hesi

Don't forget your bucket and spade DB, whether it be Te Rapa or Cambridge, sand is going to be involved

Just out of interest, this was the NZ First racing policy, formally adopted by the coalition Return a greater proportion of industry taxation to the racing codes. Introduce a new (below Premier Meeting) category of meeting where every race will be for $15,000 minimum, with relativity across the codes. Enhance employment and export opportunities by working with the industry to improve the international status of New Zealand Group 1 races to attract greater international interest. Restore marque racing plans and prize money initiatives in line with New Zealand First policy implementation 2005 –2008 Return New Zealand racing to what it was good at. Racing needs breeding programmes to re-establish New Zealand as a first tier country in racing. That means policies assisting importation of quality mares, and properly using the sire cost write down. Urgently review the operations and costs of the New Zealand Racing Board Continue to support projects and initiatives, e.g. the Racing Safety Development Fund (a contestable fund of $1.5 million per annum, matching dollar for dollar contributions from racing clubs) that enhances safety and improves the quality of facilities in the racing industry, including the safety of riders, handlers, spectators, officials and others involved in racing codes, as well as the health and safety of animals. Direct IRD and Treasury to respect the spirit of the laws passed to assist racing so we do not have specious departmental interpretations of laws that are clear to the industry. Further improve the appeal of the racing industry to a wider audience by encouraging the promotion of “family-friendly” activities in conjunction with race meetings in all codes. Defend the historic, modest share of the racing industry, to lawful gambling proceeds, against unreasonable attacks.

That's one hell of a story mustelid Businessman from the provinces - check Tall story - check Must be Winston on BOAY

Peters completely sidestepped the RB, NZTR, Harness and Greyhounds by going directly to Messara. He's just re-affirming he's in charge now

PETERS CONFIRMS RACING AMENDMENT BILL SCRAPPED Posted by Garrick Knight | Sep 28, 2018 | Harness, News The Racing Amendment Bill, better known as the ‘race fields’ legislation was withdrawn from Parliament on Thursday. Racing Minister Winston Peters confirmed the move when speaking at the annual New Zealand Harness Racing Conference, being held in Auckland, on Friday. “The Bill before parliament was withdrawn yesterday,” he said in response to a question on its progress. “The Bill wasn’t fit for type; it wasn’t going to address the real issues the racing industry needs addressing. “It was looking at one small aspect of it and we decided we need a complex piece of legislation as fast as possible. “There’s no use trying to do a half-pie job with a piece of legislation that wouldn’t have done the job properly.” The Bill, that sought to make numerous amendments to the Racing Act 2003 designed to improve the competitiveness of the New Zealand Racing Board’s betting operations, had been sitting in front of the Parliamentary Select Committee for a number of months. The move wouldn’t have come as any great surprise to harness racing administrators as Peters has already strongly alluded to the move in discussions when unveiling the Messara Report in Hamilton on August 30. But the New Zealand Racing Board’s CEO John Allen, who was present at the meeting, seemed blindsided by the news. “I didn’t know that before (Peters) said it,” said Allen in response to a question from the floor asking if Peters’ revelation was true. “It is a surprise and a disappointment. “We’ve been waiting now for a year for that. That legislation has been in front of Parliament for that period of time. “And while I understood the minister’s enthusiasm to do a whole lot of other things, I simply can’t understand why that legislation hasn’t progressed to being passed and put in place. “It would benefit us by about a million dollars a month. “It’s a surprise, it’s a disappointment, and I don’t doubt Shaun Brooks here, our CFO, is now thinking about our targets for this year because obviously we are not going to see any race fields money for this period.” Allen had just spoken passionately, almost defiantly, in defense of the Racing Board’s direction after Peters had previously criticised the Board’s results on August 30. National’s racing spokesman, Ian McKelvie, issued a statement later in the afternoon chastising Peters for the ‘race fields’ move and saying his Party was disappointed. “It would have had considerable financial benefit to New Zealand’s racing industry, “The Racing Amendment Bill took several years to develop and involved extensive consultation with the whole racing industry. “The Bill had the support of the whole industry and was set to provide a multi-million dollar injection into the racing and sporting codes, which would have flowed through to race stakes. “The Bill would have enabled the industry to receive approximately $1 million per month in extra revenue. “This extra revenue has already been delayed since late last year as the Minister initially postponed the Bill. “Now Mr Peters is making the industry wait even longer for that potential income.” Peters, Allen, NZRB Chairperson Glenda Hughes and Harness Racing New Zealand Chairman Ken Spicer were among those to speak to delegates from 44 clubs and associations from throughout the country. Outgoing HRNZ CEO Edward Rennell also joined Spicer, Allen and NZRB harness code nominee Rod Croon answering questions from the floor on numerous subjects primarily the contents and permutations of the Messara Report.

So come on, who are you guys going to front up with, we've already ruled out Paula, sorry the makeover just didn't cut it

Come on guys, isn't she just handling herself so well with those stick in the mud American TV hosts. All off the cuff, nothing rehearsed, hasn't looked like a chump when John did the pre-prepared 10 question thing. Come on, just admit it, she is handling herself with aplomb, even you one eyed right whingers(I used to be one) can see that

Here's a bit of irony. Avondale is racing at Avondale on Saturday. The track, whose sale will save the industry

Unfortunately Pete, I think you would be in a minority. The cacophony of bitterness and personal attacks, particularly from sites like WhaleOil, would only have been silenced had the petulant Nats got their way, and they didn't, and they would be better off addressing their energies at why not.

It has been a fortuitous circumstance in this case, for racing The Messara report Abolition of the Racing Board and the top heavy costs that have weighed the industry down Abolition of NZTR Hopefully all to be replaced with something that works for racing

So anyone got any thoughts on what the percentages should be. The Messara figs are great for Thoroughbred and would put another 30 mil in the kitty, but at what cost..... a splintered racing industry

That's true, 37% It never gave the Nats a mandate either(44%) So what do you do? The highest polling party has the first option to try and form a Govt???

Ok, we'll give you that, early in the new year Apart from the politics of governing, very interesting all this. Who could honestly put their hand on their heart and predicted Ardern would have become such a charismatic leader. I thought Andrew Little might do alright, then I thought Simon would do pretty good. Is there anyone lurking in the ranks of the Nats, who could blossom when elevated. After watching The Block the other night and seeing Paula Bennett, it won't be her

Distributions on average the last 5 years(Messara in brackets) Thorougbred 54%(67.2) Harness 30%(27.1) Dogs 16%(5.7) Why would anyone involved with greyhounds or harness support this

Isn't that ever the understatement of the decade. For the record Simon - won't last past Xmas, nice guy, no impact, for whatever reason Coalition - will go the 3 years Ardern - will continue to show her layers and remain PM for the full term Next election - mmmmmmmmmmmm, bit of a hard one that, but unless the Nats get off the bitter wagon, then probably another term for the coaltion

Could be a prob at the mo Chief, I don't think they have a track

Can you list what that ratio would be based on 17/18 data, compared with current S16 and the Messara report recos. I could probably find it, but you more than likely have the figs at hand somewhere

Put your name forward VS, you're a farmer, they are pretty level headed business folk

"A transition agency (Racing Industry Transition Agency or RITA) will be put in place to oversee racing's changing landscape and Peters did not try to hide his lack of faith in the New Zealand Racing Board structure and performance. "I know a dead horse when I see one," he quipped."

Curious, has done an excellent precis response to the 17 recommendations. In many cases, it is a matter of agreement in principle, because of the absence of more detail, which clearly will follow. It is not the intention to submit anything as a formal response, but feel free to comment or add in Recommendations 1. Change the governance structure, so the NZRB becomes Wagering NZ with racing responsibilities devolving to the individual Codes. This will sharpen the commercial focus of TAB operations and improve the decision-making and accountability of the Codes. Something along these lines possibly a good idea. Worth more detailed development. 2. Establish Racing NZ as a consultative forum for the three Codes to agree on issues such as entering into commercial agreements with Wagering NZ, approving betting rules and budgets for the integrity bodies, equine health & research, etc. Same as 1. 3. Change the composition and qualifications for directors of regulatory bodies. Yes, definitely needs sorting. Again, the devil is in the detail. 4. Request that a Performance and Efficiency Audit of the NZRB be initiated under section 14 of the Racing Act 2003, with particular emphasis on the operating costs of the NZRB. Absolutely. Required under current legislation anyway and overdue. The right reviewer and terms of reference to address some of the matters in this report is critical. 5. Amend the Section 16 distribution formula of the Racing Act 2003 to a more equitable basis for fixed 10-year terms. Don’t think the report makes a sensible case for this. Should remain proportionally based on domestic revenue generated. 6. Initiate a special review of the structure and efficacy of the RIU and allied integrity bodies, to be conducted by an independent qualified person. Yep. Probably should be devolved back to the codes. Has been a disaster as currently structured. Critical ingredient for increasing wagering revenue that integrity system is much more robust and reliable and seen to be so by punters. 7. Begin negotiations for the outsourcing of the TAB’s commercial activities to an international wagering operator, to gain the significant advantages of scale. Worth considering but detailed business case needs to be made alongside alternatives. In particular, retaining the tote business and making it globally competitive and licensing fixed odds operators in NZ (with a restriction on tote derivative products) should be considered. 8. Seek approval for a suite of new wagering products to increase funding for the industry. OK. But not likely to improve revenue. Adds to costs and unlikely to increase overall punter spend. 9. Confirm the assignment of Intellectual Property (IP) by the Clubs to the Codes. Don’t see the point in this. Clubs may be better to retain and control this themselves. Needs work and a better case made. Can club and community assets be co-opted legislatively or lawfully? 10. Introduce Race Field and Point Of Consumption Tax legislation expeditiously. These two measures will bring New Zealand’s racing industry into line with its Australian counterparts and provide much needed additional revenue. Race fields, yes of course. But legislation not required for arrangements with corporate bookmakers to be put in place as already demonstrated. RB estimates wildly out of kilter with the reliable research. DIA estimates more robust. I’d say might get to $3-5m net across all codes. PoC tax, nope. See DIA estimates that administrative costs may exceed revenue. Providers already paying a consumption tax in the form of GST. If implemented any net revenue should go to taxpayer not racing anyway. 11. Repeal the existing betting levy of approximately $13 million per annum paid by the NZRB, given that the thoroughbred Code is a loss maker overall, with the net owners’ losses outweighing the NZRB’s net profit. Nice if you can get it. Note that some $50m of duty relief previously granted has been wasted on stakes and operating costs. Industry didn’t do what they said they would with that so why should the taxpayer gift more to a declining industry, or any industry for that matter. Also, an equity matter with casinos betting duty. Probably politically unpalatable. 12. Clarify legislation to vest Race Club property and assets to the Code regulatory bodies for the benefit of the industry as a whole. Big NO. Can’t legislate to colonise community and club assets. Needs to occur voluntarily at the discretion of club members where clubs will no longer have raceday licences. They should decide whether assets are put to other uses in the community. Any reinvestment in racing will also mostly have to be in the same region. 13. Reduce the number of thoroughbred race tracks from 48 to 28 tracks under a scheduled program. This does not require the closure of any Club Yep. No brainer but the redevelopment of remaining tracks needs to occur first in order to have an infrastructure in place that can cope with the racing required. 14. Upgrade the facilities and tracks of the remaining racecourses with funds generated from the sale of surplus property resulting from track closures to provide a streamlined, modern and competitive thoroughbred racing sector capable of marketing itself globally. Yep to the upgrades but the business case for that needs to be funded from current and future revenue and be sustainable. 15. Construct three synthetic all-weather tracks at Cambridge, Awapuni & Riccarton with assistance from the New Zealand Government’s Provincial Growth Fund. Support the development of the Waikato Greenfields Project. Yep in principle. Again, the initial cost and ongoing maintenance needs to be funded from current and future revenue increases. The business case is not made in the report. Needs more detailed work. That should include comparison of synthetics with Strathayr for these AWTs. 16. Introduce robust processes to establish traceability from birth and the re-homing of the entire thoroughbred herd, as the foundation stone of the industry’s ongoing animal welfare program. Fine. 17. Increase thoroughbred prizemoney gradually to over $100 million per annum through a simplified three-tier racing model, with payments extended to tenth place in all races. Great but it is not clear where the revenue or cost savings to do that will come from other than some from the restructuring perhaps. Recommended changes as above will not on their own make the NZ racing product competitive or attract more wagering spend. That also requires, among other things, aligning the prizemoney structure more closely to revenue generated and having a fair and competitive handicapping system for starters.

What should change and what will change are 2 things that are well removed from each other

I think it is inappropriate that NZTR or RB has anything to do with implementation, commenting etc etc of the Messara report. AFTER ALL, Peter's went straight to Messara to get a report, and the report was back to him, therefore going over the top of all the people in charge at NZTR and NZRB. A clear vote of no confidence The report clearly signals the RB to be replaced by Wagering NZ, NZTR to be replaced by Racing NZ in conjunction with the 2 other codes. How much more of a message do those currently in charge need Many of the aspects of the report are non-negotiable, such as the 2 points above. Maybe a few changes in the venue plan, but that will be it

You appear also to be able to click on the support link as many times as you want??

Actually that is a very good point Chief. Saundry is the one who stopped the wagering turnover data, yet he is asking for the very people who are affected by the data for support???? It's a 2 way street, anyway, it does not really matter if people do not support the report, the only real area where support is relevant is the venue plan, and there is a lot of water to flow under that bridge yet....Avondale won't roll over without a fight

It's all pretty irrelevant, there are 2 main issues that I can see, that the stakeholders have very little influence over. 1. Can Avondale be sold and NZTR get the funds, to pay the 190 mil of refurbishments at the 28 remaining tracks to bring racing facilities up to modern standards. If they can't, then they fall well short of the figure. 2. Will outsourcing the TAB, and the other re-jigging, generate enough income each year and save enough costs each year, to make the model be self sustaining, at double the stakemoney level