OneRacing - the unanswered HRNZ questions

[Balmyknight 0]

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?

[Freda 0]

Well, having just digested the questions posed by HRNZ, and the non-reply, I can see even MORE reason why the other two codes don't want a bar of this model.

[John Clydesdale 229]

Yet zzz believes that TR and RB have been clear and transparent in the processes thus far.

The PR that was released after the AGM was just plain lies. It did not state that the motion as it was listed on the agenda underwent two further reviews before it was voted upon.

Nor was the motion, as presented by the Masterton Racing Club that NZTR to review their own Board governance, even mentioned in the PR that was released from the NZTR AGM. Strangely, it had almost the same numbers of votes as the One Racing motion, and yet it wasn't even worthy of a mention.

That's what I really like about NZTR, transparency and honesty, the full picture.....yeah right!!

[Nerula 1,402]

You have got bogged down in the process and the sensibilities of a party.

Why dont you leave the feeling of those who perceive to be aggrieved aside and concentrate on the fundamentals

Q. Is the current governance model dysfunctional.

A. Yes it is

Q. Will it improve if nothing is done

A. No what a silly question

Q. Would not grown ups when faced with the above situation debate the proposal and negotiate amendments.

A. Yes unless they are foolish

You can wuss around with this situation and regardless of what the minister says I believe if goodwill to embrace change is not shown that arbitary decisions may be taken. Harness and dogs can obsfuscate but it will be at their peril.

Q. Who rules in a democracy

A. Why the majority

Change will occur

[threeman 0]

Nerula, I have no preference either way as to the merits of this proposal but agree with most that change is required. It is never easy and often unpopular (in some quarters at least) but this is no reason not to pursue a better system.

What I can not believe is the apparent arrogance shown by the NZRB in handling this matter.

If, as it appears, HRNZ made their concerns clear and asked for clarification and answers to their legitimate questions, then to stonewall them and still expect their support in moving forward with One Racing defies logic.

I would love to see all the codes working more closely together for the betterment af all. As a relative youngster I don't want to be around in 50 years witnessing another governance review that goes nowhere.

But I can not think of any other business where one party could treat another with such disdain and yet still expect to have a functioning relationship.

Agree with your Q&As and most of your sentiment, but goodwill is a two way street.

[Freda 0]

Nerula, I have no preference either way as to the merits of this proposal but agree with most that change is required. It is never easy and often unpopular (in some quarters at least) but this is no reason not to pursue a better system.

What I can not believe is the apparent arrogance shown by the NZRB in handling this matter.

If, as it appears, HRNZ made their concerns clear and asked for clarification and answers to their legitimate questions, then to stonewall them and still expect their support in moving forward with One Racing defies logic.

I would love to see all the codes working more closely together for the betterment af all. As a relative youngster I don't want to be around in 50 years witnessing another governance review that goes nowhere.

But I can not think of any other business where one party could treat another with such disdain and yet still expect to have a functioning relationship.

Agree with your Q&As and most of your sentiment, but goodwill is a two way street.

Agree also.

And as well, I believe the WA govt. has invested significantly in their new structure.

That is not going to happen here, a fact which seems to have been glossed over.

[Nerula 1,402]

Just to say that the opinions I have expressed here are entirely my own

Neil Miller

[chelseacol 2,488]

Nerula excepted may I suggest the other contributors read the series of questions posed by HRNZ, then try to rationalise exactly what they're saying or trying to achieve.

It's just anti thoroughbred tripe, ie the 'no synthetic tracks', the 'what happens if NZTR and the NZRB form a union', the objection to proportional representation at board level with the implied demand that the minor party, HRNZ, continues to have equivalent voting rights to TB, the query re distribution formulas (when any idiot can see the fair way to distribute is 'you earn it, you get it'), the demands to know if S16 is to go ...etc..etc...

It must be of great comfort to the gypsies to know that we have so many stupid and ignorant folk amongst our code that they cannot and will not see this for what it is, and that's a chance to level the playing field and do what is morally right in order that we may have control of our own resources and our destiny.

Mind you the gypsies have exploitation as a cultural principle, normally exploitation of the soaked and debauched, the indigenous, uneducated, the ignorant and the vulnerable through their vile pokies, and now they're exploiting our industry members, well to be more exact they're exploiting the stupid and the naive, both of you.

I accept TPS that many of the HRNZ questions were self serving.

It beggars belief however that NZRB would initiate such a process without consultation - submit it to one of the parties they want to accept the proposal, and then not answer questions.

Have no doubt that when vested interests are involved people are hard to move. With this in mind NZRB had 2 choices - push for change without buy in from the other 2 codes, or seek buy in. Once they chose the latter they have to accept there will be a process to work through and then be willing to undertake the process.

This does not excuse the other 2 codes if they are not properly considering the best interests of "racing" in general and are instead just trying to protect their patch.

But bottom line NZRB appear to have handled this all wrong.

[John Clydesdale 229]

Nerula excepted may I suggest the other contributors read the series of questions posed by HRNZ, then try to rationalise exactly what they're saying or trying to achieve.

It's just anti thoroughbred tripe, ie the 'no synthetic tracks', the 'what happens if NZTR and the NZRB form a union', the objection to proportional representation at board level with the implied demand that the minor party, HRNZ, continues to have equivalent voting rights to TB, the query re distribution formulas (when any idiot can see the fair way to distribute is 'you earn it, you get it'), the demands to know if S16 is to go ...etc..etc...

It must be of great comfort to the gypsies to know that we have so many stupid and ignorant folk amongst our code that they cannot and will not see this for what it is, and that's a chance to level the playing field and do what is morally right in order that we may have control of our own resources and our destiny.

Mind you the gypsies have exploitation as a cultural principle, normally exploitation of the soaked and debauched, the indigenous, uneducated, the ignorant and the vulnerable through their vile pokies, and now they're exploiting our industry members, well to be more exact they're exploiting the stupid and the naive, both of you.

zzz, "stupid and naive" are the words used by people who believe they know it all. Often because they cannot get people to believe in what they say when they feel that they have used their most persuasive powers to convince them otherwise.

Disappointing you do no read more and find other words that may help you convey your message, because in what you have said so far, and the manner in which you have stated it, albeit amusing at times, falls well short of explaining why TR is in the position it is now.

Clearly it has been badly lead, badly governed, and in a position that is even worse than you claim Harness may be in.

So leave out the personal jibes and put some constructive guidelines up for discussion, because TR have a long way to go to convince most people they have any credibility at all. You may be able to help them in a better way than you are presently.

[Nerula 1,402]

Just to say it's not a crime to show intelligence on Race Cafe Neil, ditto common sense, sadly though you and I are in the minority when it comes to those commodities (at least on this thread).

zzz Im not sure I want to get too closely aligned with you. I would find it much harder to dodge the "incoming" as I present a much larger target physically and a less agile one mentally.

I would say that what we do share is the passionate belief that TB racing is to a large degree hamstrung by its current form of governance.

There is visible evidence of this with infrastructural problems in the south. To use a metaphor a dying organism will first wilt at the extremities.

It is ironic that it is from this area that the resistance to change is apparent.

It seems that we have both come around to the idea that the One Racing initiative is the way forward as have the Northern stakeholders.

Here now is a situation where the paymaster, NZRB has engaged with the major code, TB to create change. It is entirely reasonable that these discussions took place in the absence of the minor codes. The ideas had to begin and be fleshed out from somewhere

The cries of non consultation, tardiness due to holidays perceived alienation are side issues. These human responses must be subservient to the common good.

This is the future in New Zealand of whichever code you support.

Thoroughbred racing people support the oldest code and honour its legacy. They are the current custodians. You would think common sense will prevail.

Ever the optimist because it is a better way to live

[Theysay 0]

what about the pomgolian import on nearly a $mil a year!...is he a 'can do'...may do ,should do or a do do? :tcheek:

[Tahu 0]

zzz is fighting the fight for harness racing. He gets on here with his rants and crazed tirades...all he's doing is giving people more reason to believe 1 Racing is not the way to go.

Alienation. is that the word? I ain't too good wiff fancy words.

It's funny to watch him go though. He reminds me of the same extreme fundamentalists that would walk into a Baghdad cafe with 5kgs of C4 stapped to their backs.

Hey mate, you keep fighting the good fight. Whoever that may be for?

Ooh & back you'll come with some shocking, rapier-witted retort. Save it Eddie Munster. Firstly, you don't impress me (your psychologist maybe?). Secondly, I can not get over the jackets you used to wear on Trackside so I will never be in a positon to take you seriously - it seems the entire racing industry is in a similar boat.

Get a hobby.

T.

[dale 0]

what aload of rubbish

7.5m savings with a "concerted effort"

4m savings based on 10% reduction- of what a wage bill of 40m for the industry, what planet are people on thinking that the total cost are 40m, get an abacus for god sake, absolute rubbish

and all the answers are there are they. well thats everything fixed then!

these people believing this should leave harness alone and look at themseleves

[dale 0]

1. the figures on savings in the one racing answered questions?

2. the gallops share of the 6m released? is it to be paid to gallops clubs that are hurting like everyone else?

3. the financial state of the large galloping clubs, especially lower north island and hawkes bay?

[dale 0]

Exactly..we want to leave Harness alone...forever, and ever.

However, Harness doesn't want to leave us alone, they want the umbilical cord to stay intact and they want to have the power to veto our decision making progess to prevent us having control of our own resources.

Harness has a culture of dependency, Turkey Ted and the pokie parasites are ample evidence of that, but please, if you have any influence at all could you ask them to go do their own thing, tell them to show some courage, prove they can stand on their own two feet, back their product and gamble on their future...without us and without dragging us down to their level.

A thought to close, Harness is a scab on the face of global racing, no self respecting equine/racing purist would look at in any other way than you'd look at One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, but just as people have the right to vote Labour or be homosexual they have the right to follow harness, however, we have the right to consider those habits vile and vulgar so don't impose your fetid foibles on us, OK?

one minute you want harness gone, next you want one racing with harness in, confused?

surely money earnt is all well and good, but that is domestic earnings, or are you claiming that nz gallops actually earn the overseas galloping revenue by doing....., what exactly, they do nothing to earn that money, in fact it is easily argued that harness do more by moving off saturdays to allow more overseas racing in.

if things are shared in the joint model then 52 saturday day harness meeting would be fine thanks

[Properispomenon 1]

people have the right to vote Labour

Every time I see Auntie Helen, on her far too frequent returns to this country, carping on about how 'unfair' it is that a (duly elected, mind) National-led administration is 'undoing all her good work', I am never far from imagining that by this time in her new term (had the people voted her back) that 'right' to vote Labour would be a compulsion, TPS...

I haven't seen a more vindictive, mean-spirited former leader of this country since Rob Muldoon...

[Don Frampton 1]

If the current NZRB governance structure is set up so as not to allow TBs to have their morally right and proportional representation (as is the case) and yet that very same board is pushing for a change that would perhaps redress that situation while also allowing each code to manage its own affairs, then I conclude as follows:

1. Wobblers and Dogs have already had a more than fair representation at board level in assessing the merits or fairness of any change (given there are independents on the board);

2. The board by its own majority vote or if nothing else, by its own mandate to act in a way that does not ongoingly see the majority code disadvantaged, should now act in a democratic sense to free it from the current unfair governance, funding and obstructive (tri-code impeded) decision making processes. They should now lobby government for a change to the Act (to allow codes to self-govern through their own revenues). I mean it's not as if the board has to face Helen - who perhaps favoured the social engineering of all three codes to the point of them being incestuous. There should be no concern as to Helen needing to backtrack or that in pushing too hard, vindictive "shooting the messenger" repercussions might arise. I mean it was not this current National's baby to start with - so no face-saving to overcome). We are simply talking about fixing something that is not working for the main code, so no big deal.

3. Wouldn't this government favour a change to the Act anyway (particularly Section 16) if it meant human endeavour and effort could again be encouraged and directly rewarded? I mean taxes are bound to go up if the total betting increases through real growth of home and overseas betting.

4. If it meant giving one of our two TV channels away to the Doggies and Wobblers and allowing codes to compete more on prime dates, that's fine. If necessary (and it might not be) overall domestic meeting numbers for all codes could be limited anyway - by an agreed formula or date by date common sense or relative to the size of betting appeal generated by each code. That could still be pretty fluid anyway if the two TV channels were separated TB / Wobblers and Woofers. Gosh, we don't tell Rugby when to play their games in fear of competition from another (even more popular) code, do we now.

5. As to each code importing or exporting their own code product, it could be virtually unrestricted if it was kept on their own TV channel (thus no cross-code betting distortions would apply) and revenue streams could be rightfully kept by the same-code (so also ensuring any code-specific competition was automatically compensated for in the right quarter). This would also end the band-aid fixes and code arguments over who is subsidising who. Of course the resistance thrown up by HRNZ and their questions on change to Section, 16 makes it pretty clear which code themselves thinks they are among the two being subsidised by TB - they would be all for change to a level playing field otherwise.

[Geoff Collis 0]

Neil I'm a team of one, but thanks for the support.

John and the 'can't do' crowd, here's your challenge.

The two biggest problems facing TB are a) the need to increase our gross sales of gambling product, and the need to exercise complete and total control over the revenue from those increased sales, and extrapolating that, to re-invest in our racing infrastructure and human assets by way of education, research, and development.

Now you miserable 'can't do' whingers, tell us how to go forward and address those two issues under the current regime and administrative structure.

Peice of p--s zzz, sack the lot up top move the NZTR office to Rangiora , Employ only South Island people then cut the cable Racing would never look back. Colin for chairman,

[Fartoomuch 1,376]

I presume that's your strategy for the remake of Deliverance??

You really are the best zzz!!

Are Colon and Geoff best of mates????

[bazzag 0]

I presume that's your strategy for the remake of Deliverance??

For you zzz.......... Have ya got a banjo.

Doodle loot DO do DO do DO do .

[Stig 0]

And of course the reply to Mr O'Brien would be]

I doubt Mr O'Brien would bother replying but if he did I imagine it would read

And of course the reply would be

The Bluegrass Trust was formed to enable donations to be made to trotting and galloping clubs, possibly the same as the Endeavour Trust that Guy Sargent is a Trustee of.

Recipients would be clubs that apply and are supported by the Trustees.

Yes of course the Trust complies with DIA and government directives, if not it would not have been granted a licence would it?

South Island harness isn't in free fall, you're mistaken that for NZ Thorougbred racing.

SI are travelling to Auckland for their carnivals, to compete for the high stakes legally supported by the pokies at Alexandra Park.

Not really scared of anything but wouldn't want either the Thoroughbred people running the show (refer Manawatu debacle, Hawkes Bay propping up, staff turnover, internal strife, inability to budget) or the RIB(refer TAB incompetance, high salaries) would we?

I imagine he would find it ironic that the weasal mouthpiece is targetting pokie monies considering the recent RIB payout is because the Thoroughbred code budgetted for pokie monies as part of their code income stream and when it didn't eventuate they were left in the crap.

Hrnz is distributing this money to clubs, wheres Thoroughbreds going? Oh yes, $2million to balance their books and the rest spread around the mates clubs like Hawkes Bay.

[bernard 0]

zzz Im not sure I want to get too closely aligned with you. I would find it much harder to dodge the "incoming" as I present a much larger target physically and a less agile one mentally.

I would say that what we do share is the passionate belief that TB racing is to a large degree hamstrung by its current form of governance.

There is visible evidence of this with infrastructural problems in the south. To use a metaphor a dying organism will first wilt at the extremities.

It is ironic that it is from this area that the resistance to change is apparent.

It seems that we have both come around to the idea that the One Racing initiative is the way forward as have the Northern stakeholders.

Here now is a situation where the paymaster, NZRB has engaged with the major code, TB to create change. It is entirely reasonable that these discussions took place in the absence of the minor codes. The ideas had to begin and be fleshed out from somewhere

The cries of non consultation, tardiness due to holidays perceived alienation are side issues. These human responses must be subservient to the common good.

This is the future in New Zealand of whichever code you support.

Thoroughbred racing people support the oldest code and honour its legacy. They are the current custodians. You would think common sense will prevail.

Ever the optimist because it is a better way to live

"Its entirely reasonable that these discussions took place in the absence of the minor codes"

Possibly the most arrogant statement ever made on this website. How would you feel if major discussions concerning racing were made by HRNZ & Greyhounds with nzrb and leaving out tbnz?

You have no idea how to move this forward do you

[Stig 0]

Thoroughbreds obtained $8 million or so last season for stakes funding? Any comment?

Trax Bar = support of RACE. Any comment?

Regional Equine Trust. Any comment?

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

[Stig 0]

Stig I agree with you 100%, the TB code is no better but obviously is not involved to the same degree.

When the last pokie machine is buried at the local tip I'll be happy as they exploit the vulnerable and the naive, the very people we as a society should be protecting.

My objection is to the thin disguise of the 'bluegrass trust', its name and its intentions....and I'll bet if the DIA had an overture from credible and moral folk they'd strike it out in a flash.

Mind you the Ngahere Trust was another example of just how warped you gypsies are morally, and you'll know all about that!!

Could I close by saying that in a situation like Alexandra Park, where pokies are present as part of the 'culture' I can tolerate them, but I still despise them.

Wrong zzz. the Thoroughbreds are currently to within a dollar I'd say "involved to the same extent".

I think the name Bluegrass is brilliant myself, 100% legal and has passed the level of scrutiny imposed on it by DIA, a bit like Endeavour Trust that your Guy is a Trustee of that you always omit to mention?

Sorry, never heard of Ngahere Trust.

Your insults are sounding quite repetitive now, haven't you enough time on your hands?

[Geoff Collis 0]

I doubt Mr O'Brien would bother replying but if he did I imagine it would read

And of course the reply would be

The Bluegrass Trust was formed to enable donations to be made to trotting and galloping clubs, possibly the same as the Endeavour Trust that Guy Sargent is a Trustee of.

Recipients would be clubs that apply and are supported by the Trustees.

Yes of course the Trust complies with DIA and government directives, if not it would not have been granted a licence would it?

South Island harness isn't in free fall, you're mistaken that for NZ Thorougbred racing.

SI are travelling to Auckland for their carnivals, to compete for the high stakes legally supported by the pokies at Alexandra Park.

Not really scared of anything but wouldn't want either the Thoroughbred people running the show (refer Manawatu debacle, Hawkes Bay propping up, staff turnover, internal strife, inability to budget) or the RIB(refer TAB incompetance, high salaries) would we?

I imagine he would find it ironic that the weasal mouthpiece is targetting pokie monies considering the recent RIB payout is because the Thoroughbred code budgetted for pokie monies as part of their code income stream and when it didn't eventuate they were left in the crap.

Hrnz is distributing this money to clubs, wheres Thoroughbreds going? Oh yes, $2million to balance their books and the rest spread around the mates clubs like Hawkes Bay.

Go Stig, any chance you would entertain changing codes.:beer: