THE WEDNESDAY WHINGE has a new look but won’t be dispensing with some of our old favorites and will continue to focus on THE GOOD, THE BAD & THE UGLY side of what has happened in racing over the past week. Our old mate ‘Godfrey Smith’ is back by popular demand and again pens his ‘Look Back at the Racing Week’. The Whinge will also include an opportunity for The Cynics to Have Their Say. Thanks again for your support for the most read column on this website. Our popularity continues to grow despite the bagging it is copping from some officials who cannot cope with constructive criticism.
EDITOR’S NOTE: RARELY has a single issue attracted as much feedback to the Wednesday Whinge and the majority – all bar one email in fact – was negative. We are referring to the new TAB deal in Queensland. Despite all the political propaganda and positive slant from a mainstream media that earns millions each year off the Tatts Group, many in the racing industry in Queensland have their doubts about the worthiness of the arrangement and already the sniping has begun with the carve up of the supposed ‘pot of gold’ yet to be announced amid fears of favoritism not only for RQ-friendly clubs but also to the harness racing code because of its political affiliations. For racing in Queensland there is also more bad news ahead with strong speculation that top trainer Robbie Heathcote is scaling back his operation - hardly a sign of confidence in the future of the industry in the north.
THE ‘FURLONG AHEAD’ PROMISE HAS ‘LEFT THE MINISTER WITH EGG ON HIS FACE’ 
OUR EMAIL OF THE WEEK was contributed by A PROMINENT INDUSTRY STAKEHOLDER who voices the concerns of many who we have heard from, which reads:
‘THE dust has just settled on the new deal TAB Product arrangement for racing in Queensland and the industry is looking for the results of the storm but as far as I and many others can see there is only a handful of crumbs.
I am a prominent stakeholder in this industry and the outcome of the new deal with the Tatts Group is a major plank in my future in this industry.
I was prepared to give Minister Steve Dickson and Racing Queensland chairman Kevin Dixon the benefit of the doubt as to their skills of negotiation.
On the details available it would appear I was sadly mistaken on their ability and skills of negotiation.
The new deal with Tatts was to be the ‘new beginning’ for racing in Queensland.
I was sceptical at many stages during the proceedings, with the constant ‘clap trap’ from the Racing Minister and how the new deal he and Kevin Dixon were negotiating would power the industry forward and what a good job his buddy, the RQ Chairman, was doing reinventing Racing Queensland.
I must admit to a lapse of reality, especially when Minister Dixon made the following comment and quote: “We will be a furlong ahead after the new deal and I stake my reputation and future on my negotiation skills.”
Poor Steve should follow through on ‘staking his future’ now that the quality of his negotiation skills has been laid bare. No doubt another hot air brain snap?
I am reliably informed that the whole negotiation was conducted by the Minister and the RQ Chairman to the exclusion of others, including his own Board.
Kevin Dixon apparently refused any assistance from one Board member who subsequently resigned and who would be regarded as one of the best and toughest negotiators in the state and who has conducted numerous multi-million dollar deals.
In the opinion of many in politics and racing the Board member referred to would have forgotten more than Chairman Kevin Dixon will ever know or learn.
Why exclude this resource and not use his skill and experience?
The corporate legal counsel highly regarded and head hunted for the position at Racing Queensland for her skills in corporate governance resigned quoting lack of governance and probity by Racing Queensland during the negotiations.
TIME FOR THE TWO ‘DICKOS’ TO DO A BIT OF EXPLAINING 
IT is the time for Minister Dickson and Chairman Dixon to explain the new deal in simple form of what is the increase to the industry, not the garbage we were fed in the The Courier Mail under the banner: ‘EVERYONE A WINNER AS MILLIONS FLOW TO RACING’.
The story then goes on without any detail to tell interested readers that the deal is worth $4.5 billion over the life of the agreement.
I might have been a mug for having faith in the Minister and the RQ Chairman to deliver a reasonable outcome, but the deal that is sealed for a further 30 years to 2044 is a disgrace, and to then attempt to feed the industry a line explaining the deal is worth $4.5 billion is an insult to the intelligence of the entire Queensland racing industry.
Stakeholders like myself want, and need to know, what is the increase here and now, not what figure some magician can conjure up some 30 and 60 years into the future when most of us will not be here.
The industry needs the prizemoney increase now.
The time has come, and even if Kevin Dixon and his followers are ignorant of the critical position that Racing Queensland now finds itself, to show some resemblance of leadership and explain the new deal and the actual increase in funding to all stakeholders and alternative media such as your website.
Tatts Group should be congratulated for the informative annexure as an attachment to their press release. No nonsense just the facts.
Racing Queensland Stakeholders would have been completely in the dark had they had to rely on the industry website as there was little if any informative information.
THIS IS THE ACTUAL POSITION SET OUT BELOW
I have set out below what I and others consider to be the actual position. It is incumbent for the Chairman of Racing Queensland to detail the deal that he negotiated. Just explaining to the ‘chosen few’ in private, to the exclusion of others, is no longer good enough.
The below may be of interest:
|
Category |
NSW Current |
QLD Current |
Cost to match NSW |
|
Metropolitan |
$85,000 |
$45,000 |
$13,000,000 |
|
Metropolitan – Midweek |
$40,000 |
$17,000 |
$10,000,000 |
|
Major Provincial |
$22,000 |
$10,000 |
$17,700,000 |
|
Minor Provincial |
$15,000 |
$10,000 |
$3,000,000 |
|
Cost to Match NSW Prizemoney at TAB meetings |
$43,700,000 |
||
THE FOLLOWING SHOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED
- REMOVAL of starters fees (1st to 4th at TAB and 1st to 3rd at Non-TAB) - $3 million.
- INCREASE in Jockeys’ Riding Fee ($143 QLD, $170 NSW) - $1.25 million.
- INCREASES to Winter Carnival Feature Prizemoney - $2 million.
This highlights that the gallops alone would require an annual increase of $50 million just to match NSW.
Looking at the above figures one wonders when the Minister will be stepping down from his position as promised if he failed to deliver or how he feels now about that famous or infamous statement:
"We will be a furlong ahead after the new deal” and “I stake my reputation and future on my negotiating skills”.
All this embarrassing political rhetoric aside, it is now up to Kevin Dixon to show some leadership at RQ and give the racing industry some ‘hard facts’.
AN INDEPENDENT OBJECTIVE APPRAISAL OF THE NEW TAB DEAL 
LETSGOHORSERACING asked an independent racing ‘expert’ to dissect the new TAB wagering deal – free of all the political propaganda and spin doctor slant from the racing media circus and here is his take on the outcome:
LICENCING FRAMEWORK
NON EXCLUSIVE WAGERING LICENCE: No change, expires in 2098
EXCLUSIVE WAGERING LICENCE: Expired in 2014
WHAT IS NEW?
NON EXCLUSIVE WAGERING LICENCE: No change operating to 2098
NON EXCLUSIVE SPORTS BETTING LICENCE: Extended 61 years to 2098
EXCLUSIVE SPORTS BETTING LICENCE: Extended 30 years to 2044
WHAT IS THE OUTCOME AND RESULT?
THE Labor Government received $320 million for a non exclusive wagering license for 100 years to 2098 and an exclusive term of 15 years to 2014.
THE LNP Government has sold the extension to 2098 of the non exclusive sports betting license for an additional 61 years to 2098 and extended the exclusive retail license by 30 years to 2044 for only $150 million with spread payment over nine years and no interest.
TAX
THE LNP has reduced the tax payable on wagering by approximately $15 million on current terms.
PRODUCT FEE
As existing – at 39% of gross wagering revenue (no increase) – with both Tatts Group and Racing Queensland agreeing to the offset of fees paid on race waging by Queenslanders on racing conducted in other states and international racing.
Tatts to pay up to $5 million per year on revenue generated by wagering on fixed sports betting through retail bricks and mortar outlets. This does not include wagering by internet and phone. This being the growth area Racing Queensland will not participate.
The revenue can only be estimated as there are no figures currently available to ascertain if in fact the revenue will reach $5 million.
FIXED PRODUCT FEE
$15 million roughly equates to the tax reduction given to Tatts who will pass this back to Racing Queensland at the taxpayers’ expense.
This payment indexed at 809% of CPI means a dilution of real value over time.
REGIONAL MARKETING FUND
$1 million per year to regional and country racing will not go far and will be fiercely competed for.
JOINT VENTURES
50\50: This is ‘blue sky’ nothing of any value that can be quantified to add to the final outcome.
ON COURSE SIGNAGE
This has no value whatsoever.
BUSINESS COMMITMENT
No value can be attributed as this is an on-going business commitment of Tatts in any case.
THE VALUE IN THE NEW DEAL
WHAT is the quantifiable value of the new deal if all the planets align and Racing Queensland product does not continue to slip into insignificance?
Product fee: 39% of gross revenue existing since 1998 and continuing to 2098
Extra payment: $15 million
Country Racing Promotion: $1 million
Retail Sports betting: $5 million
TOTAL EXTRA QUANTIFIABLE
$21 million Extra with conditions – ANY other revenue is not a guarantee
WHAT IS THE LESS OBVIOUS IN THE NEW DEAL?
* DROP in tax revenue to the Government will affect the money available to the infrastructure fund as the fund is dependent on receiving 50% of the tax received directed to the fund.
* GROWTH in sports betting must be considered doubtful as the major transactions are internet and telephone based not through bricks and mortar retail outlets.
* GROWTH in wagering depends on the quality of the product. NSW and Victoria continue to be way out in front and continue to pull away. The Queensland product has shown a downturn in recent years with Queenslanders betting more on interstate racing. This, in turn affects the final return to Racing Queensland as the offset fees apply for use of the southern product.
* 50\50 in joint venture revenue returns to each party also applies to a 50\50 contribution to capital outlays and costs, as well as any losses incurred.
* ‘Virtual Racing’, as quoted in the media, is under investigation. Revenue can hardly be booked at this point.
* THE requirements of the harness and greyhound codes cannot be overlooked when the increase is distributed with the greyhound code deserving a better deal than the current distribution. This needs to be corrected. The harness code can hardly survive on its distribution that is currently well in excess of its contribution to the overall revenue return to the industry.
So will harness be restricted to its proportional wagering returns and greyhounds receive their correct share?
Will thoroughbreds be required to reduce their share to 75% to correct the inbalance? This would reduce thoroughbreds to under $16 million of additional funds for prizemoney distribution
EDITOR’S NOTE: RQ are welcome to right of reply to any of the above. The assessment above hardly paints the bright picture of a ‘pot of gold’ at the end of the racing rainbow as RQ and the LNP Government have promised for months, if not years, and are now suggesting has been delivered. The facts our ‘expert’ reveals make a mockery of the headline: ‘Everyone a winner as millions flow to racing.’ It’s time we got some objective coverage of what the deal means to racing in Queensland. It’s time the Labor Opposition and the Palmer United Party started asking for an explanation from the Racing Minister or demanding that he instruct RQ Chairman Kevin Dixon to detail in layman’s terms for stakeholders the real facts and figures and not all these smokes and mirrors. And the question needs to be answered why it is taking a month or more to determine how the pie will be sliced. Surely that should have been ready when the deal was announced to avoid any inter-code or inter-club sniping.
THE ONE CONTRIBUTOR WHO WAS COMPLIMENTARY TO THE NEW TAB DEAL 
BRETT W of BRISBANE was the only contributor who had anything positive to say about the new TAB deal when he wrote:
‘MINISTER Dickson should be applauded for his hard work in securing a lucrative wagering deal for Queensland.
He promised that our racing industry would be in front of other States and it has finally happened.
For this measure to be sheeted home, metropolitan prizemoney needs to go to $90,000 or even $100,000 per race and this will put us in front of the prizemoney paid in NSW and Victoria.
Although I am worried that Kevin Dixon (the RQ Chairman) has only highlighted metropolitan prizemoney of $60,000, I am hopeful of the Minister sticking to his commitment as metropolitan prizemoney is the yard stick of our industry and ability to remain competitive with other states.
I look forward to this massive increase from late July early August.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: WE can all dream I guess Brett. I am advised that there’s as much chance of across the board metropolitan prizemoney reaching $100,000 a race in the foreseeable future as there is of me becoming RQ Chairman.
BELOW are a selection of the emails that we chose to run on the new TAB deal hoping it gets the general message across even to those who pretend not to read this forum:
KEVIN DIXON COMMENT ON ‘TRUCE’ IN COURT DEAL PROVOKES ANGRY RESPONSE 
ALBERT W of REDCLIFFE writes:
‘I don’t normally contribute to the Wednesday Whinge but one specific comment by Kevin Dixon (the RQ Chairman) on this new deal got so far up my nose that I felt I had to.
In an interview with David Fowler on the racing radio station owned by Tatts, Dixon was asked why RQ elected not to pursue $150 million or more in funds allegedly owed by the gambling giant to the industry in Queensland.
When I heard his response: “It’s usually not the best idea to take your partners to court”, I almost threw my radio at the wall.
This reply summed up the supercilious, smart arse attitude of the RQ Chairman to anyone who dares to question or criticize. He is firmly convinced that he is a one-man band running racing in Queensland and answerable to no-one except his political mates.
Racing is another reason why this Government is on the nose in Queensland despite the fact they would argue that they are the ‘pin-up’ boys.
The fact remains that they have ignored two key recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry that they instigated at a cost of millions to the taxpayers of this state.
The first involved standing Kevin Dixon aside from the Chairmanship of the All Codes Board and replacing him with an independent. But they ignored that.
The second related to pursuing the $150 million through court action against Tatts. They only went as far as a political witch-hunt against Bob Bentley and his Board and stopped at taking the matter further with Tatts because of the TAB ‘sweetheart deal’ that was being negotiated. Whatever happened to rivals of Tatts being given a chance to provide some sort of competition in the gambling market place in Queensland?
I would also like to raise the conflict of interest in David Fowler interviewing Kevin Dixon on the Tatts-owned racing radio network. Fowler is the acting chairman, I understand, of the Albion Park Harness Club and is also employed by Tatts as their No 1 race-caller. He also writes a blog where he has been very supportive – not surprisingly – of the new deal.
He is hardly likely to rock the Dixon boat considering the ‘red hots’ will be relying on plenty of ‘Hail Kevin’s’ to continue to receive more than their entitlement under the new TAB deal simply to survive.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: You make some good points in relation to the Commission of Inquiry Albert. What was the point of holding it if you then ignore the recommendations of the hard working people who ran it. As for David Fowler, I have to defend his interviews with Kevin Dixon. He has been prepared to ask the hard questions of the RQ Chairman that some other high profile racing media identities have not been.
‘HARD TO SORT OUT FACT FROM FICTION’ IS THIS NEW TAB DEAL 
THIS one from a regular contributor, JIM BRANNIGAN:
‘THERE is so much spin surrounding this new TAB deal, it is hard to sort out fact from fiction.
We were told by Minister Steve Dixon, RQ Chair Kevin Dixon and RQ CEO Darren Condon that as an industry we were going to get about $130 million from Tatts that was owed to the industry.
This was reported widely when the Racing Commission was on. It looks to me that we have given up on that and yet it seemed so certain at the time.
Also, the previous Board under Bob Bentley negotiated about $20-odd million a year in wagering tax redirection for an infrastructure fund.
In the new deal the LNP Government has continued the Labor Party deal and it has provided tax relief to Tatts to allow Tatts to pay this money to RQ.
The industry is also going to benefit from sports wagering, but only through ‘bricks and mortar outlets’. No growth here though as wagering continues its on-line migration.
So leaving aside all the marketing stuff and the upgrade to wagering outlets stuff that Tatts as a business should be doing anyway, what are we left with compared to what we had?
The $130 million mentioned above is worth about $4 million a year over 30 years, which is the term of the deal, and we were already getting about $20 million a year for infrastructure.
We were due about $24 million a year.
So for all the fanfare are we really better off?
If the Government didn’t step in and continue with the Labor party commitment would there be any upside at all?
So thank you taxpayers for helping us out, because without you propping this deal up we would be in strife.
On another related matter, in April this year The Courier Mail reported in an interview with Minister Dickson that he would resign if he didn’t deliver a bumper deal for the industry as a result of the new wagering arrangement.
From the strong majority in the industry, Au Revoir Minister!’
MORE ‘SMOKE AND MIRRORS’ IN THE FIGURES ASSOCIATED WITH TAB DEAL? 
TOM V of GOLD COAST sent this email:
‘THE recently released Racing Queensland strategic plan highlights an increase of about $22 million in wagering income over three years.
Can you tell me if this was mistakenly put in there and it represents the new wagering deal which would have been confidential when the plan was made public, or are we going to get this extra $22 million plus all the money from the new wagering deal which means we will be getting an extra $40 million per year?
I hope so. We will have so much money we won’t know what to do with it.
I know a couple of jockeys and they are looking forward to more riding payments because they are so far behind what jockeys are being paid in other places. Finally, it looks as though they will get what they deserve.’
EDITOR’S NOTE: Wishful thinking Tom where the extra big bucks are concerned. I am assured that someone – deliberately or otherwise – did jump the gun with the ‘confidential’ figures. But why spoil a good story with ‘real facts’ – RQ or their ‘spin doctors’ in the racing media have never done that before?
SHOULD RACING MEDIA NOT ADD DISCLAIMER ABOUT WHO WORKS FOR TATTS? 
TEGAN S sent this on behalf of her grand-father who doesn’t have access to an email account:
‘YOU may want to look at why The Courier Mail has not put a disclaimer at the bottom of their Tattsbet stories stating that Mr Nathan Exelby is employed (part-time) by Radio Tab which is owned by the TAB (Tatts).
The story today (on Monday) was very supportive of Mr Cooke (Tatts Group CEO). That appears to be a conflict.
EDITOR’S NOTE: THIS is in keeping with many emails we are receiving about the conflict of interest, stemming back to the days of Bart Sinclair as Racing Editor of Everything Media in Queensland. I have no problem with high profile identities in the print or electronic racing media accepting contractual work with other outlets – provided it does not influence their objectivity when it comes to issues relating to that organization and the role it plays in the industry.
AND this one on the same topic:
‘NATHAN’S SUCK-UP TO TATTS CEO’ SEEN AS TIMELY AFTER NEW TAB DEAL 
EDGAR J of BRISBANE writes:
‘HOW timely was it to see the ‘suck up’ by Nathan Exelby in The Courier-Mail to Tatts Group CEO Robbie Cooke in the wake of the new TAB deal?
That appeared on Monday and followed a full page advertisement in the same newspaper on Saturday by the Tatts Group.
One could be a cynic and suggest the price of good publicity these days is a page advertisement but luckily I am not a cynic nor am I suggesting that.
The ad read: Tatts Group and Racing Queensland – supporting our racing industry together.
It parroted the same propaganda that the stakeholders have had shoved down their throat by the Racing Minister and the RQ Chairman. Only the ‘true believers’ would be fooled by this.
The only thing that Tatts and RQ have in common is that both groups are failures in the eyes of the punters and the racing stakeholders.
The new TAB deal is all ‘smokes and mirrors’ and Tatts as a gambling giant is Jack and the Beanstalk stuff. Ask any serious punter and they won’t have a bar of a joint that only wants to put up its Fixed Odds prices in whimpish fashion after the real agencies have been betting for two days.
As for the Exelby article, well the less said about what that lightweight writes in The Courier-Mail (not on greyhound forums), pumping up his chest slapping mates running racing the better.’
AND perhaps we should add this one to the above:
GOOD TO SEE 'THE STING' BACK AND 'KEEPING THE BASTARDS HONEST' 
FROM DANNY B of GOLD COAST:
‘ISN’T it wonderful to see ‘The Sting’ – Peter Cameron – back in form writing what has been lacking for too long at Queensland Newspapers – a no-holds-barred racing blog for The Sunday Mail.
It might only appear on one day of the week but at least it adds some balance to what many see simply as an unbalanced, biased commentary on behalf of mates in high places that graces the pages of The Courier-Mail far too often.
While the apologists for those running the show has done his best to pump up the tyres of the RQ Chairman, Cameron called the new TAB deal as it was in his Around The Traps column in The Sunday Mail.
Not one word in the Media Releases or the propaganda disguised as news that has appeared in the daily rag about why the RQ Board did not pursue up to $150 million in betting fees from Tatts. Wonder how the Commission of Inquiry feels about this decision?
I won’t repeat everything that Cameron wrote but he summed it up in a few words: ‘Racing in Queensland is going backwards.’
GREYHOUND RACING IN QUEENSLAND HAS A LONG WAY TO CATCH UP UP ON VICTORIA 
THIS email from B.K. of PARK RIDGE:
‘I am a greyhound owner but since 2009 have raced all my dogs in Victoria where I can race at three times the number of race meetings for three times the prize money here in Queensland.
I am reluctant to write responses to articles on your website. However, I feel that the recent dialogue regarding Cronulla Park needs some input.
I was a member of the old Gold Coast Greyhound Racing Club (GCGRC) which ran one of the best tracks in Australia with plenty of interstate support and increasing TAB turnover because it was one of the few one turn tracks in this country.
The track was closed and the club was promised a replacement track. That was six years ago.
Since then we have had a change in Government but nothing has ever been done to replace the Parklands complex.
There are many concerns about the ex-toxic dump at Cronulla Park being used as a greyhound track and in September last year the club’s president wrote to the Racing Minister with copies to the Premier, asking for guarantees that if built on the Cronulla Park site there would be no harmful effects to the public given that there are grave concerns about the emissions and toxic materials dumped previously on this uncontrolled dump.
In his letter the GCGRC President outlined that several other sporting clubs had rejected the site but it seemed OK to build a greyhound track.
As an indication of the ignorance displayed by this Racing Minister or the Premier no reply was ever forthcoming to the assurances asked for by the GCGRC.
It seems ironic now that 66% of Queenslanders disapprove of the way Newman and the LNP are administering this State.
Given ignorance displayed by Minister Dickson and Premier Newman to this issue and the fact they couldn't even find the time to address these concerns shows why there is such a lack of confidence in this LNP Government.’
HIGHER PRIZEMONEY ISN’T THE TOTAL ANSWER TO RACING’S WOES 
CHARLIE J of GOLD COAST sent this email:
‘MIGHT I suggest there is something important that is being overlooked in this whole debate comparing racing in Brisbane to that in Sydney?
Prizemoney levels don’t necessarily ensure quality and quantity in fields, just look at last weekend’s race meeting at Rosehill for example.
It was a disgrace and despite the big prizemoney at stake without runners from the Chris Waller stable they would have struggled to get a half decent meeting.
Rather than me rant on about this here is what Max Presnell had to say in his column in the SMH this week on this issue which says it all:
AS Peter V’landys, the Racing NSW Don Quixote tilting at windmills with a broken lance, attacks the ramparts of state government for more money, Sydney racing wallows in Saturday doldrums.
Rosehill Gardens on Saturday could entice only 66 starters, including three events with just seven runners, making the races unpalatable for each-way betting, despite a perfect winter surface and for more prizemoney than Flemington’s eight races for 103 starters.
Chris Waller carried the meeting with 21 runners for four winners, posing the question: Where are all the other horses trained from Randwick, Rosehill and Warwick Farm?
It will be answered by the present period being in between seasons and young horses coming into stables for education, but then it doesn’t seem to apply in Melbourne, which supplies far superior betting mediums.
The situation follows possibly the worst summer turf action here ever, emphasised by the lacklustre Villiers, once a feature of Randwick racing.
However V’landys, buoyed by recent handouts in depressed Queensland, is attempting to get a better deal for the NSW industry, its fair whack of the punting dollar.
Alas, our enthusiastic but bedraggled knight gives the impression he is crusading for a bigger, richer autumn and let the rest of the year wallow in mediocrity.
Still, punters on Saturdays were left with another medium, backing how many winners Waller can produce which, incidentally, paid a dividend of $3.60 with the TAB.’
THE CYNICS HAVE THEIR SAY:
TOOWOOMBA RACE MEETING AN ‘ABSOLUTE DISGRACE’ AND WHAT IS RQ DOING? 
From an ‘EX-RACING ENTHUSIAST’ and long-time follower of racing in TOOWOOMBA:
‘I don't know how many of your readers watched the Toowoomba race meeting on SKY last Saturday, but from my view what was delivered by this Club was an absolute disgrace.
The Toowoomba Turf Club attracted 43 starters to their six race meeting that delivered $62,000 in prizemoney. The field sizes were 6, 7, 7, 7, 8 and 8. That’s right not one race with more than eight starters and 66% of the races were restricted to two places dividends for each-way punters.
Just up the road the progressive Warwick Turf Club conducted a non-TAB meeting with 52 starters attracted to their five race program with only $32,500 in prizemoney.
This leads me to think that many of our Downs’ participants don't want to race at Toowoomba.
The likely reason is this new track that in my view wasn't designed to account for the racing schedule of weather conditions at Toowoomba.
I am scared that this will soon result in less race meetings allocated to the Toowoomba Turf Club.
For the record the track was rated a Dead 5 for races 1 to 4, this was after just 0.8mm of rain in the week leading up to the meeting and just 20mm in the preceding 35 days.
That’s right, less than one inch of rain in 35 days and the track was rated Dead 5.
IT gets worse!
The track received 5.6mm of rain and in my view the track fell apart. There was clods being thrown 20 metres into the air and the stewards immediately reacted downgrading the track to a Slow 7 (two ratings in one movement).
I am unsure where Racing Queensland is at with their investigation of this matter, but this needs to be addressed ASAP or Toowoomba stakeholders will be without a racing surface.
It appears we have lost stakeholder confidence in this surface. Let’s hope punter confidence is not also lost.’
‘DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO PHILOSOPHY IS WHY THIS GOVERNMENT IS ON THE NOSE’ 
STEVE W of the GOLD COAST writes:
‘INTERESTING item on the 7.30 Report last week concerning a well known racing man and the alleged start he has received from a high profile member of the LNP Government.
It alleged sand dredging operations had been undertaken in the upper Brisbane River without a permit reportedly destroying surrounding properties.
The suggestion is that the Act was changed and back-dated in the middle of the night – like the time Joh got the Dean Brothers into destroy – or should I say - demolish a well known heritage listed building.
What amazes me is that the bloke who was involved from the Government perspective was the first to heap plenty of crap on Bob Bentley and his Board and others associated with him – of course using his usual modus operandi method of Parliamentary Privilege for those attacks.
It seems a lot of long-serving National Party members are leaking information against this long-time colleague. They hate him with a passion. Expect more and more dirty laundry to be leaked before we seen the back of this bloke.
Is it little wonder that the voters of Queensland have quickly had a gutful of his likes and the Party he represents and is a good reason why they could lose the ‘unloseable’ election next year?’
BUSH RACING WILL BE HARDEST HIT BY NEW STARTERS’ LIMIT 
KENNY ELLIOTT, president of the North Gregory Turf Club, made this observation:
‘YOU and I know that bush racing will be hit hardest (King Hit) from Racing Queensland's new six horse starter's fields size.
To guarantee six races with six runners is like placing a Bush Handicap on all small clubs.
If the club only has five jockeys and seven horses accept, how long before Racing Queensland scratch the meeting.
Presently it is possible to stack the deck. But for how long?’
‘NATHAN WAS RIGHT WHEN HE SUGGESTED THE ‘RED HOTS’ ARE DOING DOWNHILL’ 
JOHN G of BRISBANE sent this email:
‘I believe Nathan Exelby (Racing Editor of The Courier-Mail) got it right with his comments (to a greyhound forum) that the trots are going downhill.
I used to go to the trots years ago on a regular basis and hadn’t been for a long time until recently. A group of us went out to Albion Park and to my dismay half of the building was missing.
We went inside and it was nothing like I remembered it. It was a shock. There was hardly anyone there and the grandstand, or what’s left of it, was empty.
Doesn’t the club have any money to fix the problem or have people just gone off the trots?
From my perspective I hope Kevin Dixon doesn't succumb to ‘peer pressure’ from the Harness God and doesn't agree to give this code any more of the new Tatts money than it deserves.
From my perspective this code has been living beyond its means for too long and from what I witnessed any increased investment could not be justified.’
MORE ON METHANE GAS THREATS AT THE NEW GREYHOUND TRACK BEING BUILT 
OSCAR J of GOLD COAST writes:
‘I read recently in your website that there is a probability that methane gas will be emitted from the new greyhound track (at Logan) until 2017, according to a report commissioned by the Queensland Trail Bike Riders’ Association when looking for a new sporting field.
Naturally, they rejected the once contaminated dump site where apparently up to 3000 animal carcasses of dead dogs, cats, horses and cattle were dumped.
Another report on the locality was done in 2009 by Sinclair Knight Merz, which also said the methane would be emitted and suggested as part of a lengthy Remediation Action Plan that gas alarms are to be fitted inside any building at appropriate locations.
As methane gas is colorless and odorless it would seem that as soon as one of the gas alarms goes off everyone will have to evacuate the building and the complex.
I imagine these gas alarms would be costly that I am suggesting to Minister Dixon and GRC Board Chair Mr Byrne that as a cost saving measure they look at contacting all the local canary breeders.
In years gone by coal miners working underground carried with them canaries in cages and if the canary carked it they would exit the mine shaft ASAP.
Seeing the greyhounds are slowly going broke, as indicated last week when they had to cut back the number of races held at Capalaba, Cairns and Bundaberg because there were no funds, I am sure the cost of a canary would be a lot less than installing gas alarms and the singing and whistling of the birds would create a great ambience for the complex.
It would be a bit tricky when the singing stopped however!’
THE PUNTERS POST MORTEM – HAVE YOUR WHINGE!
SHOULD PARR HAVE COPPED THE WRATH STEWARDS OF DESTINY’S KISS DISASTER? 
ROGER K of SYDNEY sent this email:
‘PERHAPS some jockeys are fortunate that I’m not a steward as I felt that Destiny’s Kiss was dealt to by some of his rivals in the Winter Cup at Rosehill last Saturday.
Let’s not forget that the Waller stable had four runners in the field, which by the way filled the first four placings – Secessio, Hoylonny, Mulaqen and Permit.
If someone had told you before the race that Destiny’s Kiss wouldn’t finish in the first four in that eight-horse field you would have had them certified.
But the unexpected happened – as it so often does in racing – especially in Sydney where Waller rules and the racing media just continue to rabbit on about how wonderful he is regardless of whether his favorite runs last and roughie salutes.
But back to my original belief about Destiny’s Kiss and the trouble that the horse endured in the straight. I see where the stewards have blamed his rider Josh Parr.
Rather than trying to relay what they had to say, here are excerpts from their report on the race:
WHEN questioned regarding his riding of Destiny’s Kiss, Josh Parr state that approaching the home turn he endeavored to follow Mulaqen into the race. However, when that runner did not quicken as he thought, he was held up on the heels of Mulaqen for some distance making the turn. When questioned in respect to his riding from this point and in particular as to whether there was an opportunity to improve into a run between Secessio and Mulaqen sooner than he did, Parr stated, as he was held up inside the heels of Mulaqen, he was unable to get to that runner’s outside in order to improve and, as a consequence, he was held up for some distance. He added that he was also of the view that Ty Angland, rider of Secessio, would close that run. Parr was advised that, in the opinion of the Stewards, he had erred in not attempting to improve between Secessio and Mulaqen approaching the home turn and that he should avail himself of opportunities so as to not leave his riding open to question.
Interestingly, stewards questioned Waller about the improved performance of Secessio which had been beaten almost 14 lengths in the Stayers Cup on a heavy track behind Destiny’s Kiss at their previous clash.
Waller said Secessio was not suited by the 3200m of that race and also attributed the big improvement to the firmer ground.
Stewards didn’t ask Waller about the improved showing of stablemate Hoylonny which almost pulled up a massive upset failing by only a short head after collectively beating home four runners at its three previous starts (one on two occasions and two at its latest run at Rosehill behind Keep Cool).
Enough said on the subject apart from the fact that the Waller horses are almost impossible to follow, especially when he has multiple runners in a race that presents an absolute nightmare for the punters.’
HOW THE BIG BETS FARED LAST SATURDAY 
THIS report is starting to sound rather repetitive but once again the big bets laid in early Fixed Odds betting largely failed to salute.
Costly losers for punters were: Charmed Harmony, Sacred Flyer and The Thief at Flemington; Mulaqen, Dream Folk and The Alfonso at Rosehill; and Agitate, Architect and Mr O’Ceirin at the Sunshine Coast.
There were only a handful of winners that caused the bookies any angst including Winx and Scream Machine at Rosehill; Vain Queen and Nautical at Flemignton; and Miss Cover Girl at the Sunshine Coast.
JOHN THE FIREMAN’S TAKE ON ALL THING’S RACING IN QUEENSLAND
JOHN THE FIREMAN keeps a close eye on all thing’s racing in Queensland and isn’t backward in coming forward with his views to those in authority including the Minister if he feels it is necessary. We haven’t heard from John for a while but he bobbed up during the week with this interesting contribution:
‘I thought it time again to pen something.
I have continued to watch emails coming through to your site and looked for RQ to show they are getting their act together.
I remain concerned as many that the deck chairs have shifted but much remains the same.
The decisions remain reactive and the information on where things are heading quite difficult to obtain through a good communication process. Stakeholders remain very much in the dark.
The milk carton has gone from infrastructure site, but the information doesn’t inform you of the future and a lot isn’t up to date. The report (Deloitte’s) on the industry that talked about the 133+ tracks etc has gone.
The meetings I have attended to try to obtain information have not helped and actually the RQ people get quite defensive.
I understand that the TAB deal has been time consuming and very important to the future [stop press just received text/new 30 year deal signed off], but it still is only one part in an industry that has many other parts that need attention.
Some key issues still remain unanswered:
What is the viable model for each of the codes/particularly thoroughbreds? Surely modeling can be done of different options that deliver different outcomes that stakeholders can be shown and vote on.
By this I’m referring to say a model with 100 tracks may deliver six day a week racing with increased prize money and better infrastructure and less tracks again may deliver further gains and there should be a point of where the gains become negligible.
As we should all know change has to happen but what that change is, depends on input, discussions and using that to make informed decisions.
EXAMPLE: I remember the days when it was races Saturday/Trots Saturday night and Silks for dinner on occasions (when you could get a booking) then football on Sundays and NO poker machines and casinos in Brisbane. Betting was via bookmaker or track/agency tote.
But that is no longer the case and the industry needs to deal with it and change, but the product still should be number one and the alternate income streams not primary focus, but part of the new picture.
ISSUES/CONCERNS/THOUGHTS
IT has been rumored the new TAB deal will allow a 20% increase in prize money. Thoroughbred wise what’s this mean? Surely there has to be thought about a larger increase to country/provincial prize money first up and a smaller increase to metropolitan meetings. What are the future years’ aims for prize money targets?
Country racing, where is it heading? My views for SE Queensland are back to a country circuit. Issues though to be considered: Which day Monday/Friday/Saturday? Country tracks rely on volunteers. They have Saturdays OFF. My past experiences were going to country meetings expecting a cold stubby out of an Esky of ice and a good steak burger. If Saturday could be achieved Sky channel coverage would be hard but maybe if thinking outside the square: “What about commercial TV. 7mate/7TWO/9GO etc. Country tracks are country racing!
Tracks & facilities: What has an audit shown of every track’s issues?
I know that Eagle Farm was well overdue and hopefully the track will be done right and given the time to settle in.
The communication to the current uses and how the ‘product’ continues through the works is ordinary at best. Owners/Trainers need to know how things are going to work at Doomben. People have horses to prepare for racing, yearlings coming through and education processes for next season.
Doomben will now go from race/trial to full on again. The grass track will have trials and morning gallops to cope with (currently Tuesday only). There has been no operational sand or bullring for years. I cringe at trial days now when I see horses playing up in tie ups with the low head room and no modern rubber footing in stalls or down walking areas. Is this on the infrastructure list for Doomben? WHO KNOWS!
Toowoomba: Well it has a grass track back but plenty of issues remain (your site emails have raised a few). My main question having been there since the new track was built and not for many years before is: They have had two goes at funding, so why was no work been done to modernize the enclosure and tie up areas? Water pipe/fencing etc are very much outdated these days.
Industry/clubs: What are proposed as areas that can generate alternate income from facilities? I saw the Eagle Farm/Doomben plan a while ago. How will this income be split when the new stream of income is created particularly if the industry is part of it? The big race days attract some crowd numbers but the bread and butter days remain to owners and the few die-hards.
Let’s hope when the new harness track is built the priority is on the product and not the ability the site has for secondary income.
There has to be a great opportunity here to create a state of the art facility with track design and facilities that offer a change of product different to that offered at Albion Park. This may help to create different interest in the sport and thus turnover.
Well with the new deal struck let’s hope we see real change to this industry and money isn’t wasted on poor decisions and the changes are created to strengthen the product first and we end up with an industry that delivers to all involved and something to be proud of.
Time will tell the future story. I’m hanging in there.’
STORIES YOU MAY HAVE MISSED IN THE MAINSTREAM RACING MEDIA
STEWARDS GIVEN GREATER POWERS TO TEST LICENCEES FOR DRUGS & ALCOHOL 
THE Australian Racing Board has introduced new rules from 1 July which give stewards powers to test any trainer, strapper, vet, barrier attendant or other horse handler they suspect of being drug or alcohol affected.
These new rules stem from a safety viewpoint and have been formulated after two years consultation with industry bodies. A horse handler impaired by an illicit substance or alcohol, poses a significant safety risk in the workplace to other workers and to horses in their care.
As a condition of their licence, horse handlers undertake to submit to tests that are intended to detect substances banned under the new Rule AR.81AA.
The banned substances when found in a urine sample are broadly grouped into the following:
- Alcohol (in excess of .05%)
- Cannabis
- Amphetamines
- Ecstasy
- Cocaine
Stewards have further issued a warning to riders, trainers and stable employees against taking herbal and other “over the counter” medicines without firstly making thorough enquiries as to whether ingredients of such products are regarded as a banned substance. The fact that a medicine is herbal or indeed “non-prescription” does not guarantee that is does not contain a banned substance.
Just a few examples of these products that are available “over the counter” or via the internet that fall within the definition of a banned substance include:
1. Reductil: a weight reduction pill containing sibutramine;
2. Citrus aurantium (bitter orange) extract: containing the weight loss agent synephrine;
3. Coca tea derived from the coca plant: containing the illegal stimulant cocaine;
4. Thermo-lift classic formula: an appetite suppressant containing ephedrine; and
5. Ephedra sinica (ma huang) extract: an appetite suppressant containing ephedrine.
Breaches of the banned substance Rules attract substantial penalties which necessarily must contain elements of both specific and general deterrence.
The ARB believes that mandatory testing for drug and alcohol is necessary in the interests of workplace safety, but also accepts the need to provide information and support to industry participants.
For this reason, in early 2013 the ARB commissioned the Centre of Law Enforcement and Public Health (CLEPH) to interview trainers’ organizations, individual trainers, stablehands and the AWU on drug and alcohol issues. All available data was analysed by leading counsellors and practitioners in this field resulting in a landmark report of immense value to the industry.
The report, titled “Reducing the Risk”, identified the extent of drug and alcohol problems and the resultant OH&S issues due to the high risk elements of stable work. As a result, Principal Racing Authorities (PRAs) will introduce the Australian Drug Foundation’s Drug Awareness program which horse handlers must complete online before obtaining a licence. The program is progressively being rolled out across the country.
Other support measures include a wallet card being distributed to all horse handlers which will contain key messages and contact numbers for drug and alcohol information or assistance.
Additionally, SMS messages of reinforcement will regularly be sent reminding horse handlers of the Drug Awareness Program, mandatory testing and sources of assistance.
Drug and alcohol use is widespread in the community and racing is no exception to societal trends. Racing Authorities have a zero tolerance policy to drugs in the workplace, but understand the need to educate horse handlers of the inherent dangers not least of all to their own health.
NEW NATIONAL REGULATIONS TO ENHANCE WELFARE OF OZ THOROUGHBREDS 
THE welfare of Australia’s thoroughbred racehorses will be bolstered by the introduction this week of new national regulations to capture enhanced information about their transition to a life after racing.
Effective from Tuesday of this week, the Australian Racing Board (ARB) has introduced a new rule making it compulsory for owners to report the retirement of their racehorse within 30 days.
The managing owner of each racehorse is now responsible for advising the reason for their horse’s retirement and their plans for the horse beyond its racing career.
Owners will indicate, at no charge to them or their trainer, whether their racehorse was retired due to illness, injury, for breeding purposes or at their request and whether the horse will be re-homed as an equestrian or pleasure horse, enter an official retirement program or be sent to a livestock sale.
In addition to the new retirement of racehorse rule for owners, the rule requiring trainers to notify authorities of the death of a racehorse in their care has been strengthened. Trainers will also be asked to inform authorities of the cause of the death.
The changes will provide the industry with greater insight into the reasons why horses conclude their racing careers, as well as their activities post racing, thus supplying statistics which can be used to better direct education and welfare initiatives.
Racing Victoria (RV) Head of Equine Welfare and Veterinary Services, Dr Brian Stewart, has welcomed the establishment of what he described as “a significant welfare initiative for the industry”.
“These important enhancements to the Rules of Racing will provide access to information about why racehorses are retired as well as details about their life after racing – equipping the industry with knowledge which will help direct future welfare activities,” Dr Stewart said.
“The retirement of racehorse rule is something that Racing Victoria has actively campaigned for and we welcome the ARB’s decision to introduce it on a national level. The rule complements the range of initiatives we’re undertaking to manage the welfare of our equine athletes.
“By capturing enhanced information from owners and trainers we’ll be armed with accurate data around injuries and deaths, retirements and stable departures.
“This will then assist us in Victoria to further develop our research and welfare initiatives as well as our Off the Track program which promotes the retraining and re-homing of thoroughbred racehorses.
“It’s also information which can be fed back to trainers and owners and will be beneficial in assisting them to make informed decisions in the future.”
Dr Stewart said that most owners retire their horses responsibly, often within the broader equine sporting and pleasure markets, but that data could be improved.
He cited a 2013 University of Melbourne study which found that thoroughbreds with a connection to racing are the most commonly represented amongst Victoria’s 600,000 pleasure horses as an example of the positive efforts being made by owners to transition their horse to a life after racing.
“Misleading figures and statistics about the destination of retired racehorses are often quoted by animal welfare groups and collating this data will help to ensure the industry is represented truthfully,” Dr Stewart said.
“Ultimately, we are asking owners to take responsibility for providing information about the destination of their horse post racing so that we have accurate information on retired racehorses to better direct welfare programs.”
Under the newly introduced Australian Rule of Racing (AR) 64JA, the managing owner of each horse is required to notify the industry’s data provider, Racing Information Services Australia (RISA), on the retirement of their horse. The retirement of racehorse form can be found at the RISA website www.risa.com.au under the Registrar of Racehorses/Forms page.
Under the amended AR 64J, if a horse which has not been retired dies the registered trainer will be required to advise their relevant Principal Racing Authority and update the horse’s stable return via RISA’s online Stable Assist program.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed in the above e-mails should not be interpreted as those of JOHN LINGARD, the owner-editor of the letsgohorseracing web-site. That is why he has added an ‘EDITOR’S NOTE’. Every endeavor is made to verify the authenticity of contributors. We welcome any reasonable and constructive responses from parties or individuals.
