INQUIRY THEME IN DISCUSSIONS

Press, Volume CIX, Issue 32038, 12 July 1969, Page 6

INQUIRY THEME IN DISCUSSIONS

(From Our Own Reporter) . WELLINGTON. The proposed inquiry Into racing In New Zealand formed a theme that ran through much of the discussions at the annual meeting of the Racing Conference In Wellington yesterday. Four remits, two of them dealing with trotting events on galloping programmes, were withdrawn. Those identified with them explained that they were withdrawing them because these are subjects that might engage the attention of a commission of inquiry. Earlier at yesterday’s meeting, Mr W. G. Prince (Whangarei) told delegates he believed a commission might not have been in the offing if country clubs had had a bigger voice in the administration of racing. In asking (or a different method of representation for the executive committee of the conference—the remit was defeated —Mr Prince said that the upshot of an inquiry into racing might mean a form of representation less palatable than the present one. In supporting the remit, Mr Silson (Bay of Plenty) commented: “In view of the commission being set up I feel district clubs should get a greater method of satisfaction about their presentation. REFUNDS When the question of refunds to supporters of horses locked in starting stalls was being discussed later at the meeting the!

president, Mr R. A. Whyte, said some submissions on the subject should be placed before the commission.

He was supporting Mr N. J. Collins (Wanganui), who had emphasised that the conference should show some concern towards the feeling of the public who had lost by having horses out of the race from the start because of mechanical failures. Mr Collins referred delegates to the report of the chief stipendiary steward, Mr P. J. Reid.

Mr Reid recalled that at last year’* conference provision had been made in Rule 303 so that investments on a horse prevented from participating in a race through mechanical failure of the starting stalls could be refunded.

(Yesterday the conference deleted this particular part of the, rule because the validating legislation necessary for it to 1 have become operative was not c to be enacted.)

Mr Reid's comment was: “It is a basic principle that the punter should have as great a chance as possible of getting a fair run for his investment. But this principle is surely breached where through mechanical failure of the starting stalls a horse is prevented from taking part in a race and investments on the horse cannot be refunded.

“I feel that last year’s amendment left the matter properly in the hands of the judicial stewards, who, after all, are empowered to determine at their discretion such major issues as disqualifications and the changing of placings.**