by Brian de Lore
 Published 17 August 2025

Everyone in racing will be grateful for the Government bailouts of racing in the past, but making political decisions to determine its future is going too far.

The Winston Peters announcement to ban greyhound racing came just prior to the December 2024 Roy Morgan Poll, which saw the NZ First Party jump from 6.5% in November to 8.5% by January. He announced that the last greyhound meeting would take place on the last day of July 2026, two months before the next general election.

Winston must have located his old NZ Maori football boots and is polishing them up in readiness to spiral punt the political greyhound football into touch on election eve. That should win a few voters over from Green’s Chloe Swarbrick.

Winston has done some good things for racing, including the ‘Fair Tax’ in 2005, the Racing Act of 2020 and bailing out the TAB to the tune of $50 million in the same year, but banning greyhound racing is a big mistake.

The ban will damage and expose both the horse codes; why haven’t they worked that out? Racing is a three-legged stool – cut a leg off and see what happens. The ban will leave the door ajar for the woke do-gooders and activist greenies to grow in intensity and noise and come after horse racing; that’s a certainty.

In support of greyhound racing, it is important that I declare my impartiality. My interest lies with the thoroughbred code, having never attended a greyhound meeting or bet on a greyhound in my life, but I believe that the three codes need each other and should be unified in support of the status quo, meaning a retention of greyhound racing.

NZTR declared ‘neutrality’ on the issue, which says nothing more than they’re happy to see greyhounds go. Some harness people have expressed the view that their code will benefit from the demise of greyhounds – delusion is the domain of the insane, the fanatically religious and the odd follower of harness.

On August 4^th, the NZ Parliament posted a petition canvassing for signatures to ban horse racing. If greyhounds go, the petitions and raceday protests against horse racing will occur more regularly with the woke greenies knowing they will get plenty of publicity from the lefties that pervade our televised and written media.

The greyhound community cleaned up its act and now spends $8 million annually on welfare, but forces are at work to spread false information, including a series of fictitious claims recently made by a breakfast host for no other reason than sensationalism.

In July, an Animal Justice Party MP from Victoria named Georgie Purcell visited the Greens co-leader, Chloe Swarbrick, to learn the ways of getting greyhounds banned in her state. Their Facebook page, which has 47,000 followers, recently carried a post that said: “Horse racing next.”  https://www.facebook.com/AnimalJusticePartyAJP.

What’s the connection between Winston and Chloe Swarbrick? They both want greyhounds banned, and Winston defended Chloe last week when she was booted out of Parliament by the Speaker. He said, “I do not think that eviction was warranted”

Welfare and Health and Safety protocols now keep fatalities to a low level in the horse industry, with even fewer in the greyhound code. There is no legitimate reason to ban greyhounds, but the political weight in parliament has, over the years, shifted to the left, and this ban by the coalition government is directed at nothing more than an intended vote catch.

Greyhound racing sacrificed for votes

Are they frightened of the way the rabble-infested Greens and Te Pāti Māori are polling, and so Greyhound NZ is the sacrificial lamb?

The use of the moral argument based on ethics and animal cruelty for the greyhound ban falls flat with the announcement that the now geo-blocked NZ punter may continue to bet on Australian greyhound racing on TAB NZ, despite the Australian greyhound industry sustaining a higher death rate.

It brings to mind the quote of an American footballer who once said, “Hypocrisy is the audacity to preach integrity from a den of corruption.”

This intended double-standard of Kiwi greyhounds being banned while allowing betting on greyhounds in Australia incurs Australian ‘racefields’ charges in the region of $5 to $6 million annually, payable by TAB NZ to the various Australian jurisdictions for the sustainability of their greyhound racing.

Sacrificing ethics for money in keeping Australian greyhounds alive on TAB NZ is all in the figures. Greyhound NZ annually stages approximately 4300 greyhound races, grossing about $17 million for a TAB profit of $3 to $5 million after costs. The incumbent bean counters are happy to forego those profits as a trade-off for the apparent political gain.

Ban NZ, keep Aus – hypocrisy for cash!

But they are not prepared to give up Australian greyhound racing, which in 2025 figures accounts for 46,705 races, generating $48 million in gross TAB NZ betting revenue for a return of $12 to $15 million.

And for another hypocritical act, what about the geo-blocking of the NZ punter to create a monopoly for TAB NZ, which began on July 1st? This option was written into the original partnership agreement between Entain and TAB NZ early in 2023, so no one is surprised.

But in an era where the public and a cross-section of politicians advocate for more competition between banks and supermarkets to provide Kiwis with a better deal, punters looking for the best available odds for the horse they want to support have been left without any options; TAB NZ is Hobson’s choice.

There wouldn’t be a punter in NZ in favour of snaking themselves by agreeing to have their choice of odds eliminated. The people who wanted it either don’t bet or are the ones who have entered the racing administration business with scant knowledge of racing, no passion for horses, and are blinded by the upfront payment of $100 million.

Serious punters unfazed by geo-blocking

I phoned a Kiwi punter I know, who bets around $25,000 weekly, and asked him how geo-blocking was affecting him. He said it wasn’t because he has an office offshore from where his bets are placed after he has done the form from his home here.

Who will benefit from the $100 million? Sport gets $20 million, but the TAB is holding the balance to bolster its reserve fund, which has now grown to $250 million – the TAB has said a decision on how much reserve it should hold has not yet been made.

That money belongs to racing, not TAB NZ. Even so, the TAB Board, led by Bill Birnie, recently offered the NZ Government $150 million for a sole licence to conduct online casino gambling – who gave him permission to do that? Winston Peters appointed him.

 Despite the fanfare arrival of Entain almost two and a half years ago and the hundreds of millions they have poured into New Zealand racing, a dark cloud hangs over the long-term future of the racing codes, not only because of the proposed ban of greyhound racing, but also because the betting revenue levels on horses are not improving.

Betting on horses is marginal, but sports betting is up

Figures extracted from the weekly dashboards produced by TAB NZ showed that betting on thoroughbred horses declined marginally (2%) in the first six months of 2025 compared to 2024, despite all the TAB advertising and ‘The Kiwi’ slot race, etc. Then the geo-blocking kicked in for July, and on the 21 comparable thoroughbred meetings held year-on-year for the month, betting on thoroughbred racing rose by only 10.9% ($2,4 million).

Entain claims that $180 million is annually lost to overseas betting platforms, so the majority of that figure must be on sport, which makes sense given that sport now accounts for around 34% of TAB turnover.  

Sports betting is a growth market, but the profit margins are much skinnier than those in racing. Entain have guaranteed a $150 million return to the TAB each year, for the first five years. It’s believed they had to top it up with $31 million last year, and this year (ended July) will be about the same.

We are almost halfway through the agreement to 2028 (which no one has ever seen in full despite OIA requests), when the guarantees expire, and the revenue is split evenly between Entain and the TAB. Will the TAB’s half be enough to sustain the cost of racing and the current prizemoney levels? Not likely.

What odds will the TAB give me about Entain getting the stitch with NZ by the end of year five or sooner, and selling their interest to another operator?

Would such a bailout surprise you?