Facts are greyhounds don't make the $$$ like thoroughbreds, even though they could produce similar injury stats.

If politicians were fair dinkum then they would ban drinking & smoking, get serious on catching drug dealers & paedophiles. They'd volunteer their services & work for the good of the community.

Unfortunately they are mostly greedy pricks who are looking to line their own pockets for as long as possible at the expense of their country & the taxpayers in it.

There is no honour amongst thieves & sadly I can't decipher between a thief & a politician in this day & age.

its simple you can watch a thief you cant watch a politician lol

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 117. A subject of the Queen, resident in any State, shall not be subject in any other State to any disability or discrimination which would not be equally applicable to him if he were a subject of the Queen resident in such other State.

Dan Hollywood wrote:

People laying down already, pathetic.

The podcast is about 22 Minutes long and can be found via the link.

Hehehehe.

The fine for illegally racing a greyhound will be around $15,000. I don't know if they have banned afgan hound, fox terrier or whippet racing. Maybe its not harmful in their eyes if it amateur racing so maybe a few amateur races would be Ok.

Greyhounds love to race, it's a natural expression of their instincts.

But the ACT gutless government think after studying the hearsay evidence and non conviction of live baiters in NSW think that its better to be safe than sorry and ban the racing side of the greyhound industry.

Live baiting is illegal in Australia, they don't use live, dead or any non synthetic lures at race tracks. So the gutless ACT government who need to keep the two Greens on side decided its time to stamp out racing.

I feel sorry for those addicted to racing, if only they were addicted to drugs the Greens would set up pill testing and safe injecting rooms to help them out.

My second point is that I disagree with the comment about it being a great track. It can be improved substantially, especially but not only the 440m start.

The club is going to get some compensation. Consequently, while continuing to make a noise I would be quietly organising a Queanbeyan track - they had one once and can do it again. The whole joint is 90% NSW aligned anyway.

"Australia's cartel-like political parties drag down democracy - turning Australia into a democracy without the people."

The excerpts below have been taken from
(What is Democracy?)
Lecture at Hilla University for Humanistic Studies
January 21, 2004
"I. Democracy as a Political System of Competition for Power

Democracy is a means for the people to choose their leaders and to hold their leaders accountable for their policies and their conduct in office.

The people decide who will represent them in parliament, and who will head the government at the national and local levels. They do so by choosing between competing parties in regular, free and fair elections.

In a democracy, the people are sovereignthey are the highest form of political authority.
Power flows from the people to the leaders of government, who hold power only temporarily.
Laws and policies require majority support in parliament, but the rights of minorities are protected in various ways.
The people are free to criticize their elected leaders and representatives, and to observe how they conduct the business of government.
Elected representatives at the national and local levels should listen to the people and respond to their needs and suggestions."

p.s. are there many greyhound participants/workers/associated businesses in the ACT? That would be interesting to know the stats.

n.b. Greens in QLD want 4 extra public holidays - one for tree planting I think, I am sure I didn't hear one for a grand greyhound racing day?

Yes quite true Bruce but if you check the date of my posts, you'll notice they were made BACK in JUNE & not NOVEMBER...which would certainly NOT make it "Old News", as you state.

Honest mistake I gather mate because at the time it was hot-off-the-press ;-)

I take your point that various things are happening as time moves on but the basic decision was made at the last local election when a majority of elected members chose to dump on greyhound racing. A deal was done when the Greens made it a condition of their support for Labor. Nominally, that was democracy - horrible though it was.

The issue then becomes whether that decision could be challenged in law. No doubt the club has had some legal advice but so did the Alliance in NSW yet they decided not to go down the legal road for whatever (unknown) reasons. In practice, it was politics (votes) that influenced the withdrawal of the NSW ban, prompted by widespread but not universal public opposition - including from some government MPs. Baird eventually realised he had a tiger by the tail and so baled out - albeit leaving behind him a complex mess that could well cause severe harm to the NSW industry.

There is other precedent. When the former GRA cancelled Cessnock's licence - following years of investigation and review - the club hired a lawyer and fought the decision. It still lost and sent the club bankrupt - to eventually by baled out by the same GRA but still never to race again. I have no idea of the nature of that legal advice but it was certainly crook from a business viewpoint as it had no valid justification for knocking back the umpire's decision. The GRA had proceeded carefully and at length in taking action and it made its decision for good reasons (I don't much like a lot of what the GRA did but in the end it acted correctly from an administrative and policy angle in the interests of the overall industry).

The Canberra club faced a similar dilemma but considered itself hard done by (true) and elected to fight in the courts (doubtful) on the advice of lawyers. If they win there the club will continue racing but will be hopelessly broke. If they lose they will still be broke but also will not have the ability to move house and start again (ie to Queanbeyan or wherever).

It all comes down to the odds on a win in the courts. Their case is thin and will rest on some sort of unfair/unjust application of the government's authority. But the judge will not be able to rule on the basis of the Green's emotional opposition to racing or to its general stupidity. Only the application of the law comes into it.
Not being a lawyer or knowing the ACT law I am not really qualified to assess that. However, given what I do know (and what the government's lawyers would know) I would guess the club's odds of success are no better than 10/1. If that is true then they are mugs not to take the compensation money and run. That would be the sensible business decision.

Does a victory give the Greens greater influence elsewhere? Possibly, but 90% of the Australian public are already well aware of their idiotic and impractical policies (unlimited immigration, no coal to power your lights, Di Natali's four hour work day to reduce unemployment, and so on). So it also encourages an anti-Green vote, which would be a very good thing.

It's a pity because I have always enjoyed by visits to Canberra despite its mediocre track layout and annoying light poles. But the sandwiches and fruit cake were excellent and they had real bookmakers.

Rich.

The fundamental issue was whether the industry needed and could afford both Cessnock and Maitland. GRA dithered for years (not unusual). GRA talked and talked and then commissioned an independent report (or Minister Face did) by a supposedly independent Newcastle firm (also well known to Face). That report had more holes in it than a Swiss cheese and it was ambiguous. After some editing it did support Cessnock closure, despite - please note - Cessnock being a Labor (Face) electorate and Maitland generally Liberal.

Then and with hindsight, I think that was a correct decision although I have to say neither place has great facilities.

The key is the GRA went to a lot of trouble and then - as the responsible authority - made a decision. For the unlucky club to then appeal the decision was crazy (irrespective of whatever their lawyer told them). The judge agreed. Cessnock went broke.

Yes, at the time membership of the GRA board was dubious in many and also dubious was the later decision to carve up the Wyong/Singleton/Newcastle licenses - in part influenced by the NCA agreement to give up Wenty. Sadly, it did not appear to improve the industry when the board was later filled with (allegedly) independent people. In fact, every member had some previous association with racing or greyhounds.

The Cessnock closure was justified for a number of reasons ....

* Maitland is better located in respect to the public.
* Cessnock has a very small local population.
* The loam at Maitland is more reliable than the grass at Cessnock (never mind the die-hards who said grass is the only way to go, but then busily race their dogs at loam tracks).
* On a cold and wintry night, Cessnock is a horror.
* Race vision is poor at Cessnock (too far away).
* Cessnock had no trip start so the timing was always different to other tracks. Dog's noses??
* On the plus side, Cessnock had very good crumbed cutlets.
* All the above plus two tracks offering essentially the same product was never sensible.
* Maitland is capable of development - although it hasn't been.

But, yes, it is the politician's fault. They wish it would all go away. And no, using a committee of management will never work well. The only thing worse is a public servant in charge.

The costs to the industry?

1. Loss of a needed straight track at Wyong.
2. Loss of a strategically located track at Singleton - the feed-in from a huge area of the state and the location of many of the highest paid residents in the state. Certainly needed redevelopment but the potential and its usefulness were there.
3. Further problems at Beaumont Park ended up with a trainer's strike and together with SKY problems caused a 25% drop in TAB income for the region.
4. Squillions sorting out Newcastle (do you know the NJC offered Beaumont Park to GRA, GBOTA and NCA for $3m as is - all knocked it back).
5. And, of course, the law eventually caught up with Face.

How much of that would have occurred with a competent businessman in charge? None.