MOVING ALONG - WISHFUL THINKING OR A NECESSARY BLUEPRINT IF RACING IS TO SURVIVE?

By Graham Potter | Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Graham Potter is the managing editor and founder of horseracingonly.com.au. Calling on thirty-one years of international experience as a racing journalist and racing photographer, Graham’s personal blog, ‘Moving Along’ will appear every Wednesday on HRO.

It’s been a long time since the racing industry in Queensland has been in party mode. That is the mood this week … and, for many, it is not an exaggeration to say the feeling is akin to being liberated from a suffocating force that has for too long denied the majority of dedicated stake-holders in the racing industry a genuine voice in their own future.

So polarizing has the heavy handed rule of Racing Queensland Limited (RQL) been, that the chasm between the rulers and the subjects had become too wide to breach, creating instead a two-way street of mutual disrespect which became a malaise of discontent that increasingly damaged the industry … not quite a disease, but an aberration with a possible prognosis every bit as fatal as slow poison.

The vote for a change of government in Queensland was astounding. It was even worse than the worst prediction for those previously in power. The losers, the Labour Party and all those whose power was vested in it, weren’t merely left to lick their wounds. They had been mutilated almost beyond recognition and had gone within a whisker of annihilation … such was the unambiguous message from Queenslanders.

Racing’s celebration at the change of government in Queensland will soon give way to somber reality. It’s a tough game out there for any industry and racing has many problems that need to be addressed head-on.

Three major points stand out and, to be effective, they will have to operate in conjunction with each other. This won’t be easy to achieve, but it would certainly be worth the effort to travel this route as far as possible.

The election result has brought the imminent demise of RQL (where top executives have already tendered their resignations) but, in the euphoria of change, the obvious point of how politically entrenched the RQL operation has been should not be forgotten.

If the new regulatory body is built on the old foundation left after the rubble is cleared it will just provide a switch of party personal from one party sympathizer to the next. That’s fine to a point, even necessary to a degree as the new body, to get the job done, will need to have a fruitful relationship with government, but the outright politicizing of the office, as so evidenced by the RQL Chairman’s rash of pre-election press releases, has to end … and end from day one that the new line-up of directors takes office.

As with those before them, these officials will have been put in office charged with overseeing the viable business of racing and that must be their sole focus for the benefit of racing alone, without being distracted by political or personal battles which, as we know only too well, actually provides a disservice to the future of racing. It will be easy to identify anyone who strays from this basis commitment. That would be a breach of contract with the guilty party having his or her position terminated.

Let’s at least ensure that people in positions of power are prepared to direct all of their working energies towards the betterment of racing and nothing else.

Secondly, it is quite simple to create a rule that dictates that any individual can only hold one official position in the racing world.

That will force individuals with multi-interests to ‘officially’ choose which role, if any, they most want to fill. Of course their influence in other sectors might well still be felt after that choice is made, but this would eliminate the sour taste and stigma attached to the ‘vested interest’ or ‘conflict of interest’ syndrome, which has so often plagued the industry.

The rule (suggested above) will lay the dark side of this multi-layering to rest as well as give those lower down the food-chain some comfort that at least something is being done (as far as it can officially) to resolve this unsatisfactory situation.

Again, given a commitment to follow this rule and not doing so would naturally lead to the termination of that individual’s contract.

So, in the first two points we have sought to establish a non political base for racing which will be manned by people who do not bring any conflict of interest to the table.

Which brings us to the third, the most important, and the most difficult point to implement in this argument.

The structure of the new setup will fail, even with the first two points in place, if the new body is granted the same ‘unlimited power’ that RQL enjoyed.

The previous power structure has to be changed radically to incorporate accountability.

The whole point of those coming to grief if they did not apply themselves to their commitment in the first two points argued above was to ensure that accountability was part of the process.

Decent men and woman in business throughout the world have become board members with the best of intentions and then fallen prey to the dizziness of power. It is not that power corrupts necessarily it is just being allowed the freedom to do what you like … unchecked, means you will end up doing what you like, often to the detriment of others.

How to find a way to the monitor performance and ensure accountability of top racing officials is just about as big a problem facing racing as all of the others put together.

I don’t have a ready-made answer to this ‘accountability’ situation, particularly in an industry so badly fragmented and still smarting from the pain of the many wounds that have been (often self) inflicted on it.

I do recognize a ready-made challenge though.

It is one that needs to conquered soon otherwise the road that racing is travelling might start to look familiar.

The repair of Metropolitan racing (from tracks to marketing its image), finding the correct fiscal balance between city and country racing, stake money levels, the reversion to individual codes, marketing, promotion, promotion … there is just so much work to be done to ensure that the wonderful product that is racing is managed to its maximum and that the future of those thousands of employees within the industry is secured.

Whatever the perceived ills of the past or the promises of the future … it will only be hard work undertaken within the framework of a power and priority structure that draws of the strength of all participants that will give racing its chance to regain some vital footing.

Racing can’t afford to blow the opportunity. The starting point … the direction the new racing body takes in its first couple of steps … will be all important.

Which brings us back to the three stand out points tackled in this article and the question that racing industry stakeholders need to answer.

An apolitical racing board, filled with members who have no conflict of interest and who will held accountable for their performance … is that just wishful thinking or a necessary blueprint if racing is to survive?

Until it is implemented, either in part of in its entirety, I allow it will be wishful thinking.

Until it is implemented, either in part of in its entirety, racing will be remain at risk to its own power-brokers!

This is an invitation to all readers to get involved and have your say so that HRO can further enhance the experience of as many of the everyday racing enthusiasts as possible. In other words you can stop being a fringe player. Get off the bench and get into the game by e-mailing your views, comments, concerns, questions, suggestions, etc. to editor@horseracingonly.com.au

More articles