Balmyknight

Nerula 6 hours have passed. zzz not given your the answers!

Press release: http://www.harnesslink.com/www/Article.cgi?ID=80097 Nerula, the only thing I wish to achieve is open, transparent and honest discussion and debate about what the whole racing industry needs to do to sustain itself. What is does not need is One Racing as cooked upon in secret by one faction in one code. Why do you not try to answer the questions?

The

The Minister has said chat room conversations have been inaccurate and misleading. Why is the wider industry not allowed to know that NZTR passed this resolution in March 2009. Why take a parade around the country in the next few weeks without telling people the facts. (a) The Board ENDORSED the concept calendar, inclusive of the following recommendations of Management: (i) The venue recommendations, attached in Appendix 7 to the paper presented to the Board; (ii) The relocating of some Industry meetings from remote locations to lower cost venues, closer to the horse population; (iii) The relocating of some Saturday licences from provincial venues to strategic metropolitan venues; Just to be clear Minister Carter the "NOT REQUIRED" venues that Annex 7 refers to are: Dargaville, Paeroa, Te Teko, Waipukurau, Wairoa, Hawera, Waverley, Woodville, Hokitika, Reefton, Ashburton, Waimate, Waikouaiti, Omakau, Gore and Wyndham. In the NZTR officers own words to the board: The work done so far has the following regional split/changes in the number of meetings and venues: Northern: meetings 152 +9 venues 12 -3 Central: meetings 102 -5 venues 10 -5 South Island: meetings 78 -4, venues; 13 -8 TOTAL Meetings 332

The Racing Minister issued and press release yesterday knocking transparency, discussion and opinion. The following

Sounds like we all need a 'Super Club'. Three thoroughbred courses (bye bye Avondale and Dargiville), one combined harness/greyhound (Alexandra Park) and six $100,000+ salaries to run the lot north of the Bombay Hills.

NZRB has finally replied to HRNZ's letter of 21 December 2009 at http://www.hrnz.co.nz. Among the many obfuscations and coded intentions of takeover is this gem (Paragraph 3): " When considering a merger of NZ Thoroughbred Racing and the NZRB alone, the scope for savings is small, due to the limited duplication of activity. An integration of shared services for NZRB and the three racing codes provides the opportunity to achieve savings." One Racing touts savings of $7.5 million from the merger. How can this be when no savings from merger with NZ Racing (NZRB's words) and harness and greyhound cost less than $5 million per annum total from their published accounts. What duplication of services of HRNZ and NZGR with NZRB can produce $7.5 million? What is really going on here?

21 December 2009 Mr Michael Stiassny Chairman NZ Racing Board PO Box 38 899 WELLINGTON MAIL CENTRE Dear Michael Thank you for attending the Executive's meeting on 17 December 2009 to discuss the One Racing Report. After reviewing this matter at length the Executive resolved: 1. That HRNZ reaffirm its support for exploring shared services efficiencies with the NZRB and other codes, with it recommended that a Cross Code Working Group, comprising two representatives from each code and the NZRB, be established to review options. 2. That HRNZ reconfirm its position at this time that governance of the codes must be retained separate in accordance with the principles of the Racing Act 2003 and that changes to the industry's governance structures as currently proposed in the One Racing Report be rejected. 3. That HRNZ write to the NZRB to seek clarification on a number of issues arising from its review of the One Racing Report and request a response to these questions in writing for the Executive's meeting on 18 February 2010. Accordingly I look forward to your response to the questions outlined in the attached schedule. It would be appreciated if this could be received by 9 February 2010 for inclusion on the agenda for the Executive's meeting. HRNZ welcomes initiatives which result in enhanced benefits for the overall industry and appreciates the opportunity to participate in exploring shared service efficiencies. Should you have any queries in relation to any of the above please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours sincerely Pat O'Brien CHAIRMAN Copy to: Hon J Carter, Minister for Racing Mr G Sargent, NZTR Mr J McArthur, NZGRA HRNZ Clubs and Kindred Bodies HRNZ ONE RACING QUESTIONS TO THE NZRB Attached are a number of questions to assist HRNZ in obtaining a clearer understanding of the One Racing Report and the principles underlying it. 1. Why does the NZRB perceive the current model does not work? 2. How will this structure have any impact or improvement for the Board in dealing with its competitive challenges and leakage? Bearing in mind that the codes have had limited involvement to date and have been extremely supportive of the Board giving this the utmost priority. 3. Please outline and substantiate the basis for determining the proposed savings between the NZRB and codes? In particular, how did the Taskforce assess an additional $7.5m in savings through the inclusion of HRNZ and NZGRA into the One Racing model? 4. Would you please substantiate the $4m in "club" savings figure - how was this determined and what was the basis for this? 5. Feedback HRNZ has received is that the RWWA model has not delivered cost savings and just resulted in more bureaucratic decision making. Why will the proposed New Zealand One Racing model be any different? Did the Taskforce undertake any financial analysis of the RWWA model? 6. Public statements have been made by Taskforce members that Section 16 will go under the One Racing model. Is this correct? 7. If there are no codes, how is funding set and returned to the industry?

Both drives a disgrace to our code. Baileys Pearl the worst. It was just soooooooooo obvious that it was about to happen - 200m of the obvious. Even the Big Mac was embarrassed and tried to cover it up by declaring a deadheat! Three months OUT for both. JCA and HRNZ stips get a spine.

From the Stips Report on the FFA today: AWESOME ARMBRO broke rounding the final bend. Stewards requested Mr P Butcher as the driver of AWESOME ARMBRO to attend an investigation to explain the manner in which he drove throughout this race. Mr Butcher failed to front Stewards. A charge against Mr Butcher was laid and adjourned under rule 869(3)(g), the details of which are that Mr Phillip Butcher, through the tactics he chose to adopt throughout this race, drove AWESOME ARMBRO in a manner that was capable of diminishing his own horses chances of winning. At the request of the Stewards a veterinary inspection was carried out on AUCKLAND REACTOR with no abnormalities being found. A veterinary inspection was requested of AWESOME ARMBRO but this was unable to be carried out as the horse had been taken from the course.

I do think we are getting into the lunatic fringe here with this shabby nonsense. The JCA is a judicial body established by law to do a job. I'm hoping that they do it well, with research and a solid factual and legal base. Even by the lax standards of this website calling an NZ judicial body 'corrupt' should not acceptable. It may well be contempt. Why the venom? Because they take a few daysto deliberate on a matter that arose 11 days ago (only!!!) and which was heard over two days. An all time low for Racecafe moderating in my view. Secondly, threatening that the NZMTC will have blood on their hands on Cup Day borders on a criminal offence itself. What sort of jungle juice are you drinking!. This matter has nothing to do with the NZMTC and as far as I can see Shane Gloury and his committee have done everything they could do. If I recall correctly the above 'monkey' is Australian? Explains at lot.