Greyhound Racing Banned in NSW

[lad27 404]

Knew it was a dodgy report!

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/gaping-holes-in-flawed-greyhound-report/news-story/415a3dca32b0d0959f339365dd726c48

[lad27 404]

THE case for Premier Mike Baird’s greyhound ban has been dramatically undermined after it emerged that graphic evidence used to justify the shutdown was more than 10 years old and had nothing to do with NSW.



Errors have also been found in calculations in the report, adding to the seven mistakes and amendments that have already been acknowledged by its author, former High Court judge Michael McHugh.



And in a further blow to the document’s credibility, the report cites research carried out by an animal rights group, partly via social media and “personal contacts” of the research team, who questioned only a small number of people in NSW.



Mr McHugh’s “chilling” report into the NSW greyhound industry is being used as the state government’s central justification for wiping out the sport from next July.



But a dog breeder who makes a highly emotive claim that he drowned surplus puppies — right at the start of the document — is actually from the US and was speaking prior to 2005.



Mr McHugh linked the breeder’s quotes to shocking claims that up to 40 per cent of greyhounds born in NSW never make it to the racetrack and up to 68,448 were killed over 12 years because they weren’t up to scratch.





. Nathan Austin with Happy Petracca. Pic Nathan Edwards

The report reads: “The evidence shows that 40 per cent of those greyhounds whelped never make it to the racetrack. As one breeder stated, ‘Dogs who don’t have the instinct [to chase] or the tools to be a consistent winner, well a good handler can spot it a mile away ... most of the time I’d drown the pups’.”



But the man being quoted was not a NSW breeder — he was an American called “Ernie” operating in the US.



Mr McHugh sourced the quote from a 2015 report by the Working Dog Alliance Australia, which failed to point out where “Ernie” was from.



The quote was originally printed by Canadian-based ­academics in a 2005 report about the US greyhound industry. It appeared “Ernie’s” reference to drowning puppies may refer to a period well prior to 2005.



The Canadian academics have acknowledged their “ideological position as supporters of animal rights”.



Other flaws in the McHugh report include a table of data comparing the number of dogs officially named in NSW to those making it to the racetrack that is based on incorrect percentage calculations.





The claims - and the holes

Earlier this week, Mr McHugh retracted his claim that a slimmed-down greyhound industry — a key measure that may have reduced the number of greyhound deaths — was not financially sustainable.



Mr McHugh’s report also cites a survey of fewer than 2500 people — many of whom were found on social media or were “personal contacts” of the research team — to back up its assertion that “large sections” of the industry would resist positive changes.



Of the small number of people questioned, only 15 per cent were members of the greyhound racing industry. And only 35 per cent lived in NSW.



“Nonetheless, it tended to confirm what other evidence before the commission has indicated,” the report says. “That sections of the industry, perhaps large sections, are hostile to change that is necessary, if the industry is to continue.”



Mr McHugh did not respond to a request for comment last night. Mr Baird insisted the report looked at the global greyhound industry and said Mr McHugh’s reputation was “unblemished and of the highest order”.



The report recommends only Parliament consider a ban and offers recommendations for reform, which the government dismissed. Opposition Leader Luke Foley said the doubts raised about the justification for the ban “confirmed the need for the government to hit the pause button”.



“There needs to be a sensible debate on improving animal welfare standards without destroying the livelihoods of decent people who have done nothing wrong,” he said.

Read more: http://greyhoundsales.proboards.com/thread/30626/dribblers-pressure#ixzz4EQxBUedl

[lad27 404]

http://www.australianracinggreyhound.com/australian-greyhound-racing/new-south-wales-greyhound-racing/the-blatant-bias-in-parts-of-the-mchugh-commission-report/79487

[lad27 404]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/rendezview/greyhound-racing-ban-is-a-mongrel-act-on-small-business/news-story/fc820b846960052949280107d84733c4

[bunyarra 185]

This whole thing stinlks and goes a lot deeper and further than the NSW govt would like joe public to ever know and what a hatchet job the antis and media have done on the industry in NSW.

The truth is now starting to come out about the false figures and mistruths along with the extreme bias in the report although it may still be too late as Baird the dictator says there is no going back and he has already put an administrator in place and begun winding down the industry.

Inaccuracies already uncovered: 

• 1000 jobs in the industry is closer to 10,000
• 25% of pups are killed before they get to the naming age is bogus as it includes any pup from birth to 18 months which may have died of natural causes, mother rolling on them, snake bites, paddock accidents etc.
• The number of dogs supposedly killed in the past twelve years is dreampt up guesswork based on any dog that isn't racing anymore and the figure includes any dog that is retired and still alive whether it be residing with an owner, trainer, rehomed elsewhere and highly likely it even includes dogs exported to another country eg: NZ.  
• Dogs racing with broken backs and fractured skulls - how would they get past the vet and even make it onto the track.
• The number of dogs injured on tracks in NSW is less than 3% not the incredibly high number quoted.
• Only around 5,000 greyhounds in NSW at present when the figure is closer to 30,000 
• Ed the puppy drowner is some character (possibly even fictitious) from the US some ten years ago 

[GOM 1,017]

Also that trainers treat the  dogs injuries themselves rather than send them to the vet. This is an indication of the skill of greyhound trainers not a negative.

[what a post 811]

This thread  everyday is sounding  more like the des coppins interviews  I heard on the nsw greyhound situation.  No mention of why the lack of complaints from industry participants  in relation to the matters arising,prior to this situation hitting the headlines, apart  from the the odd  industry discredited whistle blower.         90 %  of those in nsw may well be honest,hard working  dog lovers,but by many knowingly maintaining  a silence on these serious matters,they in there own way have been partly responsible for their own demise.        Unless you can point us to something that proves otherwise, why should we have much sympathy?

[GOM 1,017]

Because what you are basing your argument on is not correct. Even the simplest research shows that the basis for the shut down is a beat up.

      The silence you talk of from the hard working dog lovers is a genuine indication that is all is well here.

   Wait till they get around to the same sort of enquiry into the "wastage" in the horse codes and see how they compare.

[shelley 43]

what a post ;;; back to your own Section.

[shelley 43]

The  figure for x Racing Horses NSW was 46,000 that went ,;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

[what a post 811]

12 hours ago, GOM said:

Because what you are basing your argument on is not correct. Even the simplest research shows that the basis for the shut down is a beat up.

      The silence you talk of from the hard working dog lovers is a genuine indication that is all is well here.

   Wait till they get around to the same sort of enquiry into the "wastage" in the horse codes and see how they compare.

Sorry don't agree it was a beat up.  After reading a lot of the queensland and nsw reports its hard to conceive how anyone could come to that conclusion.  Part of the reports specifically dealt with the issue I raised. Strange comment calling it a beat up..                   I never made any comment about nz,so not sure why the reference to nz.          Agree the horse racing industry need to take on board issues relating  to the  better use of the pool of horses they have, especially with the dwindling number being bred.

 

9 hours ago, shelley said:

what a post ;;; back to your own Section.

I might have horses but this year had done 95% of my betting on the dogs, not that I am a big punter,these revelations have certainly put me off 

 

9 hours ago, shelley said:

The  figure for x Racing Horses NSW was 46,000 that went ,;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

Where did you pluck that one from. Please enlighten me. guessing you may think you have the winning lotto numbers  for next week as well.

[what a post 811]

. P.s Have you read the latest article relating to a property where a mass grave of greyhounds was found 2 years ago. They appeared to have died from either blows to the head or  by gunshot. Apparantly the new owner of the property went to nsw greyhound officials but was told to keep quiet or they would be shut down.   Many industry participants  are to be investigated for providing false or misleading evidence. Maybe this article  should be posted to provide a little balance on here.  It was on the stuff news website today.

[Gary Sharp 224]

Any interesting interview from Chris Smith with the piece of shit & coward Mike Baird.

 

http://www.2gb.com/article/chris-smith-premier-mike-baird#dQ44gCFYEECHs7Cw.01

 

Sorry if I offend anyone with my language.

[Eagle Eye 231]

21 July 2016
 
Dear Participants,
 
When Premier Mike Baird shocked and shattered tens of thousands of greyhound families Australia wide with his unexpected decision to ban our sport and industry in NSW, collectively we were left reeling.
 
The NSW greyhound industry, was in effect, ambushed by the Government. The Government had the benefit of preparing its response with exclusive access to the McHugh Report. It chose to release the McHugh Report and the Premier’s proposal to ban our sport at the one time. In the process, it rendered our industry’s normal leadership body, GRNSW, rudderless and unable to respond to this harsh and poorly considered decision.
 
The NSW GBOTA, the independent greyhound Clubs and major stakeholders have been quick to react to these circumstances.  The initial media onslaught was tackled. A united body was formed, and a steering committee appointed to guide the way forward. The steering committee has NSW GBOTA, independent Clubs and other key players in the industry providing high level strategy. Administration support is being provided by Brad Adam, General Manager of Richmond GRC, Ellen Harris, Operations Manager of the NSW GBOTA and myself.  
 
At the current time, all external contractors and advisors have been appointed by the NSW GBOTA under the guidance of the steering committee. Costs, which will be considerable, are currently being met by the NSW GBOTA.
 
The steering committee is however, putting in place a Trust which will enable Clubs and other interested parties to contribute to a fighting fund.
 
The unfairness and gravity of the Government’s position has united all of us and we are now progressing our fight with definite strategy and single purpose. And our message is resonating.
 
Much has been done to ensure we have the best chance of a successful outcome and this letter  describes the steps that have been taken and how together we can best attempt to create a future for our industry.
 
Today is an important turning point. We will be releasing our Rebuttal of the McHugh Report to the Premier outlining why this report is flawed and any decision based on it is improper. The Premier’s intent to ban our industry should not be made based on a flawed Report and an improper process. The dramatic and negative implications for our industry and its total supply chain is only the start. This sets a precedent that impacts other sports, other industries, all local communities, across the broad business sector, including judicial and political systems. It has far reaching implications which we are ensuring become known and considered.
 
Our plan is to appropriately address all these issues in the right and proper way politically, in the public arena and through the courts. You can be assured that every aspect and angle is being considered and managed. And you are being and will be asked to contribute as part of a very integrated and strategic campaign underway now.
 
The most important thing is that we show our absolute unity and that we act according to our strategy which is timed very precisely - first in the lead up to the next sitting of the NSW Parliament and then beyond.
 
Our unity will be reflected in our campaign theme – ‘Racing to a Respected Future’.   You will see in this note to you the new logo that is being used to indicate that the entire industry is acting as one.  One voice-one vision. This symbolises that we are an industry that is reforming, that we have started making significant changes, that we have the ability to change and that we are committed to ensuring a respected future with a zero tolerance position on animal welfare issues.
 
This banner makes it clear that we have formed an alliance of all participants involved in the greyhound racing industry - The NSW Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance. The campaign will explain the position the greyhound industry intends to hold in the future – one where we are aligned with reasonable community expectation and one where participants, our greyhounds and our sport is respected.
 
Our industry reform plan will encourage the Premier and Government to not only consider but quantify our success in meeting the challenges placed on our industry by Commissioner McHugh’s Inquiry.
 
Our Rebuttal of the McHugh Report and the decision of the Premier is based on its flawed findings and construction. There are many elements to our Rebuttal, well supported by our legal Senior Counsel and judicial process, political and media advisors. A key element of this is the absolute denial to all of us in this industry of procedural fairness or natural justice. It also details where the Report is flawed. It further indicates the implications of this decision on the agricultural and agribusinesss sector as a whole, other sports and the broader community - aligned industries that could be threatened in future, as well as the Parliament of NSW.
 
In addition to working on our detailed plan for the future, the NSW Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance is undertaking the following:

• Our Senior Counsel are working on legal avenues to challenge this flawed Report and process.
• Our experienced political strategists and communications specialists are helping us reach and influence  politicians who can convince the Premier to give the sport a fair go
• Our media and campaign specialists are working with the media at every level and you will see coverage in your local communities from next week. That includes engagement with senior investigative journalists to promote the real issues which are likely to make a difference as sensational stories about a ban are considered more deeply.      
• We will work with you and directly to engage with local communities across NSW, local Chambers of Commerce, NSW Farmers Association, Australian Veterinary Greyhound Association, Country Women’s Associations, Australia’s Workers Union, Australian Hotels Associations, Clubs NSW, local industry groups, service organisations and local charities and clubs to understand the implications and knock on effect of closing down this industry so that they can lend their support. 
• Over the next 24 hours we will be launching a new look website as part of the campaign which will help keep you and the broader community engaged and informed. We have appointed a specialist social media group to manage professionally our influencer, social and online presence.

I can assure you all that we have in place an experienced campaign team that will give us all the best chance for success under these very unfair, unjust and difficult circumstances that we have placed under.
 
Much has been done but there is so much more to do. We are working hard and we seek to work with all who have a stake and interest in our wonderful sport and industry.
 
We will be circulating key messages documents for you with that you can use. We will provide the key points of our Rebuttal and we will provide suggestions as to how you can be involved in respect to garnering support for our campaign over the next few days. We will likely be asking you to engage in a campaign to your local member of parliament. This will take a format. We need your support and engagement, but in a planned and strategic manner.
 
On behalf of all now connected with the NSW Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance, I thank you, for the resolute conviction you are providing regarding our fight and our reform journey. We look forward to ongoing engagement.
 
Yours sincerely,

Brenton Scott
Chief Executive, NSW GBOTA
NSW Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance
  

[lad27 404]

Well worth a listen

http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/193321

[bunyarra 185]

People are starting to see the truth -

From today's "The Australian" newspaper by Hedley Thomas

It started with a quote that ­appears to be a hoax. When counsel assisting Steph­en Rushton SC, in an opening salvo in September at a royal commission-style inquiry into greyhound racing, ­attributed to Mahatma Gandhi the words “the greatness of a ­nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way it treats its animals’’, he made a powerful point.
Yet the oft-claimed attribu­tion to India’s former leader is almost certainly wrong. There is no evidence the words were Gand­hi’s.
Rushton’s opening rhetorical flourish was the first in a number of misfires, say lawyers and participants, in an unusually run inquiry that saw the senior lawyer on public day one declaring the message to the government about the $300 million-plus-a-year industry was: “Just shut it down.” Four weeks ago, the inquiry led by former High Court judge Mich­ael McHugh QC produced a scathing final report.
It was sufficient to persuade Premier Mike Baird to vow to shut down greyhound racing in NSW, where the industry is by far the nation’s largest.
Yesterday, the industry res­ponded with its first legal challenge: proceedings filed in the NSW Supreme Court in Sydney by a legal team headed by former commonwealth solicitor-general David Bennett QC, who argues that the report was fundament­ally flawed, unfair and ­“irrational”.
The fallout since the report has been immense. An industry worth hundreds of millions of dollars a year is being prepared for the chop in 11 months; thousands of dogs face death; and the livelihoods and passions of owners, trainers, breeders, club officials and punters, along with countless small businesses built on racing’s spin-offs, are being abolished with the stroke of a politician’s pen.
Baird has repeatedly linked his decision to the inquiry’s report. It was, he insisted, the most forensic and objective examination of an industry rocked by scandal.
The Premier cites the report and rattles off numbers and findings to stave off criticism from those who feel badly wronged.
He is accused of punishing thousands of people because of the appalling conduct of a small ­minority. His decision is exposing tensions among his parliamentary colleagues, giving animal liberationists a major fillip to take on other sports, and putting the ­government in ongoing conflict with backers, particularly in the ­regions, and commercial media from Macquarie Radio’s 2GB to News Corp to Sky TV.
Baird is toughing it out — but he needs the inquiry and its final report to be rock-solid.
The Weekend Australian has been examining aspects of the ­inquiry and its report amid serious disquiet among lawyers, greyhound experts and inquiry participants. They raise a host of concerns about the inquiry’s modus operandi, from witness ­selection to the selection and interpretation of evidence, which, they say, inevitably influenced the severe findings.
Confidential legal documents obtained by The Weekend Australian highlight what are claimed to be instances of “irrational” and ­“illogical” conduct and conclus­ions of the inquiry, with emotive and intemperate language. They describe repeated instances of an alleged glaring lack of procedural fairness and, at times, a process verging on shambolic.
Rushton declined to respond to questions and a request for an interview with The Weekend Aus­tralian. With his opening, he gave every ­indication he had made up his mind before the start of public hearings. Claims that ill-informed guesswork led to extremely rubbery estimates about dog deaths are levelled at the inquiry.
The controlling body, Greyhound Racing NSW, which has been led in a caretaker role since early last year by the Baird government’s senior public servant Paul Newson, is accused by some of its senior staff of ‘‘running dead’’ at the inquiry, of rolling over to ­accept undeserved punishment, and failing to take on dodgy evidence and witnesses.
Newson is regarded with suspicion by former and serving staff, some of whom say he should have instructed lawyers to fight for the industry and push back strongly against unfair claims made during the inquiry.
The Weekend Australian can reveal that the inquiry’s preliminary written finding about Brent Hogan, the chief executive of the control body until he was removed last year, was described as “unfair, unbalanced, makes erroneous conclusions, and deploys unnecessarily intemperate and ­hyperbolic language to enunciate moral judgments”, in the formal rebuttal by his lawyer, Dominique Hogan-Doran SC.
She went on to highlight ­alleged jurisdictional errors including a “failure to make inquiries (and) absence of evidence’’; “den­ial of procedural fairness’’; and “erroneous facts or reasoning’’. The senior lawyer attacked the inquiry’s conduct in key areas as grossly unfair, arguing that relev­ant witnesses were not called to give evidence; those who did get into the witness box were subjected to only limited questioning; transcripts of public hearings were frequently delayed by several days or weeks; transcripts from private hearings were provided “on the run or not at all”; and witness lists were not routinely published in advance.
Most of the criticisms were never meant to be revealed because the inquiry insisted on a high degree of secrecy in some of its delib­erations. People facing ­adverse findings were told earlier this year they could not disclose a word of it to anyone. They were ­issued with a “confidentiality deed’’ they were required to sign.
Bill Fanning, the retired former head of integrity at GRNSW, was warned of a likely adverse finding, despite not having been called as a witness. He was warned that he could not disclose anything to his own lawyer unless that lawyer had also signed such a deed.
This was meant to be a public inquiry, yet there were more days of secret hearings (the transcripts of which remain concealed) than public hearings. In the inquiry’s 16-month timeframe, at a cost of more than $15m, there were just 10 days of public hearings — three in September, two in October, three in November and two in February — with a total of 26 witnesses.
About half of these were trainers and most were alleged live-baiters. Five of the others were vets, but while there are numerous vet advocates for greyhound racing, they were not called.
For many trainers, breeders, owners and others, the process and outcome stink. As the fightback by the industry and its advo­cates develops momentum, veter­in­arian Liz Brown, from Casino in the Northern Rivers region, says in her opinion the report is littered with factual mistakes and makes “grossly inaccurate” assump­tions and findings about animal welfare.
“If it were not so serious for so many people, it would be laughable it has been accepted as fact,’’ she told The Weekend Australian.
Brown says the public who paid for the inquiry should be concerned it relied heavily in public hearings on a few vets with anti-greyhound-racing agendas, who were wrongly held out as experts despite lacking qualifications.
“As a result, it was always going to be painted as bad — it never had a chance,’’ Brown says. She ­advised NSW parliamentarians in a lengthy letter this week that several of the vets are “known to have predetermined agendas — the ruination of the greyhound industry — and have worked together to provide the commission with false and/or misleading evidence to achieve their goals”.
Anyone who read the ­inquiry’s 55-page opening in late September, before a single witness had given evidence at a public hearing, should have been unsurprised by the final ­report’s tone.
Right from the outset, Rushton, the statutory appointee to the Enviro­nment Protection Author­ity since 1997, was clearly flagging the end of the sport. As senior counsel assisting the inquiry and its commissioner, McHugh, Rushton held extraordinary powers, and insiders say he threw himself into the role with gusto, preparing reams of material, shaping investig­ations, and weighing evidence. Legal sources describe it as “Rushton’s inquiry’’.
McHugh, 80, who retired from the High Court a decade ago, stamped the process with his towering judicial authority.
Rushton could have begun with an open-minded view about whether the industry, reeling from the live-baiting exposed by animal liberationists who had covertly used cameras to catch a number of trainers in serious acts of cruelty, had a future under a tougher regul­atory regime.
Instead, he made it plain that greyhound racing was bad for too many animals. He introduced an amorphous requirement, saying that “a sport which utilises animals cannot operate without a social ­licence” and declaring the industry had lost this indeterminate thing.
Rushton’s opening flayed the control body and its former management, ridiculed their reform proposals, admonished breeders and trainers, and described “‘an industry culture defined by animal deaths; an industry culture which considers this to be necessary; an industry culture which considers this to be acceptable; an industry culture which puts profits before animal welfare’’.
He said there was a simple message to government from the wider community: “Shut it down. Just shut the joint down. Now.” As to whether concrete and credible reforms and stronger powers could work to change the industry, Rushton warned: “I doubt that it is possible. If it is not, then, in my submission commissioner, you would in due course recommend to government that it close the industry down.” The final report, released early this month, duly savages the regul­atory body and its senior staff, ­accusing them of many failures — among them practising a deliberate deception of the public, including people interested not in punting but in animal welfare, particularly in relation to “fatalities during races, and dogs that have needed to be put down by the on-track veterinarians as a result of catastrophic injuries suffered during a race’’.
The final report also condemns the stewards who oversee racing because certain information, the rare deaths of greyhounds in a race, was not being published in stewards’ reports read by punters.
The inquiry had relied on the evidence of co-operative witnesses such as Gregory Bryant, a vet who had kept a diary of his work for the control body at racetracks from Wentworth Park to Dapto for 14 months until August last year.
According to the inquiry, Bryant was conscientious and concerned that stewards’ reports did not record the fact that an injured dog had been destroyed at a track; instead, the reports noted the fact of the injury. The inquiry heard that the industry did not want to “stir up the greenies” by publishing information about deaths.
Solicitor John Laxon, repres­enting the chief steward, Clint Bentley, regarded the inquiry’s proposed scathing findings as being based on a false premise and unfair. Bentley and the control body owed obligations to punters, not to animal welfare groups or the broader public. Punters wanted to know about injuries because this would influence their betting. “It is the reporting of the fact of the injury, not the detail of the ­injury, that is relevant,’’ Laxon told the inquiry in his confidential ­written reply to a foreshadowed adverse finding against Bentley.
“Stewards’ reports are prepared for the purposes of informing the wagering public, to enable punters to inform themselves as to a greyhound’s capacity and ability in ­racing. The self-evident fact of the matter is that punters do not bet on injured dogs, regardless of the ­injury, nor do they bet on dead dogs. It is the bare fact that an injury has occurred that is relevant.” Laxon also pointed out that there was nothing in the legislation, nor the rules of racing, suggesting that stewards’ reports should be prepared to educate animal welfare groups.
He rejected the inquiry’s reliance on Bryant’s diary and parts of the vet’s evidence that there were 197 discrepancies between the diary and official stewards’ ­reports. The inquiry had come to a view that the control body and its stewards were knowingly engaged in “deception’’ and “suppression’’, substantially because of these ­pur­ported discrepancies. But when thoroughly analysed, Laxon arg­ued, these discrepancies were min­or and “not extraordinary at all”.
Yet the inquiry’s final report made a point of accepting what it described as “the general accuracy of the matters recorded by Dr Bryant in his diary’’. Tellingly, the final report does not suggest that omitting from stewards’ reports the fact of greyhound deaths in races ­offended in any way against any of the rules or the legislation. There was no rule breach.
Instead, the final report asserted that such conduct was “inconsistent with GRNSW having a continuing social licence to operate”. Caretaker GRNSW chief Newson’s public statements have also cited the need for the sport to “secure its social licence”, and Newson, who has lost the confid­ence of most staff, was singled out for praise in the preface to the inquiry’s final report.
Newson told The Weekend Australian yesterday: “To challenge the rigour or credibility of the commission’s comprehensive report isn’t prudent or appropriate for the industry regulator. I’m also doubtful it would restore our social licence.” He said the control body he leads worked to help the ­inquiry and co-operate at all times, adding he was disappointed at the ban as “I believed we could have restored our social licence”.
The repeated citing of a “social licence’’ rankles with greyhound enthusiasts, including Brenton Scott, head of the Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance. He says the industry understands tangibles: clear rules, legislation and policy. Something as subject­ive and airy-fairy as a “social lic­ence’’ is harder to follow. It is also a key part of yesterday’s legal challenge.
Scott says: “No one has ever seen, touched, smelt, heard, tasted or sensed a social licence. No one has ever owned a social licence. A social licence has never been bought or sold, inherited, transferred, copied, faked or handed in …(yet) the Premier has announced his intention to ban an entire ­industry based on it ‘losing its ­social licence’.’’ Retired integrity chief Fanning cannot disguise his frustration. “The way this has been done beggars belief,’’ he says, adding that he would have strongly challenged some of the inquiry’s positions if he had been issued a subpoena. “On my reading of the transcripts, there was a narrow and pointed line of questioning tending to lead witnesses to answer questions favourable to the opening address.
“We have been thrown under a bus without regard for natural justice or procedural fairness. If this is what you call an independent ­inquiry, god help the lot of us".

Disclosure: Hedley Thomas contributed $1000 three years ago for a minority interest in a greyhound

 

[aquaman 1,352]

Looks like the tide may be turning.

[Eagle Eye 231]

On 19 July 2016 at 9:06 PM, what a post said:

This thread  everyday is sounding  more like the des coppins interviews  I heard on the nsw greyhound situation.  No mention of why the lack of complaints from industry participants  in relation to the matters arising,prior to this situation hitting the headlines, apart  from the the odd  industry discredited whistle blower.         90 %  of those in nsw may well be honest,hard working  dog lovers,but by many knowingly maintaining  a silence on these serious matters,they in there own way have been partly responsible for their own demise.        Unless you can point us to something that proves otherwise, why should we have much sympathy?

Actually it's more about a dictator taking freedom away from people that's what all people are not getting if this goes through its not a democratic society anymore very dangerous times for all in Australia , lock out laws, licence for everything and anything, no such thing as freedom very sad

[lad27 404]

http://www.2gb.com/article/alan-jones-full-show-august-1-0#Yjj0ChGRzMBVZXOr.01

37min mark.

Makes very interesting listening and the tide may not be far away from turning.

[bunyarra 185]

It's great that the facts.....or lack of them.......... are coming out and that the industry is now getting support however i fear it may be too late. The bill to ban racing in NSW goes before parliament tomorrow and is likely to go through unless the Nationals cross the floor. The newly formed Greyhound Alliance has filed papers in the Supreme Court to have the ban overturned so that is likely to be the best avenue now although it is likely to come at considerable cost and be drawn out.

What is truly devastating is that the government is basically now putting out the same propaganda from the Commission (as is now proven to be factually incorrect) in the media to gain support for it's decision and to close the industry. They are so hellbent on destroying it.

 

[lad27 404]

Will be very interesting tomorrow.

Has huge ramifications for many industries if goes through.