The Corner with Garry Chittick

The two of you, having followed my Corners for some time, I hope you understand my desire to remain positive. Whinge, I may have more often than I should have, it is, however, difficult when frustrated by obvious repeating of previous errors.

My fellow commentator, a professional writer, Brian de Lore likewise wants to remain positive, excited about the sport we have spent most of our working lives being part of. His most recent blog was not an opinion piece, it was a collection of recent historical decisions made by people without racing backgrounds. (The Optimist).

Why the need now to rake over the searing coal. Well, there is the opportunity to rebalance our Thoroughbred Racing Board. Brian left us with a number of previous decisions that are probably the tip of the iceberg. I have said many times, running racing is very different from normal business. Local clubs are very often a focal point of town; Presidents are more than likely strong characters – you may be tired of my constant reminder to current administrators: ignore them at your peril.

What I fail to understand is why you would choose to. I remind you of the track record of the days of the Racing Authority chaired by the indomitable Jack Bennett, any club miscalculations dealt with very firmly. 

The blundering of the last twenty years would never have occurred with a Board elected by the industry; think of the lost momentum, we were given the opportunity of the abolition of the wagering duty, we were saved by a $70 million Government bailout and still couldn’t make a go of it. 

Entain, hallelujah, what about when the guarantee expires, 50% of the net margin for the next 20 years is their ongoing entitlement; what then are we racing for.

Now we have the anointed eight. I wish them well; the irony is all of them, bar one, have had many opportunities to enhance their Codes. Now, having expressed the strong view of our Boards and Executive having some industry knowledge, I should be happy. It’s going to be fascinating to learn about their new inspiration, wondering how it is that they have taken so long to surface.

So, why concern ourselves with appointments to our Board. The magnificent eight may unite the Codes; imagine the Combine Codes Board meeting. A coalition somewhat likened to Parliament, neither Coalition appealing, heading further downhill to the lower common denominator. The Codes have to agree to any changes; are our current Board members of the ilk to fight tooth and nail for their Code, or do they need the sustenance of new blood who will defend our position.

Well, the briefing paper as to potential Board applicants is now in circulation. Too much to incorporate here, but the bullet points include Desirable but not Essential. Point one: Interest or involvement in Thoroughbred Racing. Am I overly sensitive – seriously, it should be Bullet Point number one.

I don’t know who is accountable for these priorities, but I was equally shocked when, on the Guerin Report, our Chief Executive, when asked about his Board was effusive about how lucky he was, suggesting there were many people good at racing but not suited to Boards. Fair dinkum, I don’t intend to list previous Board members whose business acumen would supersede any of the current executive but would have, as a result of their racing involvement, not qualified, lacking perhaps an Institute of Directors scroll. 

So I think it’s worth the fight – the Members Council needs to be tested. I believe this is very important, perhaps you two might put your name forward.

Cheers,
G