curious

Since when and by whom?

I'm not actually clear why this case would even be referred to the coroner. It's not like there is any question as to the cause of death.

Correct. s74 applies to the Coroner (only) when they conduct an inquest and prevents them making public any evidence gathered during the course of that inquiry. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the RIB or any evidence they may have gathered in the course of their own inquiry.

I don't think moderation is necessarily censorship. However, it is if it is used to prevent posters posting on topics which the moderator has unilaterally decided can't be talked about at that media outlet. But who knows what goes on behind closed doors? I wonder what might have happened had the controversial topic been raised for discussion here.

Yes. My error. Thanks for the correction. There are two official languages in Aotearoa New Zealand – Māori and New Zealand Sign Language. These were established by the Māori Language Act 1987 and the New Zealand Sign Language Act 2006

Yep. Got the first horse I trained from him. Top bloke and very good horseman. Had wondered where he was.

What is Te Kāpehu Whētu then?

I might add that te reo Maōri is not a secondary language. It is an official language of New Zealand as is English (and New Zealand Sign Language). At least equal statutorily and if anything primary given its widespread use preceded English here.

When it comes to language, yes it does. Those who speak and are the kaitiaki of the language are surely the authorities on its use.

I completely disagree. Those attempting to and practising getting it right should be applauded not denigrated. Most Māori I know would agree with me.

Really? I think if everyone stuck to saying what is natural rather than what is respectful, it would be a very unpleasant place to be.

Oh true. I wonder where the 25 million increase will come from then given last season's profit was only 154 million?

Interesting. Their July end of month report says full year distributions 175 million. Do you think he hasn't read that?

And was back on horseback as recently as June this year.

They'd be better to demolish that building and fix the public stand from a racing perspective. That and the embankment in front are now way the best viewing point for the new AWT as well and great sight of the birdcage too.

Grass roots would be a good start. Not many of those left on most NZ courses.

Totally agree. They've had 10 years to do that. Now the only option they offer is to leave it to decay. . The only decent race viewing point remaining at Riccarton with the now tiring newer members stand set so far back from the course. Even better viewing now with the big screen there as well. A travesty.

Maybe true but what grandstands you have should be at the best viewing points. As far as tracks are concerned, the CJC has not spent a cent on a track that was totally screwed by a now 30 year old renovation and probably should have been redone straight away. The directive for that and insurance matters should have come from the board. They surely can't just leave that stand there decaying if the demolition is not approved. Some provision should have been made for that possibility.

I was interested to read the Victoria end of season review of AWT racing and their future plans for that. https://www.racing.com/news/2022-08-31/news-industry-synthetic-season-by-the-numbers It seems they intend to continue reducing AWT programming primarily because of participant preferences for more grass racing instead. In similar climatic conditions it also seems likely that a reapplication of binder and wax will be required here after 3 years of use in order to mitigate the kick back issues. It also seems that full resurfacing is likely to be required after 6 or 7 years rather than the 10 years mooted. To date, I am yet to see from NZTR or the clubs concerned, any sort of plan as to how this maintenance will be funded. It seems likely that Victoria may replace the AWTs with second grass tracks as part of a 10 year plan, certainly in the Pakenham case. It would be interesting to know if NZTR might have similar plans here for the Riccarton and Awapuni ones and if they similarly expect to reduce the AWT racing in the intermediate term. The Victoria experience and strategy seem like a good model to follow for that. In the mean time, the AWTs should continue to provide a decent surface for trackwork, trials and racing for another couple of years.

Correction. The above should read: a staggering increase of nearly 23% year on year in what punters are spending with overseas providers on NZ racing.

One of the striking (and worrying) things here is that BIUC distributions have gone from 18.5m to 22.7m, a staggering increase of nearly 23% year on year in what NZ based punters are spending with overseas providers. That makes it little surprise that punter spend with NZTAB is down dramatically and the above has occurred in the very same conditions that they are using to excuse their performance.

I'm not sure their core business is what you suggest. It seems to me that for the past couple of decades their core business has been sourcing other revenue streams to subsidise what was their core business, pretty much the opposite of the OZ model. The ATR approach is an extension of that.

Meanwhile, back in the CD, the Foxton trials have been moved to the Awapuni AWT