Mark, I don't think there has been an amount settled on yet.I doubt if $500 will be the figure.

I will get back to you. Too big a question for a quickie response.

Is that a best guess or Chineese Whispers?

Only last week the official statement from GWIC was and I quote;

Point 7- John Keniry spoke about the Bond and it will be introduced unless the Governments decision can be changed and a model is being developed. "It is important to clarify that the Greyhound Industry Reform Panel, led by Morris Iemma recommended the creation of a modest, upfront bond paid by the breeder and ongoing annual payments paid by the owner. The Government accepted this recommendation. No decisions have been made yet about the amount or terms of the bond".

Thank you Bruce, it may be the template for a very successful revival - most are screaming ACTION, but with no solution "how to"!

Yep I too want action, but I have no idea at the moment "how to" and it doesn't look like those we are depending do either!

Whats your opinion on the puppy bond ? Do you agree with it ?

Does the Hunter Valley Trainers Forum (200 trainers, but a closed group) have an opinion ?

The GWIC Committee has met twice so there is no doubt they have discussed the puppy bond.

Im opposed to the Bond

So your $500 has no fact behind it!

As for the group ask them their are plenty of them on here.

I read it elsewhere that the $500 is the amount, but Ill wait until GWIC announces it.
What are you doing about the puppy bonus ?

Gary,

I got involved in this discussion purely on the basis of procedures, processes and politics, not because of greyhound care and welfare issues (which are beyond my reach). I did so because of my dismay at the variety of conflicting and pointless comments on these pages. I come from decades of dealing with Ministers, Shadow Ministers, Department Heads, Royal Commissions, Parliamentary Inquiries, racing inquiries, Productivity Commissions, government/business committees of all shapes and sizes, and consultancies to two state governments and the Commonwealth Parliament, amongst others. (Most of the above is on record, as is my name).

So here is a brief sketch of what might happen.

PREAMBLE

We are now at a stage where we have won a battle but are losing the war. The enemy is the government and several bureaucracies, as stirred by Greens, anti-racing groups and much of the public. They are armed with histories of past greyhound abuses, reinforced by the commonality of the problem in two adjacent states. We are armed with moans and groans from individuals ie nothing meaningful. We have no platform to stand on. We have no friends, not even in the racing game. That should not be a surprise as we have never sought any. The result is that we are not getting a fair go and that should be our banner cry. Here are the bones of a campaign.

FAIR GO (other suggestions welcome)

Principle #1
The greyhound is one of the wonders of the animal world because ..

Principle #2
Humans run to beat time
Horses are urged to run
Greyhounds are born to run

(pinched from an old GBOTA poster)

Principle #3
Greyhound racing is a major contributor to employment, economic activity, recreation and social cohesion throughout NSW, paying many millions in taxes. More than X thousand are directly involved and many times that in associated areas.

Principle #4
The industry is a strong and professional supporter of animal welfare, providing superior care and attention to health and husbandry compared to other conventional pet or animal groups

Principle #5
Yes, the industry has made mistakes in the past but has learnt from them (contrary to misleading claims in the McHugh Inquiry report), brought in enhanced controls and removed offenders from the ranks. No walk of life is free of evil doers but the greyhound industry is aware of the past faults of a minority and has taken remedial action.

Principle #6
Government reactions over the past two years have been based on incorrect data and faulty assumptions, frequently spoken by people with little or no knowledge of the industry or those with erratic and ideological biases.

Principle #7
The industry is now being faced with regulations and government-imposed costs which are excessive, officious and discriminatory by comparison with other racing codes and other animal groups including household pets.

Principle #8
An immediate review of the efficiency and efficacy of government controls over the industry is essential to restore a level playing field. The alternative is a progressive decline in the size and profitability of the NSW industry and wholesale shifts of activity to neighbouring states, particularly from close-border areas. Related downturns will occur in activities revolving around the use of community-owned showgrounds and multi-purpose racetrack facilities.

Principle # 9
The McHugh Report, on which government relied, was flawed in the extreme in that it used faulty data, it chose witnesses selectively, it quoted irrelevant and obsolete evidence, it did not allow cross examination of critical evidence and displayed bias from the outset eg on day one when the Counsel Assisting encouraged the Commissioner to Shut it down, shut it down before any public evidence was heard. The Commission itself contained no-one with any special knowledge or experience in greyhound racing.

Principle #10
The industry has never been properly consulted about the nature and extent of new regulations and charges a problem which was exacerbated by the unrepresentative nature of the so-called Reform Panel.

HOW TO DO IT

Prepare a document with a front page highlighting the points and two or three pages listing the information. Pamphlet format would be good, too.

Advertising would be good but funds are not available.

Hard copy is needed to display/circulate in multiple venues, as costs permit.

Maximum use of electronic circulation, especially to media - repeatedly.

Nominate two or three spokespersons to answer queries.

Directly hit all parliamentarians in town and in electorate offices.

Do not enter into party political debates, but seek help wherever.

Under no circumstances use formal support from any union. No exceptions.

Under no circumstances fly under any political partys flag. No exceptions.

(What individuals do is up to them but keep it on an individual basis).

WHO?

The missing element is who will run the show and who will sign up to support it. It needs a leader, an office, a key group, key spokespersons and a name/logo for the project.

(No, dont ask me, I am too old and decrepit. It needs life, vigour and pizzaz).

I acknowledge your commitment.

Yes Bruce this is the heart of the problem. It's just victimisation. I don't see how much of the regulations etc. could hold up if challenged in a court of law tbh.

but how or who would in fact fight it?
must be some lawyers out there wanting to make a name for themselves surely.

Thank you guys ,sorry to hear about the ridiculous amount, BY THE WAY. did Mr. Borsack Object on our behalf to this amount, after all he is our only voice where it counts, or is it just all talk.

Although the Alliance supposedly had advice that legal avenues were not worth following (or could not be afforded), I would not dismiss the option too quickly.

Not sure about GWIC but GRNSW has a duty to promote and develop the industry, or words to that effect. If it can be shown that an action will harm the industry then GRNSW also has to demonstrate that such action is unavoidable and necessary.

Combatting that can take any of three forms: a reversal of policy, an administrative appeal, or a court injunction. (Bear in mind that, once in the book, new rulings can take along while to change. However, court injunctions can be effective almost immediately).

Also by way of background, the Auditor General's criticism of Baird's improper actions are relevant. In question were advertising errors and possible intrusion of personal opinions into government decisions.

Anyway, if someone has a legal mate it might be worth checking out how to keep an eye on the possibilities.