What has the greyhound industry learned from the ban?
IT has been a tumultuous year for the sport of greyhound racing in New South Wales.
Things seemed to be looking up following on from the live baiting scandal in 2015. A wide range of reforms were introduced to optimise animal welfare and integrity conditions and participants became more aware of the requirements needed for the sport to meet community expectations.
Breeding was down, rehoming was up, and yet none of this was taken into consideration on July 7 when Mike Baird announced his government's plan to shut down the sport.
Looking back, I don't think there is anyway the Premier could have known what an enormous impact his announcement would have.
The son of a politician, Mr Baird lives in a different world to greyhound folk, and paired with his cohort of north shore Liberals and inner city Greens, how could they relate to the day-to-day lives of the industry's battlers?
Teamed with this, the Special Commission of Inquiry report was damning, especially to those who had no reason to believe it was prejudiced.
Imagine not knowing anything about an industry and then being told of those horrific figures – up to 70 per cent wastage and as many as 68,000 dogs killed over the past 12 years.
Since then, the industry has been able to prove bias within the report and discredit many of those figures, however when your government spends 15 months and $15 million on a report, Baird was doomed to insult, no matter what his next move was.
Deputy Premier Troy Grant's move to back the Premier was painful for the industry. As the leader of the Nationals, Grant should have stood up for his regional constituents, however it was left to three brave Nats MPs to cross the floor in August in order to send a message to the government that it's decision was the wrong one.
Thankfully, the industry was able to rally, and with public and political pressure, the Premier backflipped on his original decision. But where to next?
When announcing the reversal on October 11, the Premier also confirmed the establishment of a newly-formed Greyhound Industry Reform Panel.
Made up of five members, only one of those is from the greyhound industry (the GBOTA's Brenton Scott), with the others being from the RSPCA, the Department of the Premier, the Department of Primary Industries and, of course, former Premier Morris Iemma.
But can the industry feel safe with these people in charge?
The RSPCA celebrated the announcement that the industry was being banned back in July, whilst the day after the reversal was made official, another message was shared on the group's Facebook page, urging the Premier to ‘Bring Back the Ban'.
Since then, this post has been deleted and replaced with another message from RSPCA NSW CEO Steve Coleman announcing he will be a part of the panel.
However, part of this post also expressed disappointment in the change in policy.
Whilst agreeing that animal welfare needs to be front and centre for the industry moving forward, how can the sport reform with people working on the inside who have publicly campaigned against it?
It would be like employing a vegan to manage a knackery — personal beliefs are always going to create a bias — it just won't work.
The panel needed an independent person who is passionate about animal welfare, not an animal rights organisation such as the RSPCA — there is a big difference.
In essence, animal welfare ensures living creatures are cared for following a range of humane guidelines – whereas animal rights dictates animals cannot be used for food, clothing or entertainment – no matter how well they are nurtured.
It's hard to believe the RSPCA will ever do anything other than condemn greyhound racing – no matter how many reforms are successfully undertaken.
And yet the organisation has now been tethered to the industry.
Add this to the fact that the industry has one representative up against two government appointed members, one former Premier and an anti-racing mob.
It's four against one from the outset and it is arguable the sole agent for the dishlickers isn't even a true representative for the entire cross section of greyhound racing.
While Brenton Scott has done a fine job campaigning for the ban to be overturned as a part of the NSW Greyhound Racing Industry Alliance, at the end of the day he is the CEO of the NSW Greyhound Breeders, Owners and Trainers Association (GBOTA).
While it is a member-based association, the GBOTA's main responsibility is managing a selection of racetracks – so where does the individual fit into the equation? Who will look after the trainers, owners and participants, particularly those not linked to the GBOTA, and make sure their thoughts and ideas are taken into consideration?
And what about transparency? Will the industry and public have any idea in regards to what is being discussed about the industry before recommendations and restrictions are decided upon? Or will we just have to deal with what we are dealt?
The industry has not had a racing board since it was removed following the live baiting scandal. I understand the structure of the sport may change dramatically at the end of the panel's work, but in the interim we should have one to protect the needs of the whole industry, not just a sector, and this board should have been represented on the panel to ensure every man, woman and greyhound had their interests covered.
Don't get me wrong, I am very thankful that the industry has been given another crack and I do think things need to change, particularly in regards to animal welfare and integrity.
However, I am very concerned about what has been set in place already and what will be decided for the future.
Call me a pessimist, call me a troublemaker, but it would be wrong for me to sit back and say nothing when I hold these concerns.
By speaking out, I hope to send a message that the industry is tired of being walked over.
Here's hoping the government is finally ready to listen.
and it needs to reform. many may disagree,but a one strike on severe drugs introduction,and you should be outed permanately. we have given to many chances to many,and certainly some appear to flaunt the rules quite regularly.and the rulers bow down to legal pressure to often.make it impossible to survive any appeals if administering severe drugs.and you all kinow what that entails. they are not thinking of every other person in the industry at the time of administering,so why should we bother about their feelings when they are caught. and do not forget the dog. the dog is the first… Read more »
spyman Reform was under way under the direction of the Grnsw reform manager Wayne Billitt and they where starting to take effect, and as usual some didn’t like it. Then out of the blue Baird and Grant torpedoes the reform process and gives the industry 12 months to live .WHY, you tell me? there had to be another agenda but what. Then came people power and Jones and Hadley on their case, and then Baird and Grant bunged a big back flipp and all the Alliance wanted to do was to get into court . The courts were not going… Read more »
Kath Another great post, like the rest of us ,we are concerned about the people put in place deciding our future and we should be !
Spyman I think it is obvious we are more than willing to reform and have already done so and willing to do more- however Coleman is not a person who should be on the reform panel. If you supported a ban that would result in 19000 greyhounds ending up on death row you are not concerned about the welfare of greyhounds. When an ABC reporter asked him why so few dogs were rehomed and why their website rarely had any ” homes wanted” his response was ” we have more important things to do” It is obvious these important things… Read more »
Deborah555 Deborah My suspicious mind tells me that this Coleman fellow has no principal at all. Baird and Grant through him under the Bus when they decided to do a back Flipp now why would one want to get back on the bus that just run over you? What it tells me is a promise of another Back Flipp on the Ban come February once Orange is out of the way. A insider told us that only 10% of their income goes to caring of Animals, are we surprised i don’t think so . now is the Time to put… Read more »
Invite Dracula to be on the Board of the Blood Bank? Having a complete anti greyhound RSPCA member on this panel is a recipe for disaster and must not be allowed to happen
Great very great reading wi tg h almost all my concerns
Your a mind reader
Kat, we need to start with the language. Animal welfare = animal rights, which is why people in the bush who work with animals use the term ANIMAL HUSBANDRY. We have to aspire to best practice animal husbandry, not welfare, as this tells the politicians and the public that the animals are working dogs, part of a rural based industry, and not an animal bred for the sole intention of being a pet. As anyone who knows me will confirm, i’ve kept a large number of pet greyhounds, and placed dozens into GAP programs over the past 20 years, so… Read more »
jeff holland not so sure in TODAYS word speak,that an argument defending welfare issues and speak,will win over who we are supposed to.i agree in principal what you decipher,but unfortunately in todays world,whether we agree or not,we have to ADJUST even if its just to please. in our dog world,a dog is a dog, not a human. but we show our respect in our own manner. I do. I read somewhere where a activist stated that dogs do not recognize cuddling as an emotion like a human may. what crap. all my dogs love hugs and scratches and one in… Read more »
Just to cut to the chase, The inter code agreements tie the racing codes and the Government into the float reforms of 1998. The consequent legislation includes section 21 (a) of the TAB Act which is headed the Commercial Arrangements with the Racing Industry. The Major Racing Club in NSW Greyhounds is expressed as the NSW GBOTA. So unless the Government is willing to unpick the inter code agreement then the GBOTA have a legitimate right to represent Greyhound Racing. This brings us to the point of how greyhound racing should deal with the GBOTA. There are several options. 1.… Read more »
My fear now is that Baird is playing us like a grand piano.
My question is and i’m sure many others are asking, is the court case on our constitutional standing still going ahead or has it been abandoned post Bairds back flip? We need to keep the pressure up and be kept informed.
BobWhitelaw Deborah555 I think his interest is a well paid job now with the additional perks of a spot on the review and reform panel. I am not sure what the salary of the CEO of the RSPCA is but I would imagine with expenses quite considerable combined with the lurks and perks of a spot on the board looking pretty. Plus all the press and attention and if he refuses it insults the government. He has done a dummy spit to appeal to the activists but now back to looking after himself. I don’t think Baird would reverse the reverse of… Read more »
BobWhitelaw PS we need to keep protesting and putting the pollies under pressure.
My sentiments If Baird has been ‘BORN AGAIN’ a man who is truly repent full would have parliament in there straight away and delete the Greyhound prohibition bill as quickly as it was made OVERNIGHT. If he waits and does nothing until after the Orange by election. Does nothing over xmas and the new year and lets the Nationals gather some credence of respectability back with their supporters. Does NOTHING and lets the public start to forget his attempted arrogant stand over tactics over the Greyhound Industry. Does nothing in February March next year. Delay any repeal of the Prohibition… Read more »
differentview Whilst I think we need to continue to protest and pressure the pollies – if Baird did that his political career would be over and I doubt he wants that. Even if he woos back Nationals if he tried that stunt again they would turn on him even more he would not risk that it would split the coalition . None of this is about welfare it is about votes. The nationals are not just concerned about greyhounds but attack on country life by activists which if they win on this one threatens other industries . He has currently just had a… Read more »
differentview PS what we need is to demand an industry person is on the Board and Coleman replaced by a welfare not activist person.
lone widow PS, It would be of huge political advantage to us if it was determined now that we had a constitutional right to exist.
PS, It would be a huge political advantage to us if it was determined now that we had a constitutional right to exist.
I can’t help but feel it would be a huge political advantage to us if the court case proved we had a constitutional right to exist.
I agee
Get that Constitution ruling done if its in your favour.
Regards him worrying about the publics vote ha
They aren’t needed till 2019.
Lots of opportunities for him to curray favour with them six months out from the state election.
I would hope most on here that comment are savy regards politicians and how the elections and goverments work since the creation of democracy.
Deborah555 differentview Agree, Just on the pressure on the Government. What do people think about the Orange Bi Election Betting. Only one betting company has up the odds. The main components are Nats .40c Labor and The Shooters . A 22% swing is needed to beat the Nats and the seat has been in the Country Party/Nationals since the second world war. What is interesting is the contest between Labor and the Shooters. I would give the Shooters a slight edge to beat Labor as the Labor vote has been traditionally low. How do you think that the Shooters V Labor… Read more »
jeff holland You can pretend that animals don’t deserve to have their welfare protected all you want, but you’re not offering any argument as to why. They are sentient, they feel pain, they suffer, and if the only justification you have for inflicting pain and suffering on animals is profit, then you’re in a pretty weak position. You either have to deny that they feel pain and suffer, which is to go against every piece of scientific evidence we have on the issue, or you have to acknowledge that they do feel pain and suffer. If you acknowledge that then… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland Hugh, everyone accepts that animals including humans feel pain. I will make an uneducated guess and say that 93% of the world population is omnivorous, the remaining 7% are either vegan or vegetarian??? It’s also been scientifically shown that plants react to being threatened or destroyed in some way, do they feel pain? No living thing animal or plant wants to die. Having said that, if 93% of the people said to you that you must stop eating vegetables, would you? Assuming your reply to that is rubbish!!! Why then should the 93% omnivorous majority listen to the… Read more »
Your a clown hugh You put words down and interpret things that have not been said. You state FACTS ghat are nothing if any but oppinions from EXPERTS like the EXPERTS that made up lies to tell the McHugh report. You waste your time here and i am wastin v my time responding to your trivia. To me your like a piece of chewing gum that sticks to your shoe and it annoys the fuck out of you until it scrapes off. When you have more understanding of animals in general and gain some knowledge of animal husbandry AND LIFE.… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland Hugh, when you come back to this forum and report that you and your friends have wiped out cruelty between animals, then i’ll take your sorry little excuse for a reply seriously, for the world doesnt work that way. Nature is cruel in both tooth and claw, we dont need science to tell us that when animals are torn apart, eaten alive, they suffer. But that suffering ends with their death, its part of the circle of life. Now you can continue with your childish worldview, try to imply a sense of guilt with use of the word… Read more »
lone widow Hugh_ jeff holland My point was that people should provide an argument for their position. If someone said that I should stop eating plants, I would say “why?” and I would listen to their argument. If their argument had merit, and I could not fault their logic, then I would stop eating plants. However since we feed plants to farm animals, and since you have to feed a lot more plants to an animal to get the same amount of energy from their flesh as you would just eating the plants to begin with, the best way to kill less… Read more »
Hugh_ lone widow jeff holland
How do you know that plants don’t have brains Hughie?
BJoe Hugh_ lone widow jeff holland The same way I know you don’t have leaves. Because we have studied the anatomy of plants, animals, and other organisms for centuries.
Hugh_ BJoe lone widow jeff holland
Once again Hughie…’F*ck off this website.
jeff holland Hugh_ Firstly, I don’t believe in fate, there’s no good reason to suspect that every event is predetermined. As for your nature is cruel argument, you are essentially saying that because animals are cruel to each other, it is ok for us to be cruel to them. You say we have no obligation to be more ethical than animals because they are not ethical. The problem is you are almost certainly a hypocrite as soon as you claim this. Animals eat and kill other species, as well as their own species. They rape their own species, and also rape… Read more »
spyman Spyman, we have already commenced the reform process. We’re limiting the number of pups bred, we have kennel inspections, vets at tracks on trial days, GRNSW keeps tabs of dogs euthised and a host of other reforms. What is sticking in the craw of the likes of Baird and Coleman, not to mention Hughie, is the number put to sleep. We all keep 2 or 3 as pets, but realistically, racing of all pursuasions, is a ‘numbers’ game. We all want that ‘good one’ to come along. Horse racing is the same. Winks, Chataqua and a host of others.… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland Hugh what will eventually result in the lowering of meat consumption is not animal activism but the simple economic reality that it is expensive to produce. While the human population continuously grows the amount of land to produce food not only stays the same but is being used for other activities. In a lot of countries meat is either a luxury already or rarely on the menu. You can feed far more people growing grain on a set amount of land than you can raising animals. intensive farming of animals has been the answer but eventually that will not… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland Hugh, I have not come up with the ultimate argument against the animal rights/welfare/liberation lobby, no such argument exists, as nobody can frame such an argument against rank hypocrisy and stupidity. Look at what you eat, what you wear, what machines you use, what services you enjoy, and if any of those are produced by countries/peoples whose animal welfare standards by being below those of Australia allow them to do so at a lower cost than is possible in Australia, then you, like the rest of your corrupt ideologues share in the profit that comes from exploiting animals… Read more »
lone widow
Too right. We need it and we need it soon.
differentview Hi Different view sorry I thought that the act was not assented but it has been assented but not proclaimed,(or not acted upon in sections) It is required under rhe standing orders of the legislative council to be included on the 90 days list of un proclaimed legislation and the reasons for this happening.. Some legislation have been on the lost for up to six years. The Parliament sits next month and the Orange Bi Election is half way through the sitting session. You have every right to be suspicious of the delay in the repeal of the legislation… Read more »
Deborah555 Hugh_ jeff holland What will or won’t result in the elimination of meat consumption ins a tangent to the conversation, so i won’t respond to that, we’ve debated on many occasions the merits of activism. I will however address the claim that humans are the only species that regularly kill their own. This is completely false, and I’m not sure where you got that information from. Google “animal infanticide” and start reading for many examples of animals that kill and often eat the young of their own species. Lions are the most popularly known examples, but there are many others, including… Read more »
jeff holland Hugh_ Look at what I eat and wear? I don’t eat animals or animal products (though I do eat bivalves because they don’t have brains), and I don’t wear animal products. I don’t use cosmetics or cleaners that are tested on animals or have animal ingredients. As for my use of a computer, you’re saying that I should boycott products that come from countries that don’t adequately protect animal welfare. I find that a little ridiculous. China has an animal rights movement, the country as a whole is decades behind the west in this regard, but there are people… Read more »
Why would you not have a representative from the racing ministers department on the committee? I thought it would be a priority for a government that admitted it got it wrong, unless of course they are distancing themselves from any blame when the new rules do their dirty work for them.
Hugh_ lone widow jeff holland Hugh I think that you and others are motivated by a perception that greyhound people regard the current dispute as allowing them business as usual. I do not think that this correct. Jeff makes the point that language is very important, it is. The evolution of the law on the prevention of cruelty to animals evolves in NSW to a definition of un-necessary cruelty and in the legislative framework un-necessary allows us to look for better conduct in the way we treat animals for our purpose. The viability of any enterprise depends on the cost and effect… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland So you’re only a little pregnant! The problem with arguing the animal rights ideology is that nobody can cast the first stone, we all share in the sins of others. But if you read your post, you’re not far from what many greyhound people say, they care, and take care of their dogs, they do their best for them, they are not perfect. The same is true of the other animal industries as well, people in general are kind and caring towards the animals in their charge, and practice the major tenet of animal husbandry, everyday is a… Read more »
jeff holland Hugh_ Go to a high intensity piggery and tell me that the systems in place are “generally kind and caring” or that “every day is a good day for the animal, except for the last day”. I don’t deny that there are caring greyhound owners, never have. I have a philosophical objection to exploiting animals for profit. But putting that to one side, the view of yours that I am arguing against is that animal welfare should be of no concern, and that profit alone serves as a justification for this. Whether an animal is a “pet” or a… Read more »
John Tracey Hugh_ lone widow jeff holland I have no disagreement with any of that John, and I do not think that the greyhound industry assumes it will be business as usual now that this ban is lifted. To be perfectly honest, while I would have preferred the sport to remain banned, I always considered Baird’s stance to be largely untenable in light of various political and media forces. It does seem likely that the welfare standards will be lifted significantly, hopefully that proves to be the case. I was simply arguing against the views of Jeff when it comes to animal welfare… Read more »
Hugh_ Deborah555 jeff holland the examples you gave are not the normal behavioural patterns for these animals. No I am not arguing that it is right for interspecies killing just that it happens more than killing members of your own species. My statement about humans stands it is just my cynical view of humanity.
Hugh_ jeff holland PS Hugh I could refute all the arguments about your examples but this is a greyhound racing site and others want to talk about those issues.
Well I’m sorry, your wrong. These behaviours I described are normal and common. I’m certainly not denying that humans are the most cruel species, to our own kind and others, I don’t think anyone could deny that. But many other species kill their own kind as a matter of routine. Not sure why you’re in denial of that. At least look it up. I would have thought the lion example was common knowledge, it’s extremely well documented. I don’t usually use Wikipedia as a source but it’s appropriate in this case because it has many examples in a single article.… Read more »
Deborah555 Hugh_ jeff holland Also I wasn’t claiming that any of the species I mention kill their own more than others. That’s obviously not true of carnivores, but that doesn’t make killing their own “abnormal”. Lions will kill and eat hundreds or even thousands of prey of other species in their lifetime (depending on how long they live). By comparison lions will have relatively few offspring in their lifetime. This does not make having offspring “abnormal” just less frequent. Obviously reproduction is normal behaviour. Similarly, infanticide by lions may occur much less frequently than the killing of other prey, but it is… Read more »
lone widow Are you suggesting that we should go along with business as usual, if the answer is yes, then we will certainly be regulated out of business. The Government has cured the situation by proposing to repeal the legislation, the matter has been complicated by us not knowing why the repeal has not taken place already. If the Government had have been interested in animal welfare in racing in the past they would have at least required the clubs standards to have the below clause inserted into the clubs constitutions as a requirement to receive public funding. My submission… Read more »
Hugh_ lone widow jeff holland Hugh , it is legitimate to argue in the extreme but the certain defences against the rules (legislation) on animal cruelty are contained in section 24. The greyhound administration and policy comes under various rules (legislation). The defence that financial defences negate some animal rights embedded in it. The greyhound governance involves sets of rules both by stature and by domestic “contract”.and also this includes the common law and in the case of domestic tribunals (including greyhound associations) unwritten customs. I think that you might be referring to unwritten customs and to ethical considerations which are important… Read more »
Hugh_ John Tracey lone widow jeff holland Hugh, My reply below was not to your post re you have no disagreement etc. so I need to further reply. I need to declare that I am engaged in a project authorised by the Alliance Group and on behalf of the Country Clubs Association which have a majority of what are referred to as community clubs. The project argued in the alternative that if it was found that a social licence breaches proved to be a legitimate ground for disqualifying greyhound racing as a whole in NSW then the clubs qualified under the charity conditions… Read more »
Hugh_ jeff holland Hugh, yes it is logically inconsistent, but the real inconsistency is with our wealthy elite. In practice our wealthy treat animals and people the same, those we treasure receive a lot more protection than those we dont. You are basing your arguments on ethics, which as a human construct is flawed. Surely a quick study of several thousand years of arguing religious ideology would be enough to make you question the validity of the ideology surrounding animal rights? What one group of people believe isnt a strong foundation for arguing how all people should act. Animal rights is… Read more »