents, designs, copyright, know-how, trade secrets, trademarks, service marks, and other intellectual or industrial property rights of any kind, and any rights in relation to them whether enforceable by Act or rule of law.

Hmnn, I'm thinking its a malfunction that I only experience on one particular website. And a malfunction I've experienced on a few occasions that still (periodically and randomly) is not rectified.

It's drives me bonkers, first they lock my account when I'm trying to deposit money. I get it unlocked and still they won't take my deposit online. Not the first time or the last that this will happen with our TAB. What a way to run a business, no other (profitable) business makes it this difficult to engage. My other betting agency gives me no headaches. TAB New Zealand = Lack of expertise = Incompetence

John Allen, The man who tells it like it isn't. Even in his departure notice he manages to offend with boasts of achievements (non). He leaves the New Zealand Racing Industry in a much worse position than he found it (full stop)